Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Nationalism is a failed political ideology, look it up.

Failed compared to what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours 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.

The same might be said for President Trump and his real estate financing.  Of course, we only have the word of his son.

Share this post


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

Yes, as an act of solidarity.  Nobody was actually expected to do anything.

You lie 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bunch of fucking idiots to believe Trump. Or you lie. Take your pick.

 

Let's say there's a kernel of truth, 70% of NatGas imports in Germany are from Russia.

 

Well, The Germans use 656 terawatts of power annually

13% of that power comes from NatGas

70% of that?  9%

 

So Russia supplies 9% of German energy needs. Big Whoop.

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts

Share this post


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

It came from Trump and I didn't say it was accurate I said when that's the case they have you by the balls.

So you based your argument and bluster on a lie, just like Trump. That's convenient.

9% came from the Germans, argue with them, I think they know better than your or Trump or Saorsa.

Share this post


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

You lie 

You're dumber than shit.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/13/us/after-attacks-alliance-for-first-time-nato-invokes-joint-defense-pact-with-us.html

The statement amounted to a powerful expression of European solidarity with the United States after a period in which trans-Atlantic relations have been strained by tensions over the Bush administration's policies in areas ranging from missile defense to the environment.

NATO's secretary general, Lord Robertson, said the declaration did not necessarily mean NATO would get involved in military action. Nor did it mean that Washington was obliged to act through the group.

''At the moment this is an act of solidarity,'' he said. ''It's a reaffirmation of a solemn treaty commitment which these countries have entered into.''

Asked whether he believed the allies would take joint action, Lord Robertson added: ''The country attacked has to make the decisions, it has to be the one that asks for help. The United States is still assessing the evidence available. They are the one to make that judgment.''

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uk came to help in Afghanistan, as percentage of population, they lost more soldiers then the US.

The US needs Russian uranium, Russia has the US by its balls.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LeoV said:

Uk came to help in Afghanistan, as percentage of population, they lost more solders then the US.

The US needs Russian uranium, Russia has the US by its balls.

Trump Corp needs Russian money. Russia has Trump by a he balls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now he wants the Eu to pay 4% GDP, he is nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what did the US spend in 2016 or 2017 on Nato ?

Share this post


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

And now he wants the Eu to pay 4% GDP, he is nuts.

Where did you get that? My understanding is that he wants all NATO nations to come up to the 2% they agreed on. 

Share this post


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

Where did you get that? My understanding is that he wants all NATO nations to come up to the 2% they agreed on. 

You should pay attention to what he says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Raz'r said:

You should pay attention to what he says.

I do...I never heard that. Cite it for me.

Share this post


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

I do...I never heard that. Cite it for me.

Heard it on the radio while running an errand. Trump said in a speech they should boost to 4%. NATO SecGen said thanks, but we’ll stick with 2%

google will find it for you if you care.

Share this post


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

Heard it on the radio while running an errand. Trump said in a speech they should boost to 4%. NATO SecGen said thanks, but we’ll stick with 2%

google will find it for you if you care.

Wow...He must really hate Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, LeoV said:

And what did the US spend in 2016 or 2017 on Nato ?

The 2% is not spending on NATO.  It is the specific countries overall defense budget.

 

Share this post


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

Uk came to help in Afghanistan, as percentage of population, they lost more soldiers then the US.

The US needs Russian uranium, Russia has the US by its balls.

We don't need Russian uranium.  What makes you think that? 

It's true that we sold some of the assets but certainly not all and you would pay hell trying to get an export license for it if the US decided to stop it.

Share this post


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

The 2% is not spending on NATO.  It is the specific countries overall defense budget.

 

So why is the Elephant saying the US is paying for the Eu, its total bullocks. The US has more power (and so spend more) then the EU, but is not paying the Eu or so... unless a war starts and the US send in the troops, then the spending will start. The premise of his tweets is wrong, so the message is wrong, so a person not to be trusted...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

We don't need Russian uranium.  What makes you think that?  

Keep dreaming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Bunch of fucking idiots to believe Trump. Or you lie. Take your pick.

 

Let's say there's a kernel of truth, 70% of NatGas imports in Germany are from Russia.

 

Well, The Germans use 656 terawatts of power annually

13% of that power comes from NatGas

70% of that?  9%

 

So Russia supplies 9% of German energy needs. Big Whoop.

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts

Nope, you need to look at their total energy demand and sources.  I put the graphs and tables up.  Those are from the EU statistics office.

Here:  Russia provides from 50-75 percent of Germany's natural Gas and 25-50 percent of it's petroleum oils.

Share_(%25)_of_Russia_in_national_extra-

Here is the sources of their energy consumption.

1eng-pierwotne-zuzycie-energii-w-rfn-w-l

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saorse, your numbers are wrong, you could notice that in the spread of it, gas is around 30%, not 50 to 75 %.

Fun fact, even during the cold war the Russians never stopped the supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Nope, you need to look at their total energy demand and sources.  I put the graphs and tables up.  Those are from the EU statistics office.

Here:  Russia provides from 50-75 percent of Germany's natural Gas and 25-50 percent of it's petroleum oils.

Share_(%25)_of_Russia_in_national_extra-

Here is the sources of their energy consumption.

1eng-pierwotne-zuzycie-energii-w-rfn-w-l

In no world of real math does any of that add up to 70% of Germany's energy supply.

Share this post


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

In no world of real math does any of that add up to 70% of Germany's energy supply.

 

36 minutes ago, LeoV said:

Saorse, your numbers are wrong, you could notice that in the spread of it, gas is around 30%, not 50 to 75 %.

Fun fact, even during the cold war the Russians never stopped the supply.

You both know this, but I'll point out for the crowd: Saorsa is a Trumpkin, it doesn't fucking matter. He'll keep arguing the same point, with wrong numbers, like his hero. Dog does the same shit, spouting off with the 2% stupidity. 

Share this post


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

Where did you get that? My understanding is that he wants all NATO nations to come up to the 2% they agreed on. 

THEY AGREED ON IT AS A GUIDELINE FOR 2024 YOU FUCKING CRETIN. 

DONNIE'S GOAL IS TO BLOW UP NATO YOU LYING TROLL.

Share this post


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

 

You both know this, but I'll point out for the crowd: Saorsa is a Trumpkin, it doesn't fucking matter. He'll keep arguing the same point, with wrong numbers, like his hero. Dog does the same shit, spouting off with the 2% stupidity. 

Yeah, you're right. I should remember that the only argument they ever pay attention to is "You Lie". Everything else is above their head.

Share this post


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

In no world of real math does any of that add up to 70% of Germany's energy supply.

You need to look at that bottom chart again.  A lot of coal is imported even though they are a large producer Mostly that crappy lignite at the bottom.  They have very little Oil or Gas production of their own since they've forbidden fracking.  They are shutting down all their nuclear plants by 2022.  Some of the nuclear is actually electricity imported from France.

Share this post


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

Saorse, your numbers are wrong, you could notice that in the spread of it, gas is around 30%, not 50 to 75 %.

Fun fact, even during the cold war the Russians never stopped the supply.

See post 225.  Let me give you the table again.  These numbers are from Official EU statistics. for 2017 Germany imports 25-50 percent of its petro from Russia and 50-75 percent of its natural gas.

Share_(%25)_of_Russia_in_national_extra-

Share this post


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

 

You both know this, but I'll point out for the crowd: Saorsa is a Trumpkin, it doesn't fucking matter. He'll keep arguing the same point, with wrong numbers, like his hero. Dog does the same shit, spouting off with the 2% stupidity. 

If you want stupidity, look in  mirror

From the actual NATO site  https://www.nato.int/cps/ie/natohq/topics_67655.htm

 

The 2% defence investment guideline

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of two per cent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to spending on defence. This guideline principally serves as an indicator of a country’s political will to contribute to the Alliance’s common defence efforts. Some Allies may need to spend more than this to develop the capabilities that the Alliance asks of them. Additionally, the defence capacity of each member country has an important impact on the overall perception of the Alliance’s credibility as a politico-military organisation.

Share this post


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

If you want stupidity, look in  mirror

From the actual NATO site  https://www.nato.int/cps/ie/natohq/topics_67655.htm

 

The 2% defence investment guideline

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of two per cent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to spending on defence. This guideline principally serves as an indicator of a country’s political will to contribute to the Alliance’s common defence efforts. Some Allies may need to spend more than this to develop the capabilities that the Alliance asks of them. Additionally, the defence capacity of each member country has an important impact on the overall perception of the Alliance’s credibility as a politico-military organisation.

Quote

While the 2% of GDP guideline alone is no guarantee that money will be spent in the most effective and efficient way to acquire and deploy modern capabilities, it remains, nonetheless, an important indicator of the political resolve of individual Allies to devote to defence a relatively small, but still significant, level of resources at a time of considerable international uncertainty and economic adversity.. In 2014, three Allies spent 2 per cent of GDP or more on defence; in 2018 eight are expected to meet or exceed this target and by 2024, a majority of Allies are expected to do so.

From your link. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone care to dredge up last years thread and save some time?

Nothings changed except that moron in the white house gets even less presidential, blusters more and finds something else to look stupid about.

Share this post


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

I do...I never heard that. Cite it for me.

I think it was a "you should really be spending 4% to make up for years of neglect" type comment. But I only heard a paraphrase..

 

  • Downvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merkel thinks Germany makes its own decisions. Ha Ha Ha. 

She dances for Putin, France and America. She can't tell there is a puppeteer because there are so many of them. 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

If you want stupidity, look in  mirror

You really should Saorsa, from this very thread

 in response to you - pointing out the 2006 number IN THE WORDS OF THE NATO SPOKESMAN WAS NOT A FIRM GUIDELINE.

So keep repeating lies in the service of the Donald. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much the US spends defending Europe is impossible to calculate. You could start with the war debts that were never paid, The policing and reconstruction of Europe. Policing the world and beating back communism. Our Navy to protect the shipping lanes  for the world. The investment in military technology that Europe then piggy back on from us. The Europeans we educate in our universities. Then the direct cost of Nato, Which only covers the administration of Nato not paying for our troops and materials stationed overseas. And then the cost of the troops and equipment we station all over the world.

 

It's funny. Libtard loonies routinely talk about how the US spends more on the military than the next X countries combined. But know they want to sell us  a load of Bull Shit that the Europeans contribute more than their fair share to defending Europe. So which is it?

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Merkel thinks Germany makes its own decisions. Ha Ha Ha. 

She dances for Putin, France and America. She can't tell there is a puppeteer because there are so many of them. 

you really are an idiot Jack. Go back to watching Game of thrones or something ....maybe read a few old Wizard of Id comics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, mad said:

From your link. 

There's also this from his link

and aim to move towards the 2% guideline within a decade with a view to meeting their NATO Capability Targets and filling NATO’s capability shortfalls.

that both he, Jeff, and the Donaldcan't comprehend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

See post 225.  Let me give you the table again.  These numbers are from Official EU statistics. for 2017 Germany imports 25-50 percent of its petro from Russia and 50-75 percent of its natural gas.

Share_(%25)_of_Russia_in_national_extra-

And Petro is just a fraction of their energy portfolio. Trump lied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here in this thread is the proof that the US' worst enemy is in fact yourselves. The divide between the Republicans and Democrats was recognised and exploited beautifully by Putin. Nato? Same thing. Nato has always been a benefit for the US, it's you that has changed.  

You're the problem. What happened to all the traits that the US was famous for?  Be empathetic, show respect for each other and re-learn how to get along, or watch your country degenerate to a melting pot of hate.  

A word of advice from a long term ally (remember them?) , a large majority of you lot have become a pack of selfish cunts, I hope you can look at your kids or in the mirror without feeling dirty.

 

 

.    

  • Like 6

Share this post


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

And Petro is just a fraction of their energy portfolio. Trump lied.

arguebot just needs to look at his own graph he posted earlier

1311_dramatic_growth_in_german_renewable

and apply commonsense to realize Trump's lieing. But the purpose of Dog, Saorsa & co is to lie and prevent rational debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic but The orange blob seems to be shrinking quickly.  I counted four or five leaders easily taller than him.  Either he’s not 6’3” or the MATO leaders all used to play basketball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

27 minutes ago, Fakenews said:

Slightly off topic but The orange blob seems to be shrinking quickly.  I counted four or five leaders easily taller than him.  Either he’s not 6’3” or the MATO leaders all used to play basketball.

6'3" is his girth, not height.

Share this post


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

So you’re another former conservative who now thinks trade is bad? You guys all have a case of the Juche. I’d say it’s terminal.

ahhhhh, no,

bad guess on your part, and well, I see you dont quite understand what "cart before the horse" means, you'll understand, one day.

I'm all for free trade. It makes the world economy go round.....

Share this post


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

ahhhhh, no,

bad guess on your part, and well, I see you dont quite understand what "cart before the horse" means, you'll understand, one day.

I'm all for free trade. It makes the world economy go round.....

Unless it’s Germany buying energy on world markets

Share this post


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

And Petro is just a fraction of their energy portfolio. Trump lied.

Here is their energy consumption by type.

1eng-pierwotne-zuzycie-energii-w-rfn-w-l

How much is produced in Germany?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Here is their energy consumption by type.

1eng-pierwotne-zuzycie-energii-w-rfn-w-l

How much is produced in Germany?

 

Trump lied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

There's also this from his link

 

 

that both he, Jeff, and the Donaldcan't comprehend.

Sure he can. He did not cone up with the 2% (wink wink nudge nudge target) And Trump is exactly right. Trade and defense has been a one way street. All well and good that the Europeans can pretend they live in a sustainable Social Utopia but they are doing it partly on our dime and they don't like for Trump to rocking their boat. 

I say Rock on Mr. T. 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

arguebot just needs to look at his own graph he posted earlier

1311_dramatic_growth_in_german_renewable

and apply commonsense to realize Trump's lieing. But the purpose of Dog, Saorsa & co is to lie and prevent rational debate.

1eng-pierwotne-zuzycie-energii-w-rfn-w-l

OK, now take a look at those two graphs and perhaps think.  I know it's a foreign concept to you but think.  (By that I mean strange to you, not foreign like Germany is a foreign country.)

The graph I put up before shows you the proportion of energy that they PRODUCE from renewables and that shows you that a bit under 30% or ALL the energy they produce comes from renewables

Now, the bottom graph shows you the source of ALL the energy they CONSUME from all sources.  Now, where do you think all of that renewable consumption shows up on the bottom graph?  Well, it wouldn't be coal which is the bottom two colors on the consumption graph.  And, it wouldn't be Crude Oil or Natural Gas.  And, it wouldn't be Nuclear.  So, that whole 30% of their production capability is the little green and dark blue line up at the tippy top of the graph.

So, what do they produce in the way of non-renewables?  Coal for a start but they can't even produce enough of that to supply their coal fired plants.  Lignite (down at the bottom) isn't much better than peat but it makes up about 60& of their coal production  and it isn't good for generating electricity.  You need hard coal for that.  the other 40% is hard coal but, they import coal to make up the difference.  I don't know the specific figures for Germany but Eurostat does give us a graph for the coal source for the EU as a whole.

Hard_coal_imports_into_the_EU-28_by_coun

I know this is hard for you to think about but LOOK AT THE PRETTY COLORS!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I say Rock on Mr. T. 

Of course you do. That is all you do. 

The man could shit on your head and you would applaud him, complimenting his use of corn for texture. You’d leave it there and take pleasure that Democrats had to smell it. 

Share this post


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

Of course you do. That is all you do. 

The man could shit on your head and you would applaud him, complimenting his use of corn for texture. You’d leave it there and take pleasure that Democrats had to smell it. 

Only it's your head he shat upon. Ah ha ha ha

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


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

What part of "Trump's goal is to blow up NATO, not fix it" do people not understand?

The world needed a wake up call. Trump is it. 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


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

The world needed a wake up call. Trump is it. 

Actually, no we didn't. With the state your own country is in, its laughable you think the rest of us need your help.. 

You realise wealth is a poor matrix to gauge success against, don't you?

Happiness and self worth is what the rest of us use. Tell you what, we'll let you keep him all to yourself. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Actually, no we didn't. With the state your own country is in, its laughable you think the rest of us need your help.. 

You realise wealth is a poor matrix to gauge success against, don't you?

Happiness and self worth is what the rest of us use. Tell you what, we'll let you keep him all to yourself. 

 

Just promise me you will lose our number when Indo or China come knocking. 

Time to ditch Anzus too. 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, they do have the "world series"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

You really should Saorsa, from this very thread

 in response to you - pointing out the 2006 number IN THE WORDS OF THE NATO SPOKESMAN WAS NOT A FIRM GUIDELINE.

So keep repeating lies in the service of the Donald. 

They have had 12 years to meet their guideline and utterly failed.  Another 8 years sounds a lot like a Florida contractor telling me he'll be done "Real soon now" which is slightly less definite than "We'll get round to that first thing tomorrow'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Just promise me you will lose our number when Indo or China come knocking. 

Time to ditch Anzus too. 

Happily .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BrickTopHarry said:

What part of "Trump's goal is to blow up NATO, not fix it" do people not understand?

Hey, make the goal 4 and they might compromise at 2 which is where we want them to be.  Of course, if the goal is set today, it will take until 2036 or 2040 to get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because the US decides to spend insane amounts of cash on the worlds largest military industrial complex doesn't mean that the rest of the world should do the same.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Just because the US decides to spend insane amounts of cash on the worlds largest military industrial complex doesn't mean that the rest of the world should do the same.

I agree. But at the same time they should not expect us to protect them either. 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I agree. But at the same time they should not expect us to protect them either. 

you obviously missed the memo , the days of 'merica protecting anyone are over .

Share this post


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

you obviously missed the memo , the days of 'merica protecting anyone are over .

Good, they don't need to be involved in every military conflict on the planet anymore. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

Actually, no we didn't. With the state your own country is in, its laughable you think the rest of us need your help.. 

You realise wealth is a poor matrix to gauge success against, don't you?

Happiness and self worth is what the rest of us use. Tell you what, we'll let you keep him all to yourself. 

This isn’t his “own” country. 

He’s adopted. 

Share this post


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

This isn’t his “own” country. 

He’s adopted. 

Canada doesn’t send their best...

Share this post


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

you obviously missed the memo , the days of 'merica protecting anyone are over .

Sure they are.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Sure they are.

so just who are 'merica currently protecting ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Just promise me you will lose our number when Indo or China come knocking. 

Time to ditch Anzus too. 

+1000 if the offer of help comes from you sport.  

This administration wouldn't honor it anyway, unless theirs a benefit to the holy messiah.

Which kinda proves the point about all that is wrong with you in the first place. If that's too hard to follow, just take a good look at your own self.  

.. 

 

 

Share this post


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

so just who are 'merica currently protecting ?

Sk

Japan

Europe

Israel

Taiwan

Iraq

Afghanistan

Australia 

NZ

Canada 

and others. 

 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


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

Sk

Japan

Europe

Israel

Taiwan

Iraq

Afghanistan

Australia 

NZ

Canada 

and others. 

 

Now there's the grand poobah idiot statement of the year right there.

Fair dinkum, this dopey cunt is beyond redemption. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Now there's the grand poobah idiot statement of the year right there.

Fair dinkum, this dopey cunt is beyond redemption. 

He’s gone ‘round the bend. 

Share this post


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

+1000 if the offer of help comes from you sport.  

This administration wouldn't honor it anyway, unless theirs a benefit to the holy messiah.

Which kinda proves the point about all that is wrong with you in the first place. If that's too hard to follow, just take a good look at your own self.  

Actually I'm a strong supporter of most of America's  many alliances. 

I just wish asholes like you were a bit more appreciative. 

So predict for me how an Aussie referendum on continuing with  ANZUS would fair? 

 

 

 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Actually I'm a strong supporter of most of America's  many alliances. 

I just wish asholes like you were a bit more appreciative. 

So predict for me how an Aussie referendum on continuing with  ANZUS would fair? 

 

 

 

We'd back the US to the hilt. Unlike you, we take a different view on our mates. 

Even if you are a cunt. 

Edit: name one time Oz has NOT sided with the US since WWII. Zero.

Now name on time the US has lifted a finger to help Oz since WWII. Zero.

The appreciation seems somewhat misguided. Or is that just lack of any modicum of education? 

Over to you , oh eludite one.  

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

candies from babies ^_^

Share this post


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

We'd back the US to the hilt. Unlike you, we take a different view on our mates. 

Even if you are a cunt. 

 

I would not be so sure , plenty still remember all the way with LBJ 

Share this post


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

We'd back the US to the hilt. Unlike you, we take a different view on our mates. 

Even if you are a cunt. 

 

 

You seem confused. Has America stood ready since 1951 to defend Australia or not. Simple question. Since obviously the US does not need Australia to defend itself it seem reasonable to argue that Anzus was more beneficial to Australia than America.  

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

 

You seem confused. Has America stood ready since 1951 to defend Australia or not. Simple question. Since obviously the US does not need Australia to defend itself it seem reasonable to argue that Anzus was more beneficial to Australia than America.  

seems too me you have no concept of team player... carry on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Since obviously the US does not need Australia to defend itself

WTF does that mean? 

The US would have come to our aid if needed with previous administrations, sure. 

This one won't while your messiah is in the hot seat calling the shots, I can guarantee that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

 

You seem confused. Has America stood ready since 1951 to defend Australia or not. Simple question. Since obviously the US does not need Australia to defend itself it seem reasonable to argue that Anzus was more beneficial to Australia than America.  

 

Screen-Shot-2017-05-04-at-3_57.09-PM.thumb.png.269230f87074947cb45d98856625994f.png

 

http://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/fighting-with-america/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

WTF does that mean? 

The US would have come to our aid if needed with previous administrations, sure. 

This one won't while your messiah is in the hot seat calling the shots, I can guarantee that. 

 

What has Trump said or done to make you think that?

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

What has Trump said or done to make you think that?

He has lied and grabbed pussies.

Malarky.thumb.jpg.70afb8161f54d78925722250808011a6.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact is America needs Oz more than Oz needs America .:P

 

According to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trading (DFAT), the United States is Australia’s second-largest two-way trading partner in goods and services, worth $70.2 billion, as of 2015.

Nonetheless, Australia imports more than double the amount from the U.S. and is 15th on the list of U.S. principle export destinations.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/millystilinovic/2017/02/04/how-much-does-australia-really-need-america-anyway/#3f0aa3d248c1

Share this post


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

Here is their energy consumption by type.

1eng-pierwotne-zuzycie-energii-w-rfn-w-l

How much is produced in Germany?

 

1990???   That has nothing to do with current events.    Was that when America was great?      

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to say it but Trump has a point* with Jans Stoltenberg, NATO's titular manager. If the Euro's are going to make themselves dependent on Russian oil and gas the whole notion of there being a clear and present danger is at least semi-bullshit. I'd be fine with pulling nearly all US military money out of basing in the EU. 

 That said alienating the EU in general is a very dangerous game. We, by our gross fiscal recklessness, NEED foreigners to buy our debt. We NEED to maintain the US/Saud petro dollar as the world's currency, effectively making us the world's banker. 

 

 

 *Notwithstanding Trump's exaggeration of the percentage of oil the Germans import from there, and of course Trump's diplomacy being on a par with a log cabin constructed by a cub scout with a dull hatchet. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

What has Trump said or done to make you think that?

Unlike you, I've dealt with him. The Aussie entreprenuer and he fleeced every poor cunt involved with the project, even though it was brought in on time and under budget. 

Why?

No other reason except that's how he makes his money. He has one interest, his wealth.

And no I didn't get caught, I'm much smarter than a New Yorker real estate wannabe. That doesn't say a lot, he's a low bar after all.  

"Don't listen to what he says, watch what he does" is oh so true with Trump.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Hate to say it but Trump has a point* with Jans Stoltenberg, NATO's titular manager. If the Euro's are going to make themselves dependent on Russian oil and gas

they are working to make themselves less dependent on russian oil and gas I believe*. there was a disruption after Germany decided to get rid of nuclear power post Fukushima.

Trump point: turd :: oyster grain of sand: pearl

Share this post


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

1eng-pierwotne-zuzycie-energii-w-rfn-w-l

OK, now take a look at those two graphs and perhaps think.  I know it's a foreign concept to you but think.  (By that I mean strange to you, not foreign like Germany is a foreign country.)

The graph I put up before shows you the proportion of energy that they PRODUCE from renewables and that shows you that a bit under 30% or ALL the energy they produce comes from renewables

Now, the bottom graph shows you the source of ALL the energy they CONSUME from all sources.  Now, where do you think all of that renewable consumption shows up on the bottom graph?  Well, it wouldn't be coal which is the bottom two colors on the consumption graph.  And, it wouldn't be Crude Oil or Natural Gas.  And, it wouldn't be Nuclear.  So, that whole 30% of their production capability is the little green and dark blue line up at the tippy top of the graph.

So, what do they produce in the way of non-renewables?  Coal for a start but they can't even produce enough of that to supply their coal fired plants.  Lignite (down at the bottom) isn't much better than peat but it makes up about 60& of their coal production  and it isn't good for generating electricity.  You need hard coal for that.  the other 40% is hard coal but, they import coal to make up the difference.  I don't know the specific figures for Germany but Eurostat does give us a graph for the coal source for the EU as a whole.

Hard_coal_imports_into_the_EU-28_by_coun

I know this is hard for you to think about but LOOK AT THE PRETTY COLORS!!!!

Trump Lied. Doesn't mean you have to lie. Wait. Yes it does.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dh3-bKsX4AAkQTY.jpg.0e893d6326f842082662bc1a2987249d.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4%

Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
FollowFollow @realDonaldTrump
More

....On top of it all, Germany just started paying Russia, the country they want protection from, Billions of Dollars for their Energy needs coming out of a new pipeline from Russia. Not acceptable! All NATO Nations must meet their 2% commitment, and that must ultimately go to 4%!

11:12 PM - 11 Jul 2018

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites