Always treat others with respect and kindness, even if you disagree with them. Avoid making personal attacks or insulting others, and try to maintain a civil and constructive tone in your discussions.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 7
Four times as many NATO allies are meeting or exceeding defense spending targets today than did so in 2021.
A record 23 of NATO’s 32 member nations are hitting the Western military alliance’s defense spending target this year, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Monday, as Russia’s war in Ukraine has raised the threat of expanding conflict in Europe.Look for Russia to make a big push to elect Dementia Don, the man who wants to abandon NATO in exchange for a Trump Tower Moscow.
https://apnews.com/article/nato-defense-spending-s...
No. of Recommendations: 3
A record 23 of NATO’s 32 member nations are hitting the Western military alliance’s defense spending target this year, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Monday, as Russia’s war in Ukraine has raised the threat of expanding conflict in Europe.
--------------
Thank you president Trump for cajoling the NATO laggards into stepping up. Still more to do if nine are still freeloading. Trump can improve on that starting next year. One way to do this is to make NATO worry a little bit about US support if they don't meet their obligations. Seems to be working, more please.
No. of Recommendations: 8
Thank you president Trump for cajoling the NATO laggards into stepping up
You should be thanking Putin.
No. of Recommendations: 1
CONGRATULATIONS on endorsing big Defense spending, warmonger! :)
Obama begged them.
Trump shoved his foot up their racist pansy Euro butts and they realized 'oh shit, the Big Dog isn't our slave" and they got cracking.
Not to mention there's an unstable hungry bear in the Soviet Union like Reagan's ad said......while Bernie was honeymooning in Russia and you Liberals are begging Gorbachev for a taste.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Absolutely hilarious!
This thread is now the POSTER CHILD of "not being the flex you think it is".
After years of "Trump wants to destroy the NATO alliance" (presumably by asking these deadbeats to pay what they agreed to) and all the insane criticism leveled at Trump for even asking...we're bragging because...
roughly 70% of NATO members are starting to pay?
Too funny. It's amazing how much focus one can gain by watching the Theoretical Possibility From The Textbook ("Hmm. Some foreign enemy might decide to start a war") morph into reality ("Holy crap! The Russians are on my doorstep and I only have a couple of rusty buckets to use!!").
No. of Recommendations: 9
bighairymike: Thank you president Trump for cajoling the NATO laggards into stepping up.
Huh. Ain't that the way it always is with the Trump Cult: bow down to Dear Leader in praise for something that happens two-and-one-half years after he's out of the picture but when he invited a mob to DC and literally minutes after he told them to go and fight for him at the Capitol, overturn the election, and take back the country, it's "Hey, absolutely no way Trump's responsible for what that mob did."
No. of Recommendations: 1
The Reaganauts are so pleased with their record defense spending and nuke arsenals.
Yeah, get them commies!
(The Russian ones. Leave the Chinese ones alone because then your stock portfolios would take go down....gasp)
No. of Recommendations: 1
bighairymike: Thank you president Trump for cajoling the NATO laggards into stepping up.<<
Huh. Ain't that the way it always is with the Trump Cult: bow down to Dear Leader in praise for something that happens two-and-one-half years after he's out of the picture but when he invited a mob to DC and literally minutes after he told them to go and fight for him at the Capitol, overturn the election, and take back the country, it's "Hey, absolutely no way Trump's responsible for what that mob did." - CO
-------------------
You forget the liberal style sheet and failed to use the term "convicted felon" in your otherwise brilliant rebuttal.
bhm, helpful
No. of Recommendations: 1
In Liberal land, if a President calls for Europe to spend more on defense, it just has to happen the next morning.
It can't possibly take a few years for democracies to debate. Allocate funds. Decide what to buy. Get the shit built.
LOL
Europe has licked Trump's boots and been forced to open thei mooch purses and spend on what Liberals like best: Weapons.
Liberals love weapons, 2nd only to Fossil Fuels and low taxes for the rich.
Lennon got bent over.
And Club 401K Liberals, are on their knees for Halliburton and Trump and Cheney instead.
Strange bedfellows ---literally.
Someone ask SandyLeeLee if Dick Cheney talks in his sleep.
No. of Recommendations: 5
You should be thanking Putin.
I wish I could rec this 10x. Yes, the NATO allies were somewhat complacent after the fall of the USSR, and the formation of the EU. Putin shook them awake. Now they are meeting, and in some cases exceeding, their targets. Plus we've added Finland and Sweden, and the Ukraine is firmly OFF the fence about joining NATO (the question is whether or not they could qualify).
All thanks to Putin. Neither Trump nor Biden can take credit. Though at least Biden doesn't repeatedly threaten to leave NATO.
No. of Recommendations: 1
You should be thanking Putin.
I wish I could rec this 10x. Yes, the NATO allies were somewhat complacent after the fall of the USSR, and the formation of the EU. Putin shook them awake. Now they are meeting, and in some cases exceeding, their targets. Plus we've added Finland and Sweden, and the Ukraine is firmly OFF the fence about joining NATO (the question is whether or not they could qualify).
All thanks to Putin. Neither Trump nor Biden can take credit. Though at least Biden doesn't repeatedly threaten to leave NATO.
****
They'd rather give Putin credit over Trump. Oh well at least going back to their Leftist Commie Soviet roots.
Forget about the 500,000 people killed. Club 401K got their NATO weapons.
No wonder people take flying lessons and get visas.
Apologies in advance if I toss around the word "terrorist" when it should be freedom fighter.
Epiphanies all the time.
No. of Recommendations: 12
All thanks to Putin. Neither Trump nor Biden can take credit.
--------------------
I would disagree with this. Trump's prior actions CAN be directly attributed to these boosted levels of spending but the linkage is one of BLAME, not credit. None of these members likely boosted funding rates after concluding "Gee, that Trump guy's a bright guy, we better do the right thing and pony up." They ponied up because Trump's unique combination of corruption, servility to Putin and complete ignorance about history (ANY history) and military strategy created a disaster in their backyard that generated MILLIONS of refugees that fled to NATO countries and instantly created grave military and nuclear threats to the continent, both from war and a second Chernobyl level nuclear power plant disaster.
I've stated multiple times previously that it is VERY likely that Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine due to the following sequence of events:
1) Trump's ongoing willingness to suck up to Putin throughout term #1
2) Trump's attempted extortion of Zelenskyy via withholding US military aid in exchange for creating a public APPEARANCE of an investigation into non-existent wrongdoing of Hunter/Joe Biden
3) The distraction of American voters by the Russia-based context of the first impeachment stemming from the Zelenskyy coercion attempt
4) The distraction of the American House and Senate by the second impeachment stemming from Trump's failed coup attempt
5) The fizzling out of the second impeachment by Senate Republicans that took up the initial weeks of the new Congress and proved Congress was paralyzed by partisanship on protecting the most obvious / basic elements of democracy (domestically or for an ally)
I am nearly 100% certain there is no way Putin would have rolled into ANY other country without having conditions so optimally prepared as they were by Trump regarding Ukraine:
* a combative relationship between a US President and Zelenskyy seemingly preserved by remaining Republicans into 2021 past Trump's term
* a target already behind in defensive preparations due to promised weapons illegally delayed for months by a US President
* a world still at risk medically and economically from a COVID epidemic that still lacked a vaccine
* a US Congress that had already proven its (then) Republican minorities would prevent the US from doing the right thing in any matter involving Russia as an expression of continued fealty to ex-President Trump
WTH
No. of Recommendations: 2
Crimea taken - Obama President.
Ukrainians killed en masse - Biden President.
May the truly guilty, truly reap what they sow.
End the Bush Patriot Act, please. (Obama and Biden forgot :)
No. of Recommendations: 3
OK. I think you analysis is more-or-less on the mark. Putin definitely felt emboldened because of the weakening bonds among the western nations, thanks to Trump. That is for sure. The obstructionism in Congress by a minority (Republicans) to send weapons to Ukraine likely helped Putin's decision. And, if we care to go back, the lackluster response from the west (and Obama) to the seizure of Crimea certainly didn't help. That harkens back to the seizure of the Sudetenland, which was met with lots of bluster but no action. Same with Crimea. In both cases, the aggressor leaders were correct in their assessment of western resolve (i.e. there was none).
Putin probably overplayed his hand with Ukraine. Maybe he was thinking it would be like seizing Austria in 1936 (i.e. no declaration of war followed, and resistance was token, at best). Instead of a cake-walk, he faces stiff resistance, lots of western aid, sanctions, and a lot of coffins. Ironically, the Reps are responsible for his recent gains because they thought of Ukraine aid as a bargaining chip (at best), without regard to the geopolitical consequences, and played games. Result: Ukraine couldn't hold some of their forward lines anymore and had to fall back until more materiel was received.
As a bonus, the US has accepted several hundred thousand refugees from Russia and Ukraine since the initial invasion. Contrary to what border hawks want, Putin is fueling more refugee/asylum requests in the US. And, as you say, it all stems from Rep and Trumpian actions.
No. of Recommendations: 3
OK. I think you analysis is more-or-less on the mark. Putin definitely felt emboldened because of the weakening bonds among the western nations, thanks to Trump. That is for sure. Nope. Were this true he would have moved when Trump was actually President, and not waited until the supposedly-stronger-alliances-guy in Biden showed up.
Your analysis overlooks that Putin already took Biden's measure when he was doing what he wanted in the Crimea when Obama was President and Biden was his VP. He knew darned well that Biden's first instinct is to hesitate when decisiveness is called for; that's been a trait of his for literally decades: He thinks of himself as a master diplomat, and mistakes indecision and delay for "thoughtfulness".
Nothing to do with Trump, sorry.
The second point you get wrong is here:
The obstructionism in Congress by a minority (Republicans) to send weapons to Ukraine . Trump sent weapons to the Ukraine, were you aware of that?
https://apnews.com/article/71fd3f8ee74f488fb788acc...WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration has approved a plan to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine, a long-awaited move that deepens America’s involvement in the military conflict and may further strain relations with Russia. Moscow responded angrily on Saturday.
The new arms include American-made Javelin anti-tank missiles, U.S. officials said late Friday. Ukraine has long sought to boost its defenses against Russian-backed separatists armed with tanks that have rolled through eastern Ukraine during violence that has killed more than 10,000 since 2014. Previously, the U.S. has provided Ukraine with support equipment and training, and has let private companies sell some small arms like rifles.That bolded bit will be important in a minute. The narrative of 'Republicans helping Putin and not wanting to arm Ukraine' does not and never has held any water.
Bbbbut Biden opened the floodgates.
Or did he? What's his actual history with giving the Ukrainians weapons? Let's go to 2021:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security...The Biden administration prepared a $200 million package of additional military assistance for Ukraine in recent weeks but held off on delivering the aid despite appeals from Kyiv and some lawmakers, according to three people familiar with the issue.What aid did he hold up?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/12/16/us-ukraine-ru...The White House has not yet OK’d a package of lethal and nonlethal assistance for the Ukrainian military that includes Javelin anti-tank munitions, counter-artillery radars, sniper rifles, assorted small arms, and communications and electronic warfare equipment, according to a source familiar with the matter. Why would he hold it up?
Because Biden was always squeamish about "angering" the Russians, that's why.
He's actually been dragging his feet for a while; one just needs some sophistication to skip past the BS White House spin that they've always been on top of giving them everything:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/07/politics/joe-biden-...President Joe Biden told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Friday that it was a “difficult decision” to provide Ukraine with cluster munitions for the first time, but that he was ultimately convinced to send the controversial weapons because Kyiv needs ammunition in its counteroffensive against Russia.Giving the Ukrainians cluster munitions is in no way "a difficult decision" when they're the ones keeping orcs from carrying off their children. If you get into a fight you fight to win, not something else.
We can count on the democrats to provide the "moral center" needed here though:
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/07/top-dems-...“The decision by the Biden administration to transfer cluster munitions to Ukraine is unnecessary and a terrible mistake,” said Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), the ranking member of the House’s defense appropriations subcommittee. “The legacy of cluster bombs is misery, death and expensive cleanup generations after their use.”
“These weapons should be eliminated from our stockpiles, not dumped in Ukraine,” she added.Reeeeal lib of genius, that one. What about Republicans? Surely they opposed this, right? What did some of them say about cluster munitions?
https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/...Washington, D.C.— Senator Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) released the following statement after it was reported the Biden administration will provide cluster munitions to Ukraine’s military:
“For Ukrainian forces to defeat Putin’s invasion, Ukraine needs at least equal access to the weapons Russia already uses against them, like cluster munitions. Providing this new capability is the right decision—even if it took too long—and is one I’ve long supported.”And surely they've never called for shipping advanced weapons there?
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4208276-gop-se...A group of Republican senators sent a letter to President Biden Saturday urging him to “immediately” provide the missiles Ukraine needs to win its war against Russia.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) shared the letter in a post on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, arguing that not sending the weapons would “only prolong the war and cost lives.”
Cotton was joined by Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) in his request.
“We … urge you to immediately send MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) to Ukraine,” they wrote. “Additional delay will only further undermine U.S. national security interests and extend this conflict.”Step away from the narratives and look at the facts.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Putin probably overplayed his hand with Ukraine. Maybe he was thinking it would be like seizing Austria in 1936 (i.e. no declaration of war followed, and resistance was token, at best).
Minor quibble that doesn't impact your analysis of Putin's strategy-
Per my Father and Uncle.....to my family's great disappointment and ultimate peril, a substantial number of Austrians were thrilled by the arrival of the Nazis.
I believe the word my uncle used was 'giddy.'
No. of Recommendations: 0
I believe the word my uncle used was 'giddy.'
True. There was a lot of support in Austria.
That was also true in some of the occupied territories of Ukraine. Crimea had a sizeable population in favor of Putin marching in, and in the current conflict I believe a lot of the people of Donetsk feel the same. Or they did initially (not sure how they feel now with all the destruction Russia has wrought).
No. of Recommendations: 9
Nope. Were this true he would have moved when Trump was actually President, and not waited until the supposedly-stronger-alliances-guy in Biden showed up.
Short sighted and wrong, as usual. Putin wouldn't have given up on the effect Trump was having on NATO until Trump lost the election. Putin thought his invasion of Ukraine would be over in weeks. It would be a dumb strategy to start moving troops into assault position in Belarus during the election as that would strengthen Biden and weaken Trump, and Trump was already weak enough.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Short sighted and wrong, as usual
Nah, bruv. 100% spot on. Facts and all that.
Putin wouldn't have given up on the effect Trump was having on NATO until Trump lost the election. Putin thought his invasion of Ukraine would be over in weeks. It would be a dumb strategy to start moving troops into assault position in Belarus during the election as that would strengthen Biden and weaken Trump, and Trump was already weak enough.
The US election wasn’t a part of his timetable; not sure why you think that.
The only people who actually, truly think that Trump wanted to end NATO are people who don’t really understand foreign policy, incentives, what the Europeans actually spend their money on vs. what they’re supposed to spend their money on, the actual force structure of NATO militaries, so on and so forth. I think we can gather from posts here how little the left knows of many of those topics.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Short sighted and wrong, as usual
Nah, bruv. 100% spot on. Facts and all that.
You never gave any facts. You just made statements. You writing something doesn't make it a fact.
The US election wasn’t a part of his timetable; not sure why you think that
Explain why you think it had no affect on his timetable. My view is he held off as long as Trump was busy alienating NATO leaders. Trump has now stated he would "let Putin do what he wants" - what's your explanation (apology) for that statement? BTW, no one said "end NATO" but you.
And it was Trump who kept uttering statements that he misunderstood how NATO money is spent.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Short sighted and wrong, as usual. Putin wouldn't have given up on the effect Trump was having on NATO...
Yep. I was debating whether it was worth responding to his lengthy list of errors, but I think you picked a good summary point. It wouldn't benefit Putin until Trump was out. Until then, Trump was doing too much to help Putin (and I'll say "unintentionally", even if I don't think that is determined definitively). Once Biden was in, Trump was of no further use. And associating Biden with his invasion didn't hurt Putin at all (probably helped).
No. of Recommendations: 2
Until then, Trump was doing too much to help Putin (and I'll say "unintentionally"</iL
Right, sending Javelins over was helping Putin.
Dude, I give up.
