Do not try to outcompete me in English, you simply cant. I write fast and dont care that much to check it, so sometimes some letters are missing, because this is neither an important interlocutor, nor an important subject.
I have no idea why you said that but thanks for sharing.
As weak as yours, and mine is not a weak argument.
Based on your statement, your arguments are as weak as mine but your arguments are in fact not weak and therefore mince cannot be weak. Thank you for your compliment.
Listen, am not impressed by your late attitude of simply stating the obvious,
I am not impressed with you, period.
Yet you neglect the fact, that Greece gave in America's policy regarding Kossovo in practice, as far as NATO obliged her too.
And you also seem to forget that this was your exact sentence:
Uncooperative in this sense does not necessarily mean that Greece did not eventually yield to NATO but was disagreeable about it. i.e. Greek attitude was uncooperative regardless of their eventual cooperation.
And i was not whining about US sentiments, you are probably having english reading problems.
Well perhaps if you were to spend a bit more effort to articulate your thoughts in your perfect English (which is clearly better than mine, as you have come to believe), then perhaps those reading this thread would find it easier to understand your assertions.
Boy, wtf do you rant about?
I am not ranting about anything, you are. Are you confused or something?
historical ties of Greece that you attributed through Orthodoxy were effectively cut down during the communist reign as manifested with their supporting Kemal, and as manifested today, with Greece disapproving of their actions against Georgia.
Soviet endorsement of the Nationalists were rather a fluke as well. It briefly lasted until the late thirties and then demands were placed on Eastern Turkey and the Straits (they also wanted bases in Greece, you could have mentioned that as an example of Greek-Russian enmity).
And while Greece may be objective in her approach to every crisis, it again does not mean that her relations are merely neutral towards a country. Your Ministry of Foreign Affairs website highlights the historical and cultural ties between Greece and makes a statement that both countries have traditionally good relations. Though perhaps this is just for show, a sort of rhetorical statement to make things appear nice. Check the website if you want. I can't comment on the Greek language portion of the page though, I read the English. Frankly, Greek is all Greek to me.
Don't let your arguments be so little, you are just keeping me awake for nothing.
As if I am responsible for your fixations. Go sleep. What do I care?
The ties between their governments which were huge, the Romanovs being part Greeks, and the higher offices being occupied by Greeks just like the Russian foreign minister during the reign of Alexander the Great of Russia are effectively over by Bolshevism.
Bolshevism is over.
The historical ties remaining are as much as yours with Sudan, on a governmental level.
General apathy?
If that was the world case, then Nazis today would have ruled the world. Since in mid 20th century they were the stronger ones on all levels and all countries should go along!!
They were ahead but the Germans were not overwhelmingly superior to other states (had the French had more morale and more prudence in protecting her Benelux borders, WWII would have been another WWI), whereas US economy and military spending is more than that of the entire world combined. Moreover, realist theory would predict that powers of relatively equal strength would necessarily fight in the case of aggressive behavior of one. Moreover, if the aggressor is perceived to be very strong, it would encourage bandwagoning in some countries (i.e. Italy, Hungary, Romania, etc.) and chain-ganging/balancing behavior in stronger ones (i.e. Britain and the Commonwealth, France, Yugoslavia etc.). In a unipolar world, the hegemon sets up its own international system and its own rules of the game. Few dare challenge the hegemon militarily as the hegemon is overwhelmingly superior on all levels... the reason by unipolarity is more peace prone and more potentially long lasting has to do with so much inequality in capabilities.
In any case, I am afraid this particular assertion of yours is incorrect.
Next in line was the "religion alliance"
A state with people who are politically trained in diplomacy and international affairs, should form an alliance based on a religious dogma???
Well, an alliance would not be based on religion but strong cultural ties between nations would encourage friendly and cooperative relations and in the kind of scenario DemonicRage suggested, it is just as likely for Greece to join the Russian sphere as the "FYROMians" (provided that NATO and EU would indeed collapse).
Using religion is a weapon used in the Dark Ages (Crusades) and for Islamic Fanatics who have their own goals to achieve!
If you are referring to state behavior, you are partially correct. Using religion as a weapon is still common practice within societies.
Not the way of civilized countries of modern age!
Rhetorical statement. Even in "civilized" societies one can observe acts of barbarism or ignorance.
Both World Wars started from Balkans.
How did World War II start in the Balkans? Neither Germany nor Poland are in the Balkans. Versailles was signed in... Versailles, the Great Depression and the debt cycles and the national humiliation of Germany that contributed to the Nazis rise to power had nothing to do with the Balkans. The only reason why the Balkans ever became involved was because the Italians wanted to play the role of Roman imperialists and invaded Albania and then Greece. The others (excluding Yugoslavia) allied with the Axis out of fear and desire for territorial expansion (How very typical of them. The Bulgarians got Western Thrace, Hungary received a decent bit of Slovakia and Romania etc.) .
Balkans area is a hot potato for any president of a country great in power.
The importance of the Balkans is somewhat exaggerated in your statement. If you were to expand your scope, there are more troubled regions in the world than the Balkans. The only reason why the Balkans are treated with such sensitivity is because it is basically the backyard of Europe ("Europe" being the Western European nations - the borders of Europe end with the last Gothic cathedral).
Cause i still fail to see some logical arguments set here except noemon's and only a few of Doomhammer.
I am flattered.
"It is a dangerous thing to be a Machiavelli. It is a disastrous thing to be a Machiavelli without virtū."
- Hans J. Morgenthau
I think we'd avoid this tangent seeing as how your previous rants against America were pitiful. 
- By litwin
- By QatzelOk
- By Saeko