paxamericana Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 (edited) No they lack the economic strength with too many retiree and welfare programs to fund a military industrial complex. They are perpetual deadbeats. Edited April 13 by paxamericana Quote
herbie Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 Sure calling people names, threatening and taunting them really makes them do what you want, right? F-cking MAGA warmonger m0ron, it's a defence organization, it comes to your aid if you're attacked, not if you start a war without even consulting them. Didn't clue in renaming the pig boy Hegseth to the Secretary of War? Didn't elect an oaf that's done nothing but f-ck over every ally economically? Didn't clue in how he defends other democracies with that shemess treatment of Zelensky and repeated threats to vut off aid to Ukraine? Your entire administration can go pi55 up a rope if it expects anything from any other country on the planet. Be happy they're deadbeats or you'd already be glowing in the dark. BTW if you trolling is intent on making people dislike Americans, you're doing a good job. Unfortunately though the normal common sense ones get smeared with the same shit. 1 Quote
User Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 Speaking of deadbeats… here comes @herbie who is one of the deadbeat freeloaders. 1 Quote
John Stone Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 (edited) Throughout the Cold War (1945-91) NATO's purpose was to deter and counter Russia and it's satellite countries which together made up the Warsaw Pact. Although Article 5 has only been invoked once, following 9/11, there has been occasion where arguably, the mere existence of NATO had the intimidating effect of preventing an all-out nuke exchange between the 2 superpowers of the time. (Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962) NATO was designed for defending North America, Europe and Turkey and article 5 is invoked with any attack against member countries within those continents. (Bosnia notwithstanding - UN) With the collapse of the USSR (Warsaw Pact) and the resulting much diminished Russia (nukes notwithstanding) has the need for NATO been removed? There is no question, that today, Europe, with it's combined economies, could not put on it's big girl panties (gear up) and deter any Russian aggression - Russia is only a ghost of what it was during the Cold War - it could be argued that it is not even a global power, look ma .................. no money, dated equipment, low morale, poor leadership. ideological malaise. NATO on the other hand is a global power in every calculus - money, equipment, allies, bases, training, influence, political clout, etc. Who does NATO benefit, today? Could NATO be a deterring effect in the future as it has in the past? Edited April 13 by John Stone Quote
Nationalist Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 24 minutes ago, John Stone said: Throughout the Cold War (1945-91) NATO's purpose was to deter and counter Russia and it's satellite countries which together made up the Warsaw Pact. Although Article 5 has only been invoked once, following 9/11, there has been occasion where arguably, the mere existence of NATO had the intimidating effect of preventing an all-out nuke exchange between the 2 superpowers of the time. (Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962) NATO was designed for defending North America, Europe and Turkey and article 5 is invoked with any attack against member countries within those continents. (Bosnia notwithstanding - UN) With the collapse of the USSR (Warsaw Pact) and the resulting much diminished Soviet Union (nukes notwithstanding) has the need for NATO been removed? There is no question, that today, Europe, with it's combined economies, could not put on it's big girl panties (gear up) and deter any Russian aggression - Russia is only a ghost of what it was during the Cold War - it could be argued that it is not even a global power, look ma .................. no money, dated equipment, low morale, poor leadership. ideological malaise. NATO on the other hand is a global power in every calculus - money, equipment, allies, bases, training, influence, political clout, etc. Who does NATO benefit, today? Could NATO be a deterring effect in the future as it has in the past? Interesting. So you think russia is weak and Europe is strong? Man...you sure do dream big. Been listening to General Jack Keane? Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
User Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 14 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Interesting. So you think russia is weak and Europe is strong? Man...you sure do dream big. Been listening to General Jack Keane? Russia hasn’t been able to conquer Ukraine for years now… Yeah, they are weak. It doesn’t mean Europe is all that, but they certainly are stronger than Ukraine. Quote
LinkSoul60 Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 14 hours ago, paxamericana said: No they lack the economic strength with too many retiree and welfare programs to fund a military industrial complex. They are perpetual deadbeats. Serious question GI Joe... Do you think the US would have spent any less on your military even if NATO countries had met the GDP spend targets? Another question... What additional spending has the US done because of NATO countries lack of, and where was it spent? Best I can tell in recent memory is that NATO countries supported the US after 9/11 in the skies above the US and in Afghanistan. I don't recall a security issue that involved the US having to protect us.... was there? Quote
User Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 1 hour ago, LinkSoul60 said: Serious question GI Joe... Do you think the US would have spent any less on your military even if NATO countries had met the GDP spend targets? Another question... What additional spending has the US done because of NATO countries lack of, and where was it spent? Best I can tell in recent memory is that NATO countries supported the US after 9/11 in the skies above the US and in Afghanistan. I don't recall a security issue that involved the US having to protect us.... was there? Serious question… Does your being a deadbeat have anything to do with someone spending as much as they would have anyhow that you are taking advantage of? No. Quote
robosmith Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 16 hours ago, paxamericana said: No they lack the economic strength with too many retiree and welfare programs to fund a military industrial complex. They are perpetual deadbeats. And they don't get the producer country discount of economic stimulus like the US gets with greater employment and income taxes paid. There's a reason why the US spends so much more than any other country on defense. Quote
robosmith Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 3 hours ago, Nationalist said: Interesting. So you think russia is weak and Europe is strong? You believe communism creates strong economies? LMAO Quote
WestCanMan Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 (edited) If they were just being deadbeats it would honestly be a massive improvement. They're mostly pro-Iran cucks (Dems included) who are speaking in favour of the ayatollah, denying the US access to airspace, etc. Edited April 13 by WestCanMan Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Nationalist Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 41 minutes ago, robosmith said: You believe communism creates strong economies? LMAO Dweebles...do you really think Russia is still communist? Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
robosmith Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 4 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Dweebles...do you really think Russia is still communist? Do you really believe that a kleptocratic oligarchy is better than communism? Neither has real competition. Quote
Nationalist Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 1 minute ago, robosmith said: Do you really believe that a kleptocratic oligarchy is better than communism? Neither has real competition. Good gravey but you're shallow. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
robosmith Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 31 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Good gravey but you're shallow. You're shallower than a gravy boat. LMAO Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.