Trump says he’d disregard NATO treaty, urge Russian attacks on U.S. allies

submitted by Cancelthis from (washingtonpost.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]GuyWhite 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (42 children)

The poor WaPo is going down the tubes. Not even Bezos could save it. The losses are costing him his fortune. And no wonder…the article doesn’t even mention that by refusing to spend enough on defense, those countries have been disregarding the NATO treaty for a while.

[–]LordoftheFlies 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Shit, I half believe that the lack of defense spending is why some of those countries want to be part of NATO; they can shuffle that money elsewhere, tell their people that they're downsizing their militaries in the name of peace, love, and soul for public approval, and still have a big shield--paid for by someone else--to hide behind in case someone tries to jump.

[–]Musky 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Half believe? That's the whole point of NATO for these countries.

The US is the only country with a significant military among any NATO nation.

Crazy how people relying on the US for their entire defense like to shit talk us.

[–]Jiminy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

NATO = gladio.

USA with Permanent occupation after WWII. They never had to fund their military and are discouraged from doing so.

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (36 children)

So - those countries can be asked to pay or leave NATO. Trump arguing that he'd encourage Russia to attack a NATO country is additional evidence of Trump as a traitor to the US and its allies, not to mention his continued role as a simp for Putin. There's absolutely nothing redeemable about him. His comment is part of a U-turn in the decades of GOP cold war policy. WaPo merely reported the comment.

[–]Bridgeheadprod 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

Being a sovereign country means looking after your own people. Not the people of other countries. At the expense of your own.

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

Looking after your own country means surrounding yourself with allies. No country develops with without allies. Reversing decades of cold war policy would be stupid for many reasons.

[–]yellowsnow2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

Reversing decades of cold war policy would be stupid for many reasons.

Maybe NATO shouldn't have violated it's long held agreements about expanding. That is the whole reason for the Ukraine shit. That and the 2014 coup.

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

There's no evidence that NATO wanted Ukraine as a member. None.

It was also essential in 2014 for Ukrainians to expel the Russian puppets from its government. That level of corruption was destroying Ukraine.

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Let's not play dumb

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

seems you're playing dumb

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

They were definitely going to nato, and wanted to provoke putin for war profiteering reasons

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The only ones claiming this are in Russia. There is no evidence of this in Ukraine. Russia lost power in the Ukraine government in 2014, and began invasions as a result of that. This is about power and control for Russians, nothing more.

[–]yellowsnow2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Ukraine was a country that was 50% of ethnic Kievan Rus (ethnic Russians) prior to 2014. Why forcefully remove the president you democratically elected? Why would the interim government that was installed have the first action to turn the country's military against it's own citizens by labeling them "Russian backed separatists". The country was 50% of Kievan Rus decent prior to 2014, how many now? How did that ethnic cleansing go?

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Seems you want to find an excuse for Putin's invasion of Ukraine, a sovereign country. There is NO excuse for this. None whatsoever.

Your statistics are also wrong, by a large margin. Here are the ethnicity stats for 2014:

Ukrainian 77.8%, Russian 17.3%, Belarusian 0.6%, Moldovan 0.5%, Crimean Tatar 0.5%, Bulgarian 0.4%, Hungarian 0.3%, Romanian 0.3%, Polish 0.3%, Jewish 0.2%, other 1.8%

[–]yellowsnow2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Seems you find an excuse for ethnic cleansing.

43-50% spoke Russian.. What is a Ukrainian? How many of them have a Kievan Rus ancestry? Kiev is the founding land of all Kievan Rus (Russian) peoples. Kievan Rus is where the Rus in Russia and Belarus comes from. Kiev was the capitol of the Russian empire off and on for almost 900 years.. So technically every Russian could be called a Ukrainian, although that is a new name that did not exist in earlier times. So again, what is a "Ukrainian" but an ethnic Russian?

“the proverbial kinds of falsehoods, ‘lies, damned lies, and statistics.’"-- quote statistically attributed to many different people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus'

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Seems you find an excuse for ethnic cleansing.

Did Ukraine invade Russia? (No.) Did Russia invade Ukraine and start a war that could be considered an ethnic cleansing program? (Yes.)

43-50% spoke Russian..

Many in the US speak Spanish (13.2%), but they are American, not Spanish or Mexican. Some of them are Mexican-American.

Many in Ukraine have spoken Russian for decades, before the fall of the USSR. But they're Ukrainian. Ukraine is sovereign. Russia has had no right to invade Ukraine. Ask normal people about this. You're believing lies, on the behalf of Putin. Read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine

[–]Musky 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

He's trying to light a fire under their asses to build up their military forces. The US can't keep shouldering the entire burden. Every single NATO force has nothing more than a token military. They may be ramping up their spending, but that's funneling money to their defense contractors and not significantly increasing their military capabilities.

In a fight against Russia or China, Europe is toast.

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

NATO members have increased defense spending since WWII, exponentially, and would have no difficulty dealing with attacks from China, partially because of the logistics challenges for China (and they'd never attack the countries they sell $trillions of stuff to).

Trump has repeated a comment he made when he was president, attacking NATO because he's Putin's little bitch, but adding to it this time his honest agreement with Putin that NATO should be attacked by Russia. As a former president of a NATO country, and as presidential candidate, he's always been a traitor to the US and NATO.

[–]Musky 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

They're increasing spending on their stupid overpriced artillery and other bullshit. That's part of the grift. Their actual military capabilities are miniscule. Look at Britain with what, it's 68k man army? That's not going to be a serious force in another European war.

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

But we're discussing NATO, not just one of its members. Add up the arms industry SIPRI Trend Indicator Values (TIVs) of France, Italy, Germany, Spain and Poland, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry

See also global military expenditures of the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, and the Netherlands here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_highest_military_expenditures

Now if you add the US and other NATO members and parthers, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#Kosovo_intervention

There's no comparison. And for a comparison of NATO vs. Russian militaries, see: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293174/nato-russia-military-comparison/

If we want to compare NATO military expenditure with BOTH China's and Russia's, we get: https://armedforces.eu/compare/country_NATO_vs_China_and_Russia

China's support of Russia's invasion has already resulted in a massive increase in military expenditures for NATO, and the addition of new members (Finland in April, and more to come) and partners .

[–]Rah 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Moo

[–]Musky 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

military expenditures != Capable military

Spending 100k a shell isn't helping anyone. That's gonna be why we lose.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[removed]

    [–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Trump says he would encourage Russia to attack Nato allies who pay too little

    It's often difficult to agree with Trump's statements, but what the fuck is the point of encouraging a fading nuclear power to attack the allies that will trigger going to war with that nuclear power?

    There's no fucking benefit.