Is NATO Dead?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Zelenski meeting with President Trump served to clarify several issues:
1. The US is not committed to a war with Russia over Ukraine.
Wrong! The US is solidly committed to a war with Russia.

But it never has been over the Ukraine.
2. The US would like to see a peaceful settlement, but that is up to Zelenski.
The US can only settle with a win, and likewise Russia too.
3. If Zelenski refuses a peaceful settlement, the US will withdraw its military aid to Ukraine.
The US aid will be delivered but Trump can pretend that it won't, as long as he's alive.
4. Ukraine is not a member of NATO and is not a subject of NATO's mutual defense provisions.
5. If other NATO members wish to fight in Ukraine, they do so at their own peril.

This raises the question of whether the efficacy of NATO, which was originally intended to provide mutual (i.e., US) defense against an attack by Russia on member countries. If some of these countries now want to attack Russia, they have contravened NATO's original purpose and turned it into a pretentious European debate club.

No! Nato has always been a tool for US aggression, and that will continue.
If there is any consensus about European policy towards Ukraine and Russia, it should be formulated and applied by the European Union, not NATO. That being said, what purpose does NATO serve, other than bureaucratic entanglement in the foreign affairs of other countries?
The US won't run away defeated from this war. But Russia won't accept defeat either.
 
Wrong! The US is solidly committed to a war with Russia.

But it never has been over the Ukraine.

The US can only settle with a win, and likewise Russia too.

The US aid will be delivered but Trump can pretend that it won't, as long as he's alive.


No! Nato has always been a tool for US aggression, and that will continue.

The US won't run away defeated from this war. But Russia won't accept defeat either.
Oh look… the Kremlin troll speaks
 
Correction: NATO was created to oppose the Warsaw Pact, not Russia.
CORRECTION: NATO was created to oppose the USSR in 1949. The Warsaw Pact didn't exist until 1955. Educate yourself moron. SMFH, desert rats that spend too much time in the sun shouldn't be posting.
 
Well, looks like I fell for the media clowns. Trump just defended his positions. I just watched 10 minutes of the Trump, Vance, Zelensky conversion.
 
It will take decades to repair the damage to our country's reputation because of what Felon47 has done.
That is one of the dumbest statements I've seen here.
1. The US does not have a "reputation".
2. A reputation can't be damaged, duh.
3. Those "lawfare felonies" will be overturned.
4. You can't fix Biden's and Kamala's "record of failure".
 
Best guess at the moment is that the EU will be freed of America's demands and abandon the war too.

Why would anybody still pretend that the war isn't totally US aggression?

Here's Trump's next move: He'll say that America must stay completely involved and sending more money because Putin won't cooperate.

America can't lose this war!

And obviously neither can Russia/China/the Brics.
 
As Trump aligns with Putin, NATO with the US is effectively dead

European powers are aligning with Ukraine as the US can not be trusted as an ally
 
The Zelenski meeting with President Trump served to clarify several issues:
1. The US is not committed to a war with Russia over Ukraine.
2. The US would like to see a peaceful settlement, but that is up to Zelenski.
3. If Zelenski refuses a peaceful settlement, the US will withdraw its military aid to Ukraine.
4. Ukraine is not a member of NATO and is not a subject of NATO's mutual defense provisions.
5. If other NATO members wish to fight in Ukraine, they do so at their own peril.

This raises the question of whether the efficacy of NATO, which was originally intended to provide mutual (i.e., US) defense against an attack by Russia on member countries. If some of these countries now want to attack Russia, they have contravened NATO's original purpose and turned it into a pretentious European debate club.

If there is any consensus about European policy towards Ukraine and Russia, it should be formulated and applied by the European Union, not NATO. That being said, what purpose does NATO serve, other than bureaucratic entanglement in the foreign affairs of other countries?

Americas greatest national security threat is it's debt, followed by China.

Europe is going to be in for a shock I think. Zelensky has been leading the U.S administration on for awhile instead of signing a mutually beneficially economic deal which would provide support for Ukraine when American corporations were working there.

He knew this but he isn't even willing to accept a cease-fire? It would have given everyone a win while Russia would remain on the outside looking in.

I understand Ukraine wanting to fight, but it won't be the millionaires joining the military.
 
CHina just watched the US abandon its military partner on live tv.
China would have likely tuned out of Trump's sideshow, halfway through. They would have never believed that the Ukraine was ever a part of it.

China has always known too that it's nothing but America's war against Russia.

Nothing has changed except the bullshit that it's to save the Ukraine.

Only the Dems will keep peddling that lie.
 
The truth of the matter is that NATO is mainly the U.S. and member nations hate it when Trump reminds them that the U.S. is no longer the world's patsy and forces them to pay their fair share.
 
Poland and Germany and Ukraine and Lithuania will bond more closely.

Finland and Sweden may as well.

The rest are going to pressure Hungary and offer boodles of support to Turkey.
Poland‘s not getting involved with troops on the ground and they’re not gonna be giving up much money get it through your head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom