not "hostile" Trump actually strengthened NATO..
I question NATO at times as well -such as Libya and NATO expansion
which is the ultimate reason for Cold War 2, and now a hot war.
Any sane person critiques any org they fund /belong to
John Bolton: Putin was waiting for Trump to withdraw US from NATO....
- Thread starter Nomad
- Start date
I question NATO at times as well -such as Libya and NATO expansion
which is the ultimate reason for Cold War 2, and now a hot war.
Any sane person critiques any org they fund /belong to
Hoosier Daddy
Verified User
i believe alliances with other democracies in the world are useful and necessary. who gives a shit what that guy says?
Hoosier Daddy
Verified User
you need to take your head just a little bit out of trump's ass, get some oxygen, and then laugh at how fucking stupid you are to think trump strengthened NATO. what a trump dildo you are.
That is simply not true. He was shredding it in every speech. You are posting lies again. There is a hot war and Putin is the reason.
BartenderElite
Verified User
this topic has been beaten to death. duplicate threads
Only Congress can withdrawal from NATO
True. I mean, we have NEVER seen a President influence what Congress does.
are you even HINTING Congress would ever leave NATO?
The world will end before that ever happens
I dont expect you to hold 2 thoughts in your mind at the same time- but ill try to enlighten you
1. Putin started the war. it's on him
2. US meddling in internal UK affairs coupled with NATO expansion and uber-militarizing Uk was the predicate.. Thats on us
Trump's very own National Security Adviser says Trump was contemplating pulling out of NATO in his second term.
Trump consistently and routinely was hostile, dismissive, belligerent to our traditional European and Canadian allies.
The NATO agreement to increase defense spending to at least two percent of GDP was agreed to in 2014 during the Obama administration. Trump's only claim to fame was to hog credit for it, and badger Europeans to live up to it. And it wasn't because he cared about defending western liberal democracy. It was always strictly transactional with him.
an agreement isn't worth the paper it's written on if it doesnt accomplish it's goals
if t takes "badgering" good for Trump. and the head of NATO agrees Trump got it done
Quoting Bolton on Trump is so laughable I won't even bother
what difference does it make what Trumps motivations are?
Transactional doesnt apply here however -we are bound by treaty
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Bullshit. A night watch patrol isn't a threat to the next neighborhood, it's only a threat to the fucking gangstas from those neighborhoods attacking others.
You're the equivalent of the rapist who says "she provoked me by dressing and acting slutty with other men." Fuck you asshole. You're already on the way to a miserable, bitter end comrade, what are you going to do when Putin's dick shrivels in your mouth over the next month or so, comrade Dookie?
Tranquillus in Exile
New member
Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea - was NATO expansion the ultimate reason for those?
Now Finland and Sweden are on the verge of joining NATO. Was that part of the plan?
I think Trump is a manchild.
And Bolton - the poster child for neocons - makes me sick.
But pulling America out of NATO is a bloody good idea.
NATO should have been disbanded right after the Soviet Union ended.
What do we get for being part of NATO?
1) We have to pay more to have our troops stationed in Europe.
And we get caught up in all the shit that NATO does - whether we like it or not (like in Libya which left the country a COMPLETE mess).
2) So - for all that cost - what do we get?
NOTHING.
And what does Europe get?
EVERYTHING...they get to spend dick on their militaries knowing that America has their backs.
And if Putin is right and part of the reason that he invaded Ukraine was fear of NATO?
Than the reason for the invasion was - indirectly because of NATO's existence.
Finally, NATO had promised Russia when the Cold War ended that they would stay out of Eastern Europe.
Well...they went back on that...BIG TIME.
And the Ukraine invasion is partly the result.
NATO should have been ended in 1991.
Trump was RIGHT to want to pull out of it.
Not for Russia's sake.
But for America's sake.
Of course, you people cannot see any of that.
Why?
Because you Milgram-Experiment-450-volt-switchers believe whatever you are told to believe by your political 'leaders' and the completely-useless MSM you prefer to watch/listen to.
And Bolton - the poster child for neocons - makes me sick.
But pulling America out of NATO is a bloody good idea.
NATO should have been disbanded right after the Soviet Union ended.
What do we get for being part of NATO?
1) We have to pay more to have our troops stationed in Europe.
And we get caught up in all the shit that NATO does - whether we like it or not (like in Libya which left the country a COMPLETE mess).
2) So - for all that cost - what do we get?
NOTHING.
And what does Europe get?
EVERYTHING...they get to spend dick on their militaries knowing that America has their backs.
And if Putin is right and part of the reason that he invaded Ukraine was fear of NATO?
Than the reason for the invasion was - indirectly because of NATO's existence.
Finally, NATO had promised Russia when the Cold War ended that they would stay out of Eastern Europe.
Well...they went back on that...BIG TIME.
And the Ukraine invasion is partly the result.
NATO should have been ended in 1991.
Trump was RIGHT to want to pull out of it.
Not for Russia's sake.
But for America's sake.
Of course, you people cannot see any of that.
Why?
Because you Milgram-Experiment-450-volt-switchers believe whatever you are told to believe by your political 'leaders' and the completely-useless MSM you prefer to watch/listen to.
I have corresponded with three Ukrainian friends in Kiev and have seen dozens of Ukranians interviewed by the media, and I haven't seen one blame NATO for Putin's illegal aggression.
.
What exactly does bombing hospitals and apartment buildings have to do with stopping NATO aggression?
Uk would never blame NATO. Uk wants NATO - even before the invasion that government tilted to western Europe
The question you should ask yourself is why it so heavily tilted to the EU- and you'd have to start at 2014
to answer that
AGAIN:
Putin started the war -owns it
NATO expansion was the predicate and we should remember hostile Uk to Russia
in any settlement is unstable
I dont know if a "neutral UK" is even possible anymore -but that's what should have been the earlier goal
Tranquillus in Exile
New member
I may be able to help there ...
Unable to take control of Kharkiv, the Russian army has resorted to flattening it from a distance. Over the past three weeks, Russian forces have bombarded the city of 1.5 million with a relentless barrage of artillery, rockets, cluster bombs and missiles.
“They are destroying our heritage. They want to destroy it all, they want to demoralize people,” said Dmytro Kuzubov, who has since fled Kharkiv along with hundreds of thousands of others.
Kharkiv is less than 50 miles from the Russian border and 75% of the population is Russian speaking. Putin came to protect them from genocide.
If NATO was really to blame, like you claim it is, I would expect to see resentment towards NATO from at least some Ukranians.
I may be able to help there ...
Unable to take control of Kharkiv, the Russian army has resorted to flattening it from a distance. Over the past three weeks, Russian forces have bombarded the city of 1.5 million with a relentless barrage of artillery, rockets, cluster bombs and missiles.
“They are destroying our heritage. They want to destroy it all, they want to demoralize people,” said Dmytro Kuzubov, who has since fled Kharkiv along with hundreds of thousands of others.
Kharkiv is less than 50 miles from the Russian border and 75% of the population is Russian speaking. Putin came to protect them from genocide.
Yes, I have made that point myself.
If Russian-speaking Ukrainians really wanted Vlad to liberate them, Kharkiv would have been the first place to welcome the invaders with flowers and chocolates
you need to start separating the predicate from the invasion
No one in the middle of a war is going to think of balance of powers when one side is shelling you
The object lesson though is having a hostile militarized state on Russia border with all indications it's just going to be more and more militarized and the government more hostile is a fruit of NATO expansion
and uber-militarization
Unlike you who simply thinks of Putin's dreams driving him, I look at the power politics
Not insulting you - but you harp on Putin reconstructing the USSR (patently impossible)
while I look at the factors in play
So you're saying that Ukrainians are not wise enough to understand who is really causing the shelling of their hospitals, schools, and homes --> NATO is.
I already answered you. You are to the point you are just throwing out situations, while I am talking geo-politics
have a nice day