Also it's quite ironic b****ing about Article 5 when the United States is the only country to invoke it at NATO nations responded without hesitation resulting in the deaths of many of their servicemembers for our war.
Why are Democrats talking about war? About war in regards to Russia nonetheless. Russian hacking is nothing new. Its not that im okay with Putin shemnanigs. One of my issues about Iraq is that Saddam wasn't immortal. He was and Putin is gonna die one day. I wouldn't set policy to him. If he does something egregious enough we will respond. That doesn't justify the existence of NATO. He is one man, in one nation, that isn't the Soviet Union anymore.
... and here is vp pence, about a year ago, delivering a long and rambling speech in Montenegro assuring support to Montenegro, the Balkans, and NATO... https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2437/
Do you understand the concept of "show of force"? If Putin thinks that there is a slight chink in the armor amongst NATO nations squabvsqua about Article 5, he could take advantage of it. The world understanding that NATO is one cohesive strong unit deters war. Because of Article 5, Putin understands that an attack on a small military like Montenegro is essentially an attack on the United States, Germany, Britian, France etc which is something Putin wouldn't dare do.
I think both malice and stupidity apply to Mr. trump. That, and a whole lot of other things, none of them good.
Yes Putin is gonna start wwiii after being in charge twenty years because Trump is a dunce. I get it After the "i looked into his eyes" idiot nonetheless
No, you don't get it. You were talking about NATO. NATO is still going so Trump won't start crap with NATO nations. What I said was that without NATO Trump could invade some NATO nations and it is possible nobody would defend them and it would not start WWIII.
The Democrats aren't talking about war. Others are claiming they want war because they are talking about standing up to espionage attacks on our Democracy. Russia hacking on our Democratic institutions is indeed new. For the record Putin has done something egregious. NATO coming to the defense of the United States after 9/11 justifies the existence of NATO. NATO preventing further Russian aggression justifies the existence of NATO. Maybe you should do some research on NATO. I don't know what else I can tell you.
An attack on Democracy? What is that really. Dude attacked democracy, round up the posse And i rhymed
Putin is not some rogue Russian president. He is pursuing their national interest. When he's dead, the next guy is likely to pursue a similar strategy because it is in their national interest. The problem is not individual leaders. The problem is the US and Russia are vying for world hegemony and our interests are almost unavoidably in opposition. Besides which, containing Russia is not the only application of NATO. China is quickly rising as a world power. A hegemonic struggle between the US and China is coming. If we don't have friends in that struggle, it may not go too well. I do not like Trump's attitude on NATO. But, I don't think we're anywhere close to Russia doing something rash here. If, for today's example, Russia were to attack Montenegro and Trump didn't not want to retaliate, the European members still would. With Russia at war with EU nations, Congress would declare war. It'd be on Trump to execute the war, but he'd either have to do it or engage in open treason and dereliction of duty. Maybe I put too much faith on our feckless Congress. But I do think there are still some things that transcend party lines. If Europe is at war, even our scurrilous congressmen will act. In any case, it's too much of a risk for Russia to take. I hope.
Yes, I did mean Putin. Thanks for catching that. Putin has already started things including attempting to assassinate heads of state, invading other nations, committing espionage attacks on the democracy of the United States. He would do more if it wasn't for NATO.
If defending the integrity of America's democracy isn't important to you, that's your privilege. But it puts you out of whack with most of the nation. I don't know why our democracy isn't important to you. But that's your issue.
This has nothing to do with "look him in the eyes". This has to do with the leader of the most powerful NATO member expressing doubt of one of the strongest binding measures of NATO which is a detterent to war. And yes, Putin has shown a desire to use military force to invade counties . Ukraine and Georgia are two examples and not coincidentally they aren't NATO members. So yes, Putin has a legitimate fear of invading a NATO nation and that fear will lesson if Trump keeps on talking up his rhetoric of how useless NATO is along with his lack of desire to abide by Article 5 .
I don't think Putin will invade a NATO nation anytime soon. It would take much more than a dufus President to express his doubts about Article 5. But I definitely don't like the direction we are heading with this rhetoric. Also consider that the only nations Putin has been willing to invade are non NATo members. So it is in effect an effective detterent.
I understand you have studied Russia extensively so im not gonna argue any of this. The only thing i will say because its my main point is that none of this will lead to actual warfare. It does lead to stuff like trying to intefere in elections, i don't disagree. But this a new world, in which we don't invest in military bases like the fifties because these aren't military battles anymore, and therefore if not obsolete, the function of NATO should at least be reformed.
Crimenea is a specific issue about natural gas. That doesn't justify Putin but it should not shape OUR Russian policy
No... I'm pretty sure Putin used actual military troops, tanks and jets to invade non-NATO members like Ukraine and Georgia .
You know he's invaded other countries besdies Ukraine. And no, the "they mostly speak Russian" reason is absurd.
