What's new
What's new

What would it mean to manufacturing if Finland and Sweden joined NATO?

Status
Not open for further replies.

gustafson

Diamond
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Location
People's Republic
The US has no reason to meddle in this conflict.



Quite proud. I've served on 3 different continents and survived a VBIED in AFG. My mother will hug me tight today.


You are again making the same assumption people made with Hitler, that Putin will stop

Biden did not start this war, Putin did

you are parroting Putins Russian propaganda


if your parents would be proud, they are sad people indeed
 

crickets

Hot Rolled
Joined
Jul 3, 2021
Funny. yours seems to be with the former USSR


your opinion is pro war and pro Russia

but but but anything anti Biden must be good


what a fool

For whatever reason (I have a suspicion why) you have a blind spot. Putin may be an asshole, but the situation is alike to taking a dog for a walk in the big cat territory, and then blaming the cat for the dog being eaten.

We had an easy way to prevent the military phase of the conflict from happening - Biden just needed to say that Ukraine will not be joining NATO on his watch. This wouldn't even be a practical sacrifice of any kind, considering Ukraine had no path to NATO given its territorial disputes. Naturally proponents of the "free world" will start screaming about self-determination, and "open door policy" and other nonsense. I would like to preemptively respond to that with the following :


NATO-expansion-document-promise-UK-US-Germany.png


Not only there is a precedent for NATO to decide who they will offer membership to strictly on the political grounds, but also there is a precedent of us orchestrating a membership over the protest of other NATO members.
 

Gewehr 98

Hot Rolled
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Location
Cinci.O
Funny. yours seems to be with the former USSR


your opinion is pro war and pro Russia

but but but anything anti Biden must be good


what a fool

I'm pro USA, fuck everybody else, and I've proven that by putting my ass in the line of fire.

Again, you seem adamant about getting the US involved in this war that has nothing to do with the US. I, and we, have no business messing about in what is going on over there. We are aiding an abetting a country who is up against a a country who has nukes pointed in every direction.

If you're so committed, hop on a plane and go to UKR and play Rambo. Just leave the rest of the USA out of it. I can provide names and contact info of 4 different contractors that are hiring anyone who will fight. Otherwise you're just running your suck.
 

SeymourDumore

Diamond
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Location
CT
We had an easy way to prevent the military phase of the conflict from happening - Biden just needed to say that Ukraine will not be joining NATO on his watch. This wouldn't even be a practical sacrifice of any kind, considering Ukraine had no path to NATO given its territorial disputes.

I absolutely agree, there WAS a possible avenue to take the wind out of Putin's sail.
Not in February of 2022, not in Dec of 2021, rather sometime in fall of 2021.
Some clear political mumbo-jumbo as to NATO staying clear of Ukraine's acceptance on the grounds of X, Y and Z could perhaps put a cap on the fuse for a while until
a different solution presented itself.
In addition, there is absolutely no possible way at this time - regardless of all other factors - for Ukraine's acceptance, simply because of it's existing territorial disputes.
Something claiming such issues could have been used that to borrow time.
Instead, they ( US and NATO, NATO by way of US, US by way of NATO or whatever ... ) choose the brute force, referring to the 1997 summit and the NATO agreements that membership
will never be coerced, nor will it ever allow outside influence to determine the acceptance.

But to say something this stupid:

Naturally proponents of the "free world" will start screaming about self-determination, and "open door policy" and other nonsense.

Which basically suggest that She, who is about to be fucked by the bigger MAN must lay down and spread or else!

From NATO-RF agreement, Paris 1997:

Section I details the principles on which the NATO - Russia partnership will be based. These include commitments to norms of international behaviour as reflected in the UN Charter and OSCE documents, as well as more explicit commitments such as respecting states' sovereignty, independence and right to choose the means to ensure their security, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Both sides commit themselves to strengthening the OSCE with the aim of creating a common space of security and stability in Europe.

IOW, Russia has signed the document back in 1997 by Yeltsin, and then in 2002 Vladimir has re-affirmed Russia's commitment to the Paris agreement by signing onto the NRC.
Basically committing themselves to remain neutral in the decision of each non member state as to how to best proceed with their own defense in the future.
 

SeymourDumore

Diamond
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Location
CT
Again, you seem adamant about getting the US involved in this war that has nothing to do with the US. I, and we, have no business messing about in what is going on over there. We are aiding an abetting a country who is up against a a country who has nukes pointed in every direction.

Unfortunately, the fact is that we got involved in this situation back in 1994.
In fact, if you want to stay to the strictest definition, there are only 4 countries that should be involved:
Russia
Ukraine
United States of America
United Kingdom of Great Bitain and Northern Ireland
 

dcsipo

Titanium
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Location
Baldwin, MD/USA
Unfortunately, the fact is that we got involved in this situation back in 1994.
In fact, if you want to stay to the strictest definition, there are only 4 countries that should be involved:
Russia
Ukraine
United States of America
United Kingdom of Great Bitain and Northern Ireland

You managed to make me go, Huh? Read it multiple times and only come up with why, only those four, and why northern Ireland. And what happened in 1994 re Ukraine?
 

Big B

Diamond
Joined
Jun 26, 2009
Location
Michigan, USA
Today I was thinking about this place called Alaska. You know, the place where Sarah Palin lives and can see Russia from her porch. I wonder if Putin has ever considered invading Alaska. It's a lot closer to Russia than it is to the continental 48 so strategically it could possibly be easy pickings for him.

As long as he doesn't try to invade the lower 48. Well unless it's California. Some folks would probably be fine with losing California. And don't get me started on those eastern liberals. But he'd never dream of taking on Texas, the place that can't even figure out how to keep the power on in a storm.

What ever happened to the USA?
 

SeymourDumore

Diamond
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Location
CT
You managed to make me go, Huh? Read it multiple times and only come up with why, only those four, and why northern Ireland. And what happened in 1994 re Ukraine?

Dee, the Budapest Agreement of 1994 had 4 signers:
Russian Federation
Ukraine
United States of America
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Basically, if one wants to stick to the absolute strictest definitions in that Article, then those 3 nations have an obligation to join Ukraine in it's defense.
Question is what do you do if Ukraine needs defense from any one of those 3?
From my perspective, the Russian Federation walked all over Section 3 in 2012 with it's customs embargo against Ukraine, then did the same to Section 2 in 2014 with
the annexation of Crimea.
From where I stand, anything Ukraine has done against Russia after that, said agreement could be used in its defense.
Similarly, any actions by the US and the UK on the side of Ukraine against the offender could also be used as a justifiable and contractual intervention.
( to the likes of Crickets and Scotts of PM, I did say "could" and not "should"
 

dcsipo

Titanium
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Location
Baldwin, MD/USA
Dee, the Budapest Agreement of 1994 had 4 signers:
Russian Federation
Ukraine
United States of America
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Basically, if one wants to stick to the absolute strictest definitions in that Article, then those 3 nations have an obligation to join Ukraine in it's defense.
Question is what do you do if Ukraine needs defense from any one of those 3?
From my perspective, the Russian Federation walked all over Section 3 in 2012 with it's customs embargo against Ukraine, then did the same to Section 2 in 2014 with
the annexation of Crimea.
From where I stand, anything Ukraine has done against Russia after that, said agreement could be used in its defense.
Similarly, any actions by the US and the UK on the side of Ukraine against the offender could also be used as a justifiable and contractual intervention.
( to the likes of Crickets and Scotts of PM, I did say "could" and not "should"

Duh, thanks for the reminder, not sure how I messed up that date...I should not post on Mother's Day.
 

Bill D

Diamond
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Location
Modesto, CA USA
As long as he doesn't try to invade the lower 48. Well unless it's California. Some folks would probably be fine with losing California.

Russia left california right before gold was discovered. They sold out the settlement for $30,000 to the man who discovered gold. So they no longer have rights to California. Unless the fact he never paid the note means they do still have ownership.
Bill D
 

barbter

Diamond
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Location
On Tour...
On September 11, 1941, at an America First speech in Des Moines, Iowa, Lindbergh identified the “the British, the Jewish, and the Roosevelt administration” as “war agitators” who had used “misinformation” and “propaganda” to mislead and frighten the American public. The response was immediate. Public support for Lindbergh evaporated, and the Des Moines speech was denounced as anti-Semitic and un-American.

....Just like the UK Gov has done in the last 2 years then, with their "Behavioral Insights Team" (BIT "Nudge" Unit).
Where they (Gov) "declared war" on the population, trying to frighten them to death....They (Gov) demanding the "scientists" to be more frightening to generate compliance....while themselves ignoring "their own made up $cience and rules"....
The 'covert tactics' used to scare Britons into staying at home | Daily Mail Online
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Today I was thinking about this place called Alaska. You know, the place where Sarah Palin lives and can see Russia from her porch. I wonder if Putin has ever considered invading Alaska. It's a lot closer to Russia than it is to the continental 48 so strategically it could possibly be easy pickings for him.

As long as he doesn't try to invade the lower 48. Well unless it's California. Some folks would probably be fine with losing California. And don't get me started on those eastern liberals. But he'd never dream of taking on Texas, the place that can't even figure out how to keep the power on in a storm.

What ever happened to the USA?

Great post!
 

gustafson

Diamond
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Location
People's Republic
For whatever reason (I have a suspicion why) you have a blind spot. Putin may be an asshole, but the situation is alike to taking a dog for a walk in the big cat territory, and then blaming the cat for the dog being eaten.

We had an easy way to prevent the military phase of the conflict from happening - Biden just needed to say that Ukraine will not be joining NATO on his watch. This wouldn't even be a practical sacrifice of any kind, considering Ukraine had no path to NATO given its territorial disputes. Naturally proponents of the "free world" will start screaming about self-determination, and "open door policy" and other nonsense. I would like to preemptively respond to that with the following :


NATO-expansion-document-promise-UK-US-Germany.png


Not only there is a precedent for NATO to decide who they will offer membership to strictly on the political grounds, but also there is a precedent of us orchestrating a membership over the protest of other NATO members.

So you continue to parrot the Kremlins weak jsutification for invading a sovereign nation and murdering innocent people

Biden merely had to appease Putin to prevent a war

please show historical precedent where that has succeded

hint: you won't find them


you excuse Putin and blame Biden

blind spot?

look in the mirror
 

gustafson

Diamond
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Location
People's Republic
I'm pro USA, fuck everybody else, and I've proven that by putting my ass in the line of fire.

Again, you seem adamant about getting the US involved in this war that has nothing to do with the US. I, and we, have no business messing about in what is going on over there. We are aiding an abetting a country who is up against a a country who has nukes pointed in every direction.

If you're so committed, hop on a plane and go to UKR and play Rambo. Just leave the rest of the USA out of it. I can provide names and contact info of 4 different contractors that are hiring anyone who will fight. Otherwise you're just running your suck.


What I am adamant about is not listening to propaganda excusing the murder of innocents


You are pro Russia from the get go, no matter your history

You claim to be pro USA, but excuse Russia at every turn

Why is that?

This whole thing will end when Russia turns around and goes home

You fought for the USA, what in the Civil War?

Seriously

If you fought for the USA in the last 75 years, you went to someone else's country doing someone else's business.
 

gustafson

Diamond
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Location
People's Republic
....Just like the UK Gov has done in the last 2 years then, with their "Behavioral Insights Team" (BIT "Nudge" Unit).
Where they (Gov) "declared war" on the population, trying to frighten them to death....They (Gov) demanding the "scientists" to be more frightening to generate compliance....while themselves ignoring "their own made up $cience and rules"....
The 'covert tactics' used to scare Britons into staying at home | Daily Mail Online

Look! Squirrel!


When you cannot win an argument, change the subject
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
So you continue to parrot the Kremlins weak jsutification for invading a sovereign nation and murdering innocent people

Biden merely had to appease Putin to prevent a war

please show historical precedent where that has succeded

hint: you won't find them


you excuse Putin and blame Biden

blind spot?

look in the mirror

Guess Joey was not gonna be stupid like his old boss and do an Obama "draw red line in the sand" and then get laughed at.
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
What I am adamant about is not listening to propaganda excusing the murder of innocents


You are pro Russia from the get go, no matter your history

You claim to be pro USA, but excuse Russia at every turn

Why is that?

This whole thing will end when Russia turns around and goes home

You fought for the USA, what in the Civil War?

Seriously

If you fought for the USA in the last 75 years, you went to someone else's country doing someone else's business.

"will end...when Russia goes home...." Certainly hope sooner than later because, today I think, Joey gives something like $33 Billion to Zelensky. $33 Billion! Sure could fix a whole bunch of stuff in Baltimore for that much money.
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
No argument. Historical figures like that are always more complicated than a simple hero designation. I'm interested that nobody cares about the real contribution he made during ww2.

I think he had another wife in germany as well.

The positive side of Lindbergh--pilot, conservationist, engineer and such mean nothing. As 'gustafson' says 'a piece of human garbage'. That Ryan airplane needs to be taken out and burned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.








 
Top