No. of Recommendations: 3
NATO is also ensuring that Ukraine has enough dudes, guns and money to similarly prevent the Russian army from defeating them.</i<
That’s the question, isn’t it? NATO is not supplying any direct dudes, btw.
Which is why we keep pointing out to you that there are plenty of historical examples where a force that was too small to drive out the bigger army was still able to win the war anyway
And yet you’ve done nothing but prove that the small countries need tons of help. Your board
Compatriots are woefully ignorant of even recent history. It’s…sad.
The U.S. won the Revolutionary War because the British left after they were defeated on the battlefield. You never ack that point because *your* argument hinges on the other side just up and quitting. No, with French help we beat the British. Beat that ass as a matter of fact.
And it took guns, money and the direct involvement of French dudes to do it.
Are you willing to do the same in the Ukraine? How many US and NATO troops do we commit?
