repulsewarrior wrote:...and to this day, Cyprus represents a gateway, because it is Cypriot, at least the possibility of social-exchange between what are adversaries.
In my mind, if NATO is evolving, Russia may well be the essential partner it lacks.
Paphitis wrote:repulsewarrior wrote:...and to this day, Cyprus represents a gateway, because it is Cypriot, at least the possibility of social-exchange between what are adversaries.
In my mind, if NATO is evolving, Russia may well be the essential partner it lacks.
Back in the day of the Cold War, neither side was interested in having a 'gateway'.
The Soviets were behind their Iron Curtain, and the Americans and NATO allies were building their defenses against a possible Soviet Invasion which would be unprecedented in scale. NATO was literally up against it. The Russians had far superior land forces. 12000 tanks V 4000 for NATO. The same ratio applied with artillery, mechanized and infantry. The odds only favoured NATO in the Air and at Sea where it held the upper hand.
You were either with them or against them and the stakes were high. NATO genuinely feared a large scale invasion. Probably would have led to a Nuclear Holocaust around the world which is probably why the Soviets did not move but there was an arms race and a huge build up of Nuclear Weapons everywhere - Europe, Asia Pacific, Asia and Canada.
Both sides were in it till the end and Cyprus made itself a huge obstacle in NATO's Southern Flank which included Greece and Turkey, both NATO allies. Both countries picked their side wisely, but sadly Cyprus was still at the station when the train left.
Paphitis wrote:That's nonsense!
AUSCANNZUSUK has many bases in Asia and yet Singapore, Malaysia, Japan etc are vitally important.
NATO would never say NO to Cyprus. The mere fact that Paphos will be open to them is reason enough. You can't fit a 100 or more jets in Akrotiri alone.
Return to Politics and Elections
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests