https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/world/article221587240.html
https://www.newsweek.com/merkel-calls-common-european-army-trump-slams-macron-over-plan-continental-1213317?amp=1
https://www.thelocal.de/20181113/merkel-calls-for-a-real-true-european-army
http://amp.star-telegram.com/news/nation-world/world/article221587240.html

what do we have here. well we all know mainland european nations have a rich history of getting along and combining armies with a massive level of success.

this saber rattling from that part of the world is nothing new just laughable how it’s going down now

That's a very short-sighted way of looking at it. Military is working the best when you dont need it. That's the whole purpose of military strength and military alliances like NATO: to deter potential foes and prevent wars or military conflicts from even breaking out.

That's like... saying "I dont think locking my car was ever necessary because in all those years it was never stolen."

You don't seem to understand the opportunity cost involved. You have to factor how the world would be growing differently without the presence of the entity.

strawman. i dont want NATO abolished per say, and i dont have a shallow view.

Endless' claim was that there's no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise. which is of course retarded. maybe little proof, but plenty of evidence.



x2. learn to work kid.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Nov 13 2018 10:08am

all this will change when democrats will be in charge for 20 years, the time to push free healthcare and shit

Ironically it was used to defend the US,

And we got cheap oil for it.

This post was edited by Knoppie on Nov 13 2018 10:18am

The Russia threat has been overblown for the last 30 years. To invade and have active wars and occupying armies is extremely expensive. It’s been a very successful and profitable campaign by the intelligence communities & defense companies and military cabals to use Russia as the gift that keeps on giving.

NATO to the Europeans is more about feeling safe than actual defense. no one fucks with you because we pumped up the weapons so high no one would bother trying. but as a result Europeans can't look at NATO and say "this saved us X, Y, and Z times."

i'm of the mind that Russian expansion and Chinese expansion, while still an issue, are something that NATO might not be best designed to handle. But i still think that the EU should buy it's weapons, even if they will use them without US help, to maintain the alliance. The US-EU alliance is keeping russia at bay as much as the weapons themselves. they know we can get an aircraft carrier there fast, and jets even faster.



also this, open warfare is dead and NATO was designed for that. Russia, China, etc are looking to cyber warfare increasingly anyways.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Nov 13 2018 10:19am

you wrote:


yes, nato is not necessarily needed, and there are plenty of arguments to support this view. but no, the fact that it has almost never been used since it was created is NOT one of those, is NOT a valid evidence for the nato being obsolete. which is exactly what you were saying in your 11:02am post, and I was arguing against the notion of this particular post of yours. therefore, not a strawman!

we agree on the nato not being needed (anymore?) in its current form.

Trump: European Union is a foe.
Macron: Europe Union needs to build up defenses.
Trump: WTF DUDE WHY U EYEBALLING ME