• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Trump Says He Might 'Encourage' Russia To Attack NATO Allies

Yes, Putin just waits for the opportunity to invade France. In fact, he started learning french.

France is a bit far, even for aggressive Russian imperialism. It's really
  • border states that are in the most danger,
  • countries that have relatively high numbers of ethnic Russians in concentrated areas around borders,
  • former Soviet republics which may still have some sympathies,
  • and especially but not necessarily those states that have not joined NATO.
Examples meeting all criteria: Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Belarus. We see what happened with 3 of 4 of those countries experiencing Russian aggression. Perhaps Belarus is an exception because it is currently closely allied to Russia.

Now with Trump's words, if we were to take them literally, we could re-evaluate those criteria listed above by removing the last one since NATO membership would be virtually meaningless. Then, we could consider Latvia, Estonia as possibly in more danger. But atm Russian forces are spread very thinly and so this would be more of a future concern if Trump won the Presidency, then implemented this change, and further that Putin ended hostilities elsewhere such as splitting Ukraine in half with peace so he could move forces around.

France is a bit far, isn't going to have large numbers of ethnic Russians in support, won't have troop movements from Russia easily getting there, and has little sympathy for Russian oligarch control of assets or Russian propaganda.

Speaking of Estonia...

 
Some like Alaska were just there for the taking.
And yet you were unable to take it in any real sense. How embarrassing!
We took it just fine.
Well, no. You barely managed to hold on to a tiny portion if it, taking heavy losses of capital and personnel the whole while. As colonial empires go, it was pretty pathetic.
No, we took it and had hold it for ~100 years, until it was decided that it was not viable to hold it against USians.
There are bunch of russians still living there. So, watch out!
You took a hill. You attempted other settlements but all of them failed. It was sixty years, which is only ~100 if you are very liberal at rounding. You claimed to have possession of Alaska, without any evidence to legitimize that claim of ownership. Just like you are doing right now. No other country ever recognized that claim, most importantly those indigenous nations that actually did owned the Alaskan coastline and have not ceded it, to Russia or any other colonizing foreigners.
Alaska was sold to US because of crimean war. You have to thank French and british for that.
This time around you are going to lose territory.
 
This time around you are going to lose territory.
If you couldn't beat the Tlingit Kwaa'n on their own, I don't know why you think you'd stand a chance fighting the Tlingits, the USMC, and the Palin kids all at once.

2FD0415A00000578-3385407-image-m-13_1452002998852.jpg
 
This time around you are going to lose territory.
If you couldn't beat the Tlingit confederations on their own, I don't know why you think you'd stand a chance fighting the Tlingits, the USMC, and the Palin kids all at once.

2FD0415A00000578-3385407-image-m-13_1452002998852.jpg
You are going to lose Ukraine.
We are not even in Ukraine. You're losing a war against our guns and money, as wielded by another party. The only threat we really face from Russia are the toadies your president is wisely buying off inside our government, and there, the threat is not so much that Putin will somehow take over our country, but that the people he funds are also insane fascists who feed on our worst tendencies for bigotry, greed, and xenophobia.
 
The US and NATO are fighting in Ukraine, in the same way that Horace Smith and Daniel Wesson are bank robbers.
You are setting yourself up for big asskicking in ME.
I have no plans to visit the ME, so your comment is as stupid as it is irrelevant.

Assuming ad argumentum that anyone was, in fact, "setting themselves up for big asskicking" anywhere in the world, how would that be in the slightest way connected to the post to which you made it your response?

Your comments are increasingly detached from the immediate context of the conversation, having long since come un-moored from reality.

Incoherence might impress the Trump supporting deplorables who wouldn't know logic or reason if they saw it; But it just makes the rest of us worry about your mental health. Have you taken a recent blow to the head?

Or are you just badly attempting the old political trick of answering any claim from your opponent with a prepared statement that you just pretend is somehow relevant, regardless of the blatant fact that you are changing the subject?
 
Back
Top Bottom