Russia literally invaded Georgia and invaded and annexed part of another sovereign country in Europe in the form of The Ukraine...There is no "demand" that Russia be a threat to Europe... Trying to establish better relationships with Russia is not the same as seeking to reform a NATO type organization with Russia in it... The US is also trying to establish better relations with the Taliban in order to ease the tensions and hopefully finally get us out of Afghanistan after 20 years. That's not the same as advocating we recruit the Taliban to become part of the War on Terror coalition of nations...
Yep yep yep, I see you lap up the U.S. military industrial complex propaganda. You see, when NATO makes a shitshow out of Yugoslavia.....it's okay because the U.S. paid for it. You see, when Kosovo declares independence.....it's okay because we have an Army base there. When Crimea declared independence in the early 90's....Ukraine took it back by force a couple of years later. When they declared independence again in 2014, with another legitimate referendum as was in the early 90's, they were smart enough to vote to join Russia the second time. But that's bad because Russia = boogie man. Never mind it was Russian territory for hundreds of years up to 1954 and ethnically predominantly Russian. Freedom, democracy, unalienable rights.....it's all bullshit when it is someone else who wants independence if U.S. politicians and the MSM find it objectionable. So tell us about South Ossetia and Abkhazia. May as well throw in Transnistria too.
No idea about those places, I'm not knowledgeable on European affairs nor do I care to be. I personally couldn't have cared less when Russia invaded Georgia for whatever reason nor could I have cared less when Russia annexed Crimea. Or took it back from Ukraine, or whatever the actual facts are. Russia is Europe's problem for the most part not ours. I said it many months ago in a different thread that I 100% support Trump for lashing out at our NATO allies and telling them to belly up more money to fund that alliance and stop relying on America to fund the majority of it. NATO needs America for whatever threat they may have whether real or contrived. America doesn't NEED NATO for any threat we have, we'd like to have NATO but we don't NEED them. Pay up. You've got the wrong guy here, I am a nowhere near a fan of the Team America World Police mentality. I've seen saying we need to leave Afghanistan to the wolves tomorrow for years and when Russia walked into Crimea I said that sounds like a whole lot of not our problem. If Europe wanted to freak out the way they did then they need to pony up and do something about it. There are enough allied nations in Europe that can band together and deal with Russia if they have to, stop relying on the US to protect you. Especially when you refuse to come when we call for your help when we want it, France. I am all in favor of keeping our foot on other nations throats for the purpose of keeping them growing into something we have to worry about later on. But Russia could re-conquer all of it's old Soviet satellite states for all I care as long as it doesn't make them any more powerful militarily or economically. There is a fairly large gap between American military and economic power vs any other nation in the world. As long as that gap stays wide with us way out in front I couldn't care less what other nations run around doing.
If you actually believe what the Daily Beast said about Bernie "cozying up to the Russians", that suggests you are either very impressionable or have trouble with the language.
After the break up of the USSR, NATO and Russia signed the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security in 1997....https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_25468.htm It was a roadmap to lead to Russia becoming a members, that all fell apart over the years because of protest in Russia over the Govt working with NATO, largely lead by pro-leftist groups https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/...-protest-plan-for-nato-site-in-ulyanovsk.html Ultimately, by 2014, after Obama's "more flexible" policies with Putin, it all fell apart, and NATO backed out after Russia invade Ukraine.
"Drifting"? Thank you, most say I'm already there. Mostly I'm referring to the "Deep State" thing. Trumpers act as if there is this sort of far-reaching conspiracy against him which would take years to set up and have in place to the extent they seem to think exists and this belies the fact that Trump wasn't expected to win or even really taken all that seriously as a contender right up to the point where he did. Most of the people you have in the "Deep State" are career civil servants who have decades-long careers under pols of all parties and are suddenly throwing it all over to cause Trump a minor annoyance. The best example of what I'm talking about would be Comey. Comey has this long and distinguished career but you have him as some sort of lying traitor. The fact is that Trump fired him because he wouldn't knuckle under and "go easy" on one or another of the several Trump appointees who were going to jail, but Trump later made up all this bs about the Clintons and Clinton campaign just to make himself look like less of a scapegoater, which is possibly his major fault as a President, certainly as a human being
To the former, the U.S. did indeed fight the Russians in the immediate aftermath of World War One. We lost several hundred soldiers IIRC. I've heard the Russians still whine about it. And why would we be able to reduce military spending just because we have peace and harmony with the Russians? They aren't the only threat the U.S. faces.
1. Comey was outed as a liar by the IG and many others. 2. Bill Clinton was an above average President/felon, and The Clintons corruption is well documented. 3. The existence of the Deep State is celebrated by those who run it. “Thank God for the ***DEEP STATE***,” declared former acting CIA chief John McLaughlin recently while appearing on a panel at George Mason University. A year ago, the deep state was routinely reviled as a figment of paranoid right-wingers’ imagination. But much of the news media are now conferring the same sainthood on the deep state that was previously bestowed on special counsel Robert Mueller." USA TODAY, As the deep state attacks Trump to rave media reviews, BY JAMES BROVARD, 11/13/19. (emphasis mine) https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...e-cia-nsa-state-department-column/2521881001/
The media are making fun of you and you don't even realize it, but that is a characteristic of the Right and has been for years What specific lie did Comey tell, where and when?
Do you really think we have to spend going on to a trillion dollars to defend against a bunch of "threats" none of whom spend even a fifth of what we do?
Comey lies like a rug. "Former FBI Director James Comey has been caught committing perjury to Congress, after recent testimony directly contradicts claims about Trump pressuring him to stop the Flynn investigation. Comey told a Senate Judiciary Committee on May 3, 2017, that President Trump did not tell him to halt an investigation into Michael T. Flynn. This completely contradicts new claims made by Comey in which he accuses Trump of asking him to shut down the federal investigation into the former national security adviser during an Oval Office meeting in February, according to an alleged memo Comey wrote after the meeting. Infowars.com reports: The New York Times claims this February memo is the “smoking gun,” but in fact it contradicts Comey’s sworn testimony on May 3. NEWS PUNCH, "Bombshell: James Comey Caught Committing Perjury To Congress, By Sean Adl-Tabatabai News, May 18, 2017. https://newspunch.com/james-comey-perjury-congress/
Putin has longed for the return of the glory of the USSR...he s already working hard to get sanders elected, once that happens...say goodbye to NATO, and he’ll finally have his chance to gain that back with his dem in the White House
"spending" and "capability" are not related directly. Especially given that 1) The U.S. spends far, far, far more on its personnel than nations like China for obvious reasons. 2) The U.S. military is composed entirely of expeditionary forces. That is forces meant to be deployed overseas. In other words, for Americans to get to a combat zone they have to fly or take a boat where as potential enemies of the U.S. such as North Korea, Iran, Russia, or even China can pretty much drive or walk to a combat zone. Expeditionary forces are man for man at least five to six times more expensive as non expeditionary troops.
So why is that? Why do we feel the need to send our Army all over the world? We are bounded by two oceans. The only even possibly hostile nation on our borders is Mexico. Are we THAT worried about the Cartels? We should pay our soldiers much more than we do, and we should use our Army to fix our infrastructure. The Romans, no slouches at managing Armies, were not at all hesitant about using theirs to construct the best infrastructure that existed until our own.
The Romans used their legions to work on infrastructure largely to keep them busy and in shape between wars. Don't know if that reasoning would work today. We send our Army all over the world because our interests are all over the world. Economic, historical, cultural, political, and diplomatic interests.
This isn't being cozy. We're not cozy with all the UN nations. The whole idea is that we need to work on problems through negotiation rather than through war. Russia was one of the nations that cooperated with the US and the other 6 or so nations in getting Iran to inspect their nuclear facilities. The problem with Trump is that he's fine with Russia contributing to his election campaigns. And, that is treason, not negotiation.
I'm certainly not a fan of Russia but what Trump did (supposedly) doesn't come close to meeting the legal definition of "treason".
Why? Because it didn't immediately overthrow our method of government - democracy??? Benedict Arnold didn't cause that to happen, either. Russia is investing heavily in causing our system of government to fail, and Trump is aiding them.
I don't think the US Army Corps of Engineers would agree with that. https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/army-corps-of-engineers-are-stewards-of-infrastructure/ Our interests are indeed all over the world, but our people and our infrastructure are right here.
