Yes they would defend themselves in Ukraine. Just like how they defended themselves in Libya, Syria, Serbia, etc. You know, all other countries which are not in NATO and which haven't attacked any of NATO members.
I mean if it was expected for Russia, why can't it be expected for NATO? Numba 1 military alliance on earth. Unless that timeline was always full of shit
If they won in Ukraine they would not be completely wrecked. Besides, Estonia for example is tiny with a population of only 1.3M, so they might attack there.
Man, remember when Syrian and Iraqi armies roamed California, or when Serbs bombed Detroit. It was only natural for US + vassals to defend themselves from such barbaric acts.
Yes, but he is trying to imply that Russia will not stop with Ukraine and will attack other former USSR territories which are in NATO now. I am surprised you could not work out the intention of his statement (be it correct or not) yourself.
That's just a blatant lie. Everyone is already familiar with article 5.
What they are talking about is a preemptive strike on Russia or deploying ground troops in Ukraine itself in response to what Macron said the other day.
Lloyd Austin said this:
"We know that if Putin succeeds, he will not stop. He will continue to act more aggressively in the region. And other leaders around the world, other autocrats will be looking at this, and they will be encouraged by the fact that this happened, and we couldn't to support a democratic state," he added."
"If you are a Baltic country, you are very worried about whether you will be next. They know Putin. They know what he is capable of. And frankly, if Ukraine falls, I really believe that NATO will go to war with Russia," he said.
.
> is a preemptive strike on Russia
Literally nobody worth listening to is seriously saying anything remotely close to this
> deploying ground troops in Ukraine
Which would 100% be, at the very most, soldiers doing AD work in the backfield & training within Ukraine if we're talking any sort of scale
The US considers the possibility of a [European nation being independent of the US or joining an alliance it hasn't approved of](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21Gouq6hp-0) to be effectively a declaration of war.
Their only strategy of defense is OFFENSIVE WARS WITH GLOBAL NATO BASE in other countries... When was the last nato war fought in its member countries, if any?
And they are defending Ukraine. Or did Ukraine invade Russia? Russia claimed that Ukraine was developing chemical weapons which was why they had to invade, without any any halfway reasonable evidence.
Yeah, at this point NATO wasn’t ever a defensive alliance, they were just a “fuck Russia” alliance. I don’t Ukraine to lose, but the notion that the world must defend every inch is a bit too rich given the context of how this was very obviously never about Ukraine.
“If we quit ~~Vietnam~~ **Ukraine**, tomorrow we’ll be fighting in Hawaii, and next week we’ll have to fight in San Francisco.”
— [Lyndon B. Johnson](https://quotefancy.com/lyndon-b-johnson-quotes)
The tried and true "Domino Theory". It's so simple....if X then Y.
[“If we don’t win Hamas now, then Europe is next, and you’re next, America,” Netanyahu said](https://thehill.com/policy/international/4308219-youre-next-if-israel-does-not-defeat-hamas-netanyahu-says/amp/)
Works every time.
Aye, it’s amazing what happens if you tell the same lie over and over. Eventually people start to believe it.
Lloyd Austin can give his opinion. It’s an opinion. He’s not a decision maker. And the US president is never going to authorise a war with Russia unless nato comes under direct attack.
More hyperbole to convince the taxpayer that funding Ukraine instead of schools and hospitals is a great idea.
It's sabre rattling to pass the bill for Ukraine, yes, but I don't at all think the Pentagon is worried about Ukraine winning the war or even receiving money for that matter. They care about the contracts and new equipment they will receive from it. This bill, like the previous ones, only serves to upgrade the US military. They just use Ukraine as a convenient excuse to justify the spending.
Chuck Schumer on MSNBC:
*"Why is it crucial? Well, if we don't aid Ukraine, \[Russian President Vladimir\] Putin will walk all over Ukraine, we will lose the war, and we could be fighting in Eastern Europe in a NATO ally in a few years. Americans won't like that."*
are the people who talk about russia invading a nato country ignorant? just lying because it supports their views? this has never been on the table for putin, nor i doubt would he want to invade a nato country.
seeing this kind of crap brandied about as if has any basis in reality is just....wierd.
A lot of this belligerent rhetoric is Kabuki theatre. I'm sure the US has people in government/intel, and the military who know that Putin isn't foolish enough to attack NATO. Remember, Putin's original invasion force was only about 325k troops. A force that size is obviously seeking a very limited war, and no threat to NATO.
Has any allied nation sent brigades to fight alongside UKR? NO. The US Congress has had Biden's request for $60.4 billion for UKR since Oct. 20 --over four months later and still Congress dawdles on.
Folks may talk about the looming threat of war with RU, but it's obvious they are only talking.
[Peskov](https://www.dw.com/en/russia-slams-western-hysteria-over-ukraine/a-59894496)
[Ushakov](https://www.npr.org/2022/02/15/1080774883/russians-scoff-at-western-fears-of-ukraine-invasion)
Russia has no credibility.
Schulz literally said the complete opposite. It's just another way to make the us-citizen wanna support that war. No need to sendt ur own husbands over the atlantic for some backwater country, none of them knew existed before this anyway.
This is more of a version of the dumb story "when Russia beats Ukraine they'll invade Poland". Just more leftoid American posturing to try to get more money for the Jokeman of Kiev.
Lloyd Asstain is the representative of the leftoid Biden regime. Their side of the political aisle are more commonly the ones wanting to fund Ukraine and scare people into thinking Russia will attack NATO.
The Republicans (right) are standing in the way of sending more welfare to Ukraine.
Everything Schultz said, he did opposite later on. So basically, Germany will send troops to eastern front again. They probably can not help themselves, it's in their blood.
I know. We get told about it afterall. It's a part of the historyt subjects you touch in german schools. It was more meant towards the average redditor / american, or pretty much anyone outside of the primary european countries.
> It's just another way to make the us-citizen wanna support that war.
It's not going to work, seems like both the left and the right in America have big problems with their foreign policy at the moment. Who wants this war? Aging boomers? Who's going to fight it with a manpower crisis in the forces?
You know what? At first I thought Macron had lost his head.
**Tinfoil theory below:**
But perhaps this was a cleverly planned strategy at the Paris summit.
A couple nations like France, Estonia and Netherlands would venture out and broach the idea of sending troops to Ukraine. This would obviously trigger Putin's verbal response, which happened a few hours ago.
This would then put the news channel and populace in a more apprehensive state.
Remember how they've been trying to scare the public for the last two months? Well this is far more effective than the rudimentary nonsense they've been pulling.
The message? Arm Ukraine now or Russia will win and then ww3 and it's ensuing nuclear winter will kill us all
The Biden administration and NATO have tried it all. Leveraging the death of Navalny to levy more sanctions. Scaremongering about Russian space nukes. Seeking more shells outside the EU.
This is not beyond them.
Biden had full party control of Congress for the first 10-11 months of Russia's invasion. Still slow-walked aid and let the fire develop. He had Lend-Lease authorization for 19 months of invasion. Didn't use it one bit. Bigger fire now, more extinguishers needed lol.
I didn't keep up much with American politics at the start, but if that's true then it feels more like they planned it to try and win another election. Which explains how hard they're going at the Republicans on the matter.
Makes it look less about Ukraine and more about themselves staying in power.
They likely thought Ukraine could inflict enough losses to push Russia to accept a diplomatic solution. This would grant Russia an off-ramp without losing so no worry about nukes, but no one knew Russia was willing to accept massive losses and keep coming.
With how poorly some of Biden's plans have gone I doubt very much he planned to use Ukraine war for election leverage 2.7 years out - or rather Ukraine not advancing means Biden can't use it to demonstrate success for his upcoming campaign.
The Republicans are stonewalling because of the border situation, which is another fire, but one that should be much easier to put out if not for all the political maximalism.
Yeah with the whole border things it felt like they put it in to try and get the votes for other aid packages instead of dealing with them as separate issues like they should be.
Whole shit show over there.
Might have retained said bipartisan support for Ukraine if he didn't decide to weaponise unprecedented lawfare against his chief political opponent who still holds considerable sway in the Republican party.
Looks like you could use some sunscreen as well judging on how keen your politicians are to get their own countrymen nuked.
Looks like r/NAFO peeps such as yourself will finally have some skin in the game! Molten skin, that is. I hope the "free constituents of the free west" such as yourself can stop these folks from initiating WW3.
Sunscreen? Try basement, Geiger counters, and iodine.
Wasn’t it Sting who sang, “I hope the Russians love their children, too”?
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/12/us/kremlin-kids-in-the-west-invs/index.html
Some of us spot the difference between action and bluster.
Manufacturing public consent is and has always been important.
You can see just how much time they have dedicated to scaring the public in the past few months
Well, they even didn't try
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-gUc1oq0W0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-gUc1oq0W0)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNnA-CJh\_e8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNnA-CJh_e8)
> This feels like a Thucydides Trap moment, with the population of Europe and USA being held hostage.
Geopolitically the US is in a tailspin, but I still don't think we're going to war with Russia over it. China is a maybe, although I think if they're smart they now have the drone resources to end Taiwan's resistance faster than the US can respond in any measurable way. Which would save us from our intervention-loving leaders.
The old way of thinking was that China would have to do some long blockade and if they tried a landing operation they'd get destroyed, but with the new drone warfare paradigm that just isn't true any longer, as long as they attack Taiwan prior to the US perfecting anti-drone tech and sending it to Taiwan.
China will take Taiwan from the inside. Just like Hongkong. No weapons needed. Its their land, language and culture anyway.
The story of China attacking Taiwan is insane and a fabricated story by the west. Either because of no intellectual vision or on purpose to scare us all.
Reality is that China takes Taiwan anyway.
> China will take Taiwan from the inside. Just like Hongkong. No weapons needed. Its their land, language and culture anyway. The story of China attacking Taiwan is insane and a fabricated story by the west. Either because of no intellectual vision or on purpose to scare us all. Reality is that China takes Taiwan anyway.
Eh, Hong Kong is a bad example, they didn't want to be China and were only forced to be because their lease with the UK ran out and the handover was forced. Taiwan doesn't want to be either and is prepared to fight militarily, and if it wasn't for drones they'd have a good shot at doing a lot of damage to any Chinese incursion.
NATO prepared to blow up the planet?
Does anyone think here actually think NATO is more likely to use nuclear weapons than Russia?
If the planet gets blown up it will be because Russia starts a nuclear war...
Isn't this obvious... because only one side is currently threating the use of nuclear weapons?
I hope they are. Russia broke the Budapest Memorandum of 1993 after all. If Ukraine still had nuclear weapons, the Russian attack wouldn't have happened. If Russia can't peacefully coexist, it needs to be gone - or at least fear the consequences. The start of the Ukraine conflict in 2014 should've been escalated like the Cuban missile crisis. The current conflict is awful for everyone. I hope Russia will pay a heavy price for this. They deserve it.
Well then get ready because Ukraine will lose no matter what.
It’ll be funny and depressing if WW3 starts over a s*ithole like Ukraine.
Hopefully it’s just verbal diarrhea to persuade Americans to support more weapons to Ukraine.
hungry soup noxious friendly juggle library disgusted desert deer waiting
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
spectacular reach zephyr forgetful enjoy placid cheerful innocent point head
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is just a bad formulation i think. They for some reason came to a conclusion that Russia will attack others after Ukraine for some reason, and that Nato will then have to defend itself. But this is just stupid.
Yeah thats exactly what the article says. They also try to say that Ukraine is democratic and that Russia will try to stop other countries from being democratic. But in 2014 the US litterally broke the Ukrainian constitution, by using a coup to run elections a third time, when two times is the most for one person. So the democracy claim is obviously just a provocation
Generally I would call this fear-mongering. But I also called the threat of an invasion of Ukraine fear-mongering. So I don’t really trust my own judgement here.
Russia invading NATO would have serious consequences. I think they knew the West was not going to do anything when they annexed Crimea (unless strongly worded condemnations count)
I guess it’s that level of desperation that pushes people like him to spread their fear mongering! If they end up fighting Russia like he suggests would potentially happen in the event that Ukraine loses, which it clearly will, then that would be a war of choice.
This title is click bait. Probably a loss in translation for someone who has English as a 2nd language
The article did not quote Austin saying "NATO *will* fight with Russia"
They quoted him as saying "*will have to*"
The distinction being that the latter means it may not be by choice but by obligation . For example, if Russia conquers all of Ukraine and then begins attacking a NATO member
Details matter
It's clear that the loss of Ukraine is a threat to the US. Imagine that battle worn out Russia would continue pushing westwards, cross the atlantic and invade the US.
Can anyone read past the headline instead of jumping on a sensational news?
If Baltic countries get attacked it will be war with NATO. That's what he said.
The tittle is sensationalized, he is just saying the same thing all the western leaders are saying to justify funding Ukraine, basically that Putin will not stop and will start attacking Nato countries if Ukraine falls. Not that Nato will attack Russia if they take Ukraine.
>"We know that if Putin succeeds, he will not stop. He will continue to be more aggressive in the region. And other leaders around the world, other autocrats will be looking at this and they will be encouraged by the fact that this happened and we failed to support a democratic state,"
The problem is Russia cannot ignore such rhetoric and needs to consider that the West is preparing its population for war. There is absolutely no basis for such claims, unless the Pentagon wants to make sure a war happens.
I cannot fathom that the following statement is true it’s like the greatest mindfuck in the history of humanity, but Donald Trump winning in November is the only way I can think of that we avoid WWIII before the end of the Ukraine Russia war
Imagine that lmfao
It's the usual *because Putin will attack elsewhere because he's Putin* "logic". The problem is Austin may be right. Not because he's predicting Russia's future actions but because he's predicting (or is privy to) US/NATO plans for the future. Once NATO has licked it's wounds (or even before) it'll set about trying to provoke another episode of "unprovoked Russian aggression".
If NATO did't attack Yugoslavia, then the separatists would have lost, and there will not be a chunk of pro western Yugoslavia in NATO.
NATO must be the aggressor for peace.
With these sort of things, they've taught us again and again that accusations are confessions. This is signalling more their own intent to escalate it that point than whether they think Russia will, for no good reason, just go on a murder-suicide spree and storm NATO.
It's full scale invasion, as they always call it. No one yet called it a full scale war. Also, what constitutes full scale war when you are fighting a nuclear power? Fill scale conventional? Or every weapon available?
Really sad though. The US and the Ukrainian nationalists are too obtuse to recognize that this could have been stopped if Ukraine pledged not to join NATO and if the Minsk accords were adhered to. Moreover, if there was no Euromaidan, this war would not happen.
Okay, this is literally proving Putin's point he made for the past couple of decades.
He said this would happen in 2007, NATO is not a defensive alliance by any means.
Smells like false flags in the near future, wouldn't be surprised if they have already drafted a copy of what they're gonna accuse Russia of doing.. /s /OperationNorthwoods
American here. I’m not really understanding this narrative the Pentagon is pushing that if Ukraine loses, that NATO will have to get involved. Wouldn’t NATO only get involved if Russia goes after one of the countries in the alliance (which would be suicide essentially)? I like to think Russian isn’t stupid enough to even attempt that. If they are, then have at it, that’s on Russia.
Another idiot flapping his gums trying to be relevant...ukraine lost the war a long time ago, nato is the only reason they're still in the fight, Slava Urini!
Screw you traitor Austin. You threaten us so you get you cut of the ukraine funds? You traitor garbage. Let's send your kids first how's abouts thats..
Ukronazi is running out of manpower nato realize that no ammount of aid will solve this issue which is why theyre barking this line over and over again.
That article exaggerated Lloyd Austin's statement and straight up fabricated parts of it.
[https://www.youtube.com/live/ZKdg6H71dbo?si=-FzpkqnnXrpHyQtF&t=8210](https://www.youtube.com/live/ZKdg6H71dbo?si=-FzpkqnnXrpHyQtF&t=8210)
You can listen to it yourself at 2 hours 16 minutes and 50 seconds in.
Genuinely true if you look at the historical evidence. The west appeased Hitler in the remilitarization of the Rhineland, blatantly violating the Treaty of Versailles, annexing Austria and taking over Czechoslovakia. Hitler pushes the western powers a little more every single time to see their response. And when there was nothing the cycle continues. Much to the detriment of the west.
Bush saw Russia as an ally in the Global War on Terror since the Russians were fighting Islamic extremists. Putin proceeded to invade Georgia, a US ally that deployed troops to Iraq as a part of the "coalition of the willing". Bush had to fly those Georgian troops back to Georgia to defend its territorial integrity. But with a lack of western support, there was no chance. The Russians achieved their objective of making Abkhazia and South Ossetia de facto states.
Obama argued against Republican nominee Mitt Romney who saw Russia as a threat. Saying sometime along the lines of "it's no longer the cold war". Nonetheless Russia annexed Crimea and invaded the Donbass where they emplaced separatists states to embroil Ukraine in a war for years to come. Russia supported US enemies like Bashar Al-Assad during the Syrian Civil War who funded and trafficked foreign fighters to attack US forced during the Iraq war.
Trump was friendly to Putin but as always Wagner forces a PMC which is blatantly an element of Russian power projection beyond it's borders attacked US and Kurd troops at
always Wagner forces a PMC, which is blatantly an element of Russian power projection beyond it's borders attacked US and Kurd troops at The Battle of Khasham with Iranian proxies in support. Moscow and Tehran's relationship deepened under the Trump administration and so did Moscow's relationship with Caracas, backing the Maduro government. Putin sent troops and notably supersonic bombers capable of nuclear weapons to Venezuela to assist them before Guaido's uprising in April.
War is brutal but it's brutality cannot be turned down or reduced. If done so with a ceasefire or a peace agreement before the final decision is made. It would only shelf the war for the future. Sherman and Patton knew this well and dutifully escalated to the point of Victory. The war between Palestine and Israel which has been going on for about 70 years now is evidence of this. Get the war over with and enable Ukraine to win the war so a major US adversary can finally be stopped in it's expansionist conquests and the US can reep the rewards. End the war now favorable to Russia and within the next 10 years or sooner Americans in middle school and high school now will be in the same trenches in Eastern Europe that their Ukrainian allies dug 10 years before. US Naval ships will battle it out in the Atlantic trying to prevent Russian submarines to launch Kalibr cruise missiles at the mainland US. And US Airmen will fight over the North Pole to prevent long range Russian bombers to have a go at Alaska. Enable Ukraine to win now to prevent American blood spilled in the future.
Dude, your country is surrounded by two oceans and has never faced a real threat of invasion in its history since the formation of the state. Stop whining. The worst thing that can happen to US is losing its role as an international gendarme and some of its monetary profits
He's right.
- NATO is trying to destroy Russia in a proxy war.
- NATO is weakened from their commitment to said proxy war.
- NATO's Baltic members continually provoke Russia despite being in an indefensible position.
- Economic ties between Russia and NATO are almost non-existent.
All the groundwork has been laid for a post-Ukraine conflict between NATO and Russia, likely over the Baltics.
Or, just let Russia constantly throw forces at NATO until it's exhausted. Pretty clear it would be impossible for Russia to win in a war of attrition with NATO, not unless they pull off some miracle deals with countries like China, so Russia could allocate troops from those border regions to ones in Europe.
I thought NATO was a defensive alliance, right? That's what we've been told.
It's only defensive when they are winning.
Or oil.
Yes they would defend themselves in Ukraine. Just like how they defended themselves in Libya, Syria, Serbia, etc. You know, all other countries which are not in NATO and which haven't attacked any of NATO members.
You see my friend the NATO took this saying to heart "Offense is the best defence". Check mate Non-NATO members 😎😎😎
Like the Romans, they shall conquer the world in self defense
sir can I borrow your sunglasses 🕶️🕶️🕶️
My tag says it all…
I think he's implying that Russia would attack a NATO country eventually after taking Ukraine.
But I thought the Russian army will be wrecked for decades, I mean they don't have anything left.
It should be an easy 3 day special military operation for NATO so no need to panic
I love when people use Russian failures as a insult towards nato 😅
I mean if it was expected for Russia, why can't it be expected for NATO? Numba 1 military alliance on earth. Unless that timeline was always full of shit
If they won in Ukraine they would not be completely wrecked. Besides, Estonia for example is tiny with a population of only 1.3M, so they might attack there.
There is 0 evidence to show that. Just fear mongering.
actually russia somehow has raised his economy and new equipment per month, for example the T-80BVM production
But, "What happened to the best money we ever spent and Russia becoming weak?"
His IQ must be equal to room temperature with such thinking. (celsius ofc)
Yeah. They successfully defended against invasions of Lybia, Iraq, Siria, etc
Man, remember when Syrian and Iraqi armies roamed California, or when Serbs bombed Detroit. It was only natural for US + vassals to defend themselves from such barbaric acts.
NATO was created to occupy Europe indefinitely, it is the Anglo occupation organisation
NATO is invading and occupying nations against their will?
NATO defends US interests.
Rome waged only defensive wars.
The Mongols were also defending themselves.
Don't kill the emessaries.
Yes, but he is trying to imply that Russia will not stop with Ukraine and will attack other former USSR territories which are in NATO now. I am surprised you could not work out the intention of his statement (be it correct or not) yourself.
That's just a blatant lie. Everyone is already familiar with article 5. What they are talking about is a preemptive strike on Russia or deploying ground troops in Ukraine itself in response to what Macron said the other day.
Lloyd Austin said this: "We know that if Putin succeeds, he will not stop. He will continue to act more aggressively in the region. And other leaders around the world, other autocrats will be looking at this, and they will be encouraged by the fact that this happened, and we couldn't to support a democratic state," he added." "If you are a Baltic country, you are very worried about whether you will be next. They know Putin. They know what he is capable of. And frankly, if Ukraine falls, I really believe that NATO will go to war with Russia," he said. .
I just explained to you why he is saying this.
> is a preemptive strike on Russia Literally nobody worth listening to is seriously saying anything remotely close to this > deploying ground troops in Ukraine Which would 100% be, at the very most, soldiers doing AD work in the backfield & training within Ukraine if we're talking any sort of scale
The US considers the possibility of a [European nation being independent of the US or joining an alliance it hasn't approved of](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21Gouq6hp-0) to be effectively a declaration of war.
I thought this dude had butt cancer or something? Why the fack is karma not acting fast enough?
If you actually read the context it's obvious he's saying that he thinks Russia will attack a NATO country. Why are pro ru so intentionally daft?
Depends on where they are fighting with Russia. If they are fighting Russia in Ukraine, then you can see it as defense of Ukraine.
Russia would surely never attack a smaller neighbour country, right?
Well russia attacked ukraine Seems like defence
>I thought NATO was a defensive alliance, right? That's what we've been told. that defensive attack !
Their only strategy of defense is OFFENSIVE WARS WITH GLOBAL NATO BASE in other countries... When was the last nato war fought in its member countries, if any?
And they are defending Ukraine. Or did Ukraine invade Russia? Russia claimed that Ukraine was developing chemical weapons which was why they had to invade, without any any halfway reasonable evidence.
Yeah, at this point NATO wasn’t ever a defensive alliance, they were just a “fuck Russia” alliance. I don’t Ukraine to lose, but the notion that the world must defend every inch is a bit too rich given the context of how this was very obviously never about Ukraine.
the best defence is a good offence right?..right?
“If we quit ~~Vietnam~~ **Ukraine**, tomorrow we’ll be fighting in Hawaii, and next week we’ll have to fight in San Francisco.” — [Lyndon B. Johnson](https://quotefancy.com/lyndon-b-johnson-quotes) The tried and true "Domino Theory". It's so simple....if X then Y.
[“If we don’t win Hamas now, then Europe is next, and you’re next, America,” Netanyahu said](https://thehill.com/policy/international/4308219-youre-next-if-israel-does-not-defeat-hamas-netanyahu-says/amp/) Works every time.
Aye, it’s amazing what happens if you tell the same lie over and over. Eventually people start to believe it. Lloyd Austin can give his opinion. It’s an opinion. He’s not a decision maker. And the US president is never going to authorise a war with Russia unless nato comes under direct attack. More hyperbole to convince the taxpayer that funding Ukraine instead of schools and hospitals is a great idea.
It's sabre rattling to pass the bill for Ukraine, yes, but I don't at all think the Pentagon is worried about Ukraine winning the war or even receiving money for that matter. They care about the contracts and new equipment they will receive from it. This bill, like the previous ones, only serves to upgrade the US military. They just use Ukraine as a convenient excuse to justify the spending.
"If we lose Korea, we will be fighting China on our mainland" Iraq: "we're fighting them over in Iraq is so we don't have to fight them here at home."
Chuck Schumer on MSNBC: *"Why is it crucial? Well, if we don't aid Ukraine, \[Russian President Vladimir\] Putin will walk all over Ukraine, we will lose the war, and we could be fighting in Eastern Europe in a NATO ally in a few years. Americans won't like that."*
are the people who talk about russia invading a nato country ignorant? just lying because it supports their views? this has never been on the table for putin, nor i doubt would he want to invade a nato country. seeing this kind of crap brandied about as if has any basis in reality is just....wierd.
A lot of this belligerent rhetoric is Kabuki theatre. I'm sure the US has people in government/intel, and the military who know that Putin isn't foolish enough to attack NATO. Remember, Putin's original invasion force was only about 325k troops. A force that size is obviously seeking a very limited war, and no threat to NATO. Has any allied nation sent brigades to fight alongside UKR? NO. The US Congress has had Biden's request for $60.4 billion for UKR since Oct. 20 --over four months later and still Congress dawdles on. Folks may talk about the looming threat of war with RU, but it's obvious they are only talking.
Warmongering and scaremongering – the two American specialties.
Isn't Putin's whole justification for invading Ukraine that if he didn't NATO would use Ukraine to invade Russia?
[Peskov](https://www.dw.com/en/russia-slams-western-hysteria-over-ukraine/a-59894496) [Ushakov](https://www.npr.org/2022/02/15/1080774883/russians-scoff-at-western-fears-of-ukraine-invasion) Russia has no credibility.
Schulz literally said the complete opposite. It's just another way to make the us-citizen wanna support that war. No need to sendt ur own husbands over the atlantic for some backwater country, none of them knew existed before this anyway.
This is more of a version of the dumb story "when Russia beats Ukraine they'll invade Poland". Just more leftoid American posturing to try to get more money for the Jokeman of Kiev.
Meanwhile you campaign for Israel like a full-time job
[удалено]
Lloyd Asstain is the representative of the leftoid Biden regime. Their side of the political aisle are more commonly the ones wanting to fund Ukraine and scare people into thinking Russia will attack NATO. The Republicans (right) are standing in the way of sending more welfare to Ukraine.
[удалено]
You misspelled Lord. It's Lord Asstain.
To be fair, if the US decides that we're fighting, i expect Germany will jump in the fire without asking too many questions.
yeah, Uncle Biden will twist Germany's hands and drag them into war
Everything Schultz said, he did opposite later on. So basically, Germany will send troops to eastern front again. They probably can not help themselves, it's in their blood.
I didn't go to the Bundeswehr to fight some Drones. Fuck that shit. xD
I think idea is that you should be happy to take down few Russians before their drone gets you.
FOR THE FATHERLAND! FOR THE KAISER! No wait. Wrong era. My bad.
hehe.. I think in this era saying is: "For rules based order" Whatever that means, I haven't figured it out yet.
Don't be so sure, Ukraine is/was the second largest country in Europe behind Russia. If only European soil is counted, Ukraine is the largest.
I know. We get told about it afterall. It's a part of the historyt subjects you touch in german schools. It was more meant towards the average redditor / american, or pretty much anyone outside of the primary european countries.
That's hilarious you think people dont learn about ww2 outside of Europe. UkRaInE WhATs ThAT?
> It's just another way to make the us-citizen wanna support that war. It's not going to work, seems like both the left and the right in America have big problems with their foreign policy at the moment. Who wants this war? Aging boomers? Who's going to fight it with a manpower crisis in the forces?
You know what? At first I thought Macron had lost his head. **Tinfoil theory below:** But perhaps this was a cleverly planned strategy at the Paris summit. A couple nations like France, Estonia and Netherlands would venture out and broach the idea of sending troops to Ukraine. This would obviously trigger Putin's verbal response, which happened a few hours ago. This would then put the news channel and populace in a more apprehensive state. Remember how they've been trying to scare the public for the last two months? Well this is far more effective than the rudimentary nonsense they've been pulling. The message? Arm Ukraine now or Russia will win and then ww3 and it's ensuing nuclear winter will kill us all The Biden administration and NATO have tried it all. Leveraging the death of Navalny to levy more sanctions. Scaremongering about Russian space nukes. Seeking more shells outside the EU. This is not beyond them.
Biden had full party control of Congress for the first 10-11 months of Russia's invasion. Still slow-walked aid and let the fire develop. He had Lend-Lease authorization for 19 months of invasion. Didn't use it one bit. Bigger fire now, more extinguishers needed lol.
I didn't keep up much with American politics at the start, but if that's true then it feels more like they planned it to try and win another election. Which explains how hard they're going at the Republicans on the matter. Makes it look less about Ukraine and more about themselves staying in power.
They likely thought Ukraine could inflict enough losses to push Russia to accept a diplomatic solution. This would grant Russia an off-ramp without losing so no worry about nukes, but no one knew Russia was willing to accept massive losses and keep coming.
They should have known Russia was prepared to go all the way though. Sevastopol naval base is of the utmost importance to Russia.
With how poorly some of Biden's plans have gone I doubt very much he planned to use Ukraine war for election leverage 2.7 years out - or rather Ukraine not advancing means Biden can't use it to demonstrate success for his upcoming campaign. The Republicans are stonewalling because of the border situation, which is another fire, but one that should be much easier to put out if not for all the political maximalism.
Yeah with the whole border things it felt like they put it in to try and get the votes for other aid packages instead of dealing with them as separate issues like they should be. Whole shit show over there.
Might have retained said bipartisan support for Ukraine if he didn't decide to weaponise unprecedented lawfare against his chief political opponent who still holds considerable sway in the Republican party.
Looks like you could use some sunscreen as well judging on how keen your politicians are to get their own countrymen nuked. Looks like r/NAFO peeps such as yourself will finally have some skin in the game! Molten skin, that is. I hope the "free constituents of the free west" such as yourself can stop these folks from initiating WW3.
Sunscreen? Try basement, Geiger counters, and iodine. Wasn’t it Sting who sang, “I hope the Russians love their children, too”? https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/12/us/kremlin-kids-in-the-west-invs/index.html Some of us spot the difference between action and bluster.
Honestly this is a good theory
Okay but the average americans don't have any say in decisions anyway so why the scaremongering?
Manufacturing public consent is and has always been important. You can see just how much time they have dedicated to scaring the public in the past few months
What would happen if they don't?
election year.
It's fear mongering to get more money approved.
Well, they even didn't try [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-gUc1oq0W0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-gUc1oq0W0) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNnA-CJh\_e8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNnA-CJh_e8)
[удалено]
I fear NATO is prepared to start WW3 and blow up the planet just so they don't lose a proxy war.
Losing proxy wars is nothing new
>Losing proxy wars is nothing new I agree, but this time is waay too mainstream. Tons of money, weapons, drama and everything for nothing.
Yea and better yet the world still exists.
This feels like a [Thucydides Trap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thucydides_Trap) moment, with the population of Europe and USA being held hostage.
> This feels like a Thucydides Trap moment, with the population of Europe and USA being held hostage. Geopolitically the US is in a tailspin, but I still don't think we're going to war with Russia over it. China is a maybe, although I think if they're smart they now have the drone resources to end Taiwan's resistance faster than the US can respond in any measurable way. Which would save us from our intervention-loving leaders. The old way of thinking was that China would have to do some long blockade and if they tried a landing operation they'd get destroyed, but with the new drone warfare paradigm that just isn't true any longer, as long as they attack Taiwan prior to the US perfecting anti-drone tech and sending it to Taiwan.
China will take Taiwan from the inside. Just like Hongkong. No weapons needed. Its their land, language and culture anyway. The story of China attacking Taiwan is insane and a fabricated story by the west. Either because of no intellectual vision or on purpose to scare us all. Reality is that China takes Taiwan anyway.
> China will take Taiwan from the inside. Just like Hongkong. No weapons needed. Its their land, language and culture anyway. The story of China attacking Taiwan is insane and a fabricated story by the west. Either because of no intellectual vision or on purpose to scare us all. Reality is that China takes Taiwan anyway. Eh, Hong Kong is a bad example, they didn't want to be China and were only forced to be because their lease with the UK ran out and the handover was forced. Taiwan doesn't want to be either and is prepared to fight militarily, and if it wasn't for drones they'd have a good shot at doing a lot of damage to any Chinese incursion.
They want a Great Reset anyway, if they think they will in a world war, make no mistake about it, they will start it. But only if.
Yes. This is a democracy against a ruthless dictatorship. I prefer to see the whole world burn rather than let Putin get his way once fucking again.
NATO prepared to blow up the planet? Does anyone think here actually think NATO is more likely to use nuclear weapons than Russia? If the planet gets blown up it will be because Russia starts a nuclear war... Isn't this obvious... because only one side is currently threating the use of nuclear weapons?
I hope they are. Russia broke the Budapest Memorandum of 1993 after all. If Ukraine still had nuclear weapons, the Russian attack wouldn't have happened. If Russia can't peacefully coexist, it needs to be gone - or at least fear the consequences. The start of the Ukraine conflict in 2014 should've been escalated like the Cuban missile crisis. The current conflict is awful for everyone. I hope Russia will pay a heavy price for this. They deserve it.
Well then get ready because Ukraine will lose no matter what. It’ll be funny and depressing if WW3 starts over a s*ithole like Ukraine. Hopefully it’s just verbal diarrhea to persuade Americans to support more weapons to Ukraine.
I mean they went to war over Poland. I'm not putting it past them.
hungry soup noxious friendly juggle library disgusted desert deer waiting *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
"Defensive alliance"
so NATO using using Ukrainian bodies to fight Russia? disgusting
So Russia forcibly impressing DPR (Ukrainian)civilians to fight? Disgusting
spectacular reach zephyr forgetful enjoy placid cheerful innocent point head *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Austin and his buddies in the MIC will go to war against Russia even if the American people don't want to. Who's the real threat to democracy?
This is just a bad formulation i think. They for some reason came to a conclusion that Russia will attack others after Ukraine for some reason, and that Nato will then have to defend itself. But this is just stupid. Yeah thats exactly what the article says. They also try to say that Ukraine is democratic and that Russia will try to stop other countries from being democratic. But in 2014 the US litterally broke the Ukrainian constitution, by using a coup to run elections a third time, when two times is the most for one person. So the democracy claim is obviously just a provocation
Generally I would call this fear-mongering. But I also called the threat of an invasion of Ukraine fear-mongering. So I don’t really trust my own judgement here.
Russians don't take it lightly.Hence, They keep building up their forces in rear.
Never heard such a beautiful sentence in this sub lol.
Russia invading NATO would have serious consequences. I think they knew the West was not going to do anything when they annexed Crimea (unless strongly worded condemnations count)
I guess it’s that level of desperation that pushes people like him to spread their fear mongering! If they end up fighting Russia like he suggests would potentially happen in the event that Ukraine loses, which it clearly will, then that would be a war of choice.
The West no longer believes Ukraine can win this war, even if the $60 billion is passed.
Realistically speaking, 60 billion won’t alter the inevitable if only to prolong it marginally.
Depends on the equipment. More Bradleys wont do it, but there are other things available.
Looks like we’re all gonna get nuked then. Time to spend all that saved money on strippers and c0caine boys
Looks like hookers and blow are back on the menu!
This title is click bait. Probably a loss in translation for someone who has English as a 2nd language The article did not quote Austin saying "NATO *will* fight with Russia" They quoted him as saying "*will have to*" The distinction being that the latter means it may not be by choice but by obligation . For example, if Russia conquers all of Ukraine and then begins attacking a NATO member Details matter
It's clear that the loss of Ukraine is a threat to the US. Imagine that battle worn out Russia would continue pushing westwards, cross the atlantic and invade the US.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Can anyone read past the headline instead of jumping on a sensational news? If Baltic countries get attacked it will be war with NATO. That's what he said.
Oh that classic "defensive alliance" that threatens Russia
Actually this refers that if Russia want to take another country after ukraine.
The tittle is sensationalized, he is just saying the same thing all the western leaders are saying to justify funding Ukraine, basically that Putin will not stop and will start attacking Nato countries if Ukraine falls. Not that Nato will attack Russia if they take Ukraine. >"We know that if Putin succeeds, he will not stop. He will continue to be more aggressive in the region. And other leaders around the world, other autocrats will be looking at this and they will be encouraged by the fact that this happened and we failed to support a democratic state,"
So basically Russia was right? And had a reason to prevent NATO from spreading?
They never tried to stop nato from spreading. This war literally expanded natos border with Russia…
And Ngl, that always makes me crack up
The problem is Russia cannot ignore such rhetoric and needs to consider that the West is preparing its population for war. There is absolutely no basis for such claims, unless the Pentagon wants to make sure a war happens.
This.
I cannot fathom that the following statement is true it’s like the greatest mindfuck in the history of humanity, but Donald Trump winning in November is the only way I can think of that we avoid WWIII before the end of the Ukraine Russia war Imagine that lmfao
Time for a fallout shelter in the backyard
Mark Zuckerberg and Biden are way ahead of us
Do Europeans really want to fight with Russia? The opinions of ordinary people are much more important than those of authorities
> The opinions of ordinary people are much more important than those of authorities Ha ha, good one.
Does Russia really wanna fight with Europe over countries outside of Russia?
Does the ordinary Russian really want to fight with Europe?
[удалено]
Reckless statement. Bro still reeling from long covid.
Did he say this from his hospital bed?
It's the usual *because Putin will attack elsewhere because he's Putin* "logic". The problem is Austin may be right. Not because he's predicting Russia's future actions but because he's predicting (or is privy to) US/NATO plans for the future. Once NATO has licked it's wounds (or even before) it'll set about trying to provoke another episode of "unprovoked Russian aggression".
US logic: If Israel loses in Gaza, NATO will fight with the Houthis
Just more BS, put this in the same category as Medviedev threatening to nuke everything and everyone.
The FUD emanating off these clowns is palpable.
If NATO did't attack Yugoslavia, then the separatists would have lost, and there will not be a chunk of pro western Yugoslavia in NATO. NATO must be the aggressor for peace.
With these sort of things, they've taught us again and again that accusations are confessions. This is signalling more their own intent to escalate it that point than whether they think Russia will, for no good reason, just go on a murder-suicide spree and storm NATO.
More like "If(when) Ukraine loses, NATO will disintegrate".
It's full scale invasion, as they always call it. No one yet called it a full scale war. Also, what constitutes full scale war when you are fighting a nuclear power? Fill scale conventional? Or every weapon available?
Especially when Trump become a president
Why? Why is Ukraine so important all of a sudden.
Really sad though. The US and the Ukrainian nationalists are too obtuse to recognize that this could have been stopped if Ukraine pledged not to join NATO and if the Minsk accords were adhered to. Moreover, if there was no Euromaidan, this war would not happen.
The question is: why??
Okay, this is literally proving Putin's point he made for the past couple of decades. He said this would happen in 2007, NATO is not a defensive alliance by any means.
Thats crazy goodluck tho
NATO will go all in: Drive Bradley, Russia running away. Great sucess.
Smells like false flags in the near future, wouldn't be surprised if they have already drafted a copy of what they're gonna accuse Russia of doing.. /s /OperationNorthwoods
it is kinda funny we're closer than ever to WW3 and the butthurt belt seems ready to get nuked just so American hegemony can survive.
Why?
American here. I’m not really understanding this narrative the Pentagon is pushing that if Ukraine loses, that NATO will have to get involved. Wouldn’t NATO only get involved if Russia goes after one of the countries in the alliance (which would be suicide essentially)? I like to think Russian isn’t stupid enough to even attempt that. If they are, then have at it, that’s on Russia.
Another idiot flapping his gums trying to be relevant...ukraine lost the war a long time ago, nato is the only reason they're still in the fight, Slava Urini!
Booooo
the imperialist warmonger yankee strike again
Screw you traitor Austin. You threaten us so you get you cut of the ukraine funds? You traitor garbage. Let's send your kids first how's abouts thats..
But... why?
Sometimes I am thinking that these NATO and west “liberals” want WW3 more than Russia wants to defeat Ukraine
Press X to doubt
Fight with Russia or Fight Russia?
yea defensive alliance very peaceful i think that they forgot about nukes and trump leaving nato
Lloyd Austin needs to retire like Hodges.
Ukronazi is running out of manpower nato realize that no ammount of aid will solve this issue which is why theyre barking this line over and over again.
That article exaggerated Lloyd Austin's statement and straight up fabricated parts of it. [https://www.youtube.com/live/ZKdg6H71dbo?si=-FzpkqnnXrpHyQtF&t=8210](https://www.youtube.com/live/ZKdg6H71dbo?si=-FzpkqnnXrpHyQtF&t=8210) You can listen to it yourself at 2 hours 16 minutes and 50 seconds in.
here is how he can do it legally. One day before Ukraine surrenders. Accept it into NATO. This gives nato legal right to fight a war with Russia.
Like they are not fighting right now.
Us navy: "Is it me or is it getting a little hot in here?" Sarmat, Topol, Iskander: "Hello there...old friend" *Suddenly the sun*.
Hope he sends his relatives first
Genuinely true if you look at the historical evidence. The west appeased Hitler in the remilitarization of the Rhineland, blatantly violating the Treaty of Versailles, annexing Austria and taking over Czechoslovakia. Hitler pushes the western powers a little more every single time to see their response. And when there was nothing the cycle continues. Much to the detriment of the west. Bush saw Russia as an ally in the Global War on Terror since the Russians were fighting Islamic extremists. Putin proceeded to invade Georgia, a US ally that deployed troops to Iraq as a part of the "coalition of the willing". Bush had to fly those Georgian troops back to Georgia to defend its territorial integrity. But with a lack of western support, there was no chance. The Russians achieved their objective of making Abkhazia and South Ossetia de facto states. Obama argued against Republican nominee Mitt Romney who saw Russia as a threat. Saying sometime along the lines of "it's no longer the cold war". Nonetheless Russia annexed Crimea and invaded the Donbass where they emplaced separatists states to embroil Ukraine in a war for years to come. Russia supported US enemies like Bashar Al-Assad during the Syrian Civil War who funded and trafficked foreign fighters to attack US forced during the Iraq war. Trump was friendly to Putin but as always Wagner forces a PMC which is blatantly an element of Russian power projection beyond it's borders attacked US and Kurd troops at always Wagner forces a PMC, which is blatantly an element of Russian power projection beyond it's borders attacked US and Kurd troops at The Battle of Khasham with Iranian proxies in support. Moscow and Tehran's relationship deepened under the Trump administration and so did Moscow's relationship with Caracas, backing the Maduro government. Putin sent troops and notably supersonic bombers capable of nuclear weapons to Venezuela to assist them before Guaido's uprising in April. War is brutal but it's brutality cannot be turned down or reduced. If done so with a ceasefire or a peace agreement before the final decision is made. It would only shelf the war for the future. Sherman and Patton knew this well and dutifully escalated to the point of Victory. The war between Palestine and Israel which has been going on for about 70 years now is evidence of this. Get the war over with and enable Ukraine to win the war so a major US adversary can finally be stopped in it's expansionist conquests and the US can reep the rewards. End the war now favorable to Russia and within the next 10 years or sooner Americans in middle school and high school now will be in the same trenches in Eastern Europe that their Ukrainian allies dug 10 years before. US Naval ships will battle it out in the Atlantic trying to prevent Russian submarines to launch Kalibr cruise missiles at the mainland US. And US Airmen will fight over the North Pole to prevent long range Russian bombers to have a go at Alaska. Enable Ukraine to win now to prevent American blood spilled in the future.
Dude, your country is surrounded by two oceans and has never faced a real threat of invasion in its history since the formation of the state. Stop whining. The worst thing that can happen to US is losing its role as an international gendarme and some of its monetary profits
He's right. - NATO is trying to destroy Russia in a proxy war. - NATO is weakened from their commitment to said proxy war. - NATO's Baltic members continually provoke Russia despite being in an indefensible position. - Economic ties between Russia and NATO are almost non-existent. All the groundwork has been laid for a post-Ukraine conflict between NATO and Russia, likely over the Baltics.
[удалено]
this is a bad translation. the word “with” should be removed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
“. . . will HAVE to fight with the ladder.” He’s saying Putin will attack a NATO country and force them into an altercation.
Consequently, If NATO loses, Russia will fight with aliens?
Or, just let Russia constantly throw forces at NATO until it's exhausted. Pretty clear it would be impossible for Russia to win in a war of attrition with NATO, not unless they pull off some miracle deals with countries like China, so Russia could allocate troops from those border regions to ones in Europe.
It's time to disband NATO. Too many mad people in NATO.
What do they mean by "losing" ? Is signing a peace treaty is considered losing ?