Jump to content

Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Jim Cowan said:

Yes, I am aware.  It would be a historical first though.

Afghanistan was an Article 5 invocation IIRC.

All the more reason we need to be there. We owe these partners a debt

Edited by mtutiger
Posted

He's not getting the Baltic's.  Belarus is trying to court favor by being as much of an ally as possible, but their leaders should be watching their back.  Moldova definitely would be next.  

And while I joked about Obama's dissing of Romney over Russia, Obama obviously was right that China as a major concern.  China and Taiwan are very interested in how this plays out. 

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

He's not getting the Baltic's.  Belarus is trying to court favor by being as much of an ally as possible, but their leaders should be watching their back. 

Luka basically owes his power to Putin at this point... he's got little room to maneuver.

Moldova is probably the next on the menu, but if I'm in Poland or Romania or the Baltics, this looks existential to me. It's not abstract as it is for someone living in the USA. 

Edited by mtutiger
Posted
5 minutes ago, romad1 said:

First time since 9/11

I don't get the reference.  A friend or ally was not invaded on 9/11.  The historical first would be entering a conflict on behalf of a friend or ally that had been invaded.  If you guys think that congress would approve it, you would know better than I would.

Posted
1 minute ago, Jim Cowan said:

I don't get the reference.  A friend or ally was not invaded on 9/11.  The historical first would be entering a conflict on behalf of a friend or ally that had been invaded.  If you guys think that congress would approve it, you would know better than I would.

I think they probably would if it were a NATO country, fwiw.

Posted
7 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Afghanistan was an Article 5 invocation IIRC.

All the more reason we need to be there. We owe these partners a debt

I don't see Afghanistan as a comparison.  It wasn't a NATO member.  It was invaded though...by NATO.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Jim Cowan said:

I don't get the reference.  A friend or ally was not invaded on 9/11.  The historical first would be entering a conflict on behalf of a friend or ally that had been invaded.  If you guys think that congress would approve it, you would know better than I would.

Sorry we weren't better allies. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Jim Cowan said:

I don't see Afghanistan as a comparison.  It wasn't a NATO member.  It was invaded though...by NATO.

But it was Article 5. An invasion of Poland or the Baltics would fall under that same article.

We have to be there for that, or else NATO ceases to exist.

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Don't take the bait on Trump, et al. They are Russian plants doing Putin's bidding. Don't let them drive the wedge.

Definitely.

No need to share anything from Tulsi Gabbard as well

Edited by mtutiger

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...