You should have used the time since your birth, to learn how to think.
Should NATO dismantle?
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
For example:
Definition of genocide
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
Comment: Ukrainian citizens are being systematically destroyed, as primary targets, and it's being done quite deliberately. Now, that's genocide, even though they ain't bloodthirsty Injun Joes.
Definition of genocide
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
Comment: Ukrainian citizens are being systematically destroyed, as primary targets, and it's being done quite deliberately. Now, that's genocide, even though they ain't bloodthirsty Injun Joes.
Last edited by Walker on Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
The Invasion Was Necessary
The United States could have easily prevented Russia’s military action. It could have stopped Russia’s intervention in Ukraine’s civil war from happening by doing three things: forcing implementation of the 8-year old Minsk peace accords, dissolving extreme right Ukrainian militias and engaging Russia in serious negotiations about a new security architecture in Europe.
But it didn’t.
The U.S. can still end this war through serious diplomacy with Russia. But it won’t. Blinken has refused to speak with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Instead, Biden announced on March 16 another $800 million in military aid for Ukraine on the same day it was revealed Russia and Ukraine have been working on a 15-point peace plan. It has never been clearer that the U.S. wanted this war and wants it to continue.
NATO troops and missiles in Eastern Europe were evidently so vital to U.S. plans that it would not discuss removing them to stop Russia’s troops from crossing into Ukraine. Russia had threatened a “technical/military” response if NATO and the U.S. did not take seriously Russia’s security interests, presented in December in the form of treaty proposals.
The U.S. knew what would happen if it rejected those proposals calling for Ukraine not to join NATO, for missiles in Poland and Romania to be removed and NATO troops in Eastern Europe withdrawn. That’s why it started screaming about an invasion in December. The U.S. refused to move the missiles and provocatively sent even more NATO forces to Eastern Europe.
MSNBC ran an article on March 4, titled, “Russia’s Ukraine invasion may have been preventable: The U.S. refused to reconsider Ukraine’s NATO status as Putin threatened war. Experts say that was a huge mistake.” The article said:
“The abundance of evidence that NATO was a sustained source of anxiety for Moscow raises the question of whether the United States’ strategic posture was not just imprudent but negligent.”
Senator Joe Biden knew as far back as 1997 that NATO expansion, which he supported, could eventually lead to a hostile Russian reaction.
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/03/27/c ... e-us-trap/
The United States could have easily prevented Russia’s military action. It could have stopped Russia’s intervention in Ukraine’s civil war from happening by doing three things: forcing implementation of the 8-year old Minsk peace accords, dissolving extreme right Ukrainian militias and engaging Russia in serious negotiations about a new security architecture in Europe.
But it didn’t.
The U.S. can still end this war through serious diplomacy with Russia. But it won’t. Blinken has refused to speak with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Instead, Biden announced on March 16 another $800 million in military aid for Ukraine on the same day it was revealed Russia and Ukraine have been working on a 15-point peace plan. It has never been clearer that the U.S. wanted this war and wants it to continue.
NATO troops and missiles in Eastern Europe were evidently so vital to U.S. plans that it would not discuss removing them to stop Russia’s troops from crossing into Ukraine. Russia had threatened a “technical/military” response if NATO and the U.S. did not take seriously Russia’s security interests, presented in December in the form of treaty proposals.
The U.S. knew what would happen if it rejected those proposals calling for Ukraine not to join NATO, for missiles in Poland and Romania to be removed and NATO troops in Eastern Europe withdrawn. That’s why it started screaming about an invasion in December. The U.S. refused to move the missiles and provocatively sent even more NATO forces to Eastern Europe.
MSNBC ran an article on March 4, titled, “Russia’s Ukraine invasion may have been preventable: The U.S. refused to reconsider Ukraine’s NATO status as Putin threatened war. Experts say that was a huge mistake.” The article said:
“The abundance of evidence that NATO was a sustained source of anxiety for Moscow raises the question of whether the United States’ strategic posture was not just imprudent but negligent.”
Senator Joe Biden knew as far back as 1997 that NATO expansion, which he supported, could eventually lead to a hostile Russian reaction.
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/03/27/c ... e-us-trap/
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
So, that gives Putin justification to drop nukes?
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
Asshole politicians are skilled at saying everything, and nothing.
Last edited by Walker on Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
America is going down ''economically'' along with the rest of the world because of America's arrogance in wanting to be the best country in the entire history of humanity. Only the mighty, fall the hardest.
Only the rats survive.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
As a Catholic, Biden also supports abortion ... so much for consistency. Let's see, what's in it for Joe, and which way is the wind blowing.
The immortal rats.
The immortal rats.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
The implication of your answer to the question, in relation to the question, is that Putin's justification for dropping nukes is that he now considers the US to be weak, because of Biden.
This is correct. If you can be correct twice more, you're beating an analogue clock, which many children can't use to tell time.
If he thinks the US is strong because of Biden, and he drops nukes, then he's a cuckoo.
Last edited by Walker on Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
These comments I make are all on topic, however, explaining the alphabet of why to you is getting tedious, as I already explained.
Abortion is death. War is death. Nukes are death.
Drop your obsession with being dense.
Duh.
Last edited by Walker on Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
Many countries are going to suffer economically because of NATO..which is stupid, dumb, and of zero intelligence.Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:06 pmThe implication of your answer to the question, in relation to the question, is that Putin's justification for dropping nukes is that he now considers the US to be weak, because of Biden.
This is correct. If you can be correct twice more, you're beating an analogue clock, which many children can't use to tell time.
NATO Should have dismantled...would have saved a lot of chaos and heart-ache.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
Ok...that explains it then...do carry on.Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:09 pmThese comments I make are all on topic, however, explaining the alphabet of why to you is getting tedious, as I already explained.
Abortion is death. War is death. Nukes are death.
Duh.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
OK, if you say so...but just so you know, I do not have to follow your nose...I've got my own, but thanks for the advice anyway.
Re: Should NATO dismantle?
Now back to the topic...what's really going on here, oh that's it, I remember, it's about NATO, and should it be dismantled.
Yes, it should because that is what's really going on here. NATO wants a fight with Russia, it's America's wet dream.
Yes, it should because that is what's really going on here. NATO wants a fight with Russia, it's America's wet dream.