Ukraine in NATO?!

[boevans]

Stop lying.

Ukraine in NATO?!

Of course.

 

[frigidweirdo]

1. Trump's tough talk strengthened NATO, so says NATO. Putin gave Biden months of warning, even I knew the attack was coming.

Secretary General thanks President Trump for his commitment to NATO

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg thanked US President Donald Trump for his strong leadership and commitment to the Alliance in a meeting at the White House on Thursday (14 November 2019). Mr. Stoltenberg highlighted rising defence investment across European Allies and Canada, amounting to...

www.nato.int

3. I gave you the link and map of the ISIS Caliphate under Obama. Trump and his coalition with the Kurds defeated ISIS.
See my post #98.

5. Abraham Accords was a big step in the right direction.

6. Trump was not held in CONTEMPT by US allies. Biden was.

Fact check: Trump administration officials try to rewrite their own Afghanistan history

There's been no shortage of fact-based criticism aimed at the Biden administration's handling of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan.

www.cnn.com

“In the past 18 months, the U.S. has not suffered a single combat casualty there. By the time we left office, the Afghan government and the Taliban each controlled their respective territories, neither was mounting major offensives, and America had only 2,500 U.S. troops in the country—the smallest military presence since the war began in 2001,” Pence wrote.


7. Biden held in CONTEMPT by US allies. Gates is right, Biden is always wrong. Obama is right, "never underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up"

UK Parliament Makes Unprecedented Decision to Hold Biden in Contempt

Members of the UK parliament from across the political spectrum have decided to hold President Biden in contempt for his bungled withdrawal.

www.westernjournal.com

Sigh

 

[Lesh]

1. Trump can say anything to get the EU deadbeats to pay up, like Putin can do whatever he wants with deadbeats.
2. What if the US stops military aid to Ukraine, that doesn't mean the EU needs to stop.
3. Trump's values are fine, democrats have no values.
4. You did not say what happens if Ukraine falls to Russia.

For someone supposedly supporting Ukraine, your support has become pretty lukewarm. But then you got the word from Deat Leader so…

 

[AntonToo]

1. Trump can say anything to get the EU deadbeats to pay up, like Putin can do whatever he wants with deadbeats.

Nothing to do with America supporting Ukraine, just another half-baked excuse to shit on the western aliance and signal to Putin a weakened resolve.

2. What if the US stops military aid to Ukraine, that doesn't mean the EU needs to stop.

It means US has failed to lead the free world.
It means we don't stand behind our promises.
It means our word is worthless.
It means we don't back our democratic ideals, do not care about supporting international order and law.

Shame. Thats what it means to me.

3. Trump's values are fine, democrats have no values.

democrats support constitutional, representative democracy (aka a republic). So do most Democracts, including one you are talking to now. So do most Republicans.

Ukrane's importance as a young country striving for democratic values means NOTHING to Trump, because he is not a democrat. He is a power and celebrity addicted degenerate who writes love letters to despots and envies their autocratic grip on power.

4. You did not say what happens if Ukraine falls to Russia.

Fall of Ukraine will mean more autocratic world, more imperialistic wars, more instability and economic decline with more misery and suffering.

Think back to WW2 if you really think it can't come to our shores and consider how much smaller the world is now.

Failed Russia will show the world a spectacular autocratic failure. Successful Ukraine will show the world the way to future. So every dollar we send for Ukraine's defense and rebuilding efforts is some of the best money we can spend.

 

[Care4all]

Can we at last acknowledge that having Ukraine join NATO was a bad idea? (Strategically, this is on par with Russia placing missiles in Cuba.) If we really thought Russia was so weak as to not oppose this idea, why didn't NATO just move into Ukraine and take over its defense? One explanation for pushing Ukraine to join NATO is that hatred towards Russia was ginned up in response to Russia's alleged interference in the 2016 US Presidential election. Do you have another explanation for why we wanted Ukraine to join NATO?

When did we want Ukraine to join NATO? Before the invasion of Russia, we told the Ukraine NO on joining NATO when they asked, they were not ready...?

 

[AntonToo]

Trump and his coalition with the Kurds defeated ISIS.

Same Kurds that Trump then sold down the Turkish river?

A move explained by his senior foreign policy advisor as a result of personal financial interests in Turkey.

Kurds will remember their "coalition" with Trump for a long time.

Trump defends decision to abandon Kurdish allies in Syria

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump cast his decision to abandon Kurdish fighters in Syria as fulfilling a campaign promise to withdraw from "endless war" in the Middle East, even as Republican critics and others said he was sacrificing a U.S. ally and undermining American credibility.

apnews.com

 

[Ringo]

NATO in 1991: "Not one inch east.
"NATO in 1999: <launches illegal bombing of Serbia, admits Hungary, Poland and Czechia>
NATO in 2004: <admits former Soviet republics>
NATO in 2008: "Georgia and Ukraine should join!"
NATO in 2022: "WHY IS RUSSIA LAUNCHING UNPROVOKED WAR?!"

 

[kyzr]

For someone supposedly supporting Ukraine, your support has become pretty lukewarm. But then you got the word from Dear Leader so…

1. The fucking EU needs to step up and carry the ball until the US figures things out.
2. The US can't afford to keep borrowing money to give to Ukraine.
3. Letting Ukraine into NATO is a reasonable solution based on the Budapest Memorandum (NATO gave security guarantees if Ukraine gave up its nukes)
4. So net-net its cheaper & faster just letting them into NATO, forcing Putin to back off. One off-ramp could be the 2014 lines, Ukraine gives up some land for NATO membership.

 

[kyzr]

NATO in 1991: "Not one inch east.
"NATO in 1999: <launches illegal bombing of Serbia, admits Hungary, Poland and Czechia>
NATO in 2004: <admits former Soviet republics>
NATO in 2008: "Georgia and Ukraine should join!"
NATO in 2022: "WHY IS RUSSIA LAUNCHING UNPROVOKED WAR?!"

The 1991 statement was Jim Baker under Papa Bush. It was a statement, not a formal Treaty. If you want a more formal Treaty look up the Budapest Memorandum that everyone signed, even Russia.

 

[Lesh]

1. The fucking EU needs to step up and carry the ball until the US figures things out.
2. The US can't afford to keep borrowing money to give to Ukraine.
3. Letting Ukraine into NATO is a reasonable solution based on the Budapest Memorandum (NATO gave security guarantees if Ukraine gave up its nukes)
4. So net-net its cheaper & faster just letting them into NATO, forcing Putin to back off. One off-ramp could be the 2014 lines, Ukraine gives up some land for NATO membership.

You do understand that NATO Article 5 would mean we immediately go to war with Russia if Ukraine enters NATO… right?

 

[kyzr]

Same Kurds that Trump then sold down the Turkish river?
A move explained by his senior foreign policy advisor as a result of personal financial interests in Turkey.
Kurds will remember their "coalition" with Trump for a long time.

Trump gave the Kurds an oil field. The Kurds are very happy.

U.S. Troops Really Are in Syria to Protect the Oil—for the Kurds

It’s the only way to get Trump to keep troops on the ground.

foreignpolicy.com

 

[kyzr]

Nothing to do with America supporting Ukraine, just another half-baked excuse to shit on the western alliance and signal to Putin a weakened resolve.
It means US has failed to lead the free world.
It means we don't stand behind our promises.
It means our word is worthless.
It means we don't back our democratic ideals, do not care about supporting international order and law.
Shame. Thats what it means to me.

democrats support constitutional, representative democracy (aka a republic). So do most Democrats, including one you are talking to now. So do most Republicans.

Ukraine's importance as a young country striving for democratic values means NOTHING to Trump, because he is not a democrat. He is a power and celebrity addicted degenerate who writes love letters to despots and envies their autocratic grip on power.

Fall of Ukraine will mean more autocratic world, more imperialistic wars, more instability and economic decline with more misery and suffering.
Think back to WW2 if you really think it can't come to our shores and consider how much smaller the world is now.

Failed Russia will show the world a spectacular autocratic failure. Successful Ukraine will show the world the way to future. So every dollar we send for Ukraine's defense and rebuilding efforts is some of the best money we can spend.

1. Trump strengthened NATO, NATO said so.

'Trump is having an impact': NATO head credits president's tough talk for $100B boost

Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary general, said Trump is helping the alliance adapt to "a more unpredictable world."

www.usatoday.com

2. The US has a $34T Debt, and climbing. The Ukraine war needs to end sooner not later. Admitting Ukraine into NATO looks to be the fastest option.

3. WW2 has nothing to do with today's world. NFW the US can be invaded. We have the 2nd Amendment (millions of shooters) and a great military.

4. Once again, the US can't keep sending Ukraine money. The war needs to end sooner, not later.

 

[kyzr]

You do understand that NATO Article 5 would mean we immediately go to war with Russia if Ukraine enters NATO… right?

No. The terms can be negotiated. Something like:
1. Ukraine gets admitted to NATO with a 60-day timeline.
2. Russia is invited to "accept" new Ukraine boundaries, say the 2014 lines, Putin gets Donbas & Crimea for his fucked-up invasion.
3. After 30-days NATO forces enter the west half of Ukraine, freeing up Ukraine to move troops east, and for Russian troops to vacate.
4. After 60-days NATO troops can move further east as peacekeepers and are allowed to defend themselves.

So IMHO a 60-day timeline gets the Ukraine War over.

 

[AntonToo]

1. Trump strengthened NATO, NATO said so.

'Trump is having an impact': NATO head credits president's tough talk for $100B boost

Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary general, said Trump is helping the alliance adapt to "a more unpredictable world."

www.usatoday.com

2. The US has a $34T Debt, and climbing. The Ukraine war needs to end sooner not later. Admitting Ukraine into NATO looks to be the fastest option.

3. WW2 has nothing to do with today's world. NFW the US can be invaded. We have the 2nd Amendment (millions of shooters) and a great military.

4. Once again, the US can't keep sending Ukraine money. The war needs to end sooner, not later.

Admitting Ukraine into NATO now means entering war with Russia and spending MORE, not less.

You are not posting coherently.

 

[Lesh]

No. The terms can be negotiated. Something like:
1. Ukraine gets admitted to NATO with a 60-day timeline.
2. Russia is invited to "accept" new Ukraine boundaries, say the 2014 lines, Putin gets Donbas & Crimea for his fucked-up invasion.
3. After 30-days NATO forces enter the west half of Ukraine, freeing up Ukraine to move troops east, and for Russian troops to vacate.
4. After 60-days NATO troops can move further east as peacekeepers and are allowed to defend themselves.

So IMHO a 60-day timeline gets the Ukraine War over.

Yeah. We’ll send you over with the Secretary of State to negotiate your fantasy.

Bottom line. Admitting a nation at war means under Article 5, all of NATO goes to war.

 

[kyzr]

Admitting Ukraine into NATO now means entering war with Russia and spending MORE, not less.
You are not posting coherently.

Thinking that Putin wants a war with NATO is incoherent.
He can't even take on Ukraine, duh.

 

[kyzr]

Yeah. We’ll send you over with the Secretary of State to negotiate your fantasy.

Bottom line. Admitting a nation at war means under Article 5, all of NATO goes to war.

Bottom line: Everything can be negotiated, even conditions for admission into NATO.

 

[AntonToo]

Thinking that Putin wants a war with NATO is incoherent.
He can't even take on Ukraine, duh.

...so you just imagine that Russians will just cut their 400,000 dead and wounded losses, roll up their army and go home with tail between their legs?

 

[kyzr]

...so you just imagine that Russians will just cut their 400,000 dead and wounded losses, roll up their army and go home with tail between their legs?

Putin is 71, and just got elected to another 6-year term.
His army is shit, his "soldiers" are fleeing Russia to avoid the draft.
His "economy" is about the size of Italy's.
Yes he should cut his losses, take Crimea and Donbas and call it a win.

 

[Ringo]

The 1991 statement was Jim Baker under Papa Bush. It was a statement, not a formal Treaty. If you want a more formal Treaty look up the Budapest Memorandum that everyone signed, even Russia.