Jump to content

Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills


Social Media

Recommended Posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, scorecard said:

And I repeat, how can a con-man who has deliberately failed to pay hundreds of contractors and their workers, the trump uni staff and more be seen as having any right to make comments about Nato countries etc.

I don't know if it is a right, outside of free speech and the freedom to be a hypocrite--anyone's entitled to go through life as an idiot and I'm entitled to walk away from them--but what gives him the podium to threaten NATO and world stability is the Republican Party as it has evolved from a valid American political party to a Russian Big Lie political machine no longer rewarding even in money or jobs for the masses but assuring fealty among the ranks by threat and support of its electorate by all the trickeries of the con.

 

6 hours ago, johng said:

He is correct they should pay their share.

why is the USA the policeman of the world with close to 800 military basses around the globe,interfering all over the place  bring those troops home and protect your own borders not someone else's.

I'd have to study the issue to venture anything more than a wild guess and I'm pretty sure I'd not be privy to the most pertinent intel to debate strategies, # of bases, etc., but I'd imagine a lot of that is because America is intricately linked into world capitalism which could be disrupted by, say, Yemen Houthis or and Somalian pirates, etc. So it is less a projection of power for the sake of power and more a system of protecting the arteries of the flow of goods and services that make this world go 'round. And for that, America benefits by trade agreements etc. or don't you think American companies, workers, tax base will profit in later rebuilding Ukraine to bring those farmlands back online post Putin's illegal destructions upon them and those good people.

 

As to bring them home to protect our borders? Wow. Besides how bizarre that sounds to me, I would just point out that if you think todays migrations are overwhelming, you might consider that we've not seen nothin' yet. Because once oceans rise more as science shows they will within just a few decades (if we have that much time) and given the 8,000,000,000 people on the planet, many living in lower lying areas, there won't just be mass migrations of millions upon millions internationally, but even domestically. I suppose you'll then be screaming for America to bring back their troops to protect Colorado from the all the invading Floridians.

 

2 hours ago, candide said:

Two news which are not unrelated.

Funny, in a worrisome sort of way.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

just a week or two ago the Republican House refused to consider a bill that would have imposed extremely strict border controls and provided foreign aid at the same time. Their reason: it is not politically expedient for Republicans to “protect the border” at this time.

Perhaps they should have not coupled border security to "foreign aid". That's two separate things. It's like they wanted the bill to fail.

  • Confused 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

As for “giving billions to foreign countries,” yes, it’s aid, not a loan. But the aid in the form of weaponry comes directly from US arms manufacturers, benefiting US workers, so the money in a very real sense stays in the country.

Sooooo, you are OK that the US workers make loadsacash by providing the means to kill lotsapeople elsewhere?

I wonder if the people getting blown to bits with American bombs agree with you? You do realise that they are people, don't you? People with families and lives and dreams for the future, just like you.

  • Confused 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, you are OK that the US workers make loadsacash by providing the means to kill lotsapeople elsewhere?

I wonder if the people getting blown to bits with American bombs agree with you? You do realise that they are people, don't you? People with families and lives and dreams for the future, just like you.

I talked about just that in another post that you may have missed; I'm not going to repeat myself to you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps they should have not coupled border security to "foreign aid". That's two separate things. It's like they wanted the bill to fail.

I'm sorry, it's the Republican House members who are changing their tune every other day depending on Trump's instructions. The blow-by-blow is covered extensively in the news, so you might want to check your sources of information.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see what is so bad about putting some heat on the other NATO members to start pulling their weight and living up to their promises regarding defence spending.  It has been years and years, and they still want Uncle Sugar to pay the freight.  Well, perhaps they can do it themselves.  The combined GDP of the non-USA NATO countries is far larger than Russia- perhaps 10 times as much. There is no reason, other than laziness, that they cannot increase their military spending to a level where they can defend themselves. 

  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

I don't see what is so bad about putting some heat on the other NATO members to start pulling their weight and living up to their promises regarding defence spending.  It has been years and years, and they still want Uncle Sugar to pay the freight.  Well, perhaps they can do it themselves.  The combined GDP of the non-USA NATO countries is far larger than Russia- perhaps 10 times as much. There is no reason, other than laziness, that they cannot increase their military spending to a level where they can defend themselves. 

Right after a quite noticed Putin's interview.... what a coincidence! 😁

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

I don't see what is so bad about putting some heat on the other NATO members to start pulling their weight and living up to their promises regarding defence spending.  It has been years and years, and they still want Uncle Sugar to pay the freight.  Well, perhaps they can do it themselves.  The combined GDP of the non-USA NATO countries is far larger than Russia- perhaps 10 times as much. There is no reason, other than laziness, that they cannot increase their military spending to a level where they can defend themselves. 

 

I broadly agree. I think you are correct to suggest that some European nations need to contribute much more, both financially and logistically, to ensure the security of Europe.

 

However, unfortunately, even if all the European NATO members were to meet their financial obligations tomorrow, it will be a long time before Europe is able to defend itself without US assistance.

 

https://riponsociety.org/article/nato-at-75/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2024 at 12:56 PM, Jingthing said:

OMG!

The republicans DEMANDED that.

Then they got it.

Then that sleazeball citizen Trump ordered weirdo far right extremist Christian white nationalist speaker Johnson to kill it because he wants to preserve the border crisis as a campaign issue.

Do you even follow the news?

Apparently not. 

Wrong. Bad deal involving 4999 crossings a day plus $61bn to Ukraine.

 

  • Confused 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2024 at 3:49 PM, Cory1848 said:

I'm sorry, it's the Republican House members who are changing their tune every other day depending on Trump's instructions. The blow-by-blow is covered extensively in the news, so you might want to check your sources of information.

 

The two things were joined together. Both flawed.

Edited by stats
trolling comments removed
  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

I'm sorry, it's the Republican House members who are changing their tune every other day depending on Trump's instructions. The blow-by-blow is covered extensively in the news, so you might want to check your sources of information.

If it results in a Biden loss in November, I'm OK with it.

  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...