sherpa

I don't answer for Trump or Putin. What I am familiar with, and from open source material, is the state of NATO at the date of Russia's invasion. Specifically, the gross disregard of NATO military agreements from Germany, Canada and a few others. All that aside, the funny thing about this site is that the reality of the issue is never discussed. Instead, people seem to think it's US politics that are the cornerstone. If you hate Trump, forget about NATO parties not living up to responsibilities, and the resultant commitment of disproportionate US money and potentially, lives. It's the way Trump packages it, and if anyone points those issues out, they must support Trump. Not true at all. The issue is not addressed. The political figures are. The sickening repetition never ends.

Simply absurd. Carpet bombing? Where did you ever get this? The Israelis have never done this in their history, and certainly not here. The "siege on Gaza" has been Hamas. They are the entity that took all of those assets and did nothing other than build an underground military assault capability designed to launce offensive operations and hide when the predictable response came.

Just for awareness, I have zero interest or concern regarding what you believe about me. Absolutely no interest or concern. Haley is infinitely better at expressing the issues re NATO/UN etc. I can't stand the guy, and that goes back to 1989. I think there are far more diplomatic methods with far more efficacy than what Trump is doing, but it plays to his base, so he does it. I find it revolting, but his view on NATO is not lost on people who know a bit about the nuts and bolts of military capability with likely scenarios.

This is the kind of disgusting response that people who don't live up their obligations opine. There is no treaty/formal codification of NATO obligations. There was definitely an understanding of an agreed to %of GDP expenditures. It could be more accurately stated: "We in NATO never signed a formal commitment regarding GDP % directed to maintain our military capability. We are quite happy to task the US taxpayer to uphold our deterrent threat," and we have done exactly that for a very long time.

I really hesitate to do this, but reading this thread, and specifically the Trump/NATO/Russia issue. Most countries in NATO have been grossly negligent in living up to promises re funding as a % of GDP. This has real consequences regarding the US. If the ability of NATO to respond to a legitimate threat, ie., Russia involves one country providing almost all of the capability, is is really not an alliance as proposed. That is the situation, though recent promises, if enacted, make is more equitable. During Trump's admin, it was horribly one sided. Germany and Canada, specifically, were grossly under funded. That gets to mission capability. When you are relying on one nation to handle: airlift tanking (air to air refueling) electronic warfare night capability intel supply chain replenishment anti air suppression stealth capability combat search and rescue And I could go on. In a conflict, that disproportionate capability, which has already resulted in the US taxpayer and their grandchildren bearing much more $ to maintain, results in far more US casualties, as the US handles the far more dangerous missions, and far less NATO alliance casualties NATO relies on the US for all of this, and it was much worse two years ago. I can't stand Trump, and I think there are more effective ways to point this stuff out, but he is correct. You either have an alliance with everyone living up to their promises, or you don't. Eventually, if there is some desirable tragedy to Russia's military capability that removes them as a threat, there's no need for NATO, but we are not there yet.

I fully agree with Precision's post in response. Israel is a sovereign nation responding to a ceasefire break and the most heinous massacre in recent memory. They are not puppets of the US or any other nation that might provide aid. Their military is known for being extremely careful and professional, and I'm certain they are doing the same in this case. Hamas chooses to attack them and withdraw to areas on their own volition. There is no chance that Hamas gets to a moment where they change their tactics and future hope to eliminate Israel and all Israelis. That isn't going to happen. In my view, they are fully justified, and this oft repeated, since 1967, tactic of attacking Israel, losing the ensuing battle, and then going to the international community for sympathy and a forced ceasefire needs to end. Either way, the US has no right to demand that they pursue a "proportionate response" action. That day passed on Oct. 7.

In this case, Israel's definition of "self defense" is the elimination of Hamas. I don't have a problem with eliminating Hamas. They have defined the battlefield, and the battlefield determines the tactics.

I spent a little time looking at the evidence of this. It seems there really isn't any. The man says enough goofy stuff, but I think this is fiction. Either way it is completely unrelated to judging one of our greatest allies actions as being indiscriminate; actions he is incapable of knowing the details about.

I'd say the exact same thing now. It was senseless, and he has no way of knowing what he was talking about.

I'd support Nikki Haley, but that isn't going to be an option. I like her a bit better than I did Desantis, but I would have supported him if he got the nomination. Quite amazing how you never get anything right.

I'm hardly politically agnostic. I view my vote as an endorsement. If my conscience doesn't lead me to an endorsement, I won't vote for the person. Simple.

This might be too complicated for you. You are really bad at remembering things and understanding differences in positions. I never said "its a threat to peace." That is your imaginative, crazy creation. What I said was that it was a "senseless statement," and it was. Biden is the President of the US. Israel is involved in an extremely serious and deadly war, and we are a major ally and supporter. The statement was as totally false as it was senseless. Trump said something really stupid while shining light on a major problem within NATO. You repeatedly state falsehoods, then form premises and suggest conclusions. False from the start. False at the end, and too much work to attempt to unscrew. How many freakin' times do I have to answer this. Never have and never will. Would never vote for Biden either, but I'm getting confident that will never be an option.

Foolish, unnecessary and undisciplined. Same as always. It's what he does when he gets wound up while speaking. The performance of some of our NATO allies has been disgraceful, but there are other ways to bring that point into the light.

Just pathetic. Joe Biden has never had any other job other than running for office. His "college professor" claims are his normal fiction. That is all he has ever done. Hardly inspired, and never inspiring, but in some inexplicable way, has made a fortune that cannot be explained.

You are obviously too stupid to figure this out, nor capable of reading. Everything I have said here relates to Russia invading Poland or Germany. You continue to suggest I am talking about Trump, which has not occurred. To be responded to, you have to make sense. You don't.

With all due respect, the appointment delays impacted a lot of people and a lot of families. It was a stupid strategy and further separated the military from respecting Congressional politics. Next time, hold up appointments for positions in the political world, and not the military. Makes more sense and doesn't penalize people who have no authority to influence these things.

Not true. Not surprising you wouldn't know.

He isn't my buddy, and that has nothing to do with Russia invading Poland and Germany. You will have something when that occurs and you can quote my claim that it is preposterous. Until then, you can throw stupid stuff at the wall and be laughed at.

I'm not sowing anything. There is zero chance Russia does what you have suggested. You have weird stuff in your head.

Still a complete insanity post.

Complete insanity post.

No. It implies nothing other than what is stated. Biden is finished. I have no view on this obvious exposure of the man as a significantly diminished individual, re Trump, and your assertion is not only unsupported, it is idiotic. Kinda Bidenesh

Maybe there is another Sherpa here, or maybe you are as cognitively challenged as Biden. I have never said a thing about people voting for Trump. Do you and tibs share the same imagination?

Save it. He is done. Not that he will remember it. Should be a good week watching his staff react after having failed to protect him from himself. They'll be on it first thing after the Super Bowl.

They are both guilty beyond reasonable argument. The difference is that Biden is now absolutely done. Last night was fatal. It is over. Trump, we shall see.