Europe needs their money for lavish social spending, they don’t have time for war. That’s what we’re for.
2 Likes
Yes I will, because the sooner europe can defend itself without us, the sooner we can change our status in NATO.
Low-cost cannon fodder in a US-backed proxy war?
Ukrainians and Russians have been singing this funeral hymn thousands of times. The melodies may be different, but the words are the same in both languages.
Dead soldiers leave behind bereaved family–widows, orphans, parents, bothers, sisters.
a good reason to want to see a shift in the european power base toward the east. we know poland, the baltics and ukraine will pony up for their defense.
Ukraine is not a traditional ally. If we were talking about article 5 on a NATO country this wouldn’t be an argument. This is a former Soviet State with little to no historic relations with the U.S. that we now find ourselves in 200 billion in spending when we don’t have that money. Where also firmly driving Russia into China’s arms who that is a real threat unlike Russia with the GDP of Italy.
There are 27 countries in the EU all of which has a more vested interest in what happens in the Ukraine than America. Obama knew better than to get us involved and rightfully stated Ukraine will always be more of an interest to Russia than America. This war doesn’t end it’s just going to be a bloody mess and that’s not helping those in the Ukraine a peace treaty would.
3 Likes
Poland is one of smart choices for NATO membership as was Lithuania. I wouldn’t have brought in Estonia and Latvia anyplace that shares a border with Russian I think just hastens the chances of some conflict breaking out.
Now by article 5 we have to go war if Estonia gets attacked who has never been allied or done ■■■■ for America. Poland is a different story and a strong ally.
Europe minus Russia has twice the population of Russia, a significantly larger combined military, better equipment, a combined naval force 10 times larger than Russia… Just what will they conquer.
1 Like
Than why are we helping em? As stupid as our China policy is it not?
1 Like
seems to me they answered the call
twice
1 Like
They sent 150 troops to Afghanistan and 40 to Iraq. And in return get perma protection of the US taxpayer. They got a hell of a deal.
2 Likes
the french sent 500 (reduced from 640 after 1 month). your point is what?
we called, they answered. I understand they don’t have a huge army, they don’t even have jets. but they are willing when called upon. Hell, they gave every single one of their artillery pieces to Ukraine.
Yup. That’s how mutual defense treaties work.
Are you talking about NATO as a whole or individual countries?
I’m asking what your line is that you feel Russia or China can’t cross without US involvement either through military aid or actual boots on the ground.
How about Finland? It’s not part of NATO. Would you say the US should not be involved at all if Russia invaded it?
currently Rhode Island has 167 total troops serving and one of the lowest per capita enlistment rates in the nation… I guess we should kick them out
I’m glad you honor that there are countries that are natural allies that we should support. And I agree there is a difference. We can support Ukraine defending itself instead of treating it like a NATO ally and actually militarily intervening with our troops.
Some here seem to think we should not support any country in Europe…at all. That’s crazy talk.
Not true-
and look who else was in afghanistan
1 Like
that was on the books, actually delivered to date is less than 30B
1 Like
Ukraine is the same as the Confederacy or World War II Germany. Ok.
By the way I thought we weren’t allowed to make analogies like that?
Yes, much like the Covid-19 Pandemic. It has lasted far longer and killed far more people than anyone expected when it started.
