What did he say about NATO? The same bullshit about him pulling out of it? lol Kaine & Rubio Applaud Senate Passage of Their Bipartisan Bill to Prevent Any U.S. President from Leaving NATO https://www.kaine.senate.gov/press-...to-prevent-any-us-president-from-leaving-nato
Believe whatever you want. The world existed before NATO and the world will exist after NATO is gone.
He is enjoying the permanent tax breaks worth trillions for the very top earners while you get a temporary tax break.
And therefore if NATO is gone a WWIII will necessarily follow? I think it's interesting what folks make up in their minds will happen if the U.S. isn't part of NATO tomorrow. Americans and American security will be perfectly fine. Same for the majority of Europe. Would probably suck to be a small, weak country in the Russian sphere of influence but, it's not our moral obligation or job to make sure Russia never does goes to war again.
No, it's not a certainty. It does become more likely. I think it's interesting what you've made up in your mind about what folks make up in their minds.
As usual, you're missing the whole point and relying on your emotions to talk for you. All you care about is getting Trump off the ballot with any means possible. If Trump is removed from the ballot going through proper protocol, so be it. If Trump is kept on the ballot going through the same proper protocol, so be it. I am not interested in enforcing my interpretation on the world.
How is it raw for America? Even if we leave, we would still spend trillions on defense. And if there is a raging war in Europe, we will likely be pulled in anyway. The whole point of NATO is to avoid that situation. (If Ukraine was in NATO, there wouldn’t be a war over there now) So, what we would lose is collective defense but not gain the independence to just ignore wars. A preventive stance is 1,000,000 times less costly (in terms of human life and cost) than waiting for a crisis. I want Europe to spend a bit more on defense (which they have, thanks to Russian aggression) and us to spend a bit less (actually, a lot less), which won’t be easy because both parties won’t touch that sacred cow, whether we are in NATO, METO, or anything else.
Tell that to British, French, Canadian, German, Italian, Polish, Danish, Spanish... etc. troops killed in Afghanistan fighting on our behalf after 9/11.
Oh, no, the Russian Boogeyman. What exactly do you think Russia is going to do? Take over a handful of small countries in Eastern Europe? Why is that the American peoples responsibility to make sure that doesn't happen? The Russian Federation will not be seeking a war with the United States of America. There is absolutely zero reason to believe that. Their GDP is far smaller, their population is far smaller and their military capacity is far smaller. The United States is extremely far away and extremely difficult to get to (besides Alaska). Russia poses near 0 threat to the American people. Europe has a GDP 8x the size of Europe and a much larger population then Russia. If they feel threatened by Russia, then let them do something about it. We should not be treaty bound or morally bound to defend Europe from Russian Aggression. Not our job.
This is a bull**** appeal to emotion. We can never criticize or look at our involvement in NATO because we had allies dies in Afghanistan? F*** off with that.
Because The United States provides nearly the entirety of the military capacity of the alliance and guarantees the freedom of 30 odds countries... what do they bring to the alliance? We should reduce our military spending and commitments. The U.S. is under no realistic threat from anyone. People say a $1 in prevention is worth _____ in action but we are spending and have been spending an unsustainable amount of money for decades on the military. It's simply ruinous to the countries finances to spend $900 billion every single year on the military... while we're not even at war.
Good analogy breh... I'm ready to learn about what threat the Russian Federation poses to the United States of America. I'm sure you can enlighten me.
Of course it's an appeal to emotion. War is emotional. My point is that the only time NATO ever invoked Article 5 was on our behalf. We were collectively defended by our allies and many of them lost soldiers for our sake. Why leave when we've been the only beneficiary of their soldiers' lives?
