US tanks arrive in Germany to help Nato defences

Germany calling for US tanks and troops because they've going down with reserve and proffesionel troops to under 145,000 in both two statistics. Only 40,000 reserve troops. Only 103,500 in proffesionel armies.

 

The founding fathers expressly stated again and again that we should strive towards independence and neutrality with regards to European affairs. One treaty that applied to one country and which was repealed in 1800 does nothing to contradict this reality.

I was about to ask you the same thing.

And in what universe does that statement translate into "we weren't obligated to defend France"?

Do you need me to explain what "enthralled" means?

And, no, not ANY European intrigue, but only those particular intrigues which directly concerned the defense of France. In any case, the treaty was repealed in 1800 by the Adams administration. Clearly they preferred neutrality to thralldom.

I'm quite consistent. You are just very adept at twisting things.

 

Several countries participated in the invasion of the Soviet Union - Italy, Romania, and Hungary all fought in the campaign.
.

 

Right, because monarchies are "legitimate governments".

 

American politics is ridiculous, a joke, i agree. Nothing matters to them now except gop or dem. A foreign country could attack them and they make it into a partisan issue. Pathetic

 

So we enthralled ourselves to the defense of a European country for more than 20 years, but the men that signed that treaty never intended us to be enthralled to the defense of Europe?

Do you see how (*)(*)(*)(*)ing stupid your "logic" is?

 

So feel free to explain this "complexity" to me, Mr. Expert. If Russia was the aggressor, then why did the USA side with them?

So you think monarchies, which are nothing more than hereditary dictatorships, are a legitimate form of government. Noted.

The de facto head of NATO, the USA, agreed to it. They did not honor the agreement. Again, what about this confuses you?

 

1. Do I really need to explain the chain of alliance activations that led to WW1? <Mod Edit>
Maybe I should point out that by the time the US entered the war, the Russians were mostly out of it?

2. They were the legitimate government of Russia in 1918.

If dictatorships are illegitimate forms of government, then Russia's government is illegitimate and we don't have to care about what they say.

3. And the US agreement was a signed treaty that was binding for all other NATO nations or the alliance as a whole?

 

Get a dictionary, look up the word "enthralled", and then get back to me.

But before you do that, please educate yourself on some basic American history. Here, I'll get you started:

Are you starting to sense a pattern yet?

 

Why do so many Democrats now demand war against Russia? Russia has NEVER attack or been at war with the USA - ever.

 

Technically not true. They occupy the Kuril Islands to this day. Just sayin'

 

THOSE SAME MEN signed a treaty with a European power that obligated us to the defense of said European power and that treaty stayed in effect for 20 years.

Methinks their propaganda does not jive with their actions.

 

Exactly. How'd that work out for the Sudetenland?

 

When did the Republicans stop being the Party of Reagan and strong defense and instead become the Party of ballless surrender to the Russians?

 

What battle did they help us fight in Japan? He said they fought for the US in Japan. Can you cite that

 

You're surprised that you need to explain your position?

Legitimate according to who? Monarchists and their apologists?

Of course we have to care about what they say. They have nuclear weapons, for starters.

It was an agreement between the US and Russia which the US broke. Your obtuse questions are nothing more than an attempt to distract from the underlying issue.

 

I wouldn't be so sure vis a vi the Baltic's. They all have sizable Russian ethnic populations and Mother Russia has essentially appointed itself the protector of extraterritorial Russian groups. Keep your eyes particularly on Estonia.

 

1. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you don't understand basic history.

Here's a rundown: a Serb assassinated the Archduke of Austria. Austria sent an ultimatum to Serbia and mobilized its army. Russia mobilized in defense of Serbia. Germany mobilized in defense of Austria. The Russian warplan called for an immediate invasion of Prussia, which they then did.

Is it Aggression when you invade the territory of a country that has already declared war on you?

2. Legimtiate according to every country in the world outside Russia.

3. So a dictatorship can be a legitimate government if it has nukes? Can you please be clear about what does and does not constitute a legitimate government so I have a fixed standard to use as reference rather than you just making up whatever bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is convenient at the time?

4. Was that agreement between US and Russia binding for the governments of Eastern Europe?

 

Their actions were entirely consistent with their words. George Washington remained neutral during the war between Britain and France in spite of that treaty. And it was repealed in 1800 by the Adams administration.

 

The same reason Canada has an armored brigade at their end of the Niagara Peace Bridge. Oh wait! That's right, they don't.

 

Reagan befriended Gorbachev and sought peace through diplomacy. He would be ashamed of the insane belligerence on display today.

 

Estonia was old Empire to Sweden in 100 years before Russia take both Finland and Estonia to Russia Empire. Old wars these.

 

The treaty was signed with a king who was dead with no legitimate successor when Britain and france went to war.

It still remains the fact that for all you claim they opposed mutual defense treaties, they signed a mutual defense treaty.

 

The Soviets invaded Japanese occupied Manchuria, August 1945.
According to the "nuking Japan was a war crime" crowd, this was the straw that broke the samurai's back and forced the surrender.

 

If a group of people declare their political independence and then invite the Russians in, how is that an invasion? I mean, Americans did essentially the same thing when we declared our political independence and invited the French in, did we not?