Putin's 3 day war in Ukraine started in 2014, right? Russia and whoever is their leader will need time after the Ukrainian War, before their next attempt at expansion.
@DaDakota Russians are our enemy. Meanwhile, we can peacefully co-exist and share this airbase as long as we can equally oppress dark skinned people. Only if Hamas and Israel can share the same foreign affair agenda.
They are our enemy - but that doesn't mean we can't work together when there is a common enemy - you really aren't all that bright at you? DD
So predictable - I have no clue who the common enemy is in the shared base, might be terrorists, might be anything. Running to the racism card is a sign of mental weakness. DD
You're acting like the informed individual, handing out insults, but yet clueless about the situation. Lots of opinions with no facts. The Russians are there to make sure the US leaves. They are not there for some joint mission to kill some 'dark skinned' terrorist.
I don't care why the Russians are there, not surprised that you as a Russian supporter would know however. I care that Russia leave the Ukraine - and gets it's ass battered while it remains, that it weakens Russia so much that it will have a new government soon that can embrace democracy instead of being run by an Al Capone like crook. DD
Comical. U.S. officials tried to work out a deal with the country’s military junta that would allow them to stay in the country, pushing its leaders to agree to a roadmap that would eventually lead to a return to democratic rule. While U.S. officials are still attempting to negotiate, the junta has so far refused to agree to those terms and pulled in Russian paramilitaries to help train its troops and provide arms. The presence of Russian paramilitary fighters at the same base as U.S. troops is symbolic of the broader problem the Biden administration faces in Africa. Moscow is increasingly forging partnerships with coup governments, providing arms and security to militaries at a time when U.S. law prohibits such support. .... Many are members of what was formerly known as the Wagner force, formerly led by Russian mercenary Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin. Following his death in August 2023, Moscow folded thousands of those fighters into new and existing paramilitary groups aligned with its military and intelligence services. Now, Russian President Vladimir Putin is using those fighters to help boost Russia’s presence on the continent. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/...iscalculation-niger-russian-presence-00156046
Yes, the leaders of that country have asked the US to leave, just as they asked the French to leave. The Biden administration is extremely weak on the forign affair front.
Leaders from a military coup that ousted a democratically elected government. Given this situation, what actions would you have expected the US to take to demonstrate strength in foreign affairs, rather than appearing extremely weak? Some possible examples could include: Assassinating those leaders Providing arms to another faction more favorable to the US to oust those leaders Ignoring the request and maintaining presence on the military base Leaving but destroying the base through a bombing campaign Refraining from dictating demands, such as insisting that Niger should have no relationship with Iran and Russia Continuing negotiations to find a way to return... ...
I asked what you think we should do to demonstrate strength in foreign affair, instead of appearing extremely weak. If that's your answer, then what the US is currently doing is not extremely weak to you, since it's doing exactly that. As for leaving as asked, I agree. But we do have an incentive to be there, so I would say we maintain relationship and hope to be back.
Ive already explained this on various occasions. Force Europe to run NATO. Force the Middle East to deal with their own issues. Improve relations with China and India. Consolidate mfg in Mexico and nation build in S America.
You position is withdraw from Niger (as requested) and do the above are strong foreign policy. And what's your thought on how? How would you force Europe to run NATO? How would you force ME to deal with their own issues? How do you improve relations with China, with India? What do you mean "nation build" in South America? As for mfg, critical mfg should be in the U.S. and the chip and infra structure bill did that. Non-critical mfg should not be consolidate anywhere - Mexico and S. American can be a primary hub, but it's best to diversify and not be dependent on any single location for redundancy.
We don't run point on NATO. Let the EU do it. They can deal with Z and Putin. We provide humanitarian aide. Same with the ME. We provide humanitarian aide. We stop giving Israel money. Let the UN run point if Israel starts stomping over Hamas/Palestine. With China, we can stop openly criticizing their style of government. Taiwan is a UN issue. We should stop suggesting we are going to use force to stop China. We are doing ok with India right now but we need to make sure we do not alienate ourselves. We need to help Mexico grow into a partnership like we have with Canada. The reality is Americans are not willing to pay the true cost for quality American goods. We let Mexico handle the bulk of our manufacturing. In doing so, the quality of life for the average Mexican will improve. Over time, the cartels will be ran off. We need to make sure Mexico doesn't turn into something like Venezuela. USA can't ramp up manufacturing over night. We do not have the skillsets or talent to do it. It took 40 years to gut manufacturing and it will take a couple decades to rebuild it, and thats if Americans are willing to pay for those cost of goods.
I'm not sure what you mean by "run point on NATO." Elaborate? Are you saying that we should withdraw from NATO and if Putin decided to invade NATO, we should not come to their defense? Regarding the Middle East, it seems you want the US to stop providing free military aid to Israel. I assume your stance is that Israel should pay for its own military aid. And you extend this view to other Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia as well? When it comes to China, you appear to want the US to refrain from even stating that it would defend Taiwan if China invaded (a US policy statement that has been there since the 70s, is not legally or even morally binding, but one that is used as a deterrent). You're proposing that we should move more manufacturing to Mexico from countries like China, Vietnam, and India. While this would benefit Mexico economically, it would likely raise prices and not help the citizens of Vietnam or India. You make a valid point that the US cannot rapidly ramp up (esp advanced tech) manufacturing overnight. The Chip and Infrastructure legislation is aimed at bringing those adv tech manuf back to the US, but the effects won't be felt immediately - it will take decades and will last decades. In summary, your position seems to be that America should adopt an isolationist stance when it comes to military aid and force projection. You advocate for better economic relationships with all countries, while prioritizing closer neighbors. To you, this represents a strong foreign policy. I will remind you that many people, especially those on the right, would likely view military isolationism as a weak foreign policy.
No, I am not stating we should become isolationist. We should stop being the global police. I did not state we should pull out of NATO. I clearly stated the EU should run NATO. The US should take on a secondary/distant role, not the lead. We should let other countries develop and stop stifling growth across the globe, and instead become more competitive across the spectrum. We should first and foremost develop the countries closest to us and create a strong regional economy that benefits everyone. The North and South American block should compete with the other continental blocks across the globe. I understand the policy of keeping Asia, Africa and the Middle East fractioned, and to an extent Europe - Don't let any particular group and country become too strong. However the sci-fi reality is coming to fruition. Space is the next frontier. Reality is getting more complex nor are we at the apex of human civilization. Bickering over identity politics and all the other idiotic **** people fight over has a closer resemblance to Neanderthal behavior than any form of advanced civilization some people want to imagine we are. Just look at Covid to see how idiotic people reacted from both sides. The first real threat to humanity will lead to doom. Stupid people will argue and bicker and arrogantly act like they know more because they read a few news articles and act like they are subject matter experts. With every global crisis, its the same people who come out and act like they are the subject matter experts.
NATO is almost all run by European officials. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/who_is_who_51639.htm The US only has the most power because we have the largest single economy so we have the largest amount of power. Just like California, Texas, and New York have so much power in the US. It would be a catastrophe for the US if California, Texas, and NY left the Union, and it would be a catastrophe for NATO if the US backed out of the alliance. But it's a misconception that the US is leading NATO. The day to day management of the organization is mostly run by European officials. .... On the Mexico rant, you are kind of all over the place there. You say something like "We cannot let Mexico become Venezuela" while your whole point about Ukraine is we cannot be the "World Police." Talk about using two sides of your mouth. Anytime someone says something like "We need to make sure....X,Y, Z...." you are all but saying "Team American World Police" at some point. And before you say "Oh I just mean influence with economics, trade, etc... reg Mexico...." Yeah right.... you think the US doesn't use levers of violence behind the scenes to influence Cartel and Mexican govt. matters?? Keep in mind that one of the most powerful Mexican's ever (much less drug lords) is currently being held in COLORADO. From the US' perspective you either make a choice one way or another to be truly isolationist or you influence outcomes for the benefit of the US and the world at large. Does it benefit the US for Ukraine to not have been invaded, and for Putin to not show the world that it's open season to invade sovereign neighboring nations killing thousands of innocent civilians??... Hell yeah it is. Is it to our benefit to go to war with Russia.... No? So that's why there is an obvious middle ground of helping without direct conflict. Like this isn't that hard. You going to such great lengths to continue to shill for Putin on this is just really something. I have no idea why you get so animated by this topic unless you are like Putin's step son or something. It's crazy.
