|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On July 22 2016 11:05 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2016 11:01 xDaunt wrote:On July 22 2016 10:59 Lord Tolkien wrote:On July 22 2016 10:59 xDaunt wrote:On July 22 2016 10:56 Nyxisto wrote:On July 22 2016 10:53 xDaunt wrote:On July 22 2016 10:49 biology]major wrote:On July 22 2016 10:48 Plansix wrote:On July 22 2016 10:46 acker wrote:On July 22 2016 10:41 biology]major wrote:
I disagree, he's employing a bluff or a threat to create a change in the defense spending of countries in NATO who don't put any money towards military and just rely on the USA to protect them. We have all of the control in this pact because we have by far the largest military, so we should negotiate with that in mind and get the rest to step up. By always having leaders of US say they will stand with NATO no matter what, some of the countries have been taking the protection the USA has to offer for granted. I could be wrong but that's how I see it, NATO is a combined effort, but it is basically like 4 countries that even have the capacity to do anything. If it's a bluff, it's a really stupid one. NATO consists of a few countries rich enough to afford first-rate armies and a lot of poor countries geographically situated to serve as ballistic missile platforms, docks, and air bases. Nobody cares if some Eastern European country doesn't give NATO a handful of old MiGs every year. The land is more important. Trump ends our agreement with nato, nato countries evict all our military bases and nukes. You think those countries would really let go of our protection? lmao. This. If there is no definite NATO guarantee there is no protection. That's the point of the alliance. The assurance is the protection No, what would happen is that NATO would be replaced with a new treaty regime that is more favorable to the US. ...and that would be??? Can't find out unless we go look. Think outside of the box. Right, sure. I'll get right on informing every foreign policy expert, specialist, and think-tank in DC. I'll just tell my colleagues they're all wrong about everything.
Didn't you hear people are tired of experts? 2016 elections are all about feelings. If 2-3 people in this thread didn't have the first clue about what NATO is and does and 3 pages of arguments didn't make a dent in the original position of ignorance, what expectations can you possibly have?
|
On July 22 2016 11:08 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Yango, save me.
It's ok, it's just the populism talking, no one will let the orange man destroy a 70 year agreement.
|
The thread was like this back in 2012, too. There's nothing new about this.
I look forward to the memes, alcohol, and video games come November.
|
Honestly, if Trump wanted to make a bluff to NATO, saying you'll uphold Article 5 with no intent to actually do so is probably smarter than the reverse.
|
On July 22 2016 11:13 TheYango wrote:
Honestly, if Trump wanted to make a bluff to NATO, saying you'll uphold Article 5 with no intent to actually do so is probably smarter than the reverse.
There's no leverage if he does that.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Any actual application or failure of application of Article 5 will lead to a train wreck one way or the other. No one wants to risk that shit, so they're better off just posturing in safe regions.
|
|
|
Ivanka's speech easily could have been given at the democrats' convention.
|
Ivanka is only slightly better than her dad at reading from a teleprompter but the speech is just shredding Hillary's campaign without talking about her at all. That is some masterful stuff. Democrats don't appreciate how well this is going to go over on people who just started paying attention to the election tonight.
My facebook is already lighting up with people who haven't said anything about politics this whole election. If she actually campaigns for him beyond this... oh dam. Think she'll fade away again though because she doesn't like answering for his faults. Democrats better hope so anyway.
On July 22 2016 11:16 xDaunt wrote:
Ivanka's speech easily could have been given at the democrats' convention.
You probably appreciate how masterful it is for Trump to get that arena to applaud that louder than much of the convention.
|
Ivanka is giving a real Democratic sounding speech
|
On July 22 2016 11:16 xDaunt wrote:
Ivanka's speech easily could have been given at the democrats' convention.
She's very charismatic, managed to make the GOP convention cheer maternity leave
|
On July 22 2016 11:16 xDaunt wrote:
Ivanka's speech easily could have been given at the democrats' convention.
she's said some controversial things saying she wasn't really a democrat or a republican, and her bit about the wage gap. Bold moves
|
On July 22 2016 11:17 GreenHorizons wrote:
Ivanka is only slightly better than her dad at reading from a teleprompter but the speech is just shredding Hillary's campaign without talking about her at all. That is some masterful stuff. Democrats don't appreciate how well this is going to go over on people who just started paying attention to the election tonight.
My facebook is already lighting up with people who haven't said anything about politics this whole election. If she actually campaigns for him beyond this... oh dam. Think she'll fade away again though because she doesn't like answering for his faults. Democrats better hope so anyway.
This. Democrats are sleeping while their lunch is being eaten.
|
Haha, Trump's stage is glorious.
|
|
|
Way to believe the Clinton Broadcasting System
|
On July 22 2016 11:24 plasmidghost wrote:Way to believe the Clinton Broadcasting System
he didn't learn from ivanka that the wage gap is more or less a motherhood gap
|
Trump supporters: deciding what he really means by what he says since Summer 2015.
|
On July 22 2016 11:24 plasmidghost wrote:Way to believe the Clinton Broadcasting System
You mean the Boston globe? They don't broadcast anything...
|
Looks like the speech leak was legit
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
