That’s the thing, they don’t have any leverage in negotiating the battle because Russia is now visibly winning militarily. Ukraine is out of manpower, and Europe cannot fill the gaps on its own.
NATO was fighting a proxy war against Russia and against anyone willing to stand on its side, maybe a test. By keeping Russia busy NATO/ISIS can wrap up Syria, provoke Iran to engage, Israel got a piece of Syria and most likely Lebanon, and it is about time Palestinians vacate Israel, handed to the Israelis by the UK with no conditions to keep the Arabs. Any place the UK has “vacated” has left a chaos of civil wars and antagonism behind. Roman rule surviving in 21st century with all the refinements of the UK.
Would this happen if Russia wasn’t busy fighting in Ukraine? Would Turkey/Azerbaijan be able to kill and bomb Armenians if Russia wasn’t that busy?
NATO engaged, EU supplies have run out, most committed to spending little for defense now they have nothing. But Russia didn’t lose, so any proposal for peace agreement is an effort to save up part of Ukraine for later NATO use, and to accept defeat. Nobody will ask Ukrainians what they want, nobody asked people in Donetsk Luhansk fighting for autonomy and independence what they wanted either.
When Trump says he will reduce defense spending that means he will see it that the EU will take up the slack of the US defense industry welfare system. Either they pay or Russia will start chewing them up like pacman dots. See GDP % to defense budgets of NATO members to understand how large the gap is and for whom are the bells ringing.
I’d argue that Syria ended up working in Russian favor in the end. Russia no longer has any obligations to prop it up, but the regime in charge doesn’t appear to be keep on breaking relations with Russia. On top of that, it’s become very unstable with many different factions fighting each other. This will inevitably create problems for Turkey and Israel who are backing different factions. Volatility in the region doesn’t really benefit the west, and it’s a huge concern for Europe where refugees will inevitably flee if a regional war breaks out. Meanwhile, Armenia signed its own death warrant by pulling out of CSTO. That’s what allowed Azerbaijan to start making territorial claims.
My expectation is that we might see the end of NATO here. The rift between Europe and the US is getting wider by the day, and Americans are telling Europe in no uncertain terms that they don’t see it as their primary concern now. It’s also worth noting that the economic situation in Europe is very dire which is already creating political instability. Further austerity that would be necessitated by higher military spending will only make this worse. It’s highly likely that countries like Hungary, Slovakia, and Romania might simply flip over to BRICS in a few years.
Turkey and Israel who are backing different factions
They are not backing factions, they have illegally entered Syria and occupied parts of it.
Europe is not, has never been, and will never be one thing, especially under the boot of the German pseudo-state. EU is basically Europe, and NATO in a way is the same +US/UK, but some states pay an arm and a leg to contribute to what NATO is and some states think they are smart by not paying (and paying means buying from the US mil.industry). This is the object. The US is using Russia to force insecurity to some weak states, like Finland and Sweden, to pay if they want to ever be defended. So Russia is playing the bad guy because it is not left with an option of avoiding being the bad guy.
So those that pay less than 2-2.5% will have to come up with their own defense plan, and the day after they are dropped off protectionism, their products going or coming from across the world will be attacked by pirates and there will be nobody to defend them. Piracy is booming near most large passages, and it is the US fleets that sell protection to whoever is buying.
So go back and see again Europe, who is paying protection, who needs it the most, who has the most to lose, who is more dependent on energy and other resources to support their social stability and economy, it is pin pointing one pseudo-country. One that never passed a resolution that is not under occupation and control of another due to losing THE WAR!
No? You want to build Mercedes in China and sell them to New Zealand? Who will protect your ships?
You want to depend on cheap energy from Russia but you want to have a say on what Russia will or will not do? Pay! Stingy … Homie don’t play dat!
If the real war is between them two, what business would Ukraine or Europe have in negotiations for ending the “battle”?
That’s the thing, they don’t have any leverage in negotiating the battle because Russia is now visibly winning militarily. Ukraine is out of manpower, and Europe cannot fill the gaps on its own.
NATO was fighting a proxy war against Russia and against anyone willing to stand on its side, maybe a test. By keeping Russia busy NATO/ISIS can wrap up Syria, provoke Iran to engage, Israel got a piece of Syria and most likely Lebanon, and it is about time Palestinians vacate Israel, handed to the Israelis by the UK with no conditions to keep the Arabs. Any place the UK has “vacated” has left a chaos of civil wars and antagonism behind. Roman rule surviving in 21st century with all the refinements of the UK.
Would this happen if Russia wasn’t busy fighting in Ukraine? Would Turkey/Azerbaijan be able to kill and bomb Armenians if Russia wasn’t that busy?
NATO engaged, EU supplies have run out, most committed to spending little for defense now they have nothing. But Russia didn’t lose, so any proposal for peace agreement is an effort to save up part of Ukraine for later NATO use, and to accept defeat. Nobody will ask Ukrainians what they want, nobody asked people in Donetsk Luhansk fighting for autonomy and independence what they wanted either.
When Trump says he will reduce defense spending that means he will see it that the EU will take up the slack of the US defense industry welfare system. Either they pay or Russia will start chewing them up like pacman dots. See GDP % to defense budgets of NATO members to understand how large the gap is and for whom are the bells ringing.
I’d argue that Syria ended up working in Russian favor in the end. Russia no longer has any obligations to prop it up, but the regime in charge doesn’t appear to be keep on breaking relations with Russia. On top of that, it’s become very unstable with many different factions fighting each other. This will inevitably create problems for Turkey and Israel who are backing different factions. Volatility in the region doesn’t really benefit the west, and it’s a huge concern for Europe where refugees will inevitably flee if a regional war breaks out. Meanwhile, Armenia signed its own death warrant by pulling out of CSTO. That’s what allowed Azerbaijan to start making territorial claims.
My expectation is that we might see the end of NATO here. The rift between Europe and the US is getting wider by the day, and Americans are telling Europe in no uncertain terms that they don’t see it as their primary concern now. It’s also worth noting that the economic situation in Europe is very dire which is already creating political instability. Further austerity that would be necessitated by higher military spending will only make this worse. It’s highly likely that countries like Hungary, Slovakia, and Romania might simply flip over to BRICS in a few years.
They are not backing factions, they have illegally entered Syria and occupied parts of it. Europe is not, has never been, and will never be one thing, especially under the boot of the German pseudo-state. EU is basically Europe, and NATO in a way is the same +US/UK, but some states pay an arm and a leg to contribute to what NATO is and some states think they are smart by not paying (and paying means buying from the US mil.industry). This is the object. The US is using Russia to force insecurity to some weak states, like Finland and Sweden, to pay if they want to ever be defended. So Russia is playing the bad guy because it is not left with an option of avoiding being the bad guy.
So those that pay less than 2-2.5% will have to come up with their own defense plan, and the day after they are dropped off protectionism, their products going or coming from across the world will be attacked by pirates and there will be nobody to defend them. Piracy is booming near most large passages, and it is the US fleets that sell protection to whoever is buying.
So go back and see again Europe, who is paying protection, who needs it the most, who has the most to lose, who is more dependent on energy and other resources to support their social stability and economy, it is pin pointing one pseudo-country. One that never passed a resolution that is not under occupation and control of another due to losing THE WAR!
No? You want to build Mercedes in China and sell them to New Zealand? Who will protect your ships? You want to depend on cheap energy from Russia but you want to have a say on what Russia will or will not do? Pay! Stingy … Homie don’t play dat!