you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

At this point, why bother with NATO? The US is unlikely to take any action if its allies are attacked -- hell, they'd prolly join in on attacking their own allies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The other members are pretty strong too

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    There are some nukes in the hands of the UK, and some in the hands of France. I don't recall hearing any other NATO partner as having their own nukes.

    Israel has more of a nuclear deterrent than a place like Canada or Spain. Turkey has a large army, but against nuclear armed aggressor countries that's less of a deterrent. The NATO of yesteryear, was a united block with Article 5 basically meaning "If you're part of NATO, you're protected from nuclear armed aggressors due to the general principle of mutually assured destruction should shit hit the fan". Now, it's "Russia can attack anyone they want, and the USA will assist as best they can. The US will also pressure NATO countries to buy sub-standard weapons that cannot be used without US approval; this helps the US prevent its new ally, Russia, from losing any conflict". Sorta like how there are US controlled nukes in some NATO countries, that they can't use for their own defense without the US go-ahead.

    And anyone that thinks Trump / the USA is gonna go against Russia, hasn't been paying attention to all the Putin cock America's been sucking lately.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments