The fact that he put his boi in charge of the US, who pushed to dissolve NATO and back the US out of it.What from those facts leads you to conclude Putin will try to conquer Europe
The fact that he put his boi in charge of the US, who pushed to dissolve NATO and back the US out of it.What from those facts leads you to conclude Putin will try to conquer Europe
When did he push dissolving nato?The fact that he put his boi in charge of the US, who pushed to dissolve NATO and back the US out of it.
When he was President.When did he push dissolving nato?
It’s quite frightening how close we are to becoming an authoritarian government run by people who will absolute ignore the constitution and fight to hold onto this power if it is given and aligned with our greatest enemy for 80 years now, Russia. Truly,
If Russia ‘wins’ in Ukraine and turns them into a neutral buffer state, how does that turn into WW3?
Putin has publicly said that Russia’s conventional forces are weaker than NATO, and that if NATO enters the conflict their only resort is nuclear weapons.
Merkel explained that Putin viewed Ukrainian entry to NATO as a ‘declaration of war’.
Brilliant minds at the State Department and White House pressed ahead regardless.
We now have the predicted war.
What from those facts leads you to conclude Putin will try to conquer Europe, and as importantly, what convinces you that Russia actually possesses the wherewithal to conquer the EU with 3x the population and god knows what multiple of GDP?
Fvck you are stupid
Putin gets to dictate terms of our alliances? He can invade any sovereign country if he threatens nukes? Fact of that matter is we were slow incorporate Ukraine in NATO, if they were already a member Putin wouldn’t have invaded. It’s amazing to me how people justify backing down from a bully.Putin has publicly said that Russia’s conventional forces are weaker than NATO, and that if NATO enters the conflict their only resort is nuclear weapons.
Merkel explained that Putin viewed Ukrainian entry to NATO as a ‘declaration of war’.
Brilliant minds at the State Department and White House pressed ahead regardless.
We now have the predicted war.
What from those facts leads you to conclude Putin will try to conquer Europe, and as importantly, what convinces you that Russia actually possesses the wherewithal to conquer the EU with 3x the population and god knows what multiple of GDP?
Explain how you see it turning into WW3.
Why is it so hard for the fear mongers to make their case?
Putin gets to dictate terms of our alliances? He can invade any sovereign country if he threatens nukes? Fact of that matter is we were slow incorporate Ukraine in NATO, if they were already a member Putin wouldn’t have invaded. It’s amazing to me how people justify backing down from a bully.
Ukraine was not going to enter NATO. The main point of keeping them out was to prevent more Russian aggression. We all see how well that worked out.Putin has publicly said that Russia’s conventional forces are weaker than NATO, and that if NATO enters the conflict their only resort is nuclear weapons.
Merkel explained that Putin viewed Ukrainian entry to NATO as a ‘declaration of war’.
Brilliant minds at the State Department and White House pressed ahead regardless.
We now have the predicted war.
What from those facts leads you to conclude Putin will try to conquer Europe, and as importantly, what convinces you that Russia actually possesses the wherewithal to conquer the EU with 3x the population and god knows what multiple of GDP?
Sometimes.When he was President.
Were you asleep then, Rip Van Winkle?
Can you Google?Can you post any video where he said that?
Sometimes.
Can you post any video where he said that?
"Certainly Russia won't...."Certainly Russia won't decide Transnistria isn't actually part of a NATO country and needs liberated/connected to the motherland.
It isn't like they've been doing this for 30+ years now.
Ukraine was not going to enter NATO.
Putin gets to dictate terms of our alliances?
He can invade any sovereign country if he threatens nukes?
Fact of the matter is that Ukrainian incorporation into NATO was never something the Ukrainian public supported until after the coup, when the predominately Russian aligned populations had left.Fact of that matter is we were slow incorporate Ukraine in NATO, if they were already a member Putin wouldn’t have invaded. It’s amazing to me how people justify backing down from a bully.
So no video and in fact a senior person saying he was not going to withdraw from nato.
It's a thought experiment. I don't have anything specific in mind. But since you asked nicely...In your hypothetical, which country has done what to provoke a Russian attack on NATO soil?
So no video
Not what the senior people claimed.a senior person saying he was not going to withdraw from nato.
So no video and in fact a senior person saying he was not going to withdraw from nato.
Thanks for proving my point.
The hypothetical is implausible because France would not directly bomb Russians without coordination of NATO. So under either hypo, it’s war, and it’s been decided as a group.It's a thought experiment. I don't have anything specific in mind. But since you asked nicely...
Macron has been rather frisky lately, so let's imagine 2 scenarios where he commits planes and pilots to Ukraine, with French planes and pilots operating from French air bases.
1. French planes piloted by French pilots target Russian forces in Ukraine. Russia then bombs French air bases in retaliation. Is the US required to attack Russia because they attacked NATO France?
2. French planes piloted by French pilots target Russian factories in Russia. Russia then bombs French air bases in retaliation. Is the US required to attack Russia because they attacked NATO France?
You can play with variations on this. Some suggest the planes be based in NATO Poland. So in this variation, Russia strikes Poland, or France, or both.
Many here - including liberals, to my shock - seem to yearn for war with Russia. I'd rather not go there. I'm looking forward to watching the world go through the coming climate catastrophe. I'm going to be really disappointed if that gets preempted by nuclear war.
Why do I bother?The hypothetical is implausible because France would not directly bomb Russians without coordination of NATO. So under either hypo, it’s war, and it’s been decided as a group.
OMG for the last time I’m not a “conservative” I’m an independent. Just like I’m not a “lib” in the eyes of northern or whoever. So under your thought experiment, macron becomes a Hawk and unilaterally attacks Russians: 1 in Ukraine, and 2 in Russia. Russia responds and bombs France in france. What does Article 5 require? I don’t know I’m not an expert on it. Unencumbered by the law, I would say neither triggers anything because there has to be weasel words built into it permitting discretion, if a NATO member goes rogue. But it is a mildly academic exercise because it is not grounded in the possible.Why do I bother?
I realize conservatives can't do nuance - don't know why, but I have learned that it's true - but I didn't know you can't do thought experiments.
I'd love to hear your positions on things.OMG for the last time I’m not a “conservative” I’m an independent.
Some war monger named Putin invaded another nation in Western Europe.Between 1991 and 2014, increasing numbers of Americans (and others) questioned the need for and value of NATO. Especially liberals, but also many conservatives.
Now Democrats are so gung ho NATO that Lindsey Graham probably thinks he's in the wrong party.
How did that happen?
Your avatar is Bernie. Everyone not outer fringe left is right in your eyes. And what are your thoughts on my thoughts on climate and democracy? I will call a spade a spade and tell you if you are right.I'd love to hear your positions on things.
Oh, wait! I have heard them.
You're a conservative who hides behind the independent label when convenient, and can even trot out the occasional not-so-conservative position - usually on something rather trivial, like legal pot, as opposed to something serious like the climate crisis or democracy.
No need for me to guess. You can prove me wrong much more effectively by telling us your not-conservative positions on important issues. Do you have some?Your avatar is Bernie. Everyone not outer fringe left is right in your eyes. And what are your thoughts on my thoughts on climate and democracy? I will call a spade a spade and tell you if you are right.
I am for democracy and against climate crisis? As for democracy, I’m not even sure what anti-democracy would be unless you think I support the insurrection and MAGA, which I don’t. AsNo need for me to guess. You can prove me wrong much more effectively by telling us your not-conservative positions on important issues. Do you have some?
Between 1991 and 2014, increasing numbers of Americans (and others) questioned the need for and value of NATO. Especially liberals, but also many conservatives.
Now Democrats are so gung ho NATO that Lindsey Graham probably thinks he's in the wrong party.
How did that happen?
Russia was practically a failed state under Yeltsin. No need for NATO without an enemy. Fortunately for NATO, Putin annexed Crimea, so more money and power for NATO could be justified.You mean right after the fall of the Soviet Union? No fvcking way.
NATO forced Russia to start invading neighbors.You mean right after the fall of the Soviet Union? No fvcking way.
And what happened around 2014?
NATO forced Russia to start invading neighbors.