The only purpose of NATO at this point is to contain Russia (& China). I think Russian has a reasonable concern about being encircled by Nuke equipped alliance put together solely for Russia.

Look at it another way, US was exactly right to say that Russia could not form an Alliance with Cuba that allowed them to put Nukes 90 miles from this Country. Its irrelevant if a major tenant of the Warsaw Pact (or any Treaty CUba and Russia came up with) is any country worried about the US could join. Allowing Russian missiles in Cuba would have caused War because it would have upset the balance and stalemate between US and Russian aligned countries. Likewise, it was a good resolution of the Cuban Missle Crisis for the US to compromise by removing U.S. nuclear missiles out of Italy and Turkey to maintain the balance and stalemate (regardless if the NATO pact allows us to put missles there).

I firmly believe there has ben 75 years of relative Peace in Europe because of the balance and stalemate between Western and Russian aligned countries. Now that Russia is on the decline of influence it seems not wise to grow a military alliance that threatens them. Let them into the EU. Form a new alliance, but the choice can't be down to either do or do not let them into NATO.

We got to remember that the purpose of all these pacts and treaties is to maintain peace and mutual protection. Going to war just to blindly follow a pact or a treaty is what started WWI. Its ironic but its very possible that entering a peace treaty and start a war.

So yeah there may be a good reason to allow Ukraine into NATO, but to me because NATO's charter says they can really isn't a compelling reason to me.


>You can't let Russia tell you what countries can and cannot
>be a part of a National Alliance of free countries.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"