Things that made you Facepalm today (Political Version)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Not entirely sure how Republicans can countenance Orange Man announcing NATO is fair game for Russian invasion, but this is consistent with his trying to destroy the alliance when he was in office. Sad Trump is such a Russian puppet.

---

It’s really quite simple. NATO members must pay their fair share and contribute to their own national defense. The policy worked well during Trump’s presidency. I don’t think he was being literal about encouraging Russia to do whatever they want to a non-contributing NATO member, but that comment came after the question was asked if a NATO member didn’t pay. He did write a book called The Art of the Deal you know…

Why are you insisting that it is the sole responsibility of the U.S. to fund NATO and provide military protection to a European country who won’t contribute? Only the U.S. should have to spend a sizable amount of our GDP towards defense and Europeans should enjoy all those benefits with none of the costs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Not entirely sure how Republicans can countenance Orange Man announcing NATO is fair game for Russian invasion, but this is consistent with his trying to destroy the alliance when he was in office. Sad Trump is such a Russian puppet.

---

"ZOMG IF YOU ELECT TRUMP YOU ARE GOING TO START WW3!!!"

How do normal people fall for this?

Oh wait.. it's Seran.

Asked and answered.

Not normal.

By a longshot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

It’s really quite simple. NATO members must pay their fair share and contribute to their own national defense. The policy worked well during Trump’s presidency. I don’t think he was being literal about encouraging Russia to do whatever they want to a non-contributing NATO member, but that comment came after the question was asked if a NATO member didn’t pay. He did write a book called The Art of the Deal you know…

Why are you insisting that it is the sole responsibility of the U.S. to fund NATO and provide military protection to a European country who won’t contribute? Only the U.S. should have to spend a sizable amount of our GDP towards defense and Europeans should enjoy all those benefits with none of the costs?

---

Some pretty impressive mental gymnastics you performed there, I give a 7.5. You 'choose' to think Trump wasn't being literal in inviting Russia to invade NATO, contrary to the words he used. Pretty much how your type didn't feel he was being literal in saying Crimea belonged to Russia, before Russia attempted to annex the rest of Ukraine. If you think an alliance against a common foe is maintained by inviting said foe to attack other member countries, you've got a lot to learn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Some pretty impressive mental gymnastics you performed there, I give a 7.5. You 'choose' to think Trump wasn't being literal in inviting Russia to invade NATO, contrary to the words he used. Pretty much how your type didn't feel he was being literal in saying Crimea belonged to Russia, before Russia attempted to annex the rest of Ukraine. If you think an alliance against a common foe is maintained by inviting said foe to attack other member countries, you've got a lot to learn.

---

So Biden literally said Russia could invade Ukraine as long as it wasn't a big skirmish.. but Trump said that if NATO countries don't pay the share they agreed to pay to be a member, then they don't get the protection offered by the agreement... and you are in full blown panic mode about Trump being a Russian asset and he's going to start WW3.

Relax, cupcake. Trump was the MOST peaceful President since Gerald Ford. He didn't have any wars or invasions started under his first term, no matter how upsetting and "ZOMG TEH WORLD IS ENDING!" people like you are.

And now you are starting it up again.. right on cue.

I can't wait for your next meltdown.. it's going to be highly entertaining to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Some pretty impressive mental gymnastics you performed there, I give a 7.5. You 'choose' to think Trump wasn't being literal in inviting Russia to invade NATO, contrary to the words he used. Pretty much how your type didn't feel he was being literal in saying Crimea belonged to Russia, before Russia attempted to annex the rest of Ukraine. If you think an alliance against a common foe is maintained by inviting said foe to attack other member countries, you've got a lot to learn.

---

You didn’t answer my question.

Also I would like to point out that Russia annexed Crimea back in 2014. Guess who was our president back then and did absolutely nothing about it?

Edit: Well to Obama’s credit he did issue a few sanctions, but history through today has taught us that didn’t do squat to Russia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Why are you insisting that it is the sole responsibility of the U.S. to fund NATO and provide military protection to a European country who won’t contribute? Only the U.S. should have to spend a sizable amount of our GDP towards defense and Europeans should enjoy all those benefits with none of the costs?

---

Welfare mentality is literally all that Seran knows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Some pretty impressive mental gymnastics you performed there, I give a 7.5. You 'choose' to think Trump wasn't being literal in inviting Russia to invade NATO, contrary to the words he used. Pretty much how your type didn't feel he was being literal in saying Crimea belonged to Russia, before Russia attempted to annex the rest of Ukraine. If you think an alliance against a common foe is maintained by inviting said foe to attack other member countries, you've got a lot to learn.

---

Is this anything like how you "chose" to think that Trump told people to inject bleach, despite him saying nothing even remotely close to that in the actual video it stemmed from, because you're a brain dead NPC with no thoughts of your own and couldn't be bothered to watch 30 seconds of video to realize how dumb and gullible you are?

Loser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Welfare mentality is literally all that Seran knows.

---

If the United States decided to cut our defense spending to less than 2% of our GDP, all of Europe would be shitting their pants on a daily basis just like Seran. If we did that we could probably afford to give Seran a bigger welfare check though, so not quite sure why he isn’t on board with this.

Quote:

---

Speaking to supporters at a rally in South Carolina, Trump recounted an exchange from his time in office with the leader of a “big country” who asked whether it would be protected if Russia attacked.


Trump said he told the leader that the U.S. government would not protect the bloc if it didn’t pay its fair share in defense spending.


“I said: ‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump recalled. “No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.”

---

So let's game this out. Russia accepts Trumps invitation and invades another country who is part of NATO, this would invoke article 5 of the treaty which we're a founding member.

Quote:

---

Article 5


“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.


Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”

---

The United States would be obligated to provide assistance to the member under such an invasion it's 'President' invited. The subsequent expenditure of materials, manpower, and economic impact of a direct war between superpowers would be -devastating- to our economy. All because Republicans want to put Donald Trump, an open ally of Putin, back in the Whitehouse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

So let's game this out. Russia accepts Trumps invitation and invades another country who is part of NATO, this would invoke article 5 of the treaty which we're a founding member.



The United States would be obligated to provide assistance to the member under such an invasion it's 'President' invited. The subsequent expenditure of materials, manpower, and economic impact of a direct war between superpowers would be -devastating- to our economy. All because Republicans want to put Donald Trump, an open ally of Putin, back in the Whitehouse.

---

You are still dodging my question.

NATO membership suggests a country should spend a minimum of 2% GDP on defense. The U.S. spends roughly 3.5% of GDP on defense. Fundamentally, do you accept a European country spending less than 2% of their GDP on defense knowing that they will be protected by the United States if Russia decides to invade them?