2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

True, we cannot look into Putin's head, however, the fact that Russia was completely misled and lied to about NATO expansion is incredibly well documented, you can find it all here:

 

"The declassified U.S. account of one key conversation on October 22, 1993, (Document 😎 shows Secretary of State Warren Christopher assuring Yeltsin in Moscow that the Partnership for Peace was about including Russia together with all European countries, not creating a new membership list of just some European countries for NATO; and Yeltsin responding, “this is genius!”

Christopher later claimed in his memoir that Yeltsin misunderstood – perhaps from being drunk – the real message that the Partnership for Peace would in fact “lead to gradual expansion of NATO”;[1] but the actual American-written cable reporting the conversation supports subsequent Russian complaints about being misled."

 

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018-03-16/nato-expansion-what-yeltsin-heard

 

Not only did Warren Chrstophe lie to Russia's president, he lied to history and tried to distort the record. As did James Baker, George Bush etc...

 

Now, if Russia cannot trust the word of America's leaders, why would it be able to trust a piece of paper those leaders signed? America's leaders are liars. Contracts would have been completely pointless. If they don't keep their word why would they keep a contract? After all Russia signed the ABM treaty with the US and the US simply withdrew from it. Again, pointless

 

 

 I think I was already in complete agreement with you on those points.....but thanks.

3 minutes ago, ChicagoExpat said:

China is emptying Russia of its natural resources, all while telling Putin to keep looking West, that's where the real threat is.  When I was in Russian language school some years ago, part of the training of course was reading articles from Russia.  In the teens, before they were all killed, sent to Gulag, or got in line, Russian journalists used to report on this, even 10 years ago.  Of course they can't anymore.

 

Yes, Vladimir, it's the West that is the real threat, not the power- and resource-hungry Borg state that is right on your border... with whom you've had actual shooting wars in the past.

The Chinese are not idiots. They have seen how tough it has been for Russia to make headway with an opponent that is right on their border. How much tougher will it be across 100 miles of water?

 

Taiwan has little by way of natural resources. Its main value is in being the world leader in manufacturing advanced chips.

 

OTOH, eastern Siberia has gold, diamonds, oil and gas. It's a treasure house. Given Russia's logistical incompetence, almost impossible to defend.

 

The Chinese are renowned for thinking in terms of decades, if not centuries.

 

In this respect, the Kremlin planners are being as dumb as a can of soup.

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

One imagines that if Ukraine cuts off Europe's gas supplies as they near winter, Europeans will not be amused.

They are certainly not giving medals for the Ukrainian suspected of sabotaging the under sea pipeline.

Lol! The pipelines are in Ukraine. It could have cut supplies off before, if it wanted.

Not really in Ukraine's interest as they get paid by Gazprom.

A certain poster is giving me the impression that this is his profession (to disseminate highly polished Kremlin disinformation). Just sayin'

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

A certain poster is giving me the impression that this is his profession (to disseminate highly polished Kremlin disinformation). Just sayin'

 

 

Putin is on here?.....wow.....now I'm sitting up.

Likely India would join China in nixing Russia if they use nukes.

 

 

Edited August 16, 20241 yr by Jingthing

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Likely India would join China in nixing Russia if they use a nuke.

Agreed. Probably the only supporter would be North Korea. Even Iran would blench.

8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

True, we cannot look into Putin's head, however, the fact that Russia was completely misled and lied to about NATO expansion is incredibly well documented, you can find it all here:

 

"The declassified U.S. account of one key conversation on October 22, 1993, (Document 😎 shows Secretary of State Warren Christopher assuring Yeltsin in Moscow that the Partnership for Peace was about including Russia together with all European countries, not creating a new membership list of just some European countries for NATO; and Yeltsin responding, “this is genius!”

Christopher later claimed in his memoir that Yeltsin misunderstood – perhaps from being drunk – the real message that the Partnership for Peace would in fact “lead to gradual expansion of NATO”;[1] but the actual American-written cable reporting the conversation supports subsequent Russian complaints about being misled."

 

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018-03-16/nato-expansion-what-yeltsin-heard

 

Not only did Warren Chrstophe lie to Russia's president, he lied to history and tried to distort the record. As did James Baker, George Bush etc...

 

Now, if Russia cannot trust the word of America's leaders, why would it be able to trust a piece of paper those leaders signed? America's leaders are liars. Contracts would have been completely pointless. If they don't keep their word why would they keep a contract? After all Russia signed the ABM treaty with the US and the US simply withdrew from it. Again, pointless

 

From your own source: 

 

Quote

Polish President Lech Walesa told Clinton (Document 12): “Russia had signed many agreements, but its word was not always good: one hand held a pen; the other a grenade. Yeltsin told the Poles in Warsaw last summer that Russia had no objection to Poland’s membership in NATO; he, Walesa, had a paper with Yeltsin’s signature to prove it. But Yeltsin had changed his mind. The Visegrad countries here represented, Walesa continued, kept their word; they had a Western culture. Russia did not.” Czech President Vaclav Havel immediately responded, “it was neither possible nor desirable to isolate Russia.”

 

You like to portray everything as Russia good, West bad and that's why your rants have no merit, as they cannot possibly be true. It's just your spin on any given situation.

10 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

A certain poster is giving me the impression that this is his profession (to disseminate highly polished Kremlin disinformation). Just sayin'

If we're talking about the guy with the blue lion avatar, I'd say it's poorly polished Kremlin disinfo and that his employer ain't getting his ruble's worth out of this guy.

Just now, ChicagoExpat said:

If we're talking about the guy with the blue lion avatar, I'd say it's poorly polished Kremlin disinfo and that his employer ain't getting his ruble's worth out of this guy.

Well it's pretty good considering the dreck he has to work.with.

39 minutes ago, ChicagoExpat said:

.

It may well have been that Ukraine destroyed the pipeline.  But it's "not an attack on a NATO member."  Not in the least.  It's a pipeline owned primarily by a hostile power with investment from several Western European companies willing to do business with today's version of late 1930s Germany.  So your initial assertion is hilariously wrong.

 

You even think like a Russian.  Russia has no actual friends, just frenemies it depends on while simultaneously being taken advantage of (China, Iran) and FSU states it dictates to,  It's hard for you to imagine that the West has alliances formed out of both common interest AND friendly ties, without coercion.  The idea that Germany, of all countries -- one of the strongest economies in the world -- just does what it is told is as ignorant and baseless as your Zakharova talking point that Ukraine attacked Germany.  You obviously don't know any Germans.

 

If ANYONE has compelled Western nations to look more to the U.S. for leadership, it's Putin himself.  One of the most wonderfully ironic results of his war is that he expanded NATO, succeeding where NATO couldn't.  Well done, Vova!

 

It's absolutely incredible you shill for this guy.

 

Ukraine's attack on Nordstream was an atack on a NATO member. Not only does the pipeline pass throug German territory, but Nordstream AG is partly owned by German, Dutch and French companies with their respective states as shareholder. In addition the attack compromised Germany's energy supply and therefore national security.

 

German officials at the time protested that Ukraine's sabotage was sufficient to trigger article 5 of NATO.

 

"Disgruntled German officials involved in the investigation declared the sabotage operation had put Berlin in a difficult position.

'An attack of this scale is a sufficient reason to trigger the collective defence clause of NATO,' one official told WSJ in alarming comments.

 

'But our critical infrastructure was blown up by a country that we support with massive weapons shipments and billions in cash.'

 

You can read the whole story, just uncovered by the Wall Street Journal, here:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13745985/Senior-Ukrainian-military-officers-came-idea-blowing-Nord-Stream-pipeline-night-heavy-boozing-ignored-Zelenskys-pleas-not-ahead-carried-plot-technically-qualifies-attack-NATO-bombshell-report-claims.html

 

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/15/ukrainian-team-blew-up-nord-stream-pipeline-claims-report

 

Quote

If ANYONE has compelled Western nations to look more to the U.S. for leadership, it's Putin himself.  One of the most wonderfully ironic results of his war is that he expanded NATO, succeeding where NATO couldn't. 

 

That's ludicrous of course, because NATO has been expanding into Eastern Europe since 1999. NATO has been negotiating and promising new membership to a whole raft of countries, including Ukraine, in the last few years. Russia has long given up listening to Western promises regarding NATO expansion. When those promises were exposed as lies, obviously unfettered NATO expansion was just a reality Russia had to deal with. And it is doing so now.

 

At least you tried, ChicagoExpat, well done. But sadly, you failed miserably. 

Edited August 16, 20241 yr by Cameroni

3 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Ukraine's attack on Nordstream was an atack on a NATO member. Not only does the pipeline pass throug German territory, but Nordstream AG is partly owned by German, Dutch and French companies with their respective states as shareholder. In addition the attack compromised Germany's energy supply and therefore national security.

 

German officials at the time protested that Ukraine's sabotage was sufficient to trigger article 5 of NATO.

 

"Disgruntled German officials involved in the investigation declared the sabotage operation had put Berlin in a difficult position.

'An attack of this scale is a sufficient reason to trigger the collective defence clause of NATO,' one official told WSJ in alarming comments.

 

'But our critical infrastructure was blown up by a country that we support with massive weapons shipments and billions in cash.'

 

You can read the whole story, just uncovered by the Wall Street Journal, here:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13745985/Senior-Ukrainian-military-officers-came-idea-blowing-Nord-Stream-pipeline-night-heavy-boozing-ignored-Zelenskys-pleas-not-ahead-carried-plot-technically-qualifies-attack-NATO-bombshell-report-claims.html

 

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/15/ukrainian-team-blew-up-nord-stream-pipeline-claims-report

 

 

That's ludicrous of course, because NATO has been expanding into Eastern Europe since 1999. NATO has been negotiating and promising new membership to a whole raft of countries, including Ukraine, in the last few years. Russia has long given up listening to Western promises regarding NATO expansion. When those promises were exposed as lies, obviously unfettered NATO expansion was just a reality Russia had to deal with. And it is doing so now.

 

At least you tried, ChicagoExpat, well done. But sadly, you failed miserably. 

 

 

Moot point.....NATO doesn't expand.....countries join it of their own volition. 

 

 

 

Edited August 16, 20241 yr by Will B Good

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

 

Ukraine's attack on Nordstream was an atack on a NATO member. Not only does the pipeline pass throug German territory, but Nordstream AG is partly owned by German, Dutch and French companies with their respective states as shareholder. In addition the attack compromised Germany's energy supply and therefore national security.

 

German officials at the time protested that Ukraine's sabotage was sufficient to trigger article 5 of NATO.

 

"Disgruntled German officials involved in the investigation declared the sabotage operation had put Berlin in a difficult position.

'An attack of this scale is a sufficient reason to trigger the collective defence clause of NATO,' one official told WSJ in alarming comments.

 

'But our critical infrastructure was blown up by a country that we support with massive weapons shipments and billions in cash.'

 

You can read the whole story, just uncovered by the Wall Street Journal, here:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13745985/Senior-Ukrainian-military-officers-came-idea-blowing-Nord-Stream-pipeline-night-heavy-boozing-ignored-Zelenskys-pleas-not-ahead-carried-plot-technically-qualifies-attack-NATO-bombshell-report-claims.html

 

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/15/ukrainian-team-blew-up-nord-stream-pipeline-claims-report

 

 

That's ludicrous of course, because NATO has been expanding into Eastern Europe since 1999. NATO has been negotiating and promising new membership to a whole raft of countries, including Ukraine, in the last few years. Russia has long given up listening to Western promises regarding NATO expansion. When those promises were exposed as lies, obviously unfettered NATO expansion was just a reality Russia had to deal with. And it is doing so now.

 

At least you tried, ChicagoExpat, well done. But sadly, you failed miserably. 

NATO hasn't been expanding, countries have asked to join NATO because of fear of invasion by the Commie. Then NATO considers their application....

 

Can you tell me why Sweden & Finland recently applied and joined NATO....?  🤔

42 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Moot point.....NATO doesn't expand.....countries join it of their own volition. 

 

 

 

 

41 minutes ago, transam said:

NATO hasn't been expanding, countries have asked to join NATO because of fear of invasion by the Commie. Then NATO considers their application....

 

Can you tell me why Sweden & Finland recently applied and joined NATO....?  🤔

 

Lol, of course NATO members join of their own volition, who claimed otherwise? However, whether those members who want to join become members or not is up to NATO and above all the United States.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

 

You cannot spin history this way and claim NATO did not expand, of course NATO did expand. Considerably. And that is the reason why Russia had to deal with this problem by force, because attempts to negotiate on this issue, and to get the US to respect Russia's interests failed and were met with lies and deception. So now Russia had no other option but to deal with the problem with the use of force. Just like the US did with Panama.

 

As for Sweden and Finland, scared little boys but irrelevant.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO

Edited August 16, 20241 yr by Cameroni

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

 

Lol, of course NATO members join of their own volition, who claimed otherwise? However, whether those members who wan to join become members or not is up to NATO and above all the United States.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

 

You cannot spin history this way and claim NATO did not expand, of course NATO did expand. Considerably. And that is the reason why Russia had to deal with this problem by force, because attempts to negotiate on this issue, and to get the US to respect Russia's interests failed and were met with lies and deception. So now Russia had no other option but to deal with the problem with the use of force. Just like the US did with Panama.

 

As for Sweden and Finland, scared little boys but irrelevant.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO

 

 

Who or what is scaring these little boys into joining NATO?

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

 

 

Lol, of course NATO members join of their own volition, who claimed otherwise? However, whether those members who wan to join become members or not is up to NATO and above all the United States.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

 

You cannot spin history this way and claim NATO did not expand, of course NATO did expand. Considerably. And that is the reason why Russia had to deal with this problem by force, because attempts to negotiate on this issue, and to get the US to respect Russia's interests failed and were met with lies and deception. So now Russia had no other option but to deal with the problem with the use of force. Just like the US did with Panama.

 

As for Sweden and Finland, scared little boys but irrelevant.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO

So you have no answer, just waffle.........😁

 

As expected, so try not spending so much time writing nonsense, just short and precise...Waffle impresses nobody...😉

4 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

 

Lol, of course NATO members join of their own volition, who claimed otherwise? However, whether those members who wan to join become members or not is up to NATO and above all the United States.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

 

You cannot spin history this way and claim NATO did not expand, of course NATO did expand. Considerably. And that is the reason why Russia had to deal with this problem by force, because attempts to negotiate on this issue, and to get the US to respect Russia's interests failed and were met with lies and deception. So now Russia had no other option but to deal with the problem with the use of force. Just like the US did with Panama.

 

As for Sweden and Finland, scared little boys but irrelevant.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO

More dishonesty from  you, to join NATO needs a consensus among all Allies. There is no special weight given to the US vote. One of the primary reasons it took so long for Finland and Sweden was permission from Turkey.

52 minutes ago, ChicagoExpat said:

If we're talking about the guy with the blue lion avatar, I'd say it's poorly polished Kremlin disinfo and that his employer ain't getting his ruble's worth out of this guy.

 Of course, all those who disagree with you are Kremlin stooges lol 

You cannot fight the truth forever - it will all come to light eventually. 

11 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

More dishonesty from  you, to join NATO needs a consensus among all Allies. There is no special weight given to the US vote. One of the primary reasons it took so long for Finland and Sweden was permission from Turkey.

The Commies will not understand that, most of their Generals have disappeared because they didn't understand what they were doing....

Just now, BobBKK said:

 Of course, all those who disagree with you are Kremlin stooges lol 

You cannot fight the truth forever - it will all come to light eventually. 

Gawd, the Commie West bloke is back.........

22 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Who or what is scaring these little boys into joining NATO?

 

Their own fearful minds. If they had bothered to look for one second at the size of Russia's economy, which is smaller than Texas' economy, they would quickly have realised that the notion that Putin would attack Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Germany, Finland, Sweden etc is about as realistic as Thailand conquering Asia.

 

Maybe they fell for their own Atlantic Council propaganda, they twist Putin's words on their website to imply Putin wants to revive Imperial Russia. It's ludicrous frankly. Russia can barely defeat Ukraine, which is one tenth of the size economically of Russia. Much less all of Euope. It's really preposterous.

 

Edited August 16, 20241 yr by Cameroni

6 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 Of course, all those who disagree with you are Kremlin stooges lol 

You cannot fight the truth forever - it will all come to light eventually. 

A bit more truth for you.

 

Ukraine opens military office in occupied Kursk region

 

Liberation continues...

22 minutes ago, transam said:

So you have no answer, just waffle.........😁

 

As expected, so try not spending so much time writing nonsense, just short and precise...Waffle impresses nobody...😉

 

I made it especially clear for you transam, because I know you need it spelled it out, I put it in bold for you.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

6 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

Ukraine's attack on Nordstream was an atack on a NATO member. Not only does the pipeline pass throug German territory, but Nordstream AG is partly owned by German, Dutch and French companies with their respective states as shareholder. In addition the attack compromised Germany's energy supply and therefore national security.

 

German officials at the time protested that Ukraine's sabotage was sufficient to trigger article 5 of NATO.

 

"Disgruntled German officials involved in the investigation declared the sabotage operation had put Berlin in a difficult position.

'An attack of this scale is a sufficient reason to trigger the collective defence clause of NATO,' one official told WSJ in alarming comments.

 

'But our critical infrastructure was blown up by a country that we support with massive weapons shipments and billions in cash.'

 

You can read the whole story, just uncovered by the Wall Street Journal, here:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13745985/Senior-Ukrainian-military-officers-came-idea-blowing-Nord-Stream-pipeline-night-heavy-boozing-ignored-Zelenskys-pleas-not-ahead-carried-plot-technically-qualifies-attack-NATO-bombshell-report-claims.html

 

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/15/ukrainian-team-blew-up-nord-stream-pipeline-claims-report

 

 

That's ludicrous of course, because NATO has been expanding into Eastern Europe since 1999. NATO has been negotiating and promising new membership to a whole raft of countries, including Ukraine, in the last few years. Russia has long given up listening to Western promises regarding NATO expansion. When those promises were exposed as lies, obviously unfettered NATO expansion was just a reality Russia had to deal with. And it is doing so now.

 

 

 there is no one in the world except a Kremlin stooge that would seriously consider that an Article-5 invoking "attack on a NATO member."  It was an attack on a Russian-owned an operated pipeline.

 

NATO has been expanding eastward and northward SOLELY because countries are afraid of Russia.  Period.  You don't seek protection when there's no threat.  And those Eastern European countries were only Russian colonies because they were forced to be.

 

 

Just now, Cameroni said:

 

I made it especially clear for you transam, because I know you need it spelled it out, I put it in bold for you.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

Misleading again, you also said:

 

However, whether those members who want to join become members or not is up to NATO and above all the United States.

 

 

Just now, Cameroni said:

 

I made it especially clear for you transam, because I know you need it spelled it out, I put it in bold for you.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

I know that, but, countries have to apply, they are NOT chased by NATO...

Now once again, with a more precise answer, not a whity jibe, why did Sweden & Finland ASK to join NATO....?

 

As you think you are the expert here, please enlighten us all...

 

Thank you.....

29 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Who or what is scaring these little boys into joining NATO?

Who could it be.... hmmmm...

 

7 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Their own fearful minds. If they had bothered to look for one second at the size of Russia's economy, which is smaller than Texas' economy, they would quickly have realised that the notion that Putin would attack Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Germany, Finland, Sweden etc is about as realistic as Thailand conquering Asia.

 

Maybe they fell for their own Atlantic Council propaganda, they twist Putin's words on their website to imply Putin wants to revive Imperial Russia. It's ludicrous frankly. Russia can barely defeat Ukraine, which is one tenth of the size economically of Russia. Much less all of Euope. It's really preposterous.

Except Russia keeps attacking its neighbors.  You forgot that part.

21 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

 

Lol, of course NATO members join of their own volition, who claimed otherwise? However, whether those members who wan to join become members or not is up to NATO and above all the United States.

 

Because NATO decides who becomes a member

 

You cannot spin history this way and claim NATO did not expand, of course NATO did expand. Considerably. And that is the reason why Russia had to deal with this problem by force, because attempts to negotiate on this issue, and to get the US to respect Russia's interests failed and were met with lies and deception. So now Russia had no other option but to deal with the problem with the use of force. Just like the US did with Panama.

 

As for Sweden and Finland, scared little boys but irrelevant.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO

The real problem of Russia is its own failure (thanks to Putin's incompetence, to a large extent).

No country is attracted by Russia, because it is a failed model, like the Soviet Union was (on top of having a long record of being an imperialist country/people).

Putin has failed to develop his country and the well-being of its citizen. No people, unless forced by an autocrat, wants to be allied with dominated by Russia. It has no soft power.

34 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

More dishonesty from  you, to join NATO needs a consensus among all Allies. There is no special weight given to the US vote. One of the primary reasons it took so long for Finland and Sweden was permission from Turkey.

 

Lol, if you think NATO membership is solely decided by votes you probably never heard of the fact that countries hold talks before crucial votes to ensure the votes go their way. The US provides the main military muscle and the bulk of financial funding for NATO, they have a vested interested what happens with NATO. By the time the vote happens the US would have long ensured it goes the way it wants.

 

Why do you think when Ukraine sabotaged the Nordstream pipeline, something which German officials protested could trigger article 5 of the NATO treaty, we never saw article 5 triggered? Because Germany has to fall in line with what the US wants in terms of foreign policy, even to the extreme of abandoning its own self interest. It's very sad to see a once proud nation like Germany humiliated by America in this way.

 

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/15/ukrainian-team-blew-up-nord-stream-pipeline-claims-report

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13745985/Senior-Ukrainian-military-officers-came-idea-blowing-Nord-Stream-pipeline-night-heavy-boozing-ignored-Zelenskys-pleas-not-ahead-carried-plot-technically-qualifies-attack-NATO-bombshell-report-claims.html

 

And please tell us all how Turkey came around to support Finnish and Swedish NATO membership? By being  leaned on by the USA who promised Turkey F16 fighters and other perks, no?  Thank you for proving my point, BKK Brian

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/7/11/why-turkey-changed-its-stance-on-swedens-nato-membership-2

Edited August 16, 20241 yr by Cameroni

7 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Lol, if you think NATO membership is solely decided by votes you probably never heard of the fact that countries hold talks before crucial votes to ensure the votes go their way. The US provides the main military muscle and the bulk of financial funding for NATO, they have a vested interested what happens with NATO. By the time the vote happens the US would have long ensured it goes the way it wants.

 

Why do you think when Ukraine sabotaged the Nordstream pipeline, something which German officials protested could trigger article 5 of the NATO treaty, we never saw article 5 triggered? Because Germany has to fall in line with what the US wants in terms of foreign policy, even to the extreme of abandoning its own self interest. It's very sad to see a once proud nation like Germany humiliated by America in this way.

 

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/15/ukrainian-team-blew-up-nord-stream-pipeline-claims-report

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13745985/Senior-Ukrainian-military-officers-came-idea-blowing-Nord-Stream-pipeline-night-heavy-boozing-ignored-Zelenskys-pleas-not-ahead-carried-plot-technically-qualifies-attack-NATO-bombshell-report-claims.html

 

And please tell us all how Turkey came around to support Finnish and Swedish NATO membership? By being  leaned on by the USA who promised Turkey F16 fighters and other perks, no?  Thank you for proving my point, BKK Brian

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/7/11/why-turkey-changed-its-stance-on-swedens-nato-membership-2

You made a claim, I disproved it. Your triggered again by your own dishonesty