Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sat Jun 03, 2017 5:47 am

BobPatterson wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
Their King has no power, yours is hiding under the title President. Of course your king is only serving at pleasure of the Russian emperor, he put him on his throne after all.


Delusional. Or worse.


Yes, that is also true for your king. Thanks for adding that

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13389
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:00 am

Aren't most of Trump's "great successes" executive orders ? Meaning they're worth shit, according to some of you ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:03 am

Aesma wrote:
Aren't most of Trump's "great successes" executive orders ? Meaning they're worth shit, according to some of you ?


Pretty much, I think only his euthanasia law for the poor, old and sick made it through Congress
But we have opposite presidency, what wasn't good from and for a black president is fine for a white one.

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4685
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:19 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
The USA is simply tired of the NATO freeloading. EU countries cut short defense spending, redirecting it to schools and social programs. You think we wouldn't like to spend our defense cash on that too?!?! Instead we are left picking up your tab and ours.


You don't want to spend your cash on that, you guys stubbornly believe it is "ebul communistical nazi shit".

This entire 2% thing is merely a ploy to get Europe to spend more of its hard-earned funds on the corrupt, lazy and inefficient US military industrial complex. You can be pretty certain that if Europe started increasing defence budgets to 2%, then the US wouldn't wait more than a few days before they started complaining about how we spend too much of our funds on non-American manufacturers and products. You guys never did anything out of altruism, and the same goes for all your troops that "valiantly defend Europe".

mercure1 wrote:
The U.S is right to demand that Europeans cover a larger (and previously agreed fair) share for their own protection.

If I was an American voter, I would also look at NATO and most member nations with skepticism when they fail to uphold and fund their required burdens.

Frankly, I think its crazy the US for 6 decades has had to fund 70 percent of the alliance while Europe sits on our hands without much gratitude.


The US isn't funding anybody other than themselves. It's their own choice to build up such a massive military. Our way of life is to spend our money on creating a safe and stable society through social welfare, and the Americans shouldn't be imposing their militaristic ways on us at the cost of our ways of living.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9750
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:26 pm

Europe is an enemy in the war for economic prosperity. The US should get out of NATO asap.
 
BCal Dc10
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:47 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:35 pm

I have followed this thread with interest - as I have many of these, and it always feels like a European Union versus [insert country name here] discussions where European posters get very "its our way or the highway" and some of y'all come across as being a little narrow minded at times, and not willing to actively, sensibly debate the issues. The incessant bashing of any theory or argument by some EU state members on this forum is becoming a little bit tiresome, and sometimes I read the posts and feel a sense of disappointment that interesting discussions always descend into this. This forum wasn't like this 15 years ago - the debate was much healthier.

I digress. I asked this question in a previous thread about Brexit (which turned into a EU members bash the UK thread - yawn) - so we're here in a EU members bash the USA thread - and I think it is pertinent, because all this talk of NATO, and Mrs Merkel talking of "no longer rely on old allies - time to look out for ourselves" - and if NATO goes south - what about the EU defense force, or EU army.

As a former Army officer, and someone who has served their country, this got me thinking - how does this work? It's a genuine question - I'm not trying to be argumentative - some of you are good posting sports (Dutchy - big love) and help me out to understand the issues. I google these things, but I'm always keen to learn from fellow members on their opinions.
Language is so important in military communications. How does the many different languages spoken across the EU deal with this issue. If the shit is going down and rapid fire orders are being barked down a crackly radio (been there done that) you need to listen and react within a second. I like to think I have a good command of French, and get by in Spanish (I live in Miami, its practically the first language there), but if a high stress scenario presented itself and orders were issued high speed, in French or Spanish, I don't think I would get the important bits, and may attack the wrong position!! So do you have country based "units", or "French Batallion", "Spanish Batallion" etc. I'm curious.

Who would command this EU army - I know there is a belief in some states that a Federal USE is what you want, but some nationalistic noses are going to be put out of joint, and isn't this where the image of EU "harmony" is going to start to crack? It's not like the USA where fundamentally, everyone is the same from a cultural and language point - (tho this really is changing - see Miami Spanish reference above!)
The EU is such a complex melting pot of French, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, Polish, German, Portuguese, Hungarian, etc etc etc - you get my point. Something has to give, and I can't imagine how some of these states will happily forego their Sovereign right to defense so easily.
(Please play nice - I like to be educated - not ranted and lectured at. X )
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2238
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:40 am

VSMUT wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
The USA is simply tired of the NATO freeloading. EU countries cut short defense spending, redirecting it to schools and social programs. You think we wouldn't like to spend our defense cash on that too?!?! Instead we are left picking up your tab and ours.


You don't want to spend your cash on that, you guys stubbornly believe it is "ebul communistical nazi shit".

This entire 2% thing is merely a ploy to get Europe to spend more of its hard-earned funds on the corrupt, lazy and inefficient US military industrial complex. You can be pretty certain that if Europe started increasing defence budgets to 2%, then the US wouldn't wait more than a few days before they started complaining about how we spend too much of our funds on non-American manufacturers and products. You guys never did anything out of altruism, and the same goes for all your troops that "valiantly defend Europe".

mercure1 wrote:
The U.S is right to demand that Europeans cover a larger (and previously agreed fair) share for their own protection.

If I was an American voter, I would also look at NATO and most member nations with skepticism when they fail to uphold and fund their required burdens.

Frankly, I think its crazy the US for 6 decades has had to fund 70 percent of the alliance while Europe sits on our hands without much gratitude.


The US isn't funding anybody other than themselves. It's their own choice to build up such a massive military. Our way of life is to spend our money on creating a safe and stable society through social welfare, and the Americans shouldn't be imposing their militaristic ways on us at the cost of our ways of living.


Your way of life was fighting massive continental wars to the brink of genocide, right up until the USSR and USA conquered the continent bar none and played daddy for 60 years. Don't act like it was some magnificent European decision.
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:59 am

Varsity1 wrote:
Your way of life was fighting massive continental wars to the brink of genocide, right up until the USSR and USA conquered the continent bar none and played daddy for 60 years.

You have zero understanding of history; I know you think you understand history, but you really don't. Your understanding of history in on a parallel with that of a nine year old.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2238
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 2:29 am

salttee wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
Your way of life was fighting massive continental wars to the brink of genocide, right up until the USSR and USA conquered the continent bar none and played daddy for 60 years.

You have zero understanding of history; I know you think you understand history, but you really don't. Your understanding of history in on a parallel with that of a nine year old.


Enlighten me history god.

I'm sure Napoleon is a figment of my imagination. Hitler's declaration of war on the USA was a canned lecture on how American's don't understand European affairs and internal conflict. It's almost comical how many times it's still used today.
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 3:04 am

Varsity1 wrote:
salttee wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
Your way of life was fighting massive continental wars to the brink of genocide, right up until the USSR and USA conquered the continent bar none and played daddy for 60 years.

You have zero understanding of history; I know you think you understand history, but you really don't. Your understanding of history in on a parallel with that of a nine year old.


Enlighten me history god.

I'm sure Napoleon is a figment of my imagination. Hitler's declaration of war on the USA was a canned lecture on how American's don't understand European affairs and internal conflict. It's almost comical how many times it's still used today.


I couldn't possibly enlighten you, it would take a few years of effort on your part to bring you up to a working level of understanding of history. .I will point out that you seem to have a tendency to lash out on a tangent that has nothing to do with the subject of current discourse when you find yourself challenged by your own lack of knowledge or information. It seems to be a bully tactic which of course is of no use in an intellectual conversation. You did it twice above and you also did it the other day:
Varsity1 wrote:
salttee wrote:
I'm old enough to remember when the US actually was "the leader of the free world" in every sense, including moral leadership.
That ended with the Vietnam war, which was of course another product of the American right wing.
Jingoism had already cost the United States its exulted position on the world stage before Bush's war.
Now those same attitudes are on the verge of condemning the US to second rate status.


Feel free to goose step to China's drum. I'm sure they'll unilaterally look out for your best interests. :lol:


This approach doesn't make you look smart or knowledgeable and when people don't respond to these minor tantrums it doesn't mean that you "won", it just means that the person you are conversing with sees no point in continuing the conversation. And it prevents you from learning. I suggest that you drop that behavior if you ever want to learn anything.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2238
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 3:26 am

salttee wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
salttee wrote:
You have zero understanding of history; I know you think you understand history, but you really don't. Your understanding of history in on a parallel with that of a nine year old.


Enlighten me history god.

I'm sure Napoleon is a figment of my imagination. Hitler's declaration of war on the USA was a canned lecture on how American's don't understand European affairs and internal conflict. It's almost comical how many times it's still used today.


I couldn't possibly enlighten you, it would take a few years of effort on your part to bring you up to a working level of understanding of history. .I will point out that you seem to have a tendency to lash out on a tangent that has nothing to do with the subject of current discourse when you find yourself challenged by your own lack of knowledge or information. It seems to be a bully tactic which of course is of no use in an intellectual conversation. You did it twice above and you also did it the other day:
Varsity1 wrote:
salttee wrote:
I'm old enough to remember when the US actually was "the leader of the free world" in every sense, including moral leadership.
That ended with the Vietnam war, which was of course another product of the American right wing.
Jingoism had already cost the United States its exulted position on the world stage before Bush's war.
Now those same attitudes are on the verge of condemning the US to second rate status.


Feel free to goose step to China's drum. I'm sure they'll unilaterally look out for your best interests. :lol:


This approach doesn't make you look smart or knowledgeable and when people don't respond to these minor tantrums it doesn't mean that you "won", it just means that the person you are conversing with sees no point in continuing the conversation. And it prevents you from learning. I suggest that you drop that behavior if you ever want to learn anything.


This is the second thread where you haven't brought a single fact to the argument. Just vague baseless personal attacks.
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 3:42 am

Varsity1 wrote:
This is the second thread where you haven't brought a single fact to the argument. Just vague baseless personal attacks.

Yes I did bring a salient fact to this discussion. When you posted:

Varsity1 wrote:
Your way of life was fighting massive continental wars to the brink of genocide, right up until the USSR and USA conquered the continent bar none and played daddy for 60 years. Don't act like it was some magnificent European decision.

I responded that: you have zero understanding of history, and anyone who has taken the trouble to learn actual history will understand perfectly well my reason for saying that.
The debate style I've seen you show so far only works on people with less than a 12th grade education. If you're capable of better you should try harder.


Would you like to start this string all over again?
VSMUT wrote:
The US isn't funding anybody other than themselves. It's their own choice to build up such a massive military. Our way of life is to spend our money on creating a safe and stable society through social welfare, and the Americans shouldn't be imposing their militaristic ways on us at the cost of our ways of living.


Now would you like to offer an intelligent comment or rebuttal?
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4685
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:56 am

Varsity1 wrote:
Your way of life was fighting massive continental wars to the brink of genocide, right up until the USSR and USA conquered the continent bar none and played daddy for 60 years. Don't act like it was some magnificent European decision.


So you are admitting that the US isn't there out of altruism, but rather as a through military occupation. Nice.

salttee wrote:
The debate style I've seen you show so far only works on people with less than a 12th grade education. If you're capable of better you should try harder.


It worked more than well enough for one man to dupe a whole bunch on Americans into becoming president. Might as well try the same. When discussing with Americans, one might as well drop down to their levels.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:47 am

BCal Dc10 wrote:
and if NATO goes south - what about the EU defense force, or EU army.


Well,.the only reason their aint an "EU army" is that the EU decided not to double NATO structures. Legally the Lisbon treaty is much much more binding.

As a former Army officer, and someone who has served their country, this got me thinking - how does this work? It's a genuine question - I'm not trying to be argumentative - some of you are good posting sports (Dutchy - big love) and help me out to understand the issues. I google these things, but I'm always keen to learn from fellow members on their opinions.
Language is so important in military communications. How does the many different languages spoken across the EU deal with this issue.


Same way NATO does. There are no mixed nation NATO platoons (few exeptions like Dutch/German or French/German corps), forces stay coherent nation wise. The cooperation between those units is trained all the time.

If the shit is going down and rapid fire orders are being barked down a crackly radio (been there done that) you need to listen and react within a second. I like to think I have a good command of French, and get by in Spanish (I live in Miami, its practically the first language there), but if a high stress scenario presented itself and orders were issued high speed, in French or Spanish, I don't think I would get the important bits, and may attack the wrong position!!


Lingua franca is english, even with the French.

Who would command this EU army - I know there is a belief in some states that a Federal USE is what you want, but some nationalistic noses are going to be put out of joint, and isn't this where the image of EU "harmony" is going to start to crack? It's not like the USA where fundamentally, everyone is the same from a cultural and language point - (tho this really is changing - see Miami Spanish reference above!)


When I look at the discussions here, I'd think US Americans cover such a large spectrum, that you are no more same or different than europeans.

EU is such a complex melting pot of French, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, Polish, German, Portuguese, Hungarian, etc etc etc - you get my point. Something has to give, and I can't imagine how some of these states will happily forego their Sovereign right to defense so easily.


I don't see any difference vs. NATO. Only that we are geografically all in the same boat. No one joins a defence treaty out of altruism, all nations do it so no knew can pick them off one by one.
[/quote]

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:03 pm

seahawk wrote:
Europe is an enemy in the war for economic prosperity. The US should get out of NATO asap.

I thought you have already left, my friend.
At least, that's what most world leaders have understood, and they can't all be that thick, can they ?
Contrail designer
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2238
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:32 pm

VSMUT wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
Your way of life was fighting massive continental wars to the brink of genocide, right up until the USSR and USA conquered the continent bar none and played daddy for 60 years. Don't act like it was some magnificent European decision.


So you are admitting that the US isn't there out of altruism, but rather as a through military occupation. Nice.

salttee wrote:
The debate style I've seen you show so far only works on people with less than a 12th grade education. If you're capable of better you should try harder.


It worked more than well enough for one man to dupe a whole bunch on Americans into becoming president. Might as well try the same. When discussing with Americans, one might as well drop down to their levels.


Joining your bud saltee with the personal attacks.

I'll accept that you have nothing to say. Move along.
 
Mortyman
Posts: 5879
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:42 pm

seahawk wrote:
Europe is an enemy in the war for economic prosperity. The US should get out of NATO asap.


Get a hold of yourself !
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:42 am

salttee wrote:
Pihero wrote:
As far as following the leaders of the free world, skepticism started after 9/11 and the whole WMD tragi-comedy... It ends to-day. so you may write checks directly to your billionaire masters.

I'm old enough to remember when the US actually was "the leader of the free world" in every sense, including moral leadership.
That ended with the Vietnam war, which was of course another product of the American right wing.


You might be old enough, but your memory is faulty.

Neither President Kennedy nor President Johnson were members of the American right wing.

They got us into Viet Nam.
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9750
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:17 am

Mortyman wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Europe is an enemy in the war for economic prosperity. The US should get out of NATO asap.


Get a hold of yourself !


But the president said, that Europe masterminded the Paris agreement to hinder the economic growths of the USA. So it is fact.
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:10 am

BobPatterson wrote:
You might be old enough, but your memory is faulty.

Neither President Kennedy nor President Johnson were members of the American right wing.

They us into Viet Nam.

The person who "got us into Vietnam" was Allen Dulles, and he operated under Eisenhower.
LBJ most certainly was a right winger when it came to international relations and the military. LBJ was in office before Nixon's "southern strategy" pulled the southerners out of the Democratic party. Up until Nixon, the Democratic party was dominant in most of what we now call the red states. LBJ would most certainly be a Republican in today's world, but back then right wingers were found in both parties.

It is inconceivable that the Gulf of Tonkin indecent would have played out as it did had Kennedy remained in office, it is inconceivable that Kennedy would have escalated as Johnson did. And as much as today's right wingers would love to hang the Vietnam war on Kennedy the fact is that he was assassinated before that Vietnamese civil war became America's war. Vietnam as a major war was created by LBJ and continued for another five years by Nixon. The political divide that occurred in the Vietnam era was the Hawks vs the Doves, or stated in political terms was the conservatives vs the liberals.
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 5:49 am

tommy1808 wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
It is conceivable that Russia influenced an election in the USA (yet to be determined as fact).


That is fact. There is no court this case can or will see, so that is as much a fact as it ever will be.


You are quite wrong. If the facts ultimately warrant it, the court that will hear the case is called the United States Senate, sitting as a jury of the whole, with the trial supervised by the Chief Justice of the United States.

But, if the facts ultimately warrant a trial, he might escape it, as did Mr. Nixon, by resignation.

Forgive me for not responding to your remark about Ivanka Kushner factories.
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 6:08 am

BobPatterson wrote:
You are quite wrong. If the facts ultimately warrant it, the court that will hear the case is called the United States Senate, sitting as a jury of the whole, with the trial supervised by the Chief Justice of the United States.


Russia is going to appear in a US court? Now that is going to be interessting. ...

Forgive me for not responding to your remark about Ivanka Kushner factories.


I wonder if you will also be quiet about the Trumps defrauding money out of donators supposedly going to children with cancer ..

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 7:48 am

tommy1808 wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
You are quite wrong. If the facts ultimately warrant it, the court that will hear the case is called the United States Senate, sitting as a jury of the whole, with the trial supervised by the Chief Justice of the United States.


Russia is going to appear in a US court? Now that is going to be interessting. ...

Forgive me for not responding to your remark about Ivanka Kushner factories.


I wonder if you will also be quiet about the Trumps defrauding money out of donators supposedly going to children with cancer ..

Best regards
Thomas


There you go again. Attempting to deflect a topic when someone responds to your crazy statements to demonstrate that you are wrong (or perhaps just ignorant). This is about the court that might hear a case against Mr. Trump. No Russians will be needed to testify if there is strong evidence presented by security agencies and members of various staffs.

We can compile a list of Mr. Trump's sins later. Be sure to remember to bring up his "charitable donations". We will probably agree on a lot of his misdeeds.

Cheers
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 7:56 am

BobPatterson wrote:
There you go again.


I was just thinking the same, as you again make up a topic no one is discussing. The topic at hand is "It is conceivable that Russia influenced an election in the USA (yet to be determined as fact).", not did US citizens collude with them in the effort.

Image

Praise the Lord!

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9750
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 8:02 am

I thought the topic was NATO and President Trump.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:06 pm

It's simple, either get your spending to 2% or give us the money we are spending to protect you.

It strikes me as a bit bizarre to deny the history that the foundation of modern European peace, the foundation each day, is US systems and US taxpayer generosity, aided by European allied forces.

A continued friendship with the US would be natural and would be a real win for the EU, versus say, a client relationship with China.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:35 pm

Flighty wrote:
It's simple, either get your spending to 2% or give us the money we are spending to protect you.


Or what? You leave NATO? Given the lack of commitment to article 5, that ship has effectively sailed. You attack us? Start Warsaw pact 2.0 with your bosses in the Kremlin?

Fact is, you are not spending a dime to defend us, you are spending all that money on your own perceived requirements. Those just happen to coincide with those of the EU partners, saving money on both sides (OMG, a win-win). We spend less on weapons, you don't have to pay for baseing rights, infrastructure used here, damages to farmers during training, can forward Base troops and so on and such. Oh, and the most important thing: we would provide the playground for that war, you don't have to fight it on US soil.

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 10:01 pm

Yes tommy, I agree we were coordinating European peace to suit our interests vs the USSR. NATO was the US's own core interest. That was then.

Our priorities are now shifting toward our all-encompassing cold war with the Chinese junta (and our scrub work against ISIS). We don't have the capacity to be the strategic overlord of Europe anymore. That is just one of our many hats now. Europe is quite wealthy and good at weapons. You will be ok. I think that logistically, Europe should provide at least 100% of European defenses. It should contribute to allied expeditionary forces as well outside of Europe. Until then... you are on your own. This is not as revolutionary as it may sound.

I don't think this matter is concluded by any stretch. Trump's core thrust is basically intact - the US plans to hand over control of Europe to Europe.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Wed Jun 07, 2017 10:58 pm

Flighty wrote:
Yes tommy, I agree we were coordinating European peace to suit our interests vs the USSR. NATO was the US's own core interest. That was then..


OK then, where do we send the invoices for stuff US forces use in Europe for free?

Best regard
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:16 am

tommy1808 wrote:
Or what? You leave NATO? Given the lack of commitment to article 5, that ship has effectively sailed. You attack us? Start Warsaw pact 2.0 with your bosses in the Kremlin?

Fact is, you are not spending a dime to defend us, you are spending all that money on your own perceived requirements. Those just happen to coincide with those of the EU partners, saving money on both sides (OMG, a win-win). We spend less on weapons, you don't have to pay for baseing rights, infrastructure used here, damages to farmers during training, can forward Base troops and so on and such. Oh, and the most important thing: we would provide the playground for that war, you don't have to fight it on US soil.

Best regards
Thomas


There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5. When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you. You are not totally capable of defending yourselves. We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed. Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.

Yes, part of the USA strategy has been and still is to fight, if necessary, in Europe and not here. So what?

You (Germany mainly, plus some other European countries) have grown arrogant in the last 50 years, having become comfortable living in prosperity and freedom that you presently enjoy ONLY because of the United States (and Britain and Canada). After we had to destroy you (Germany) as a war-making and genocidal society, we then had to feed you and help you to rebuild (as we did also with the Japanese). If we had not been, with great expense to ourselves and with no hope of ever being recompensed, the sole power preventing you from being exterminated or shipped to Siberian Gulags, all of Europe would today be known as Russia West.

I don't ever expect to hear the words thank you uttered by yourself or any of your ilk. You are an ingrate.

Enjoy the freedoms you have at the cost of our blood and fortune.
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9750
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:43 am

Trump´s speech has just one problem, it has raised public awareness on the increased defence spending and opposition is forming in many European countries. Before his outburst you could not score any positive points when speaking against increased defence spending and the agreement to reach 2% by 2024 was widely accepted. Now the left has the ammunition they need to fight the increase - the increase was even fine by them but has become unacceptable since Trump made it a payment ordered by the USA. Suddenly it is no longer "we have ignored our armed forces for 2 decades and our equipment is getting old, we need to modernize" but has turned into "not one cent for America and Trump and their global wars". Very well done.
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:06 am

BobPatterson wrote:
[There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5.

There is a current lack of commitment to NATO article 5 from the United States. It's true that this is a first, but it is real nonetheless.

BobPatterson wrote:
When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you.
Yea, 77 year old Bob Patterson will be there with a pitchfork. LOL

BobPatterson wrote:
You are not totally capable of defending yourselves. We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed.

We know that you pubbies are very enamored with Putin and Russia these days, but Russia has no ability to threaten any NATO country outside of the Baltics; and meddling in the Baltics would bring some serious blowback to Mr. Putin.

BobPatterson wrote:
Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.
As POTUS and with the support of all the treasonous Republican lackeys he certainly can.

BobPatterson wrote:
Yes, part of the USA strategy has been and still is to fight, if necessary, in Europe and not here. So what?
Has been, not "still is."

BobPatterson wrote:
You (Germany mainly, plus some other European countries) have grown arrogant in the last 50 years, having become comfortable living in prosperity and freedom that you presently enjoy ONLY because of the United States (and Britain and Canada). After we had to destroy you (Germany) as a war-making and genocidal society, we then had to feed you and help you to rebuild (as we did also with the Japanese). If we had not been, with great expense to ourselves and with no hope of ever being recompensed, the sole power preventing you from being exterminated or shipped to Siberian Gulags, all of Europe would today be known as Russia West.
That paragraph is utter nonsense from beginning to end. I am ashamed to have to share the title "American" with people who spew such arrogance as this.

BobPatterson wrote:
Enjoy the freedoms you have at the cost of our blood and fortune.
You're trying to squeeze a turnip that dried out long ago. Any good will from the acts that FDR guided the US into during the second world war have been flushed down the toilet long ago by jingoistic fools such as yourself.

You are no spokesman for the US. You should take nonsense like this back to the freeperville echo chamber where you and your ilk live in your grand delusions.
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:25 am

salttee wrote:
You are no spokesman for the US.


Of course I'm not, I've never claimed to represent the opinions of anyone other than myself.

Same goes for you, by the way.

You should not be surprised that I often find your views here at least equally contemptible.
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11982
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 8:31 am

BobPatterson wrote:
There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5. When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you. You are not totally capable of defending yourselves. We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed. Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.

Yes, part of the USA strategy has been and still is to fight, if necessary, in Europe and not here. So what?

You (Germany mainly, plus some other European countries) have grown arrogant in the last 50 years, having become comfortable living in prosperity and freedom that you presently enjoy ONLY because of the United States (and Britain and Canada). After we had to destroy you (Germany) as a war-making and genocidal society, we then had to feed you and help you to rebuild (as we did also with the Japanese). If we had not been, with great expense to ourselves and with no hope of ever being recompensed, the sole power preventing you from being exterminated or shipped to Siberian Gulags, all of Europe would today be known as Russia West.

I don't ever expect to hear the words thank you uttered by yourself or any of your ilk. You are an ingrate.

Enjoy the freedoms you have at the cost of our blood and fortune.


Oh geeeeeee, where to begin with you? It is quite astonishing to cramp so much crab into such a small paragraph, well done.

- whom is Europe not capable of defending against? Probably America, but that is about it. Russia isn't going to attack, they can't, except for the Baltics, but that is EU and NATO and the EU will intervene if America is lacking
- article five has been called into action only one time, and that is to defend the US (!)
- Yes, America will fight in Europe and not in America, so what? So you lay your defense line in Europe not in America, which is fine, but if it ever comes to that, Europe will be in ruins again and not America, with a nuclear war the whole world will be gone anyway, so that doesn't matter.
- Ah the arrogant American voice, yes Europe has grown substantially and has created a good standard of living for all its citizens. Partly because of what America has done, most part of what the nations have done. And why did America do this, because of selfish reasons, nothing else. America has grown a lot since WWII, because large markets in Europe and Japan have opened up. And now because the world is financing your debt. So the "great expense" of yourself is highly overrated. As is the role of the US in defeating NAZI-Germany. Russia did make the greatest sacrifices by far.

With your 79 years old, you really should know better if you had followed the news better and you really should try more nuances.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:18 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5.


right now there is.

When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you.


yup, because you don´t want to wait for the fight to come to your soil

You are not totally capable of defending yourselves


right... because 4 times the budget ain´t enough. .... flat out ridiculous

We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed. Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.


I take it you have never read the treaty then. No NATO member is obligated to do anything in case one is attacked.

Yes, part of the USA strategy has been and still is to fight, if necessary, in Europe and not here. So what?


I have no problem with that. It just shows that not a single US$ taxpayer money is spend on defending Europe, it is exclusively spend on making sure you can keep a war and win it away from your own borders. Which is the topic at hand in case you want to make up your own subject again.

we then had to feed you and help you to rebuild (as we did also with the Japanese). If we had not been, with great expense to ourselves and with no hope of ever being recompensed,


Ah... the selfless help. If you read Marshalls Speech, you´ll find "the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all" in it. That aid was a clear win-win situation, that economically benefited both sides. Germany also got that money as loans btw., part of which later didn´t have to be repaid, after all we needed the money to buy US weapons to be the tripwire for the red army. We are also still paying reparations, something the US has, as far as i know, never done, or did you ever pay the reparations to Nicaragua you owe them since 31 years?

the sole power preventing you from being exterminated or shipped to Siberian Gulags, all of Europe would today be known as Russia West.


Somehow the east Germans where not shipped off to Gulags either. And please don´t pretend there wasn´t a Morgenthau Plan in the US, which just happened to be the main propaganda tool for the Nazi government in keeping people fighting, prolonging the war, and in doing so giving your forces the chance to get a piece of Europe. Germany´s defeat was only a matter of time after 1943.

I don't ever expect to hear the words thank you uttered by yourself or any of your ilk. You are an ingrate.


Oh, i have no problem saying "thank you" for the new start we´ve got, the influence you had on our legal system and the way we think and are today. That is part of the reason why we react so strongly to Trump, we don´t want our friend to repeat our mistakes.Hitler only wanted to make Germany great again after all.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:34 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
You should not be surprised that I often find your views here at least equally contemptible.

How does it feel to have been on the wrong side of history your entire life?
It couldn't be more obvious that you were a rabid and outspoken supporter of the war in Vietnam. You were crestfallen when Nixon resigned. You still think Reagan was a pillar of fiscal responsibility while you accuse Obama of running up the debt. You were there waving an American flag as the AIPAC army rolled into Baghdad in 2003.

And you're still at it without a hint of humility.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 2117
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:41 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5. When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you. You are not totally capable of defending yourselves. We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed. Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.


I think you're missing the point. The American echo chamber is apparently missing clear signals coming from your Allies.

Take these excerpts from a speech by the Canadian Foreign Minister two days ago:

“Many of the voters in last year’s presidential election cast their ballots animated in part by a desire to shrug off the burden of world leadership,”
...
“International relationships that had seemed immutable for 70 years are being called into question.” [reference to NATO]
...
“The fact that our friend and ally has come to question the very worth of its mantle of global leadership puts into sharper focus the need for the rest of us to set our own clear and sovereign course.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... ip/529353/

If that's how your closest friends and Allies are publicly interpreting recent U.S. behaviour in this way, what do you think your adversaries make of it?
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Fri Jun 09, 2017 12:46 pm

It is interesting to see the extent to which a know-it-all idiot can be so completely wrong, and spout off about things for which he has completely no information.

salttee wrote:
How does it feel to have been on the wrong side of history your entire life?

I have no idea since I have been "on the wrong side of history" only a couple of times.

salttee wrote:
It couldn't be more obvious that you were a rabid and outspoken supporter of the war in Vietnam.

It might be obvious to you, but since I have never voiced an opinion here about supporting or not supporting that war, you have no grounds for making that claim. It isn't the topic, anyway.

salttee wrote:
You were crestfallen when Nixon resigned.

Wrong again. I only wish he had resigned earlier. I was elated when he did resign.

salttee wrote:
You still think Reagan was a pillar of fiscal responsibility while you accuse Obama of running up the debt.

I never thought President Reagan was a pillar of fiscal responsibility. Trickle-down economics was/is idiocy. His tax cuts were bad for the country. I have never remarked about the growth of national debt under Mr. Obama.

salttee wrote:
You were there waving an American flag as the AIPAC army rolled into Baghdad in 2003.

I have never waved an American flag (or any other flag). I don't "believe" in flag-waving, or in pledges/oaths containing the word "God". We can best be patriotic by thinking and voting, not by recitation of rote nonsense.

I have, however, served as a color-guard during a sunset review and parade of my MP Battalion. I don't know if that means anything to you. No big deal.

My two brothers served (1) in Germany during the Berlin Airlift and (2) in Korea during that military engagement. I have two sons who served in the USMC, one of them retiring after 20 years at the rank of Gunny. I have a grandson who has served several tours in or near Iraq. That's the extent of flag-waving you will get from me.

You should consider your own case. You have knee-jerk opinions when you have no information upon which to base an opinion, and you have a stock of rote accusations and nonsensical claims that are well beneath dignity.

Talk about ugly Americans..............
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11982
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:11 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
It is interesting to see the extent to which a know-it-all idiot can be so completely wrong, and spout off about things for which he has completely no information.


So you are only going to respond to this? A bit weak, Bob, after trying to go after Europe like you did.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Fri Jun 09, 2017 5:10 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
I have never voiced an opinion here about supporting or not supporting that war

Let's see you have two brothers served in Germany and Korea and two sons in the marines and you spent 20 years in the Marines yet you never voiced an opinion about the Vietnam war - right!

Oh yea, you said "here". Don't be concerned with that Bob, you're an open book, your jingoism is glowing neon, everyone knows who you are.




You know Dutchy has a good point Bob, it does look a bit like you are coping out in your choice of who to answer and what questions to avoid.
 
User avatar
11725Flyer
Posts: 1398
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:02 pm

Trump is visiting Poland on his next foreign trip, and supposedly will affirm NATO ties. We'll see how it goes.
 
Olddog
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 11, 2017 6:26 am

That will help Poland with EU, not.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13721
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 11, 2017 2:31 pm

11725Flyer wrote:
Trump is visiting Poland on his next foreign trip, and supposedly will affirm NATO ties. We'll see how it goes.


Well.. In Poland he may still be welcome, while Trump shuts his pants over visiting the UK.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11982
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:33 pm

Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11982
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:38 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
11725Flyer wrote:
Trump is visiting Poland on his next foreign trip, and supposedly will affirm NATO ties. We'll see how it goes.


Well.. In Poland he may still be welcome, while Trump shuts his pants over visiting the UK.

best regards
Thomas


Well, if you are going to insult the London mayor right after a terrorist attack, I guess you can't expect your popularity numbers to rise, now can you.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:21 am

salttee wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
I have never voiced an opinion here about supporting or not supporting that war

Let's see you have two brothers served in Germany and Korea and two sons in the marines and you spent 20 years in the Marines yet you never voiced an opinion about the Vietnam war - right!


You are incapable of reading correctly what was written.

I was never in the USMC. It was my youngest son who, after 20 years, retired at the rank of Gunnery Sergeant.
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:24 am

Dutchy wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
It is interesting to see the extent to which a know-it-all idiot can be so completely wrong, and spout off about things for which he has completely no information.


So you are only going to respond to this? A bit weak, Bob, after trying to go after Europe like you did.


Respond to what, precisely? You quoted me. I have no need to respond to me.
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9750
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Mon Jun 12, 2017 6:30 am

I personally do not understand the discussion. Americans have every right to support their president and they have every right to review their relationship with Europe. Europe has been pampered for decades by the US, it is time to demand something back or rethink the relationship. In real daily life Europe is first and foremost a competitor for economic growth and jobs. And I can see why Americans think it is time to look at American jobs first.
 
Olddog
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: NATO and Trump

Mon Jun 12, 2017 6:44 am

The flaw in your thinking is you conveniently forget what the us got in return for more than 70 years after just 3 years in war for them....
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11982
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: NATO and Trump

Mon Jun 12, 2017 7:07 am

BobPatterson wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
It is interesting to see the extent to which a know-it-all idiot can be so completely wrong, and spout off about things for which he has completely no information.


So you are only going to respond to this? A bit weak, Bob, after trying to go after Europe like you did.


Respond to what, precisely? You quoted me. I have no need to respond to me.


To this:
ElPistolero wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5. When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you. You are not totally capable of defending yourselves. We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed. Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.


I think you're missing the point. The American echo chamber is apparently missing clear signals coming from your Allies.

Take these excerpts from a speech by the Canadian Foreign Minister two days ago:

“Many of the voters in last year’s presidential election cast their ballots animated in part by a desire to shrug off the burden of world leadership,”
...
“International relationships that had seemed immutable for 70 years are being called into question.” [reference to NATO]
...
“The fact that our friend and ally has come to question the very worth of its mantle of global leadership puts into sharper focus the need for the rest of us to set our own clear and sovereign course.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... ip/529353/

If that's how your closest friends and Allies are publicly interpreting recent U.S. behaviour in this way, what do you think your adversaries make of it?
tommy1808 wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5.


right now there is.

When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you.


yup, because you don´t want to wait for the fight to come to your soil

You are not totally capable of defending yourselves


right... because 4 times the budget ain´t enough. .... flat out ridiculous

We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed. Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.


I take it you have never read the treaty then. No NATO member is obligated to do anything in case one is attacked.

Yes, part of the USA strategy has been and still is to fight, if necessary, in Europe and not here. So what?


I have no problem with that. It just shows that not a single US$ taxpayer money is spend on defending Europe, it is exclusively spend on making sure you can keep a war and win it away from your own borders. Which is the topic at hand in case you want to make up your own subject again.

we then had to feed you and help you to rebuild (as we did also with the Japanese). If we had not been, with great expense to ourselves and with no hope of ever being recompensed,


Ah... the selfless help. If you read Marshalls Speech, you´ll find "the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all" in it. That aid was a clear win-win situation, that economically benefited both sides. Germany also got that money as loans btw., part of which later didn´t have to be repaid, after all we needed the money to buy US weapons to be the tripwire for the red army. We are also still paying reparations, something the US has, as far as i know, never done, or did you ever pay the reparations to Nicaragua you owe them since 31 years?

the sole power preventing you from being exterminated or shipped to Siberian Gulags, all of Europe would today be known as Russia West.


Somehow the east Germans where not shipped off to Gulags either. And please don´t pretend there wasn´t a Morgenthau Plan in the US, which just happened to be the main propaganda tool for the Nazi government in keeping people fighting, prolonging the war, and in doing so giving your forces the chance to get a piece of Europe. Germany´s defeat was only a matter of time after 1943.

I don't ever expect to hear the words thank you uttered by yourself or any of your ilk. You are an ingrate.


Oh, i have no problem saying "thank you" for the new start we´ve got, the influence you had on our legal system and the way we think and are today. That is part of the reason why we react so strongly to Trump, we don´t want our friend to repeat our mistakes.Hitler only wanted to make Germany great again after all.

best regards
Thomas
Dutchy wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
There has never been a lack of USA commitment to NATO or Article 5. When and if the Russian Bear attacks we will be there to defend you. You are not totally capable of defending yourselves. We have no need to reaffirm what we have once affirmed. Mr. Trump cannot give away the promise of our Treaty commitment.

Yes, part of the USA strategy has been and still is to fight, if necessary, in Europe and not here. So what?

You (Germany mainly, plus some other European countries) have grown arrogant in the last 50 years, having become comfortable living in prosperity and freedom that you presently enjoy ONLY because of the United States (and Britain and Canada). After we had to destroy you (Germany) as a war-making and genocidal society, we then had to feed you and help you to rebuild (as we did also with the Japanese). If we had not been, with great expense to ourselves and with no hope of ever being recompensed, the sole power preventing you from being exterminated or shipped to Siberian Gulags, all of Europe would today be known as Russia West.

I don't ever expect to hear the words thank you uttered by yourself or any of your ilk. You are an ingrate.

Enjoy the freedoms you have at the cost of our blood and fortune.


Oh geeeeeee, where to begin with you? It is quite astonishing to cramp so much crab into such a small paragraph, well done.

- whom is Europe not capable of defending against? Probably America, but that is about it. Russia isn't going to attack, they can't, except for the Baltics, but that is EU and NATO and the EU will intervene if America is lacking
- article five has been called into action only one time, and that is to defend the US (!)
- Yes, America will fight in Europe and not in America, so what? So you lay your defense line in Europe not in America, which is fine, but if it ever comes to that, Europe will be in ruins again and not America, with a nuclear war the whole world will be gone anyway, so that doesn't matter.
- Ah the arrogant American voice, yes Europe has grown substantially and has created a good standard of living for all its citizens. Partly because of what America has done, most part of what the nations have done. And why did America do this, because of selfish reasons, nothing else. America has grown a lot since WWII, because large markets in Europe and Japan have opened up. And now because the world is financing your debt. So the "great expense" of yourself is highly overrated. As is the role of the US in defeating NAZI-Germany. Russia did make the greatest sacrifices by far.

With your 79 years old, you really should know better if you had followed the news better and you really should try more nuances.


Lot's to choose from, or you agree with these assesments :D
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hoons90, Sokes and 23 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos