- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 113,357
- Reaction score
- 77,782
- Location
- Uhland, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
For Canadians at least.
Yep, and 7 other NATO member nations.
For Canadians at least.
Yep, and is apparently optional.
We are actually in agreement. At this point, I am not certain why either Canada or the US are in NATO.That other country can't even beat Ukraine. Which is logistically much easier to support an invasion as opposed to having cross an ocean
We are actually in agreement. At this point, I am not certain why either Canada or the US are in NATO.
Canada is a bit in the position of the US for one hundred years when historical what ifs are asked (hah 1880 Prussia could have conquered all the Americas - they had no armies! - well er we didn't need one). They don't need a large military machine to protect itself.
The idea behind having multi-national defense treaties is that no member nation (alone) would have to spend enough to defend itself.
Given the defense budget of the NATO countries as they were and are even before the 2% target was decided on, were not NATO countries well defended against attacks directly on NATO countries?
Ie strong enough to deter invasion?
Given the combined budget would have been 4 times that of the largest non nato countries military budget. How much more would be required for defense?
Why thank the US for wasting its money?
The only country that can invade Canada is the US. No amount of spending by Canada would allow Canada to defend against a US invasion
The US can't dictate how European countries spend their money any more than Europe can dictate US spending.
You don't get it. The only thing that has ever stopped Russia from using nukes is the certainty that that would be the end of them. That is still the same as always. Russia will be totally annihilated if they use nukes on us or any other country. It is suicide.Well that is ridiculously wrong.
Conventional weapons - Russia would fall in a week.
You are going to entrust the lives of 100s of millions people that they would not use nukes?
You wanna take that chance?
I will submit to you, that I 100% believe Russia would use one or two nukes to make a horrific point they will not fall.
This is why WW III or any wide theater war in post nuclear age must be avoided at all cost.
Not provably true.You don't get it. The only thing that has ever stopped Russia from using nukes is the certainty that that would be the end of them. That is still the same as always. Russia will be totally annihilated if they use nukes on us or any other country. It is suicide.
You don't get it. The only thing that has ever stopped Russia from using nukes is the certainty that that would be the end of them. That is still the same as always. Russia will be totally annihilated if they use nukes on us or any other country. It is suicide.
The risk of nuclear war only increases if the west shows weakness. We have a unique opportunity to nip Russia's imperialist goals in the bud now. All we have to do is show strength and keep arming Ukraine.That can also work in Russia's favor too
If Russia got it army to half decent status and took say the Baltic republics with a sudden and overwhelming conventional invasion, would NATO risk nuclear war getting them back ?
The US can leave NATO however.The US can't dictate how European countries spend their money any more than Europe can dictate US spending.
Except in three weeks we are done.The risk of nuclear war only increases if the west shows weakness. We have a unique opportunity to nip Russia's imperialist goals in the bud now. All we have to do is show strength and keep arming Ukraine.
I hope you are wrong and Trump does not want to be the weakest President in history and a loser that he is reminded of for years of his term. The optics of a defeat for the U.S in Ukraine will be a scourge on his whole time in office with daily headlines of Russian atrocities in Ukraine culminating with Putin's victory parade down the streets of Kiev.The US can leave NATO however.
Except in three weeks we are done.
The risk of nuclear war only increases if the west shows weakness. We have a unique opportunity to nip Russia's imperialist goals in the bud now. All we have to do is show strength and keep arming Ukraine.
LOL Russia has everything to lose in a nuclear war and that is why they will never start one. That is how it has been for 75 years and it has not changed now. You think they have not started one all these years because we appeased them? Then why are we not all speaking Russian? You seem to have been born yesterday.I disagree
The West has a lot more to lose in a nuclear war - we must bear that in mind.
The US can leave NATO however.
Except in three weeks we are done.
I disagree
The West has a lot more to lose in a nuclear war - we must bear that in mind.
Well it can bring a lot of pressure on European countries to increase defense spending.
Nobody wins a nuclear war.
The USA did in 1945.
No body else had nukes
Now 9 countries hava nukes, 5 and potentially 6 have the means to launch them across the world. 2 to 3 have enough to take out most major cities in Europe, the US, Russia or China.
The others have enough to destroy the major cities of their primary threats.
No winning a nuclear war against another nuclear power just being less of a loser
No body else had nukes
Now 9 countries hava nukes, 5 and potentially 6 have the means to launch them across the world. 2 to 3 have enough to take out most major cities in Europe, the US, Russia or China.
The others have enough to destroy the major cities of their primary threats.
No winning a nuclear war against another nuclear power just being less of a loser