Spain deployed the largest international military mission near the borders of Ukraine - media
07/01/24
It will be supported by about 300 units of equipment.
Latest Thread
I mean at this point Trump is going to win, even Hasanabi and Cenk Uygur had a mental breakdown with Biden. The war is just going super slow but time might not be on Ukraine's side depending who is going to be doing the negotiations between Zelensky and Putin. Minsk 1 and 2 agreements have failed, so the Russians wont trust the west for a 3rd version and later be like ahhh geez there go the Ukrainians shelling us again. Trump even dodged the debate question of what does he think about Putin keeping the donbass regions and not allowing Ukraine into NATO. Zelensky had a pretty troubled look on his face when Trump told him to work with the Russians. But atleast Biden or his son and some democrat politicians did some money laundering deals with Ukraine so it would make sense that Zelensky at least personally knew Biden....But there is no bribing that I am aware of for a presidential candidate that is already rich. Complaining about billions being thrown into it he might stop funding the Ukraine war.Good old Us of A , they are going to save your asses like in September 1941.
Don't tell me that you could held the limes without Yenkee help?
Then , just like after Russo Japanese war in which Britain and USA help Japan to hammer you, you will make the agreement. This time solely against Muslims..
How possibly you can miss the bait?
As I have said, here is hope for you. Don't get me wrong, I despise Biden.I mean at this point Trump is going to win, even Hasanabi and Cenk Uygur had a mental breakdown with Biden. The war is just going super slow but time might not be on Ukraine's side depending who is going to be doing the negotiations between Zelensky and Putin. Minsk 1 and 2 agreements have failed, so the Russians wont trust the west for a 3rd version and later be like ahhh geez there go the Ukrainians shelling us again. Trump even dodged the debate question of what does he think about Putin keeping the donbass regions and not allowing Ukraine into NATO. Zelensky had a pretty troubled look on his face when Trump told him to work with the Russians. But atleast Biden or his son and some democrat politicians did some money laundering deals with Ukraine so it would make sense that Zelensky at least personally knew Biden....But there is no bribing that I am aware of for a presidential candidate that is already rich. Complaining about billions being thrown into it he might stop funding the Ukraine war.
I am always amused when mainstream media tries to subtly pivot from "Trump wants Europe to pull their weight when it comes to being in NATO" to "Trump is going to sell out Ukraine to Putin" and thinks no one will notice.Politiko published a very interesting article about Trump's likely policies once he takes office. It is very long, so I will give some interesting quotes.
«Trump’s Plan for NATO Is Emerging.»
Trump advisers envision a ‘radical reorientation’ in which Washington takes a back seat to Europe — and cuts a deal with Putin over Ukraine.
Donald Trump has threatened to leave NATO so many times — or has appeared to, anyway — that for many of his critics, it’s a question of when, not whether, he’d ditch the 75-year-old alliance if he’s reelected president in November.
In truth, Trump would be unlikely to quit NATO outright, according to interviews with former Trump national security officials and defense experts who are likely to serve in a second Trump term. But even if he doesn’t formally leave the organization, that doesn’t mean NATO would survive a second Trump term intact.
In return for continued U.S. participation, Trump would not only expect that European countries drastically increase their spending on NATO — his main complaint when he was president — but also undertake what one defense expert familiar with the thinking inside Trump’s national-security advisory circle, Dan Caldwell describes as a “radical reorientation” of NATO.
“We don’t really have a choice anymore,” Caldwell told POLITICO Magazine, citing rising U.S. debt, flagging military recruiting, and a defense industrial base that can’t keep up with the challenge from both Russia and China.
According to these officials, the U.S. would keep its nuclear umbrella over Europe during a second Trump term by maintaining its airpower and bases in Germany, England and Turkey, and its naval forces as well. Meanwhile, the bulk of infantry, armor, logistics and artillery would ultimately pass from American to European hands. Parts of this plan were floated in an article published in February 2023 by the Trump-affiliated Center for Renewing America, but in the months since, there’s been an emerging and more detailed consensus among Trump supporters on an outline of a new concept for NATO.
The shift they envision would involve “significantly and substantially downsizing America’s security role — stepping back instead of being the primary provider of combat power in Europe, somebody who provides support only in times of crisis,”
“We can’t be doing 10 times what the Germans are doing anymore, and we’ve got to be prepared to be tough with them. There’s got to be consequences,” Colby said in an interview. “We want NATO to be active, but we want it to be with the Europeans in the lead. That was the original idea. That was Dwight Eisenhower’s idea.” Only now, faced with a menacing China, the need for making such changes is far more urgent, Colby said. “The United States does not have enough military forces to go around. … We can’t break our spear in Europe against the Russians when we know the Chinese and Russians are collaborating, and the Chinese are a more dangerous and significant threat.”...
Politiko published a very interesting article about Trump's likely policies once he takes office. It is very long, so I will give some interesting quotes.
«Trump’s Plan for NATO Is Emerging.»
Trump advisers envision a ‘radical reorientation’ in which Washington takes a back seat to Europe — and cuts a deal with Putin over Ukraine.
Donald Trump has threatened to leave NATO so many times — or has appeared to, anyway — that for many of his critics, it’s a question of when, not whether, he’d ditch the 75-year-old alliance if he’s reelected president in November.
In truth, Trump would be unlikely to quit NATO outright, according to interviews with former Trump national security officials and defense experts who are likely to serve in a second Trump term. But even if he doesn’t formally leave the organization, that doesn’t mean NATO would survive a second Trump term intact.
In return for continued U.S. participation, Trump would not only expect that European countries drastically increase their spending on NATO — his main complaint when he was president — but also undertake what one defense expert familiar with the thinking inside Trump’s national-security advisory circle, Dan Caldwell describes as a “radical reorientation” of NATO.
“We don’t really have a choice anymore,” Caldwell told POLITICO Magazine, citing rising U.S. debt, flagging military recruiting, and a defense industrial base that can’t keep up with the challenge from both Russia and China.
According to these officials, the U.S. would keep its nuclear umbrella over Europe during a second Trump term by maintaining its airpower and bases in Germany, England and Turkey, and its naval forces as well. Meanwhile, the bulk of infantry, armor, logistics and artillery would ultimately pass from American to European hands. Parts of this plan were floated in an article published in February 2023 by the Trump-affiliated Center for Renewing America, but in the months since, there’s been an emerging and more detailed consensus among Trump supporters on an outline of a new concept for NATO.
The shift they envision would involve “significantly and substantially downsizing America’s security role — stepping back instead of being the primary provider of combat power in Europe, somebody who provides support only in times of crisis,”
“We can’t be doing 10 times what the Germans are doing anymore, and we’ve got to be prepared to be tough with them. There’s got to be consequences,” Colby said in an interview. “We want NATO to be active, but we want it to be with the Europeans in the lead. That was the original idea. That was Dwight Eisenhower’s idea.” Only now, faced with a menacing China, the need for making such changes is far more urgent, Colby said. “The United States does not have enough military forces to go around. … We can’t break our spear in Europe against the Russians when we know the Chinese and Russians are collaborating, and the Chinese are a more dangerous and significant threat.”...
When Bush Jr. was reminded of his campaign promises, he responded with something like, “There is a big difference between a presidential candidate and a statesman.”I am always amused when mainstream media tries to subtly pivot from "Trump wants Europe to pull their weight when it comes to being in NATO" to "Trump is going to sell out Ukraine to Putin" and thinks no one will notice.
A reminder that Trump was the one that started seriously arming and training Ukrainian forces after Obama basically let Russians walk in and do whatever the hell they want without serious repercussions.