- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NATO readies 300,000 troops for European Defense Against Russia
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:02 am to Jack Carter
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:02 am to Jack Carter
quote:
And when you see they are going to provoke Russia into a direct conflict,
So they're going to attack Russia preemptively?
That's the only way NATO can be an aggressor in this scenario.
Something NATO has never done.
3
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:04 am to sta4ever
quote:
Why would I be in a foxhole in Ukraine?
You have been one of the loudest supporters of this boondoggle.
You should put your arse on the line if you really were as committed as your posts indicate.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:04 am to MrLSU
Able archer
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:05 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So they're going to attack Russia preemptively?
If history is a judge, NATO will claim that a member had been attacked so as to respond.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:06 am to jimmy the leg
Nah, we are damned good without the internet. Think DDay and how we were able to create and expand the beach head. That was a logistics lollapalooza. Berlin Airlift was as well.....and Inchon
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:07 am to jimmy the leg
quote:
You have been one of the loudest supporters of this boondoggle. You should put your arse on the line if you really were as committed as your posts indicate.
What’s wrong with me thinking Ukrainians should fight for their country rather than Americans? Your point would be valid if I were advocating for direct American involvement in this war, which I’m not and never have. Isn’t this America first though? Countries should fight for their own countries, instead of American men and women? I fail to see why you’re so upset at me.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:08 am to OMLandshark
quote:
But acknowledging this apparently makes you a Putin supporter. Sorry, but according to the OT thread, Russia is Mordor, Putin is Sauron, and all the Russians are orcs. They literally say this in the thread referring to the Russians, so I’m not making this up.
Exactly and I am definitely not a Putin supporter ,but I can acknowledge the reality of the situation. At a minimum I understand why to him that this is a threat and we saw it as a threat in 1962 with the Cuban Missle Crises and the Cold War nearly became hot. The Russians were putting ICBMs in Cuba just 90 miles from our shores. We are not fully innocent here and I can see that.
This post was edited on 6/5/24 at 10:09 am
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:10 am to jimmy the leg
Nah, we are damned good without the internet. Think DDay and how we were able to create and expand the beach head. That was a logistics lollapalooza. Berlin Airlift was as well.....and Inchon
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:10 am to MrLSU
300k US troops has got to be a typo. That’s gotta be a quarter of our active duty forces. Are we sure it isn’t UN. While not a single US troop should be sent for many reasons that’s essentially just throwing down the WW3 gauntlet.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:11 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:14 am to sta4ever
So far it has been Ukrainians fighting and dying for their country. We just give them the bullets. But the blood is overwhelmingly Ukrainian
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:19 am to MrLSU
quote:
Thank you President Biden for keeping us safe and secure in the US by sending over three hundred thousand US troops abroad.
Lindsey Graham has a perpetual boner right now.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:24 am to MrLSU
quote:
sending over three hundred thousand US troops abroad.
300k NATO troops =/= 300,000 US troops.
We have 75-100k troops in Europe I believe. Maybe a third or a quarter of that are in Poland, Lithuania, and Romania. The balance of the 300k are from the other 30+ countries. Plus, this "breaking news" plan has been in effect for essentially the entirety of NATO's existence.
This post was edited on 6/5/24 at 10:25 am
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:26 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Something NATO has never done
I agree with your point. But to be annoying, I'll bet there are some baws in Belgrade and Sarajevo who disagree with that statement.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:26 am to Indefatigable
quote:
I'll bet there are some baws in Belgrade and Sarajevo who disagree with that statement.
Well Russia could have vetoed that in the UNSC so they can turn their rage to the slavic motherland.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Well Russia could have vetoed that in the UNSC so they can turn their rage to the slavic motherland.
I don't think NATO asked for permission, not that they needed it.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:34 am to jimmy the leg
quote:
If history is a judge, NATO will claim that a member had been attacked so as to respond.
Article V has been invoked once, and a member was attacked.
Not exactly the pattern you're implying.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 11:07 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Not exactly the pattern you're implying.
“History” implies more than just NATO.
However, since I wasn’t specific, I can under the confusion.
Here is a non-NATO example:
The Gulf of Tonkin incident.
There are many others.
So yes, history does support my opinion (and to a large degree no less).
Posted on 6/5/24 at 11:10 am to sta4ever
quote:
Countries should fight for their own countries, instead of American men and women?
Fair enough.
So if (when) Joepedo drags us into a hot war with Russia, are you going to volunteer to go?
This post was edited on 6/5/24 at 11:11 am
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News