Submitted by DR SIMPLICIO (not verified) on Thu, 29/04/2010 - 02:44.
DEAR OLGA KOLESNICHENKO
I WILL ALSO HAPPY IF RUSSIA AND ALL PARTERNS BECAME NEW MEMBERS OF OUR GREAT NATO.
THANK YOU OF YOUR AGREABLE COMMENT
BEST REGARDS
DR SIMPLICIO
SINTRA PORTUGAL
Submitted by Olga Kolesnichenko (not verified) on Mon, 26/04/2010 - 20:11.
Dear DR SIMPLICIO!
We all live in entirely absolutely new world that became to closer relationship like in common flat. And hundred years after this moment our world would become as the most tight place for people as we can imagine. The same process we have in intellectual sphere. What do I mean? I mean that day-by-day there are more and more educated people, which be able to share opinions, influence on community and create the new thoughts. So, as it had mentioned in NATO Multiple Future Project the most dangerous threat will be the appearance of strong new political powers and leaders. At this moment international community kind of opening the door into a next room in the game. And the first that we meet in a new room is vacuum on the higher level of people relationship. Who will fill that vacuum first? Whose ideas will be accepted in a new reality - from bad guy or from good guy? For solving the problem the future think-tank leaders must create more than in the past. It concerns neither more nor less than belief for future of people. Whose belief would be the strongest? Our world can be compared with big antheap where we have HQ, fighters, builders, babysitters, cooks and other. And what is the aim for antheap - to be alive together. So now in our big antheap - Earth - we have just found each other in corners of antheap, exclaimed - Oh! There is life too here! - and started to consolidate international community efforts for being alive in the future.
About Russia - I think that Russia will be the member of NATO very-very soon and it will be simple and surprising for all.
Olga from Moscow
Submitted by DR SIMPLICIO (not verified) on Sat, 24/04/2010 - 03:02.
MORE ONE IMPORTANT THING
IN MOMEMT WE ARE 28 MEMBERS IN NATO
OF THIS 28 MEMBERS 21 ARE MEMBERS ALSO OF UNION EUROPEAN
THIS IS FACTS
THE OTHERS 7 MORE 4 EUROPEAN COUNTRY 1 EUROPEAN ASIA COUNTRY AND THE ANOTHERS 2 OF NORTH AMERICA
THE 22 PARTERNS , 12 ARE FROM THE COMUNITY OF INDEPENDENTS STATES, 4 OLD YUGOSLAVIA, 6 EUROPEANS.
WILL BE THE TENDENCE THAT PARTERNS BECAME MEMBERS!
IN THIS CONTEXT IS VERY USEFUL THAT RUSSIA BECAME WITH THE ADEQUATE PROCESS A MEMBER!
AND IN THE RIGHT TIME ALL THE OTHERS 21 PARTERNS.
NATO WILL BE 50 STATES, THIS WILL BE ONE DEFENCE, COMPOSED WITH THE BEST COUNTRIES IN LAW AND FRREDOM!
DR SIMPLICIO.
PORTUGAL
Submitted by DR SIMPLICIO (not verified) on Sat, 24/04/2010 - 01:47.
THANK YOU
THAT YOU TRY TO CAME NEAR OF MY ANALYSIS
IN FACT NATO IS AT FIRST, ONE ADEQUATE POLITIC ORGANIZATION!
BUILDING IN 1949 AND TODAY PREPAR THE FUTURE WITH SUCESS.
DR SIMPLICIO
Submitted by Dieter Stanzeleit (not verified) on Fri, 23/04/2010 - 15:45.
I don't know in which country you are living, Mr. Jaeckel, so I don't know from which side you feel threatened. I am living in Europe, where the fall of the Iron courtain had been the most important event. Therefore to integrate the Eastern side of Europe including Russia and to win a new basis of confidence and friedly collaboration is essential for Europe. People here don't want to have European conflicts anymore, at least no major ones.
It isn't clear to me, what do you exactly mean with strategy and operations in relation with politics. Please clarify.
Concerning Afghanistan I am certain that the new NATO strategy will be successful!
Of course NATO needs a broad consent, as broad as possible
Submitted by SJaeckel (not verified) on Thu, 22/04/2010 - 22:27.
Dear Dr. Simplicio,
the use of military is the use of battle as a means of achieving a political goal.
Preventing conflict by setting up military capeability through training and arming forces is NOT military but political, despite the fact that these steps are fully neccessary to be able to conduct any military operation, getting ready for theater action and theater action (= battle). Politics is always first.
Having said this it must be clear that in no conflict in the past military ever was the only solution as the use of military was never the end.
Conflicts in which military was used continued through political activities or were accompanied by political activities. Sadly - and the history of Europe shows that - the use of military in one conflict lead to the use of military in later conflicts or conflicts were built up to allow for the use of military means. Breaking out of that trap is the most difficult thing.
European politicians only got out of that trap after two huge wars through the creation of NATO and the EU by wise men like de Gaulle or Adenauer. This shows the political challenge in solving current conflicts from Africa via the Middle East to South East Asia.
Submitted by SJaeckel (not verified) on Thu, 22/04/2010 - 21:53.
Dear Mr. Steinzeleit,
neither the size of NATO nor the countries participating in NATO or cooperating with NATO in operations has any influence on wether a goal can be achieved only by military means or not.
I maintain my position that you trying to discuss NATO-Russian relationships in this thread instead of the appropriate thread is misleading the discussion here as well displaying the very deep misunderstanding of strategy and operations that we find in politics and that has lead to the horrendous situation in Afghanistan as well as it does force more and more fragile states into failing!
Submitted by DR SIMPLICIO (not verified) on Wed, 21/04/2010 - 02:59.
OF COURSE THE MILITARY ANSWER IS NOT THE ONLY ANSWER, BUT ALSO THE MILITARY MODERN SYSTEM IS THE BEST WAY TO KEEP OUR SECURITY AND NATO IS JUST THAT
THE BETTER MILITARY SISTEM OF OUR PLANET.
WE MUST BE RESPONSABILITY AND STUDIES THE REAL DANGERS
IN FACT THE MILITARY SYSTEM CAN HAVE THREE LEVELS
PREVENTION LEVEL
DISSUATION LEVEL
ACTION LEVEL
THE FIRST WILL BE THE BEST
IS TRUE THAT THE SOCIOLOGY STUDIES WILL HELP TO FIND A SOLUTION OF POLITICAL ADEQUATE WAY
BUT LIKE IN YOUR BODY , TO EAT WELL AND CHOOSE A HEALTH WAY OF LIFE IS GOOD WAY
MUST WE MUST ALLWAYS KEEP IN ORDER THE SYSTEM IMUNITAIRE OF OUR BODY
SO
IS CLEAR WE MUST MAKE PEACE WITH ALL THE SECURITY NECESSARY
THANK YOU VERY MUCH THAT WE HAVE NATO TO GARANTIED OUR FREEDOM
PROFESSOR
DR LUIS SIMPLICIO
PORTUGAL
Submitted by Olga Kolesnichenko (not verified) on Fri, 16/04/2010 - 21:36.
So, the most actual question is what NATO should do with poppies fields in Afghanistan. Recently this problem was discussed at NATO-Russia Council meeting in Brussels. Russian side offered to eradicate all poppies fields. This 'radical' proposal can be compared with sad Russian Soviet experience when Russian authority took in force the 'dry legislation' – banned the alcohol in 1985. This tremendous measure brought only huge economical damage, Russia lost their grape-fields, the smuggling rose and numder of alcohol poisoning among people rose too. Unfortunatly, such unreasoned proposal as Russian arrangement to eradicate the poppies fields, doesn't make good image of Russia as the serious partner. Moreover the misunderstanding (or like George Bush once said 'misunderestimation') between NATO and Russia grows again.
NATO's officials of cause refused from Russian proposal. And that was absolutely right reaction. The poppy is the most hight-productivity agricultural plant which grows in drought condition. And massive campaign of whole eradication of poppies fields won't be effective. Also it won't help in fight against drug dealing.
USSR had banned the poppies fields in 1986 and, as we see today, this evil – spread of narcotics and number of deaths from narcotics – rose and are rising right now. As in case of 'dry legislation', after banning of poppies agricultural fields Russia had lost part of economical benefit. Today that Soviet decision is criticizing in Ukraine which needs 100 thousand tons poppies seeds per year for support the GDP and Ukrainian industry (pharmaceutical, food, confectionery, cosmetics and paint industries, fodder). There is the biggest percentage of essential fatty acids in the poppies seeds among all agricultural plants including even soya.
Over 50 countries in the world grow the poppy. The leaders in the world poppy market are Czech Republic and Turkey. And nobody raises a claim to these countries. In terms of ecomony problems, the eradication of poppies fields can lead to escalation of instability in Afghanistan, rise of protests against authority and rise support of insurgents among Afghan citizens.
So, does International community have the decision that wouldn't hurt very breakable stability? In Moscow in RIA News agency the ambassador of Israel in Russia Anna Azari said that Israel had suggested to Afghanistan the agriculture cooperation.
NATO may provide the official negotiation between Afghanistan and Israel authorities for solving the problem of change agricultural plants from poppies to another step-by-step, may be even genetic modified plants. It isn't only for food, but for animal husbandry and industry.
Successful technologies may provide five most advanced countries in genetic modified agriculture – USA, Canada, Brazil, Argentina and China.
Submitted by Dieter Stanzeleit (not verified) on Mon, 22/03/2010 - 15:48.
Dear Mr. Jaeckel, if you reply, would you please be so kind and watch the context, which in my case you will find in the last sentence of my 9th March-mail.
Optional widening of NATO for other nations might be
mostly only possible in a combination of military and non-military activities, where non-military activities could be police and security tasks, but also the reduction of ethnic and educational tensions.
Submitted by SJaeckel (not verified) on Fri, 19/03/2010 - 19:10.
Dear Mr. Stanzeleit,
the topic of this thread is the statement "Military is no longer the complete answer" by Mr. Rasmussen.
It is NOT about NATO-Russia relations or adding Russia or any other CIS country to NATO. That is a different topic and TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in this context!
So please stick to the topic! Those discussing the true content of Mr. Rasmussen's speech here will gladly appreciate it.
Submitted by Dieter Stanzeleit (not verified) on Sat, 13/03/2010 - 12:46.
It is not our role to anticipate in our debates here future discussions between NATO and Russia, Mr. Eisler, in view of the possibility of Russian NATO-membership.
By the way another highly important subject:
NATO should open multi-ethnic contacts and discussions under the umbrella of NATO e.g. with 4 wider conferences/per year. As terrorism can only grow hidden in the shadow=-corner, it will become essential to open a platform for public debates and contacts, especially between Christians and Islam, but also - of course - with other denominations. It could essentially help to lesser global tensions, but strengthen tolerance!
Submitted by KH Eisler (not verified) on Tue, 09/03/2010 - 14:02.
better no considerations cis - russia to become member of nato. a certain pfp treaty but with strict borders to strategic tasks should take place. joint operations eg africa are thinkable.
don`t forget nat gas breaks, cwho just wants their own advantagesivil rights, salt, org crime and different justifacation, iran position = quet deliveries eg nuclear fuel. is rusia a real reliable partner or will it be in middle run.
nato should more restrivtive with further members - no ukraine or other countries own advantages.
I am sure nato is glad tohave GS R as head of organisation
kh eisler
Submitted by Dieter Stanzeleit (not verified) on Tue, 09/03/2010 - 12:04.
Concerning further development of the NATO is would like to support the proposal of Mr. Volker Rühe to include also Russia in NATO. Of course such a significant step has to be well prepared, mainly under the view of a common win-win aspect. Therefore I would like to propose to establish a common commission with Russia and NATO which - maybe under a designed timeframe - discuss and clarify the variety of all aspects and consequences of Russian NATO-membership. To start this might become a signal to open similar contacts also with other states.
It would be wise to include the ideas and results of such kind of possible-membership-options into the plans for wider NATO military and non- military strategies for the future.
Dieter Stanzleit
Submitted by LethaChristina (not verified) on Tue, 09/03/2010 - 08:31.
Mr. Rasmussen, in another article, wrote of the critical need to impliment the use of more women in these conflicts--since they are the ultimate "loosers" in them. He is so extremely correct, theologically (he wasn't speaking in those terms, of course). St. Edith Stein (Sr. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, O.C.D.), the greatest woman mind of the twentieth century/phenemonologist/German philosopher--professor and martyred at Aschwisch because she was a Jew... states in one of her books that it is "woman who will do final battle with the serpent and conquer it through maternal LOVE through the Holy Spirit." She was, of course, referring to the Blessed Mother--but that means WOMAN and maternal LOVE in modern and practical terms.
Submitted by s anand, Ph.D scholar (not verified) on Sun, 07/03/2010 - 12:07.
we fully agree with the Secretary General's views. Afghanistan has become a battleground for many powers in the last 40 years. There are other failed states/failing nations in the pipelines such as Yemen/Somalia/sudan/Pakistan, etc. Let nation-building in Afghanistan be a test case for other states. The only way to ensure non-interference of other states in Afganistan would be to make that country a Protectorate of UN for at least 10 years during which Afghan Military and Civil Bureacracy could be well-trained and simultaneously the living standards of Afghan people could also be improved paving way for a stable democracy.
anand
Submitted by SJaeckel (not verified) on Sat, 06/03/2010 - 03:38.
Military never ever was the complete solution to anything. Military is a tool, a way of approaching an issue. So there is no news in what you state Mr. Rasmussen (unless this vid is a PR action targeted at non-gov aid groups).
News would be if politicians, who use military as a means of policy, would finally understand what military can deliver and what it can not achieve. Until that happens unfortunately brave soldiers will struggle to conduct and try to learn to conduct new types of operations in order to fulfill impossible objectives that can not be reached and with which they got tasked by their political leaders.
Until that news happens, military leaders must become political to the extend required to shape an understanding of strategy, tactics and miltary operations in the public eye; roughly well enough to keep politicians from creating more and more failing countries on our beautiful planet because of their continued missuse and false application of military capeabilities.
Submitted by Provincial View (not verified) on Fri, 05/03/2010 - 14:53.
My dear friend,
The Chinese people must liberate itself from tyranny; NATO can't do your job for you! You must fight for your rights (on many different levels)as we did in former communist Europe. Yes, we had some help from NATO and the Vatican, but they were not the ones that died on the streets while demanding democracy and respect... (Don't forget your symbolical Tian'anmen Square!!!)
You must change China from within, by educating people and by supporting good leaders when they ask for reforms. Your country is burning a lot of coal in order to get to a better position in the "New World Order"... and this is only helping you acquire new 'freedoms'. Your leaders are loosing their grip on society; you must be prepared to push them over the edge...
I hear that the Russian president, Medvedev, said that he never loved communism and that he likes his country better with its present state of openness to the world. Maybe some of your communist leaders feel the same, find those leaders and stay by them!
Submitted by Huaichun Jiang (not verified) on Fri, 05/03/2010 - 10:22.
Army is always the final decision for any conflict now and in the future. As China's military power becomes stronger and stronger and Chinese Government becomes more and more cruel, which threathen everyone in the world, and they not only brutalize me right now. Everyone who hope thave a fair and peaceful life hope that NATO has stronger military force to help the people like me to be liberated to become a normal man. Without NATO's military power settlement, Chinese Government will continue to brutalize me. When we recall the history, we really enjoy the time during 1840-1910, during this time, if the United Kingdom, or France, or the United States or Russia orders Chinese Government to stop brutalizing some one, Chinese Government stopped. But right now, China becomes stronger and stronger, Chinese Government never follow the order of above countries. According to my statements, NATO, Russia, India, Japan and Australia have the right to rule China in order to let Chinese become civilized.
Submitted by Xaliq Mustafayev (not verified) on Fri, 05/03/2010 - 08:53.
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
The NATO - the military block also carries out peace-making missions by military methods. The NATO not the Organization of the Red Cross.
Submitted by Binkley (not verified) on Fri, 05/03/2010 - 07:03.
Soldiers have been used as fire, police and emergency services for centuries and the idea that they can only be a "killing machine" has no root in history or common sense.
Submitted by KH Eisler (not verified) on Thu, 04/03/2010 - 16:16.
fully agreed!
military and/as help. this combination: if other are unable to help military are able.
HELP AND PROTECT:
But army shouldn`t be violated to become constabulary, first ais or fire brigade. clear borders must be defined! Military tasks are strictly separated but ready for certain assistance provided supervision by clear and strict army regulations!
Submitted by Phoenix (not verified) on Thu, 04/03/2010 - 14:18.
This is the appropriate approach - at least to the degree that it will in some part stop some of the use of meaningless excessive force and in the long term (emphasise) hopefully get rid of it completely. This would, as you state, also make it possible for the local people and future rulers in Afghanistan to decide their own destiny - at least to the degree that they HAVE something to say about their own destiny. IF NATO now is able to live up to these words you speak this could indeed improve the western countries reputation about how they handle conflicts around the world.
This is of great importance because it was several hundreds of years ago that the Europeans conquered Africa - an action that created a major catastrophy which is very much "alive" to this day and needs to be solved sooner or later. We have to take responsibility not only for the present and future conflicts but also for the bad things we did in the past. Taking real responsibility is a first step to correct the errors we did in the past. Combined with cooperation between many different parties, both global and local, we can hopefully avoid a potential future global conflict that could mean the downfall of our current global civilisation. I for one is sure that most people, common as "elites", have this ambition. Else we probably would have "pushed the button" during the cold war and we would not be here today to discuss these things.
Comments
DEAR OLGA KOLESNICHENKO I
DEAR OLGA KOLESNICHENKO
I WILL ALSO HAPPY IF RUSSIA AND ALL PARTERNS BECAME NEW MEMBERS OF OUR GREAT NATO.
THANK YOU OF YOUR AGREABLE COMMENT
BEST REGARDS
DR SIMPLICIO
SINTRA PORTUGAL
Dear DR SIMPLICIO! We all
Dear DR SIMPLICIO!
We all live in entirely absolutely new world that became to closer relationship like in common flat. And hundred years after this moment our world would become as the most tight place for people as we can imagine. The same process we have in intellectual sphere. What do I mean? I mean that day-by-day there are more and more educated people, which be able to share opinions, influence on community and create the new thoughts. So, as it had mentioned in NATO Multiple Future Project the most dangerous threat will be the appearance of strong new political powers and leaders. At this moment international community kind of opening the door into a next room in the game. And the first that we meet in a new room is vacuum on the higher level of people relationship. Who will fill that vacuum first? Whose ideas will be accepted in a new reality - from bad guy or from good guy? For solving the problem the future think-tank leaders must create more than in the past. It concerns neither more nor less than belief for future of people. Whose belief would be the strongest? Our world can be compared with big antheap where we have HQ, fighters, builders, babysitters, cooks and other. And what is the aim for antheap - to be alive together. So now in our big antheap - Earth - we have just found each other in corners of antheap, exclaimed - Oh! There is life too here! - and started to consolidate international community efforts for being alive in the future.
About Russia - I think that Russia will be the member of NATO very-very soon and it will be simple and surprising for all.
Olga from Moscow
MORE ONE IMPORTANT THING IN
MORE ONE IMPORTANT THING
IN MOMEMT WE ARE 28 MEMBERS IN NATO
OF THIS 28 MEMBERS 21 ARE MEMBERS ALSO OF UNION EUROPEAN
THIS IS FACTS
THE OTHERS 7 MORE 4 EUROPEAN COUNTRY 1 EUROPEAN ASIA COUNTRY AND THE ANOTHERS 2 OF NORTH AMERICA
THE 22 PARTERNS , 12 ARE FROM THE COMUNITY OF INDEPENDENTS STATES, 4 OLD YUGOSLAVIA, 6 EUROPEANS.
WILL BE THE TENDENCE THAT PARTERNS BECAME MEMBERS!
IN THIS CONTEXT IS VERY USEFUL THAT RUSSIA BECAME WITH THE ADEQUATE PROCESS A MEMBER!
AND IN THE RIGHT TIME ALL THE OTHERS 21 PARTERNS.
NATO WILL BE 50 STATES, THIS WILL BE ONE DEFENCE, COMPOSED WITH THE BEST COUNTRIES IN LAW AND FRREDOM!
DR SIMPLICIO.
PORTUGAL
THANK YOU THAT YOU TRY TO
THANK YOU
THAT YOU TRY TO CAME NEAR OF MY ANALYSIS
IN FACT NATO IS AT FIRST, ONE ADEQUATE POLITIC ORGANIZATION!
BUILDING IN 1949 AND TODAY PREPAR THE FUTURE WITH SUCESS.
DR SIMPLICIO
I don't know in which country
I don't know in which country you are living, Mr. Jaeckel, so I don't know from which side you feel threatened. I am living in Europe, where the fall of the Iron courtain had been the most important event. Therefore to integrate the Eastern side of Europe including Russia and to win a new basis of confidence and friedly collaboration is essential for Europe. People here don't want to have European conflicts anymore, at least no major ones.
It isn't clear to me, what do you exactly mean with strategy and operations in relation with politics. Please clarify.
Concerning Afghanistan I am certain that the new NATO strategy will be successful!
Of course NATO needs a broad consent, as broad as possible
Dear Dr. Simplicio, the
Dear Dr. Simplicio,
the use of military is the use of battle as a means of achieving a political goal.
Preventing conflict by setting up military capeability through training and arming forces is NOT military but political, despite the fact that these steps are fully neccessary to be able to conduct any military operation, getting ready for theater action and theater action (= battle). Politics is always first.
Having said this it must be clear that in no conflict in the past military ever was the only solution as the use of military was never the end.
Conflicts in which military was used continued through political activities or were accompanied by political activities. Sadly - and the history of Europe shows that - the use of military in one conflict lead to the use of military in later conflicts or conflicts were built up to allow for the use of military means. Breaking out of that trap is the most difficult thing.
European politicians only got out of that trap after two huge wars through the creation of NATO and the EU by wise men like de Gaulle or Adenauer. This shows the political challenge in solving current conflicts from Africa via the Middle East to South East Asia.
Dear Mr.
Dear Mr. Steinzeleit,
neither the size of NATO nor the countries participating in NATO or cooperating with NATO in operations has any influence on wether a goal can be achieved only by military means or not.
I maintain my position that you trying to discuss NATO-Russian relationships in this thread instead of the appropriate thread is misleading the discussion here as well displaying the very deep misunderstanding of strategy and operations that we find in politics and that has lead to the horrendous situation in Afghanistan as well as it does force more and more fragile states into failing!
OF COURSE THE MILITARY ANSWER
OF COURSE THE MILITARY ANSWER IS NOT THE ONLY ANSWER, BUT ALSO THE MILITARY MODERN SYSTEM IS THE BEST WAY TO KEEP OUR SECURITY AND NATO IS JUST THAT
THE BETTER MILITARY SISTEM OF OUR PLANET.
WE MUST BE RESPONSABILITY AND STUDIES THE REAL DANGERS
IN FACT THE MILITARY SYSTEM CAN HAVE THREE LEVELS
PREVENTION LEVEL
DISSUATION LEVEL
ACTION LEVEL
THE FIRST WILL BE THE BEST
IS TRUE THAT THE SOCIOLOGY STUDIES WILL HELP TO FIND A SOLUTION OF POLITICAL ADEQUATE WAY
BUT LIKE IN YOUR BODY , TO EAT WELL AND CHOOSE A HEALTH WAY OF LIFE IS GOOD WAY
MUST WE MUST ALLWAYS KEEP IN ORDER THE SYSTEM IMUNITAIRE OF OUR BODY
SO
IS CLEAR WE MUST MAKE PEACE WITH ALL THE SECURITY NECESSARY
THANK YOU VERY MUCH THAT WE HAVE NATO TO GARANTIED OUR FREEDOM
PROFESSOR
DR LUIS SIMPLICIO
PORTUGAL
So, the most actual question
So, the most actual question is what NATO should do with poppies fields in Afghanistan. Recently this problem was discussed at NATO-Russia Council meeting in Brussels. Russian side offered to eradicate all poppies fields. This 'radical' proposal can be compared with sad Russian Soviet experience when Russian authority took in force the 'dry legislation' – banned the alcohol in 1985. This tremendous measure brought only huge economical damage, Russia lost their grape-fields, the smuggling rose and numder of alcohol poisoning among people rose too. Unfortunatly, such unreasoned proposal as Russian arrangement to eradicate the poppies fields, doesn't make good image of Russia as the serious partner. Moreover the misunderstanding (or like George Bush once said 'misunderestimation') between NATO and Russia grows again.
NATO's officials of cause refused from Russian proposal. And that was absolutely right reaction. The poppy is the most hight-productivity agricultural plant which grows in drought condition. And massive campaign of whole eradication of poppies fields won't be effective. Also it won't help in fight against drug dealing.
USSR had banned the poppies fields in 1986 and, as we see today, this evil – spread of narcotics and number of deaths from narcotics – rose and are rising right now. As in case of 'dry legislation', after banning of poppies agricultural fields Russia had lost part of economical benefit. Today that Soviet decision is criticizing in Ukraine which needs 100 thousand tons poppies seeds per year for support the GDP and Ukrainian industry (pharmaceutical, food, confectionery, cosmetics and paint industries, fodder). There is the biggest percentage of essential fatty acids in the poppies seeds among all agricultural plants including even soya.
Over 50 countries in the world grow the poppy. The leaders in the world poppy market are Czech Republic and Turkey. And nobody raises a claim to these countries. In terms of ecomony problems, the eradication of poppies fields can lead to escalation of instability in Afghanistan, rise of protests against authority and rise support of insurgents among Afghan citizens.
So, does International community have the decision that wouldn't hurt very breakable stability? In Moscow in RIA News agency the ambassador of Israel in Russia Anna Azari said that Israel had suggested to Afghanistan the agriculture cooperation.
NATO may provide the official negotiation between Afghanistan and Israel authorities for solving the problem of change agricultural plants from poppies to another step-by-step, may be even genetic modified plants. It isn't only for food, but for animal husbandry and industry.
Successful technologies may provide five most advanced countries in genetic modified agriculture – USA, Canada, Brazil, Argentina and China.
Dear Mr. Jaeckel, if you
Dear Mr. Jaeckel, if you reply, would you please be so kind and watch the context, which in my case you will find in the last sentence of my 9th March-mail.
Optional widening of NATO for other nations might be
mostly only possible in a combination of military and non-military activities, where non-military activities could be police and security tasks, but also the reduction of ethnic and educational tensions.
Dear Mr. Stanzeleit, the
Dear Mr. Stanzeleit,
the topic of this thread is the statement "Military is no longer the complete answer" by Mr. Rasmussen.
It is NOT about NATO-Russia relations or adding Russia or any other CIS country to NATO. That is a different topic and TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in this context!
So please stick to the topic! Those discussing the true content of Mr. Rasmussen's speech here will gladly appreciate it.
It is not our role to
It is not our role to anticipate in our debates here future discussions between NATO and Russia, Mr. Eisler, in view of the possibility of Russian NATO-membership.
By the way another highly important subject:
NATO should open multi-ethnic contacts and discussions under the umbrella of NATO e.g. with 4 wider conferences/per year. As terrorism can only grow hidden in the shadow=-corner, it will become essential to open a platform for public debates and contacts, especially between Christians and Islam, but also - of course - with other denominations. It could essentially help to lesser global tensions, but strengthen tolerance!
Afghanistan as a UN
Afghanistan as a UN Protectorate? Remember Srebrenica? Remember Rwandan Genocide?
You got It! I subscribe to
You got It! I subscribe to your view 100%!
better no considerations cis
better no considerations cis - russia to become member of nato. a certain pfp treaty but with strict borders to strategic tasks should take place. joint operations eg africa are thinkable.
don`t forget nat gas breaks, cwho just wants their own advantagesivil rights, salt, org crime and different justifacation, iran position = quet deliveries eg nuclear fuel. is rusia a real reliable partner or will it be in middle run.
nato should more restrivtive with further members - no ukraine or other countries own advantages.
I am sure nato is glad tohave GS R as head of organisation
kh eisler
Concerning further
Concerning further development of the NATO is would like to support the proposal of Mr. Volker Rühe to include also Russia in NATO. Of course such a significant step has to be well prepared, mainly under the view of a common win-win aspect. Therefore I would like to propose to establish a common commission with Russia and NATO which - maybe under a designed timeframe - discuss and clarify the variety of all aspects and consequences of Russian NATO-membership. To start this might become a signal to open similar contacts also with other states.
It would be wise to include the ideas and results of such kind of possible-membership-options into the plans for wider NATO military and non- military strategies for the future.
Dieter Stanzleit
Mr. Rasmussen, in another
Mr. Rasmussen, in another article, wrote of the critical need to impliment the use of more women in these conflicts--since they are the ultimate "loosers" in them. He is so extremely correct, theologically (he wasn't speaking in those terms, of course). St. Edith Stein (Sr. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, O.C.D.), the greatest woman mind of the twentieth century/phenemonologist/German philosopher--professor and martyred at Aschwisch because she was a Jew... states in one of her books that it is "woman who will do final battle with the serpent and conquer it through maternal LOVE through the Holy Spirit." She was, of course, referring to the Blessed Mother--but that means WOMAN and maternal LOVE in modern and practical terms.
Finally a leader that have
Finally a leader that have realised the truth... A shame that we lost you as a primeminister in Denmark!
we fully agree with the
we fully agree with the Secretary General's views. Afghanistan has become a battleground for many powers in the last 40 years. There are other failed states/failing nations in the pipelines such as Yemen/Somalia/sudan/Pakistan, etc. Let nation-building in Afghanistan be a test case for other states. The only way to ensure non-interference of other states in Afganistan would be to make that country a Protectorate of UN for at least 10 years during which Afghan Military and Civil Bureacracy could be well-trained and simultaneously the living standards of Afghan people could also be improved paving way for a stable democracy.
anand
Military never ever was the
Military never ever was the complete solution to anything. Military is a tool, a way of approaching an issue. So there is no news in what you state Mr. Rasmussen (unless this vid is a PR action targeted at non-gov aid groups).
News would be if politicians, who use military as a means of policy, would finally understand what military can deliver and what it can not achieve. Until that happens unfortunately brave soldiers will struggle to conduct and try to learn to conduct new types of operations in order to fulfill impossible objectives that can not be reached and with which they got tasked by their political leaders.
Until that news happens, military leaders must become political to the extend required to shape an understanding of strategy, tactics and miltary operations in the public eye; roughly well enough to keep politicians from creating more and more failing countries on our beautiful planet because of their continued missuse and false application of military capeabilities.
My dear friend, The
My dear friend,
The Chinese people must liberate itself from tyranny; NATO can't do your job for you! You must fight for your rights (on many different levels)as we did in former communist Europe. Yes, we had some help from NATO and the Vatican, but they were not the ones that died on the streets while demanding democracy and respect... (Don't forget your symbolical Tian'anmen Square!!!)
You must change China from within, by educating people and by supporting good leaders when they ask for reforms. Your country is burning a lot of coal in order to get to a better position in the "New World Order"... and this is only helping you acquire new 'freedoms'. Your leaders are loosing their grip on society; you must be prepared to push them over the edge...
I hear that the Russian president, Medvedev, said that he never loved communism and that he likes his country better with its present state of openness to the world. Maybe some of your communist leaders feel the same, find those leaders and stay by them!
Army is always the final
Army is always the final decision for any conflict now and in the future. As China's military power becomes stronger and stronger and Chinese Government becomes more and more cruel, which threathen everyone in the world, and they not only brutalize me right now. Everyone who hope thave a fair and peaceful life hope that NATO has stronger military force to help the people like me to be liberated to become a normal man. Without NATO's military power settlement, Chinese Government will continue to brutalize me. When we recall the history, we really enjoy the time during 1840-1910, during this time, if the United Kingdom, or France, or the United States or Russia orders Chinese Government to stop brutalizing some one, Chinese Government stopped. But right now, China becomes stronger and stronger, Chinese Government never follow the order of above countries. According to my statements, NATO, Russia, India, Japan and Australia have the right to rule China in order to let Chinese become civilized.
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.co
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
The NATO - the military block also carries out peace-making missions by military methods. The NATO not the Organization of the Red Cross.
Soldiers have been used as
Soldiers have been used as fire, police and emergency services for centuries and the idea that they can only be a "killing machine" has no root in history or common sense.
fully agreed! military
fully agreed!
military and/as help. this combination: if other are unable to help military are able.
HELP AND PROTECT:
But army shouldn`t be violated to become constabulary, first ais or fire brigade. clear borders must be defined! Military tasks are strictly separated but ready for certain assistance provided supervision by clear and strict army regulations!
This is the appropriate
This is the appropriate approach - at least to the degree that it will in some part stop some of the use of meaningless excessive force and in the long term (emphasise) hopefully get rid of it completely. This would, as you state, also make it possible for the local people and future rulers in Afghanistan to decide their own destiny - at least to the degree that they HAVE something to say about their own destiny. IF NATO now is able to live up to these words you speak this could indeed improve the western countries reputation about how they handle conflicts around the world.
This is of great importance because it was several hundreds of years ago that the Europeans conquered Africa - an action that created a major catastrophy which is very much "alive" to this day and needs to be solved sooner or later. We have to take responsibility not only for the present and future conflicts but also for the bad things we did in the past. Taking real responsibility is a first step to correct the errors we did in the past. Combined with cooperation between many different parties, both global and local, we can hopefully avoid a potential future global conflict that could mean the downfall of our current global civilisation. I for one is sure that most people, common as "elites", have this ambition. Else we probably would have "pushed the button" during the cold war and we would not be here today to discuss these things.
Regards
/
Phoenix
Post new comment