Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

My response would be "so what?".  I haven't been particularly in favor or our involvement in the Mideast since WW II although I was far too young to do anything about it.  Israel was founded from European anti-semitism.  Nobody liked the Nazi's but neither did they give a shit about the jews.  Europe also seemed to like divvying up the area for their own political and colonial purposes and to ensure that they had a source of energy.  They'd been fucking around there since the 11th century.

Their self destructive wars in the early 20th century meant that they couldn't maintain effective control without our support.  We shouldn't have played their game for them.

My view on war is

  • Do everything you can not to get into one
  • if you do get into one, do what it takes to win
  • walk away.

 

Not really. Think Suez Canal. The French conned Egypt into paying for much of the construction, and going heavily into debt to do so. The French were to share the profits. When the Canal was completed, the Brits went into a panic since the Canal was a threat to British trade routes around Africa, and profits from their waypoint at South Africa. The Brits managed to get the loans called in and swindled Egypt out of their majority stake in the Canal. Zionism was heavily promoted to establish a friendly colony in Palestine,  located near the canal to protect it. Remember, the Ottomans still controlled most of the Middle East at the time. To be sure, there were some anti-semetics promoting Zionism as an excuse to get Jews out of Europe, just as there were honest proponents of Zionism just promoting a Jewish homeland. But the main reason was imperialism. Following WW2, the Jews and Palestinians together revolted against British rule,  the Jews prevailed and the UN backed the creation of Israel. Probably well-intentioned, but handled clumsily. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Nobody liked the Nazi's

A right winger wanting to forget the right wing in the west's infatuation with the Nazi party? Can't say I'm surprised at all. There were plenty in the west who respected Hitler and hated the Jews but people want to overlook those ugly bits.

Guess I shouldn't be surprised at the willingness to overlook massive Russian anti-semitism and it's role either, but so many on the right have a blindspot that's 11 timezones wide now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia, the army is not a problem, its small, and Russian population is not that big anymore, it is the political meddling in several countries they see as their influence area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, random said:

His point is that you are an apologist for war crimes inflicted on innocent unarmed people who posed no threat at all to the USA.

How do you figure as I just don't see that in what he posted? But actually, it was the Saudis that did it but they went after Afganistan as they would not hand over BL without proof. So they claim. And then it was onto Iraq. You know the rest of the story.:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LeoV said:

Russia, the army is not a problem, its small, and Russian population is not that big anymore, it is the political meddling in several countries they see as their influence area.

How dare they! :angry:  Political meddling, regime change and overthrowing elected governments is your job! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2018 at 3:45 PM, Sean said:

Will NATO survive Trump?

Putin is winning it seems.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/07/02/world/europe/trump-nato.html

In Pointed Letters, Trump Demands More Defense Spending From NATO Allies

Excerpt -

 

WASHINGTON — President Trump has written sharply worded letters to the leaders of several NATO allies, including Germany, Belgium, Norway and Canada, taking them to task for spending too little on their own defense and warning that the United States is losing patience with their failure to meet security obligations shared by the alliance.

The letters, which went out last month, are the latest sign of acrimony between Mr. Trump and American allies as he heads to a NATO summit meeting next week in Brussels that will be a closely watched test of the president’s commitment to the trans-Atlantic alliance after he has repeatedly questioned its value and claimed that its members are taking advantage of the United States.

They raised the prospect of a second bitterly contentious confrontation between the president and United States allies after a blowup by Mr. Trump at the Group of 7 gathering last month in Quebec, and highlighted the worries of European alliesthat far from projecting solidarity in the face of threats from Russia, their meeting will highlight divisions within the alliance. That would play into the hands of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who is to meet with Mr. Trump in Helsinki after the NATO meeting, and whose prime goal is sowing divisions within NATO.

 

 Frankly, the organization was designed from the get-go to counter the USSR, which had been gone for quite some time now. Europe depends on Russian oil now, and I think the struggle to maintain NATO is primarily driven by the interests that are vested in it. Heck of a lot of money goes into NATO management and maintenance. Hence they constantly exaggerate the nature of the Russian "threat". 

  I think the current question of great interest is based on the precept that an attack on one is an attack on all. So, if Russia was to attack Turkey from behind, would Greece help? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Mark K said:

 Frankly, the organization was designed from the get-go to counter the USSR, which had been gone for quite some time now. Europe depends on Russian oil now, and I think the struggle to maintain NATO is primarily driven by the interests that are vested in it. Heck of a lot of money goes into NATO management and maintenance. Hence they constantly exaggerate the nature of the Russian "threat". 

  I think the current question of great interest is based on the precept that an attack on one is an attack on all. So, if Russia was to attack Turkey from behind, would Greece help? 

 

 

IMO, it's somewhat likely that Turkey leaves NATO and forms an alliance with Russia. Greece will go with whoever gives them money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turkey is a modern day basket case, they shouldn’t be in nato considering their current supreme leader.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Keith said:

Turkey is a modern day basket case, they shouldn’t be in nato considering their current supreme leader.  

And we are crazy to sell them F35's.

 

  • Downvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mickey Rat said:

How do you figure as I just don't see that in what he posted? But actually, it was the Saudis that did it but they went after Afganistan as they would not hand over BL without proof. So they claim. And then it was onto Iraq. You know the rest of the story.:rolleyes:

What bullshit.

The US trashed Iraq and murdered 100's of thousands of people, for nothing other than commercial greed.

Lying killer whores of the Planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

And we are crazy to sell them F35's.

 

No no sell the pieces of unmaintainable shit to them. they'll be well and truly fucked then.  Population in poverty while all the money goes to the USA.

The F35s are a vehicle to choke and bleed other countries dry while the US keeps the good ones!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, RKoch said:

Not really. Think Suez Canal. The French conned Egypt into paying for much of the construction, and going heavily into debt to do so. The French were to share the profits. When the Canal was completed, the Brits went into a panic since the Canal was a threat to British trade routes around Africa, and profits from their waypoint at South Africa. The Brits managed to get the loans called in and swindled Egypt out of their majority stake in the Canal. Zionism was heavily promoted to establish a friendly colony in Palestine,  located near the canal to protect it. Remember, the Ottomans still controlled most of the Middle East at the time. To be sure, there were some anti-semetics promoting Zionism as an excuse to get Jews out of Europe, just as there were honest proponents of Zionism just promoting a Jewish homeland. But the main reason was imperialism. Following WW2, the Jews and Palestinians together revolted against British rule,  the Jews prevailed and the UN backed the creation of Israel. Probably well-intentioned, but handled clumsily. 

For Suez Canal insert New Silk Road and think of China.

There was, and remains plenty of antisemitism in Europe.  There will be a lot more anti-Israel as the Muslim populations grow.  Quite a few Muslims are Semites themselves.

Believe it or not, antisemitism and the commercial lust for oil can both exist without being dependent on each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mark K said:

 Frankly, the organization was designed from the get-go to counter the USSR, which had been gone for quite some time now. Europe depends on Russian oil now, and I think the struggle to maintain NATO is primarily driven by the interests that are vested in it. Heck of a lot of money goes into NATO management and maintenance. Hence they constantly exaggerate the nature of the Russian "threat". 

  I think the current question of great interest is based on the precept that an attack on one is an attack on all. So, if Russia was to attack Turkey from behind, would Greece help? 

 

 

Yep.

It would be interesting to see how Russia would manage an attack on Turkey.  Whether Greece would help or not would be interesting but not critical to a NATO response.  So long as they did nothing to interfere with existing commitments on use of ports and airfields I suspect they would not be absolutely necessary.  On the other hand, I don't think they would want Russia living next door.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2018 at 8:39 AM, RKoch said:

Jesus, what a tool. If war broke out in Europe, the US  isn't going to abandon the Pacific. Only a moron would do that.  It would be an invitation for China to fill the void, and ultimately result in war vs them too. Since current Pacific Fleet ship and manpower levels are stretched to the limit (in peacetime, no less), it's unlikely much if any assets could be relocated to a European theatre. 

And here I thought our military doctrine was the ability to fight 2 separate wars at once. 

Silly me....

But then.....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58f0f1fbe4b0156697224eb1/amp

This will be hilarious when Trump’s Gut gets involved-  I mean, the draft?  Again?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, random said:

No no sell the pieces of unmaintainable shit to them. they'll be well and truly fucked then.  Population in poverty while all the money goes to the USA.

The F35s are a vehicle to choke and bleed other countries dry while the US keeps the good ones!

Your med's seem to be losing their effectiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Amati said:

And here I thought our military doctrine was the ability to fight 2 separate wars at once. 

Silly me....

But then.....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58f0f1fbe4b0156697224eb1/amp

This will be hilarious when Trump’s Gut gets involved-  I mean, the draft?  Again?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The draft would disproportionately grab his supporters children.

Karma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

The draft would disproportionately grab his supporters children.

Karma.

And they’d love it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

The draft would disproportionately grab his supporters children.

Karma.

Voluntary enlistment disproportionately grabs his supporters children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Dog said:

Voluntary enlistment disproportionately grabs his supporters children.

Dogmedal.thumb.jpg.a5b6089055ff2707c3fa8d25aaf101f5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

Voluntary enlistment disproportionately grabs his supporters children.

That’s because it’s the primary jobs program in red states.    I’ve seen a lot of hard working kids deploy to Africa on peacekeeping missions not out of patriotism or a belief they were helping their fellow human beings.    It was that, huge student loans in a liberal college or move to a big blue city.   The military has a much bigger safety net for a kid trying to figure out a way in the world.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lark said:

That’s because it’s the primary jobs program in red states.    I’ve seen a lot of hard working kids deploy to Africa on peacekeeping missions not out of patriotism or a belief they were helping their fellow human beings.    It was that, huge student loans in a liberal college or move to a big blue city.   The military has a much bigger safety net for a kid trying to figure out a way in the world.    

I didn't mean to suggest that Trump supporters could be motivated by patriotism or a desire to help their fellow human beings.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

I didn't mean to suggest that Trump supporters could be motivated by patriotism or a desire to help their fellow human beings.

Pretty sure nobody is suggesting that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

I didn't mean to suggest that Trump supporters could be motivated by patriotism or a desire to help their fellow human beings.

That would just be silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/5/2018 at 6:03 AM, Mark K said:

So, if Russia was to attack Turkey from behind, would Greece help? 

 

So in essence, you're saying that a russkie invasion of Turkey would be "greek" style???  I hear that costs extra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

So in essence, you're saying that a russkie invasion of Turkey would be "greek" style???  I hear that costs extra.

The Turks hate Greece, but in this case they would probably accept as much as they could get. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should we pay to stay when all we get is grief from the Europeans.

image.png.737c65e50e1cf80ed5413f4981030f80.png

 

Let France be the Nuclear umbrella for Europe. 

Oh wait that's right, when France rejoined NATO 9 years ago ...

 

Sarkozy declared that rejoining the U.S.-led integrated command in Brussels will not diminish the independence of France's nuclear-equipped military

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haahhahahahaaaaa  s snorrt

Win win. 

  1. Trump pulls troops out of Germany as Putin wants
  2. Germany has to buy more weapons from US manufacturers!

How fucking good it that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

haahhahahahaaaaa  s snorrt

Win win. 

  1. Trump pulls troops out of Germany as Putin wants
  2. Germany has to buy more weapons from US manufacturers!

How fucking good it that?

Germany can always buy aircraft from the French. And Germany is very capable of building  armored vehicles and heavy guns for themselves and NATO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Germany can always buy aircraft from the French. And Germany is very capable of building  armored vehicles and heavy guns for themselves and NATO. 

Then, why aren't they doing it?

A report from this year.

The German military has secretly admitted that it can't fulfill its promises to NATO, according to documents leaked to Die Welt newspaper on Thursday.

The Bundeswehr is due to take over leadership of NATO's multinational Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) at the start of next year, but doesn't have enough tanks, the Defense Ministry document said.

Specifically, the Bundeswehr's ninth tank brigade in Münster only has nine operational Leopard 2 tanks — even though it promised to have 44 ready for the VJTF — and only three of the promised 14 Marder armored infantry vehicles.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tanks?  Fucking tanks?

They are very slow moving expensive targets that can be taken out in seconds by a whole variety on means, including shoulder launched.  Picked off by drones or anything else that can fly.  No wonder the Germans are winding down stocks.

They are dinosaurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there anything you are not expert on?

How many crew members have ever been killed in an M1A1 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Is there anything you are not expert on?

How many crew members have ever been killed in an M1A1 ?

How many M1A1s have only been in action in asymmetric conflict.

To save you looking that up, it means that the enemy did not have a fucking chance.  Sometimes unarmed.

Edit: They have never been used where an enemy has had a credible air attack.  That's the US model.   Hence my comments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why should we pay to stay when all we get is grief from the Europeans."

Why should we have the world's most expensive military when we seem on the verge of forming a new Warsaw Pact with Russia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

"Why should we pay to stay when all we get is grief from the Europeans."

Why should we have the world's most expensive military when we seem on the verge of forming a new Warsaw Pact with Russia?

No! We need an enemy! We need to increase military spending! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Mickey Rat said:

No! We need an enemy! We need to increase military spending! 

Trump has decided the EU is the enemy and we should give deference to Russia and China. That's pretty fucking stupid, imo, but I don't have the strategic smarts of you or Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Trump has decided the EU is the enemy and we should give deference to Russia and China. That's pretty fucking stupid, imo, but I don't have the strategic smarts of you or Trump.

Newsbreak: The war ended 72 years ago and the USSR ceased to exist in 1989. Time to build a US military base in Warsaw before it's too late! Increase the deficit get ready for war. Sound the alarm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps NATO has, or is, outlived its usefulness except for the protection of states directly adjacent to Russia. In my mind, Russia no longer has the ability to fight a large scale, extended land or sea war. There are a few reasons for this. One is that their economy is very weak. It only works for the oligarchs and they don't want to spend their money on tanks or submarines. The average person lives a poor life and is being distracted from this by patriotic fervour and things like the World Cup - bread and circuses. A second factor is demographics. Russia has an aging and stagnant population and every year the cohort of those available for military service declines. As part of Putin's patriotic push there are attempts to increase the fertility rate but these have generally not been very successful. The TFR is about 1.75. Immigration has been somewhat aided by a push to get ethnic Russians to move from former parts of the Soviet Union, but this is ultimately a limited source of immigrants. Russia has a lot of illegal immigrants, largely from central Asia. The result of this decline in conventional military capability is two fold. obviously they have a formidable nuclear arsenal but MAD still makes this strangely enough a paper tiger. As well, they have the ability, as shown in the US and other western elections to fight cyberwars. These are cheap to fight, do not require many 'troops', and are not likely to cause a shooting war to break out. The strange affinity that Trump has for Putin is just a huge bonus - or maybe it is just blackmail we are seeing - also a cheap and effective way to fight your enemy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, random said:

How many M1A1s have only been in action in asymmetric conflict.

To save you looking that up, it means that the enemy did not have a fucking chance.  Sometimes unarmed.

Edit: They have never been used where an enemy has had a credible air attack.  That's the US model.   Hence my comments

They’re way to expensive to use in an actual conflict. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Trump has decided the EU is the enemy and we should give deference to Russia and China. That's pretty fucking stupid, imo, but I don't have the strategic smarts of you or Trump.

Right....Trump shows that he considers Europe the enemy and shows his deference towards Russia by calling for his enemies to increase defense spending strengthening an alliance committed to defending these enemies from Russian aggression.

This makes sense only to the deranged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

Right....Trump shows that he considers Europe the enemy and shows his deference towards Russia by calling for his enemies to increase defense spending strengthening an alliance committed to defending these enemies from Russian aggression.

This makes sense only to the deranged.

get back to me when Trump tweets about Russian terrorism in the UK.

and yes, your positions and statements only make sense to the deranged members of the Trump cult of personality. Glad you've finally admitted it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dog said:

Right....Trump shows that he considers Europe the enemy and shows his deference towards Russia by calling for his enemies to increase defense spending strengthening an alliance committed to defending these enemies from Russian aggression.

This makes sense only to the deranged.

DogLovesTrump.jpg.567ccc7f43f205422666beb70d7ee11d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Raz'r said:

They’re way to expensive to use in an actual conflict. 

They did pretty well in the Gulf War against the 4th most powerful military machine in the world at that time..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

They did pretty well in the Gulf War against the 4th most powerful military machine in the world at that time..

No air assets - and all their tanks were buried in the sand... not exactly mobile.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

They did pretty well in the Gulf War against the 4th most powerful military machine in the world at that time..

They were virtually unopposed.  This message you have regurgitated was propaganda from the same people who said there were WOMDs there.  How fucking thick are you?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2018 at 12:16 PM, random said:

How many M1A1s have only been in action in asymmetric conflict.

To save you looking that up, it means that the enemy did not have a fucking chance.  Sometimes unarmed.

Edit: They have never been used where an enemy has had a credible air attack.  That's the US model.   Hence my comments

Jesus, I didn't think EVEN YOU could be this stupid.  I was wrong....

main-qimg-a45263dbf89748ea414559dd7112dd

69bf44dc3154bf20b8ebbbda9e93582e--m-abra

abrams24201qv5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

The strange affinity that Trump has for Putin is just a huge bonus - or maybe it is just blackmail we are seeing - also a cheap and effective way to fight your enemy.

It's really only possible to blackmail someone who thinks he has done something wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

It's really only possible to blackmail someone who thinks he has done something wrong.

Very true, I guess Mr Mueller will tell us whether there is a problem or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, random said:

They were virtually unopposed.  This message you have regurgitated was propaganda from the same people who said there were WOMDs there.  How fucking thick are you?

:lol:

Sorry, I must be a victim of a vast conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, what a formidable enemy.  Highly trained 'Elite' guard.   Amazing how every Iraqi army Division was Elite.

Looks just like they were a ragtag bunch who had not been informed about what was going on.  No air support, no fucking idea. 

The other strange thing about that report is that the US Commander said he had no idea there was a line of dug-in tanks that would have been obvious in any recon flight and photo.  Uh-huh.  Mmmmm.  Propa-FUCKING-ganda.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, random said:

Wow, what a formidable enemy.  Highly trained 'Elite' guard.   Amazing how every Iraqi army Division was Elite.

Looks just like they were a ragtag bunch who had not been informed about what was going on.  No air support, no fucking idea. 

The other strange thing about that report is that the US Commander said he had no idea there was a line of dug-in tanks that would have been obvious in any recon flight and photo.  Uh-huh.  Mmmmm.  Propa-FUCKING-ganda.

I'm amazed that they didn't hire you to advise Schwarzkopf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

I'm amazed that they didn't hire you to advise Schwarzkopf.

I like the part in the video where the tank commander said that they had been going up a rise without realising it, then after they crested the rise the enemy came into view.

That sounds like fucking incompetence.  How the fuck could you be driving a tank formation without knowing the terrain?  Seriously?  But people lap this shit up.

Fucking staged propaganda that does not even pass the pub test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, random said:

I like the part in the video where the tank commander said that they had been going up a rise without realising it, then after they crested the rise the enemy came into view.

That sounds like fucking incompetence.  How the fuck could you be driving a tank formation without knowing the terrain?  Seriously?  But people lap this shit up.

Fucking staged propaganda that does not even pass the pub test.

You actually be too stupid for SA, which places you in an elite group. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark K said:

You actually be too stupid for SA, which places you in an elite group. 

And you sir join the great unwashed of PA who, when faced with being raped by a good logical argument, just attack the poster.

Welcome, your membership card is in the mail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

Do you think Trump is trying to isolate Germany from Nato and the EU

Watch this..all of it

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1016956445307400193/video/1

No...He's expressing a legitimate concern. Germany makes itself dependant on Russian energy while NATO, which is disproportionately supported by the American tax payers Trump represents, protects it from Russia. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean he's wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

No...He's expressing a legitimate concern. Germany makes itself dependant on Russian energy while NATO, which is disproportionately supported by the American tax payers Trump represents, protects it from Russia. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean he's wrong.

ComradeDog.thumb.jpg.2945e687b04e3e09057a311dfe1b28f2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

No...He's expressing a legitimate concern. Germany makes itself dependant on Russian energy while NATO, which is disproportionately supported by the American tax payers Trump represents, protects it from Russia. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean he's wrong.

Open wide Doggie..

 

actually..I though Germany had just stiffed Russia billions to allow them to put the north gas pipe through german waters..or maybe I misunderstood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dog said:

No...He's expressing a legitimate concern. Germany makes itself dependant on Russian energy while NATO, which is disproportionately supported by the American tax payers Trump represents, protects it from Russia. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean he's wrong.

Serious question Dog;

If Trump shoots someone on Fifth Avenue, would you have a problem with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Open wide Doggie..

 

actually..I though Germany had just stiffed Russia billions to allow them to put the north gas pipe through german waters..or maybe I misunderstood.

Germany is profiting from its dealings with Russia while the American tax payer foots the bill for defending it against Russian aggression and you think Trump is the villain of this story. Your hate makes you easy to dupe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sean said:

Serious question Dog;

If Trump shoots someone on Fifth Avenue, would you have a problem with that?

That's not a serious question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

Germany is profiting from its dealings with Russia while the American tax payer foots the bill for defending it against Russian aggression and you think Trump is the villain of this story. Your hate makes you easy to dupe.

Hang on..I though Germany was hostage to Russian products a minute ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shortforbob said:

Hang on..I though Germany was hostage to Russian products a minute ago?

They have a mutually beneficial trade arrangement but one which makes Germany dependant on Russian energy.  Meanwhile we protect them from Russia and you think Trump is the bad guy. You're a dupe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

They have a mutually beneficial trade arrangement but one which makes Germany dependant on Russian energy.  Meanwhile we protect them from Russia and you think Trump is the bad guy. You're a dupe.

DogLovesTrump.jpg.3a88ad9464cac4f793ddf4a595e04956.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

They have a mutually beneficial trade arrangement but one which makes Germany dependant on Russian energy.  Meanwhile we protect them from Russia and you think Trump is the bad guy. You're a dupe.

WHAT!!! MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS!!!!! OH NO!!!

 

 

 

 

 

:biggrin: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

WHAT!!! MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS!!!!! OH NO!!!

 

 

 

 

 

:biggrin: 

Speaking of mutually benefitial trade arrangements, there is a subtext in play here. Trump is actively promoting expanding the sale of American energy into Europe. He seeks a mutually beneficial arrangement himself in which European countries trade with their ally at the expense of the Russians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

Speaking of mutually benefitial trade arrangements, there is a subtext in play here. Trump is actively promoting expanding the sale of American energy into Europe. He seeks a mutually beneficial arrangement himself in which European countries trade with their ally at the expense of the Russians.

Didn't know you had any spare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

They have a mutually beneficial trade arrangement but one which makes Germany dependant on Russian energy.  Meanwhile we protect them from Russia and you think Trump is the bad guy. You're a dupe.

"dupe" describes someone parroting Trump lies about German energy, and someone thinking Trump is playing the US against Russia. but then you only find deep conspiracys and coincidences when there's a D involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, random said:

I like the part in the video where the tank commander said that they had been going up a rise without realising it, then after they crested the rise the enemy came into view.

That sounds like fucking incompetence.  How the fuck could you be driving a tank formation without knowing the terrain?  Seriously?  But people lap this shit up.

Fucking staged propaganda that does not even pass the pub test.

You've never been in a tank, have you?  Never navigated across new ground?  Never been in Iraq?    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Do you think Trump is trying to isolate Germany from Nato and the EU

Watch this..all of it

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1016956445307400193/video/1

Listening to President Trump criticize Germany for their business with Russia, the one country President Trump refuses to criticize and the source of much of his cash for real estate ventures, is such delicious irony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Listening to President Trump criticize Germany for their business with Russia, the one country President Trump refuses to criticize and the source of much of his cash for real estate ventures, is such delicious irony.

Was Germany in that meeting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bus Driver said:

According to President Trump, doing business with Russia means they "totally control" you.  

Doing business with Russia is bad. 

Sometimes.

I'd like to know who feeds him his figures ..does he read reports? does he forget the facts and takes a stab..does he simply exagerate for effect?

All in all, I'm glad he doesnt clean my windows

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

"dupe" describes someone parroting Trump lies about German energy, and someone thinking Trump is playing the US against Russia. but then you only find deep conspiracys and coincidences when there's a D involved.

German 'clean' energy production is up.  That is, what they produce in country.  However their energy consumption is a lot higher than that and requires imports to meet demand.

Clean energy production

1311_dramatic_growth_in_german_renewable

Energy consumption

1305_germany_sources_of_energy.rev.14474

Imports from

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-dependence-imported-fossil-fuels

 

tabelle-primary-energy-share-and-russian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Was Germany in that meeting?

Sure, and remember, Angela is from East Germany and longs to return to the security of Russian colonization.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

According to President Trump, doing business with Russia means they "totally control" you.  

Doing business with Russia is bad. 

Sometimes.

When Germany is depentant on Russia for 70% of it's energy then yes, Russia pretty much will have them by the balls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Russia's selling asbsetos to the USA..with Trump's face printed on the pallets

Sometimes Dog..traders gotta trade 

Donald Trump’s environmental policies may have caused controversy in the US but the president’s stance has managed to get him a literal stamp of approval from a Russian mining company.

Uralasbest, one of the world’s largest producers and sellers of asbestos, has taken to adorning pallets of its product with a seal of Trump’s face, along with the words “Approved by Donald Trump, 45th president of the United States”.

The move follows the US Environmental Protection Agency’s recent decisionnot to ban new asbestos products outright. The EPA said it would evaluate new uses of asbestos but environmental groups have criticized the agency for not going further by barring them on public health grounds.

In a Facebook post, Uralasbest published pictures of its Trump-adorned chrysotile asbestos, writing: “Donald is on our side!” The post thanks Trump for supporting Scott Pruitt, the recently departed head of the EPA, “who declared that his agency would no longer deal with matters related to side effects potentially caused by asbestos”. It adds that Trump called asbestos “100% safe after application”.

Uralasbest, which is located in the mining city of Asbest in the Ural Mountains, is reported to have close ties to Russian president Vladimir Putin, who Trump will meet for talks in Helsinki next week.

Asbest was once known as the “dying city” due to its high rate of lung cancer and other asbestos-related health problems.

“Vladimir Putin and Russia’s asbestos industry stand to prosper mightily as a result of the Trump administration’s failure to ban asbestos in the US,” said Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group.

“Helping Putin and Russian oligarchs amass fortunes by selling a product that kills thousands each year should never be the role of a US president or the EPA, but this is the Trump administration.”

Asbestos was once widely used in the US for insulation and roofing but is now classed by the federal government as a “known carcinogen” due to evidence that, when disturbed, asbestos fibers can become lodged in the lungs and cause mesothelioma, as well as cancers of the lung, larynx and ovary. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, around 2,500 Americans die from mesothelioma every year.

Trump, however, has previously voiced his support for asbestos, calling it “100% safe, once applied”, in his 1997 book The Art of the Comeback. In the same tome, Trump wrote: “I believe that the movement against asbestos was led by the mob, because it was often mob-related companies that would do the asbestos removal.”

In 2012, the future president tweeted that the World Trade Center “would never have burned down” after the September 11 attacks if asbestos hadn’t been removed from the building.

Certain uses of asbestos, such as in flooring felt, are banned in the US but it is still permitted in clothing and roofing. An EPA review of asbestos regulations, kicked off under the Obama administration, saw Pruitt announce in June “important, unprecedented action on asbestos”.

This action states that the EPA will evaluate new uses of asbestos using the “best available science” but does not ban the materials. The range of asbestos uses examined by the EPA has been criticized as being too narrow, as it won’t cover, for example, the millions of pounds of asbestos dumped in landfills or used to coat piping in buildings.

“By allowing asbestos to remain legal, the Trump administration would be responsible for a flood of asbestos imports from Russia and other countries into the US, as well as the wave of illnesses and deaths that will continue for years to come,” said Linda Reinstein, co-founder and president of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization.

Last year, Brazil, which was responsible for the bulk of asbestos exports to the US, joined about 60 other countries in banning the product, leaving Russia as the major source of asbestos sent to America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Dog said:

When Germany is depentant on Russia for 70% of it's energy then yes, Russia pretty much will have them by the balls.

Or, since Russia is dependent on cash flow from Germany, you could say the Germans have the Russian bankers by the balls.

or, you could go back to being a conservative and celebrate nations trading efficiently. Idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Or, since Russia is dependent on cash flow from Germany, you could say the Germans have the Russian bankers by the balls.

or, you could go back to being a conservative and celebrate nations trading efficiently. Idiot.

You missed the part about the American tax payer footing the bill to protect Germany from Russia. They want to be dependant on Putin's energy and want us to protect them from him. Trump's right on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites