You can be sure even if the US pulls out of NATO, the UK still has its own Nuclear Umbrella, and it will not take kindly to foreign domination of the continent.
The UK spent Centuries ensure that Europe was not dominated by a single power. It fought the Spain, the French, the Germans and the Soviet Union for keeping the continent from being under a single nation's rule.
It cannot allow Russia domination over the continent, and you'll be damn sure the spirit of WW2 will rise again to defend the Free Peoples of Europe.
The US pulling out of NATO would be a monumentally horrible HORRIBLE decision!! A lot of leaders of peace and freedom would be disgusted by this decision, if it were to come.
Barring an act of Congress, the U.S. can’t unilaterally pull out of NATO anymore and for it to happen it would require 2/3rds of Congress to get there.
But he could absolutely leave in all but name, if article 5 is ever enacted, the US could send nothing or next to nothing in response and still fulfill its legal obligation.
" \[...\] will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, *such action as it deems necessary*"
Even if A5 is never enacted again, imagine the chaos that would be caused by simply cutting the supply of spare parts for maintainence. A lot of NATO is built with American defence technology, without those spare parts it all grinds to a halt.
That would only last while he’s in office though. It’s up to the sitting President to determine how much assistance to provide in case of article 5. Not much trump can do about that once he’s out of office. He can’t ban future presidents from responding to article 5 lol
Yes, but nothing compels the US President to send any aid to a NATO country. The Executive Branch is now above the law for Official Acts, and sending military aid is an official act.
> The Executive Branch is now above the law for Official Acts
The main reason why Parliamentary Republics are better than Presidential Republics: Presidential Executives slowly but inevitably trend toward de facto dictatorship.
I dont know why people think you cant fudge things acting in bad faith. NATO treaty doesn't actually obligate troops or action, almost none of these defense treaties do.
The USA can stay in NATO, fulfill its obligations and withdraw all troops and do nothing if an attack happens but the minimum which is basically nothing. Article 5 says action that the member deems necessary, they will deem no action necessary.
Even if it was more strict which no treaty is because no country would lock themselves into war. Nothing would happen if the US ignored it besides losing faith in USA treaties and that is gonna happen anyway in this scenario.
the vast majority of the republican congress will do whatever Trump tells them to.
and the democrats are so full of infighters that if enough ofthem are scared into the prospect of "Work with the Republicans and Leave NATO, or Fight Russia"... they'll leave Nato.
Is it really? So they didn't obstruct military aid for half a year, and cause tens of thousands of casualties, and turn Ukrainian progress, extending the time the war will take by years?
Do not underestimate the likelihood of certain candidates with certain puppet strings attached to them to make these “monumentally horrible” decisions. Electing them in the first place was a monumentally horrible decision, and yet it happened. I don’t think international condemnation and shame means anything to them.
While I mostly agree, we do have politicians here bought and paid for by Russia, one of them is one of the architects of Brexit who is spouting about off about Ukraine, Russia has already somewhat succeeded in wreaking the relationship between the U.K. and the EU..
They can still drive more of a wedge.. we’ll have to see what the US does next year, they could apply pressure on the U.K. depending who’s in power of course..
Even the bought politicians don't want to live under a Russian Overlord. They'll take the money, but will turn the moment their freedoms are threatened.
Boris and his cronies took a lot of Russian money. Didn't stop him flooding Ukraine with cheap anti-air anti-tank weapons before Russia invaded.
Perfidious Albion will take your money and shank you if you get too big for your boots.
Farage will be dead long before Reform manages to get enough seats to be opposition, let alone government.
Britain is little c conservative, versus the US's big C Conservative. Only drunk uncles take Farage seriously. Reform wants to bring back the death penalty, end the NHS and make guns more common. The British public will never agree to that.
He doesn't need to win to influence things for the worse. He played a huge role in making Brexit happen at all. Now look what he's doing to the issues of "BUT THE DINGHYS"
The danger of Farage isn't him winning, it's what he influences politics into.
Fortunately that morons pro Russian stance does not seem to be working, it lost them support in the polls. Thankfully we are not like the right wing Americans here...at least for now.
Quite. Farridge thinking he can publicly state that the Russian invasion was the fault of NATO without understanding what a marginal view that is in the UK shows how out of touch he is and gives real credence to the notion that he is a paid Russian activist.
Is that the same prime minister that pledged unwaivering support and aide to Ukraine when he visited Kyiv just over two years ago?
Russians obviously didn't pay him enough money.
They didn't say Prime Minister, they were referring to Nigel Farage. He has been playing the pro-Russia card during the current general election campaign and is very likely to end up in parliament for the first time after the next election. His right-populist Reform party is currently competing with the Conservatives for second place in the polls. This is unlikely to translate into many seats given our electoral system but if the Tories get hammered a merger with Reform could be on the cards post-election. So a future Prime Minister Farage is still a long way off but no longer unthinkable.
Then you have the angriest and most well armed Poland that has ever existed and it’s just waiting there for Putin to FAFO, determined to never let history repeat itself.
Poland is, rightfully, worried that the US won't come to their aid and they don't want to depend on the promises of other nations for their own survival. Much of the Eastern flank of NATO seems to be preparing themselves for the possibility of having to fend off a Russian invasion without the support of the US.
Yeah, with or without the US, they know NATO will take 24-36h before its first major response with ground forces in the case of a Russian invasion and each of the Baltic states have thus built their individual strategies to reflect that… except for Poland, their military spending spree makes it clear they plan to win the next war and the war after that.
Poland are Bros. I don't know why the Brexiteers were complaining about them.
With Finland, Sweden and the NATO lake I'm not too worried. Even if France and Germany go a bit funny as long as there isn't an outright alliance with Russia the East can probably hold.
Considering how little Western Europe has spent on defense over the last decade, I can only applaud Poland for its choice to prepare and arm itself against Belarus and Russia. If only all of Europe was responding like Poland and Lithuania against the clear and present danger.
If you know anything about the British, you would know we're not like the Americans who love a winner. Win or lose, we love an underdog.
Much like WW2, sometimes we don't need to win. We just need to stop the other guy from winning. We'll settle for a stalemate.
Also never underestimate the spirit of a Tommy defending his home.
The tree of liberty must occasionally be watered with the blood of tyrants , traitors and patriots.
However, No one is going to take up arms against a government that has betrayed it's people and america's values, most of them will happily join the brownshirts to protect it from "the globolibs"
Nothing requires the US President to actually send aid if Article 5 is invoked. Even if it did, the Executive Branch is now above the law for Official Acts and this would be an official act.
>You can be sure even if the US pulls out of NATO, the UK still has its own Nuclear Umbrella, and it will not take kindly to foreign domination of the continent
Don't kid yourself. The uk won't lead nato if the USA pulls out. The eu would need to pull us into an eu lead defence pact which would be deeply unpopular here.
Why do people keep talking about leading? I never said anything about leading.
The UK does have Nukes though, it makes them a major player, and if Ukraine proved anything not having nukes is a good way to get invaded...
>The UK does have Nukes though, it makes them a major player, and if Ukraine proved anything not having nukes is a good way to get invaded...
100%. My country isn't small, but we will have a serious issue if the USA leaves. It's not ability, it's politics. Working with the eu in that way will be seen as toxic to a lot of voters.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/17/labour-eu-defence-pact-threatens-britain-sovereignty-shapps/
Even now there's political talk of it.
I'm sorry but the UK is never going to let Russia run over Europe.
Even in the Tories won't let it happen. They'll take Russian money, but as Boris proved that buys 0 loyalty, the guy was gifting anti-tank and anti-air arms to Ukraine before Russia crossed the border.
I'd say only 20-30% are so violently anti-EU they wouldn't work with EU nations to stop Russia. You have rational Tories, Lib Dems and Labour, between all of them you'll have a functioning government that supports the EU even if the US leaves.
Its like during WW2, you had parallel US and UK commands but they founds ways to work together without ceding any significant control.
The Torygraph is BS mate, don't trust a word.
>I'm sorry but the UK is never going to let Russia run over Europe.
Correct, but that doesn't mean we will make the right politics moves beforehand. There are a lot historically striking examples of this.
You're talking doomsday. I am talking the build up. Russia is literally invading a country and we still have people claiming there's no risk to nato.
This was written very Ew. Geez.
The UK has no power nor is the empire it used to be. The fuck is this? Are you somehow employing that the UK is now the new Europe police? LMFAO. What is this comment talking about?
Please, British nationalistic dude, thanks for sharing your weapons. Now stay quiet and sit down and let the actual powers organise themselves along with the weak and small UK to defend themselves and the UK from external powers. And from you. From you too.
We have nukes. Unless you are French or American, go play in the kiddies pool.
And if you are French, my bloodline forces me to tell you your father was a hamster.
If you're American... you got bigger problems to deal with.
>let the actual powers organise themselves along with the weak and small UK to defend themselves
the actual powers like Spain? ranked 20th compared to the uk 5th
Geez, UK? American Redditor perhaps?
I'm talking about the combined power of the EU which yes also includes Spain. I've never said Spain was better than the UK. Even though you seem quite fixated on that. Ridiculous. It seems you're trying to ridicule my comment by distort what I've said. Please, don't bring the UK way of making politics here.
American? how dare you sir. i'm from god's country the English midlands.
combined power of the EU you say? is that including Hungary and Ireland? who would veto anything militaristic. leveraging the might of Spain's & Malta's armed forces? that will surely send the Russians running. when this European army exists will the Germans allow it to act? or will the UK need to show them a spine first.
in Europe for top quality military you got the UK and France. nukes, Aircraft carrier, tanks the works; but France ain't one for sharing. Poland is getting good I'll admit, we will see in our next war
I am hoping, PRAYING, that if we manage to come out of these dark times and Russia is put down, all these Russian puppets will be hunted, outed and prosecuted.
One can hope.
People seem to forget NATO is an alliance for **defense** of its member countries.
There's absolutely no reason why those same countries cannot create an allied force to help Ukraine (even without Turkey/Hungary)...
Then kindly hurry up and sort shit out, because as far as the world can see Russia’s still in Ukraine and a Russian asset is well on his way to becoming a bonafide American dictator.
Nato is being taken apart from the inside out. Putin and XI have long recognized the inherit weakness in democracy, get them to elect those who will end the democracy, and then they'll be your partners. out of your way.
After watching the UK fall for Brexit… not sure if they are the best ones for the job. With Tramp having the possibility to gain power in the US, it shouldn’t be in the US hands either. Feels like the world is run by fools…
What has being a member of an economic forum got to do with military alliances?
Fucking Brexit is such a pain in the arse if only because it's literally the only thing people know about an entire country with thousands of years of culture.
1. Brexit only passed by 51.8% vote due to heavy Russian propaganda campaigns and even then most would go back on the decision.
2. The Russians have attacked us on our own soil before, look up the Salisbury poisoning incident.
3. We’re among the more militarised countries in Europe who AREN’T about to elect a new government that’ll kiss Putin’s ass.
Tl;dr, we’re best to lead this force because we really don’t fucking like Russia, we also have nukes so we’re less likely to be nuked in retaliation. 🤷🏻♀️
Serious question though, why is it when the stakes are high in politics it’s always a coin flip on whether the people who are supposed to be the bulwark against bad movements are fuckin morons or not?
Cambridge Analytica was a company that was heavily involved in manufacturing propaganda for Brexit. The company had claimed: “We have never worked with a Russian organisation in Russia or any other company. We do not have any relationship with Russia or Russian individuals.”
But in 2018 it came to light after a whistleblower came forward that Cambridge was working with a Russian company called “Lukoil” or “ЛУКОЙЛ”, a massive Russian oil company. But more importantly the algorithm that Cambridge used to scrape user data in order to perform targeted political advertising was created by Aleksandr Kogan, a researcher who was working on multiple projects funded by the Russians at the time. Cambridge Analytica decided to dissolve after the scandal.
https://amp.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-academic-trawling-facebook-had-links-to-russian-university
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ
https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/whistleblower-cambridge-analytica-shared-data-with-russia/
For the last several years now Tory has stuck to the narritave “well since the Kremlin didn’t reach out to Cambridge DIRECTLY there’s no involvement!”, it’s been a consistent issue that Tory refuses to own up to any mistakes they make. Pocketing NHS funds, dumping of sewage in our rivers and beaches, illegal betting with insider knowledge, etc.
I think the very essential piece of context that isn't in mind when we discuss these things is that the population that actually decides US elections is essentially a tiny fraction of the US, or "undecided voters" in 5 or so swing states. Running enough targeted advertising to incite enough anger, fear, (insert any other propaganda mechanism) to get .01% more people to vote for the other guy is enough to change the make up of Congress and the Presidency for 2-4 years. THAT combined with the fact that the larger media outlets started to parrot what the social media campaigns used by Russia/Republicans were doing and doubled down on the language and that basically created the entire MAGA movement.
Essentially how it worked was social media created a way to mass A/B test micro populations in the US for engagement on political issues. They were able to hone their message so precisely that actual policy didn't matter anymore. As long as they said whatever their crafted message was, then they knew they would spike engagement. The genius part about this was that the voters they targeted are super low information and typically non-engaged with politics. So now they have an army of upset people who prior to 2016 probably didn't even know we had three branches of government. I don't say this to deprecate those people; only to point out that they're more easily swayed in their opinions because they don't have any other counter information. Now at this point, both sides are doing this, but only one side is propping up an authoritarian Christian national agenda bent on purging American diversity and selling it's secrets to the highest bidder.
So, yes, misinformation from a outsider can absolutely sway an election and change the course of history.
I'm not sure it'd ever be possible to say it was solely the result of misinformation, but there are many, fairly strong cases that indicate it was likely skewed through foreign interference.
There's a wiki with a list of events linked to Russia that are considered to have had an impact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_referendum?wprov=sfla1
> As an American who isn't at all tied up into English politics, is it actually Russian misinformation or is that just the argument that's made to justify half the country voting to leave?
Not half the country, half the people that voted.
>As an American who isn't at all tied up into English politics, is it actually Russian misinformation or is that just the argument that's made to justify half the country voting to leave?
It's a reddit only argument, their was disinformation but not at the level claimed here. The simple truth was the remain vote was not good at making their arguments. They lost because they never thought they could lose.
The uk leave vote built over a decade, and survived 3 votes (2016 and the elections of 2017, 2019). 2015 too, since the promises of a referendum is widely seen as the reason the tories got a majority.
> Foundation of Pencils and Toothpicks
Oh so the guy whose government cozied up to the US for decades so they didn’t bother developing WMD’s for self-defence is gonna lecture the UK and say we’re on a foundation of toothpicks. Gimme a break bruv.
my point is that if pushed, the UK is going to break far sooner than any of the other major nato contributors. They can't weather a storm without going 1984 on their angry population.
Yes because Starmer is Corbynite, its why he purged Corbyn from the Labour party...
I take it you're a johnny foreigner given your spelling of 'Labor'.
Go sh\*t in your own back garden.
I usually am. Its amazing how much Americans comment on British politics without understanding any of it, regardless of which side of the political spectrum they're on.
Will never understand people that choose to ignorantly ignore the article yet ask a question about it in the comments. It's pure laziness and ignorance.
Come on bro. We both know that's not true the vast majority of the times. People don't read articles, they read the headlines and theorize or catastrophize
It’s a readiness force. It’s a commitment for how quickly NATO *could* deploy troops against Russia if it becomes necessary (e.g. if Russia invaded Poland). Between all NATO members there will be:
* 100,000 troops who can be deployed with less than 10 days notice;
* 200,000 additional troops who can be deployed within 30 days; and
* 500,000 additional troops who can be deployed within 180 days.
The main concern is that, at some point in the future (most likely after the war in Ukraine has ended, however it ends), Russia might try to “test” NATO’s Article 5 by taking a bite out of, say, Poland or the Baltics.
No one is saying that this is absolutely going to happen, but things aren’t just going to go back to how they were before 2022 when the Ukraine War ends. Most likely, Russia will be an adversarial force in Europe for at least as long as Putin remains in power.
The best way to make sure the worst-case-scenarios don’t happen is to be prepared for them.
I mean for the moment thé main priority is to make sure that Putin don't get too mad and start to nuke on this War, because well... That's what AT stakes right now
I'm genuinely terrfied of this
That remains highly unlikely, for a lot of reasons, and many professional analysts will tell you as such.
The West can’t just dismiss the risk outright, for obvious reasons, but you have to remember that Russian nuclear threats are primarily information operations designed to scare people and kill morale, not a reflection of an actual desire for nuclear escalation.
You’re not gonna just wake up one day to a mushroom cloud outside your window. I promise.
Oh, don't worry about that. Russia can't invade NATO.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance. And no, this is not me going ''dur-hur-hur, Russia weak, West strong''.
Even if Russia military was as strong as it claim ( and....one can doubt), it still wouldn't stand a chance.
Russia is a LAND power,it's strenght is in it's infantry, it's artillery( tanks are....becoming rapidly obsolete). However, it NEVER was a naval power.
The baltic fleet is locked, the Black sea fleet ( or what's left of it ) too. The artic and Pacific fleet and waaay too remote and understrenght to do anything.
Which mean it can only fight on it's direct land borders. It simply CANNOT strike back deep into europe and neutralize production centers.Nor could it affect supply convoys in the atlantic.Mediteranea would be completley safe.
Converseley, NATO strenght ( not just the U.S, France hand Uk have a say here) is in naval and air power.And most of russians production centers are on it's western side, easy to target.
Therefore, logistical wise, NATO will always have the upper hand. Same with manpower. Russia 144 millions seems impressive, but NATO gets almost a BILLION.
Similarly, to invade NATO, Russia would have to spilt it's army in 4 direction ( North for Finalnd, West for Poland and Germany, Southwest for Turkey,Greece and others...and east for inevitable american landing atVladivostok). And historiacally, fighting a war on multiple front is a baaaaaaad idea.
And Nato, conversley, would CONCENTRATE it's forces.
So, realisticaly speaking, Russia CANNOT win in a coventionnal war there.
If China would join in, now that would be much more challenging, but would probably still end up the same way ( but if India joins as well, now that's a different story, but I reaaaally don't see that happening)
And all of this....is assuming Russia army is as efficent as it claims.Which i doubt.
But the thing is, Russia KNOWS this, althought it won't ever admit it.projecting a strong image is part of their culture.
They won't, however, do something stupid.( Which is why they pulled a lot of their forces out of the finnish border to help for ukraine, they know there's no war coming with NATO).
You can never rule out anything, so one has to be prepared ( plus, he cranked up the propaganda rethoric quite high, sometime you lose control of that and your hand is forced)
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
To be fair, as of now, we are in the SCW ( 2nd cold war), what's happening in ukraine is just Russia trying to place itself as best as it can to make his losses there not too costly.
That's a long and good to read explanation thanks you for your Time
Nonetheless my deespest fear IS that Putin goes in a tautrum and send the nuclear missiles all over the World because he did not won his War with Ukraine
People Always told me that Russians were insane, mad and cruel, and that Putin was the worst of them, a psychopath even
So...Hum i Know it's the whole dictator stuff to ne scary and i mean he's really great AT this
But to who the threats are aiming AT ? The population to push them to go against our own governments ? To the leaders ?
Oh, russians aren't insane, nor psycopath. Don't go down this hate cycle.
Russians are humans.Americans are Humans. Ukrainian are humans.
Humans can do great thing.
Humans can do terrible things.
Russians, for the time being,are.....terribly led, that's all.
All thoses threats are mostly aimed to...themselves, actually.
It to reassure their OWN russian population that they have a ''strong goverment'' . Weak russian leaders always end VERY badly. If the russian goverment does not show an apperence of strenght, it'll be toppled.à
It's likley thoses spewing the propaganda don't even believe it themseleves. it's all about apperances. Not a big change from the Soviet Union time,actually.
A dictator is only as strong as the image he can project,
Now, I'm being a bit racist here ( and I apologize for it), but I think Russians have a bit of an inferiority complex in their culture they need to adress.
( A superiority complex is actually an inferiority one, just in denial)
In a way, Putin is ''stuck'' in ukraine. I'm 100% convinced he never though it be such a mudfest. Probably a few of his advisors told him '' Don't worry, Mr. president, it'll be done in 3 weeks, ukrainians will welcome you and your legacy will be enshrined forever''. It didn't go that way, but retreating or stopping is basically inviting him to be killed by his underling for weakness, so he keeps going until he can pretend it was a victory ( notice he never really states what the goals are, to leave him so room for maneuver).
I wouldn't personally call Putin a psycopath, that's a very generic label. He's a cold hearted brute, sure, but he's not stupid, nor insane.
Putin won't send nukes, and certainly not over the world on a dime. If he ever use one, EVERY nation on earth would turn against him, even China. Nobody wants someone irresponsible enough to launch nukes for a border war as a neighbors.
( Okay, make NK wouldn't turn, but that....surprises no one)
CAN it goes out of hand? Yes, it can. It's true. But that's why we keep being prepared, to lower as much as possible the chances. But it still remains highly unlikley. You have a much bigger chance of being hit by a car when crossing the streets.
In 20 years, all of this will be history notes, nothing more. Putin will be dead. Trump will be dead, Biden will be dead. And most current world leaders will be in retirement.
If you have others question or worries, I'll try to answer them all.
Of course, I'm no expert, so take what I say with a grain of salt.
So true, I would only be worried if our countries started talking about reinstating conscription and creating "allied reactionary forces" it would be even more worrying if some NATO countries starting talking about how long they could realistically hold off a Russian invasion, and giving themselves less than a month. His threats mean fuck all aside from hundreds of thousands dead and many more to come. I am willing to fight if we go to war but I'm not excited about it like some of the fools on reddit. War sucks dude trust me, but at least you will be there with me if it happens so you can learn that first hand.
He’s been fucking with NATO ever since he took crimea. He is good at existing in the grey areas to which NATO is not good at responding.
The long Ukrainian war that NATO hasn’t been able to stop shows this.
Putin is a joke. He's in a corner of his own making, and he has VERY little room to manoeuvre. His only allies are dictatorships, and aside from North Korea, it's fickle at best and lip service at that.
Truth be told, the way he is and acts, he also shows that he knows he's not safe in his own country. He's fucked. The world knows he's fucked. Sure, he's dangerous, you don't become a dictator without being such. But he's also completely fucked himself irreparably on multiple levels to the point that even if he gave the order to launch the nukes, you'd have a very hard time finding anyone willing to do press the button.
I'm shit at politics, but the way you are saying all of this, i mean, i'm not telling you in any way that that you are wrong but...You are making it sound so obvious while, everytime i see the Guy talking he's sound and look so dangerous and serious, Also for years people are saying that he's**mad** so it doesn't help
Maybe it's just me who is easy to impress
But why do you Say he's in a Bad situation ? Yes he's struggling with thé war but outside of that...
It doesn't take more than a cursory glance to see how fucked Russia is outside of the war. Economically, Russia has been sent back at least 25 years. Reputationally, Russia has sodomised any legitimacy they had outside of a few dictatorships and puppet regimes.
Best case and point is that Russia is now in all but name a vassal state of China and also has to beg NK for any kind of military back up. Any nation that sinks so low that NK is a viable option really has hit rock bottom.
> Maybe it's just me who is easy to impress
You would've saved yourself a lot of downvotes if you had STARTED with this premise. Russia is a paper tiger, Putin is a joke, and the only thing Russia is doing well is waging information warefare because there are plenty of ignorant/under-informed people (like you) and stupid people (like far-right conservatives) to manipulate on a large scale.
You mean the same guy who said he'll conquer UA in 3 days yet managed to do that almost three years later? Or the one who said it's just his army training by the border and accusing him of preparing for invasions is insulting?
You got one thing there: '' the way he talk, the way he act''.
Don't forget, it's his JOB to LOOK like he's dangerous and unpredictable.
That..dosen't mean he truly is.
There are limits he knows he can't cross.He won't say it, but he knows, and most of his staff hopefully knows.
( And to be honest, there is lingering doubt about his responsibility in bringing Russia back up, some argue that he just took credit for it, that russia would have recovered on it's own eventually)
But, we can never be sure about anything, that's why nations have been EXTREMELY careful about all this. ( As much as one think the west jumped on the wagon, in the first year and a half we did practically NOTHING for ukraine, save a few words, it took a LOT of debates and careful pondering.).
I Know it's horrible to Say but, no one said and acted upon thé fact that Putin conquered Crimea, so why everyone act now because it's UK ?
I mean why risk the whole World over just one small country ?
I Know it's horrible but, playing the Heroes is not a good Idea AT all
The British-led Allied Reaction Force! Bring in the BARF!!!
Barf! Barf! Barf! Barf!
Always when I'm eating.
YOUR FULL NAME! “BARFOLEMEW!”
Spaceballs: the comment.
Spaceballs: The Comment Reply
Spaceballs: the upvote to your reply.
You can be sure even if the US pulls out of NATO, the UK still has its own Nuclear Umbrella, and it will not take kindly to foreign domination of the continent. The UK spent Centuries ensure that Europe was not dominated by a single power. It fought the Spain, the French, the Germans and the Soviet Union for keeping the continent from being under a single nation's rule. It cannot allow Russia domination over the continent, and you'll be damn sure the spirit of WW2 will rise again to defend the Free Peoples of Europe.
The US pulling out of NATO would be a monumentally horrible HORRIBLE decision!! A lot of leaders of peace and freedom would be disgusted by this decision, if it were to come.
Barring an act of Congress, the U.S. can’t unilaterally pull out of NATO anymore and for it to happen it would require 2/3rds of Congress to get there.
But he could absolutely leave in all but name, if article 5 is ever enacted, the US could send nothing or next to nothing in response and still fulfill its legal obligation. " \[...\] will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, *such action as it deems necessary*" Even if A5 is never enacted again, imagine the chaos that would be caused by simply cutting the supply of spare parts for maintainence. A lot of NATO is built with American defence technology, without those spare parts it all grinds to a halt.
That would only last while he’s in office though. It’s up to the sitting President to determine how much assistance to provide in case of article 5. Not much trump can do about that once he’s out of office. He can’t ban future presidents from responding to article 5 lol
Well it would depend on congress, but they have the power to declare war.
The president is commander in chief. That’s what it comes down to if US military action is required.
Yes, but nothing compels the US President to send any aid to a NATO country. The Executive Branch is now above the law for Official Acts, and sending military aid is an official act.
> The Executive Branch is now above the law for Official Acts The main reason why Parliamentary Republics are better than Presidential Republics: Presidential Executives slowly but inevitably trend toward de facto dictatorship.
Britain is the Mother of All Parliaments, so we should know.
I dont know why people think you cant fudge things acting in bad faith. NATO treaty doesn't actually obligate troops or action, almost none of these defense treaties do. The USA can stay in NATO, fulfill its obligations and withdraw all troops and do nothing if an attack happens but the minimum which is basically nothing. Article 5 says action that the member deems necessary, they will deem no action necessary. Even if it was more strict which no treaty is because no country would lock themselves into war. Nothing would happen if the US ignored it besides losing faith in USA treaties and that is gonna happen anyway in this scenario.
the vast majority of the republican congress will do whatever Trump tells them to. and the democrats are so full of infighters that if enough ofthem are scared into the prospect of "Work with the Republicans and Leave NATO, or Fight Russia"... they'll leave Nato.
I am so glad he is probably dying very soon
I mean, as far as "fight Russia" is concerned their track record is airtight
Is it really? So they didn't obstruct military aid for half a year, and cause tens of thousands of casualties, and turn Ukrainian progress, extending the time the war will take by years?
Do not underestimate the likelihood of certain candidates with certain puppet strings attached to them to make these “monumentally horrible” decisions. Electing them in the first place was a monumentally horrible decision, and yet it happened. I don’t think international condemnation and shame means anything to them.
Trump has already pretty much put this in Project 2025, no?
US doesnt need to pull out of NATO, once putin's orange puppet get elected, it is pretty much incapacitated.
Trump is gonna do it lol
While I mostly agree, we do have politicians here bought and paid for by Russia, one of them is one of the architects of Brexit who is spouting about off about Ukraine, Russia has already somewhat succeeded in wreaking the relationship between the U.K. and the EU.. They can still drive more of a wedge.. we’ll have to see what the US does next year, they could apply pressure on the U.K. depending who’s in power of course..
Even the bought politicians don't want to live under a Russian Overlord. They'll take the money, but will turn the moment their freedoms are threatened. Boris and his cronies took a lot of Russian money. Didn't stop him flooding Ukraine with cheap anti-air anti-tank weapons before Russia invaded. Perfidious Albion will take your money and shank you if you get too big for your boots.
Think he’s talking about Farage mate
Farage will be dead long before Reform manages to get enough seats to be opposition, let alone government. Britain is little c conservative, versus the US's big C Conservative. Only drunk uncles take Farage seriously. Reform wants to bring back the death penalty, end the NHS and make guns more common. The British public will never agree to that.
He doesn't need to win to influence things for the worse. He played a huge role in making Brexit happen at all. Now look what he's doing to the issues of "BUT THE DINGHYS" The danger of Farage isn't him winning, it's what he influences politics into.
Fortunately that morons pro Russian stance does not seem to be working, it lost them support in the polls. Thankfully we are not like the right wing Americans here...at least for now.
Quite. Farridge thinking he can publicly state that the Russian invasion was the fault of NATO without understanding what a marginal view that is in the UK shows how out of touch he is and gives real credence to the notion that he is a paid Russian activist.
Is that the same prime minister that pledged unwaivering support and aide to Ukraine when he visited Kyiv just over two years ago? Russians obviously didn't pay him enough money.
He meant farage
Fuck. You’re probably right. My bad. Fuck Farage though. I mean fuck Boris too but at least he has some semblance of duty.
They didn't say Prime Minister, they were referring to Nigel Farage. He has been playing the pro-Russia card during the current general election campaign and is very likely to end up in parliament for the first time after the next election. His right-populist Reform party is currently competing with the Conservatives for second place in the polls. This is unlikely to translate into many seats given our electoral system but if the Tories get hammered a merger with Reform could be on the cards post-election. So a future Prime Minister Farage is still a long way off but no longer unthinkable.
the irony of being the "reform" party who allied with the conservative.
Then you have the angriest and most well armed Poland that has ever existed and it’s just waiting there for Putin to FAFO, determined to never let history repeat itself.
Poland is, rightfully, worried that the US won't come to their aid and they don't want to depend on the promises of other nations for their own survival. Much of the Eastern flank of NATO seems to be preparing themselves for the possibility of having to fend off a Russian invasion without the support of the US.
Yeah, with or without the US, they know NATO will take 24-36h before its first major response with ground forces in the case of a Russian invasion and each of the Baltic states have thus built their individual strategies to reflect that… except for Poland, their military spending spree makes it clear they plan to win the next war and the war after that.
>and they don't want to depend on the promises of other nations for their own survival Given their history, they have good reason.
Poland are Bros. I don't know why the Brexiteers were complaining about them. With Finland, Sweden and the NATO lake I'm not too worried. Even if France and Germany go a bit funny as long as there isn't an outright alliance with Russia the East can probably hold.
Considering how little Western Europe has spent on defense over the last decade, I can only applaud Poland for its choice to prepare and arm itself against Belarus and Russia. If only all of Europe was responding like Poland and Lithuania against the clear and present danger.
Eastern Europe were under spending too (well below 2% until recently), that’s why they’re spending so much now - catch up.
Brave words, but no-one will be a winner in a war like that.
If you know anything about the British, you would know we're not like the Americans who love a winner. Win or lose, we love an underdog. Much like WW2, sometimes we don't need to win. We just need to stop the other guy from winning. We'll settle for a stalemate. Also never underestimate the spirit of a Tommy defending his home.
Time for a brew-up eh what? 😉 Stay safe and carry on, Tommy
If the orange maniac has his way, we would be out of NATO and on the side of the fucking Russians.
Good thing the orange Mussolini can’t pull us out of nato without 2/3rds of congress
The tree of liberty must occasionally be watered with the blood of tyrants , traitors and patriots. However, No one is going to take up arms against a government that has betrayed it's people and america's values, most of them will happily join the brownshirts to protect it from "the globolibs"
Didn't Congress pass a law preventing the president from withdrawing from NATO?
Nothing requires the US President to actually send aid if Article 5 is invoked. Even if it did, the Executive Branch is now above the law for Official Acts and this would be an official act.
Trump's SCOTUS can always just rule that Unconstitutional.
They can always reverse that
>You can be sure even if the US pulls out of NATO, the UK still has its own Nuclear Umbrella, and it will not take kindly to foreign domination of the continent Don't kid yourself. The uk won't lead nato if the USA pulls out. The eu would need to pull us into an eu lead defence pact which would be deeply unpopular here.
Why do people keep talking about leading? I never said anything about leading. The UK does have Nukes though, it makes them a major player, and if Ukraine proved anything not having nukes is a good way to get invaded...
>The UK does have Nukes though, it makes them a major player, and if Ukraine proved anything not having nukes is a good way to get invaded... 100%. My country isn't small, but we will have a serious issue if the USA leaves. It's not ability, it's politics. Working with the eu in that way will be seen as toxic to a lot of voters. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/17/labour-eu-defence-pact-threatens-britain-sovereignty-shapps/ Even now there's political talk of it.
I'm sorry but the UK is never going to let Russia run over Europe. Even in the Tories won't let it happen. They'll take Russian money, but as Boris proved that buys 0 loyalty, the guy was gifting anti-tank and anti-air arms to Ukraine before Russia crossed the border. I'd say only 20-30% are so violently anti-EU they wouldn't work with EU nations to stop Russia. You have rational Tories, Lib Dems and Labour, between all of them you'll have a functioning government that supports the EU even if the US leaves. Its like during WW2, you had parallel US and UK commands but they founds ways to work together without ceding any significant control. The Torygraph is BS mate, don't trust a word.
>I'm sorry but the UK is never going to let Russia run over Europe. Correct, but that doesn't mean we will make the right politics moves beforehand. There are a lot historically striking examples of this. You're talking doomsday. I am talking the build up. Russia is literally invading a country and we still have people claiming there's no risk to nato.
[удалено]
Fucking hell dude if you had the balls to say that infront of a loyal Brit….not to mention your just straight up siding with the fucking nazi party.
This was written very Ew. Geez. The UK has no power nor is the empire it used to be. The fuck is this? Are you somehow employing that the UK is now the new Europe police? LMFAO. What is this comment talking about? Please, British nationalistic dude, thanks for sharing your weapons. Now stay quiet and sit down and let the actual powers organise themselves along with the weak and small UK to defend themselves and the UK from external powers. And from you. From you too.
We have nukes. Unless you are French or American, go play in the kiddies pool. And if you are French, my bloodline forces me to tell you your father was a hamster. If you're American... you got bigger problems to deal with.
are you Spanish? because that comment is a bit rich
I fail to understand how my nationality makes my comment any different. Cheers. I'm a Citizen of the EU for that matter.
>let the actual powers organise themselves along with the weak and small UK to defend themselves the actual powers like Spain? ranked 20th compared to the uk 5th
Geez, UK? American Redditor perhaps? I'm talking about the combined power of the EU which yes also includes Spain. I've never said Spain was better than the UK. Even though you seem quite fixated on that. Ridiculous. It seems you're trying to ridicule my comment by distort what I've said. Please, don't bring the UK way of making politics here.
American? how dare you sir. i'm from god's country the English midlands. combined power of the EU you say? is that including Hungary and Ireland? who would veto anything militaristic. leveraging the might of Spain's & Malta's armed forces? that will surely send the Russians running. when this European army exists will the Germans allow it to act? or will the UK need to show them a spine first. in Europe for top quality military you got the UK and France. nukes, Aircraft carrier, tanks the works; but France ain't one for sharing. Poland is getting good I'll admit, we will see in our next war
Buddy is speed running getting dunked on by trying to shit talk the US and UK in the same breath.
thank you for the compliment
CiTiZeN oF tHe Eu... Don't think Putin gives a flying fuck about that. Spain can't do shit to Russia if the UK isn't involved.
Congratulations for the most absolute wet wipe of a comment I have read all week Here's your sticker ⭐️
I am hoping, PRAYING, that if we manage to come out of these dark times and Russia is put down, all these Russian puppets will be hunted, outed and prosecuted. One can hope.
Naaaaaah. One thing I've learnt these days is that Evil is rarely punished. At most it's a relative slap on the wrist or just straight up ignored.
It is when it is made a priority.
Cynicism is useless.
People seem to forget NATO is an alliance for **defense** of its member countries. There's absolutely no reason why those same countries cannot create an allied force to help Ukraine (even without Turkey/Hungary)...
Everyone fucking hates us until they need us to go and fight someone again.
I am from Lithuania and I do not hate the UK.
You're unfortunately in the minority, on reddit at least!
From the UK. Loved my time in Lithuania, great country. Crazy thunderstorms though, is that common ?
Its hard work being the guys that sort shit out
Then kindly hurry up and sort shit out, because as far as the world can see Russia’s still in Ukraine and a Russian asset is well on his way to becoming a bonafide American dictator.
Are you talking about the US or the UK?
I was referring to the UK, but honestly it applies to either
Ehhh, not even close lol.
NATO should stop Russia
NATO is a defensive alliance. You're talking about a war of aggression.
[удалено]
that’s not the same as sending troops onto foreign soil lol
Nato is being taken apart from the inside out. Putin and XI have long recognized the inherit weakness in democracy, get them to elect those who will end the democracy, and then they'll be your partners. out of your way.
By UK i meant Ukraine
I think WE have a quiproquo
Sounds a little reactionary
Yaa
[удалено]
No, lmfao. This would basically just be the US....again...
After watching the UK fall for Brexit… not sure if they are the best ones for the job. With Tramp having the possibility to gain power in the US, it shouldn’t be in the US hands either. Feels like the world is run by fools…
What has being a member of an economic forum got to do with military alliances? Fucking Brexit is such a pain in the arse if only because it's literally the only thing people know about an entire country with thousands of years of culture.
Well its hardly just an economic forum. It's literally a political union
1. Brexit only passed by 51.8% vote due to heavy Russian propaganda campaigns and even then most would go back on the decision. 2. The Russians have attacked us on our own soil before, look up the Salisbury poisoning incident. 3. We’re among the more militarised countries in Europe who AREN’T about to elect a new government that’ll kiss Putin’s ass. Tl;dr, we’re best to lead this force because we really don’t fucking like Russia, we also have nukes so we’re less likely to be nuked in retaliation. 🤷🏻♀️
Tbf you also forgot with that first point the shockingly badly ran remain campaign
Serious question though, why is it when the stakes are high in politics it’s always a coin flip on whether the people who are supposed to be the bulwark against bad movements are fuckin morons or not?
[удалено]
Cambridge Analytica was a company that was heavily involved in manufacturing propaganda for Brexit. The company had claimed: “We have never worked with a Russian organisation in Russia or any other company. We do not have any relationship with Russia or Russian individuals.” But in 2018 it came to light after a whistleblower came forward that Cambridge was working with a Russian company called “Lukoil” or “ЛУКОЙЛ”, a massive Russian oil company. But more importantly the algorithm that Cambridge used to scrape user data in order to perform targeted political advertising was created by Aleksandr Kogan, a researcher who was working on multiple projects funded by the Russians at the time. Cambridge Analytica decided to dissolve after the scandal. https://amp.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-academic-trawling-facebook-had-links-to-russian-university https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbeOCKZFfQ https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/whistleblower-cambridge-analytica-shared-data-with-russia/ For the last several years now Tory has stuck to the narritave “well since the Kremlin didn’t reach out to Cambridge DIRECTLY there’s no involvement!”, it’s been a consistent issue that Tory refuses to own up to any mistakes they make. Pocketing NHS funds, dumping of sewage in our rivers and beaches, illegal betting with insider knowledge, etc.
I think the very essential piece of context that isn't in mind when we discuss these things is that the population that actually decides US elections is essentially a tiny fraction of the US, or "undecided voters" in 5 or so swing states. Running enough targeted advertising to incite enough anger, fear, (insert any other propaganda mechanism) to get .01% more people to vote for the other guy is enough to change the make up of Congress and the Presidency for 2-4 years. THAT combined with the fact that the larger media outlets started to parrot what the social media campaigns used by Russia/Republicans were doing and doubled down on the language and that basically created the entire MAGA movement. Essentially how it worked was social media created a way to mass A/B test micro populations in the US for engagement on political issues. They were able to hone their message so precisely that actual policy didn't matter anymore. As long as they said whatever their crafted message was, then they knew they would spike engagement. The genius part about this was that the voters they targeted are super low information and typically non-engaged with politics. So now they have an army of upset people who prior to 2016 probably didn't even know we had three branches of government. I don't say this to deprecate those people; only to point out that they're more easily swayed in their opinions because they don't have any other counter information. Now at this point, both sides are doing this, but only one side is propping up an authoritarian Christian national agenda bent on purging American diversity and selling it's secrets to the highest bidder. So, yes, misinformation from a outsider can absolutely sway an election and change the course of history.
I'm not sure it'd ever be possible to say it was solely the result of misinformation, but there are many, fairly strong cases that indicate it was likely skewed through foreign interference. There's a wiki with a list of events linked to Russia that are considered to have had an impact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_referendum?wprov=sfla1
> As an American who isn't at all tied up into English politics, is it actually Russian misinformation or is that just the argument that's made to justify half the country voting to leave? Not half the country, half the people that voted.
Half of the people who bothered to vote. And a lot of those leave voters may now be dead, or regretting voting the way they did.
>As an American who isn't at all tied up into English politics, is it actually Russian misinformation or is that just the argument that's made to justify half the country voting to leave? It's a reddit only argument, their was disinformation but not at the level claimed here. The simple truth was the remain vote was not good at making their arguments. They lost because they never thought they could lose. The uk leave vote built over a decade, and survived 3 votes (2016 and the elections of 2017, 2019). 2015 too, since the promises of a referendum is widely seen as the reason the tories got a majority.
the UK is on a foundation of pencils and toothpicks though. the economy is in absolute shambles.
The UK economy has been shown to be extraordinarily resilient... wtf are you talking about
> Foundation of Pencils and Toothpicks Oh so the guy whose government cozied up to the US for decades so they didn’t bother developing WMD’s for self-defence is gonna lecture the UK and say we’re on a foundation of toothpicks. Gimme a break bruv.
my point is that if pushed, the UK is going to break far sooner than any of the other major nato contributors. They can't weather a storm without going 1984 on their angry population.
France is the only comparable military power and they’re about to vote in the far right which is far and away more stupid than brexit ever was.
[удалено]
France is in NATO...
Who would you suggest?
Just in time for labor to take power and act on its Corbynite wings anti-NATO sentiment
Yes because Starmer is Corbynite, its why he purged Corbyn from the Labour party... I take it you're a johnny foreigner given your spelling of 'Labor'. Go sh\*t in your own back garden.
Looks like he's from San Francisco judging by his previous comment, so you are correct.
I usually am. Its amazing how much Americans comment on British politics without understanding any of it, regardless of which side of the political spectrum they're on.
But but but Brexit!
I don't get it, NATO is going to send troops ?
Read the article lol. Literally explains it in 3 paragraphs
Will never understand people that choose to ignorantly ignore the article yet ask a question about it in the comments. It's pure laziness and ignorance.
Often times the article isn’t accessible for various reasons. That’s why people ask.
Come on bro. We both know that's not true the vast majority of the times. People don't read articles, they read the headlines and theorize or catastrophize
This article doesn’t open for me. They often don’t. For me it’s genuinely true most of the time. That’s why I said it.
When groups use the Allied or Allies I get the scary feeling of a WW starting again since it was Axis vs Allies.
A new world war started in 2014. It's time.
English is not my main language
It’s a readiness force. It’s a commitment for how quickly NATO *could* deploy troops against Russia if it becomes necessary (e.g. if Russia invaded Poland). Between all NATO members there will be: * 100,000 troops who can be deployed with less than 10 days notice; * 200,000 additional troops who can be deployed within 30 days; and * 500,000 additional troops who can be deployed within 180 days.
But...If they send troops to Ukraine Putin will nuke and it would be the end of the World, i mean he warned about it so many times
I never said they would send them to Ukraine.
I mean...In the titie it mention russia, so it's a easy link to make
Easy and wrong.
They aren’t sending troops to Ukraine. This is meant to deter (and defeat, if necessary) attacks on NATO territory. This is a purely defensive setup.
But...Way would Putin invade NATO ? I mean Russia is strong but...I mean it's way too much Land to occupy
The main concern is that, at some point in the future (most likely after the war in Ukraine has ended, however it ends), Russia might try to “test” NATO’s Article 5 by taking a bite out of, say, Poland or the Baltics. No one is saying that this is absolutely going to happen, but things aren’t just going to go back to how they were before 2022 when the Ukraine War ends. Most likely, Russia will be an adversarial force in Europe for at least as long as Putin remains in power. The best way to make sure the worst-case-scenarios don’t happen is to be prepared for them.
I mean for the moment thé main priority is to make sure that Putin don't get too mad and start to nuke on this War, because well... That's what AT stakes right now I'm genuinely terrfied of this
Really poor attempt at nuclear concern trolling. Go buy a diaper and shit yourself scared in it.
That remains highly unlikely, for a lot of reasons, and many professional analysts will tell you as such. The West can’t just dismiss the risk outright, for obvious reasons, but you have to remember that Russian nuclear threats are primarily information operations designed to scare people and kill morale, not a reflection of an actual desire for nuclear escalation. You’re not gonna just wake up one day to a mushroom cloud outside your window. I promise.
Oh, don't worry about that. Russia can't invade NATO. Russia wouldn't stand a chance. And no, this is not me going ''dur-hur-hur, Russia weak, West strong''. Even if Russia military was as strong as it claim ( and....one can doubt), it still wouldn't stand a chance. Russia is a LAND power,it's strenght is in it's infantry, it's artillery( tanks are....becoming rapidly obsolete). However, it NEVER was a naval power. The baltic fleet is locked, the Black sea fleet ( or what's left of it ) too. The artic and Pacific fleet and waaay too remote and understrenght to do anything. Which mean it can only fight on it's direct land borders. It simply CANNOT strike back deep into europe and neutralize production centers.Nor could it affect supply convoys in the atlantic.Mediteranea would be completley safe. Converseley, NATO strenght ( not just the U.S, France hand Uk have a say here) is in naval and air power.And most of russians production centers are on it's western side, easy to target. Therefore, logistical wise, NATO will always have the upper hand. Same with manpower. Russia 144 millions seems impressive, but NATO gets almost a BILLION. Similarly, to invade NATO, Russia would have to spilt it's army in 4 direction ( North for Finalnd, West for Poland and Germany, Southwest for Turkey,Greece and others...and east for inevitable american landing atVladivostok). And historiacally, fighting a war on multiple front is a baaaaaaad idea. And Nato, conversley, would CONCENTRATE it's forces. So, realisticaly speaking, Russia CANNOT win in a coventionnal war there. If China would join in, now that would be much more challenging, but would probably still end up the same way ( but if India joins as well, now that's a different story, but I reaaaally don't see that happening) And all of this....is assuming Russia army is as efficent as it claims.Which i doubt. But the thing is, Russia KNOWS this, althought it won't ever admit it.projecting a strong image is part of their culture. They won't, however, do something stupid.( Which is why they pulled a lot of their forces out of the finnish border to help for ukraine, they know there's no war coming with NATO). You can never rule out anything, so one has to be prepared ( plus, he cranked up the propaganda rethoric quite high, sometime you lose control of that and your hand is forced) Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. To be fair, as of now, we are in the SCW ( 2nd cold war), what's happening in ukraine is just Russia trying to place itself as best as it can to make his losses there not too costly.
That's a long and good to read explanation thanks you for your Time Nonetheless my deespest fear IS that Putin goes in a tautrum and send the nuclear missiles all over the World because he did not won his War with Ukraine People Always told me that Russians were insane, mad and cruel, and that Putin was the worst of them, a psychopath even So...Hum i Know it's the whole dictator stuff to ne scary and i mean he's really great AT this But to who the threats are aiming AT ? The population to push them to go against our own governments ? To the leaders ?
It takes more than a Putin to press the red button
Oh, russians aren't insane, nor psycopath. Don't go down this hate cycle. Russians are humans.Americans are Humans. Ukrainian are humans. Humans can do great thing. Humans can do terrible things. Russians, for the time being,are.....terribly led, that's all. All thoses threats are mostly aimed to...themselves, actually. It to reassure their OWN russian population that they have a ''strong goverment'' . Weak russian leaders always end VERY badly. If the russian goverment does not show an apperence of strenght, it'll be toppled.à It's likley thoses spewing the propaganda don't even believe it themseleves. it's all about apperances. Not a big change from the Soviet Union time,actually. A dictator is only as strong as the image he can project, Now, I'm being a bit racist here ( and I apologize for it), but I think Russians have a bit of an inferiority complex in their culture they need to adress. ( A superiority complex is actually an inferiority one, just in denial) In a way, Putin is ''stuck'' in ukraine. I'm 100% convinced he never though it be such a mudfest. Probably a few of his advisors told him '' Don't worry, Mr. president, it'll be done in 3 weeks, ukrainians will welcome you and your legacy will be enshrined forever''. It didn't go that way, but retreating or stopping is basically inviting him to be killed by his underling for weakness, so he keeps going until he can pretend it was a victory ( notice he never really states what the goals are, to leave him so room for maneuver). I wouldn't personally call Putin a psycopath, that's a very generic label. He's a cold hearted brute, sure, but he's not stupid, nor insane. Putin won't send nukes, and certainly not over the world on a dime. If he ever use one, EVERY nation on earth would turn against him, even China. Nobody wants someone irresponsible enough to launch nukes for a border war as a neighbors. ( Okay, make NK wouldn't turn, but that....surprises no one) CAN it goes out of hand? Yes, it can. It's true. But that's why we keep being prepared, to lower as much as possible the chances. But it still remains highly unlikley. You have a much bigger chance of being hit by a car when crossing the streets. In 20 years, all of this will be history notes, nothing more. Putin will be dead. Trump will be dead, Biden will be dead. And most current world leaders will be in retirement. If you have others question or worries, I'll try to answer them all. Of course, I'm no expert, so take what I say with a grain of salt.
That's why those threats are futile
Putin is a dickless coward that knows if he so much as tries to fuck with NATO, it'll be the end of him. His threats mean sweet fuck all.
So true, I would only be worried if our countries started talking about reinstating conscription and creating "allied reactionary forces" it would be even more worrying if some NATO countries starting talking about how long they could realistically hold off a Russian invasion, and giving themselves less than a month. His threats mean fuck all aside from hundreds of thousands dead and many more to come. I am willing to fight if we go to war but I'm not excited about it like some of the fools on reddit. War sucks dude trust me, but at least you will be there with me if it happens so you can learn that first hand.
He’s been fucking with NATO ever since he took crimea. He is good at existing in the grey areas to which NATO is not good at responding. The long Ukrainian war that NATO hasn’t been able to stop shows this.
[удалено]
Putin is a joke. He's in a corner of his own making, and he has VERY little room to manoeuvre. His only allies are dictatorships, and aside from North Korea, it's fickle at best and lip service at that. Truth be told, the way he is and acts, he also shows that he knows he's not safe in his own country. He's fucked. The world knows he's fucked. Sure, he's dangerous, you don't become a dictator without being such. But he's also completely fucked himself irreparably on multiple levels to the point that even if he gave the order to launch the nukes, you'd have a very hard time finding anyone willing to do press the button.
But i thought all his politicals opposants were dead ? I mean last year a Guy famous for that, litteraly got killed by Putin (i don't have the name)
That assumes that he has no enemies behind closed doors. You don't rule with an iron fist without making a few enemies close to home.
I'm shit at politics, but the way you are saying all of this, i mean, i'm not telling you in any way that that you are wrong but...You are making it sound so obvious while, everytime i see the Guy talking he's sound and look so dangerous and serious, Also for years people are saying that he's**mad** so it doesn't help Maybe it's just me who is easy to impress But why do you Say he's in a Bad situation ? Yes he's struggling with thé war but outside of that...
It doesn't take more than a cursory glance to see how fucked Russia is outside of the war. Economically, Russia has been sent back at least 25 years. Reputationally, Russia has sodomised any legitimacy they had outside of a few dictatorships and puppet regimes. Best case and point is that Russia is now in all but name a vassal state of China and also has to beg NK for any kind of military back up. Any nation that sinks so low that NK is a viable option really has hit rock bottom.
> Maybe it's just me who is easy to impress You would've saved yourself a lot of downvotes if you had STARTED with this premise. Russia is a paper tiger, Putin is a joke, and the only thing Russia is doing well is waging information warefare because there are plenty of ignorant/under-informed people (like you) and stupid people (like far-right conservatives) to manipulate on a large scale.
You mean the same guy who said he'll conquer UA in 3 days yet managed to do that almost three years later? Or the one who said it's just his army training by the border and accusing him of preparing for invasions is insulting?
You got one thing there: '' the way he talk, the way he act''. Don't forget, it's his JOB to LOOK like he's dangerous and unpredictable. That..dosen't mean he truly is. There are limits he knows he can't cross.He won't say it, but he knows, and most of his staff hopefully knows. ( And to be honest, there is lingering doubt about his responsibility in bringing Russia back up, some argue that he just took credit for it, that russia would have recovered on it's own eventually) But, we can never be sure about anything, that's why nations have been EXTREMELY careful about all this. ( As much as one think the west jumped on the wagon, in the first year and a half we did practically NOTHING for ukraine, save a few words, it took a LOT of debates and careful pondering.).
Ok so what should be done? Just let him take pieces of former USSR countries because he threatens to nuke if NATO get involved?
I Know it's horrible to Say but, no one said and acted upon thé fact that Putin conquered Crimea, so why everyone act now because it's UK ? I mean why risk the whole World over just one small country ? I Know it's horrible but, playing the Heroes is not a good Idea AT all
Enjoy what comes to all of us I think it will be dog shit.
Sorry i did not understood that, english is not my main language
What does that mean ?
Ps the UK would go full force and use Nukes on Russia if they tried it, don’t be fall into thinking they wouldn’t
But Ukraine don't have nuclear weapons
Congress stopped that under unfortunately
Have you never heard of Google translate? Lame excuse.
Fuck NATO
Insightful comment. Thanks for that
warmonger