green_red_black

(For Zionists? No need to censor for them.)

Your implication is that NATO being gone is a shrug.

My argument is that it is not so simple. Getting the components of NATO back (particularly the coordination of the common defense.) would take time, time that would create a vulnerability other powers will exploit.

And yet here you are arguing for escalation and use of nukes. The only reason MAD has worked is no one has yet call one’s bluff (or rather has with Russia constantly reminding they have an arsenal and totally will use it, and yet here we are.)

Good thing it’s not an Israeli Intervention but a US one (sarcasm)

Yes Russia is struggling but at the same time Ukraine (despite the efforts) is also not winning. Furthermore the military coordination is done via NATO, so its loss would create problems. Yes it’s not going to be Russian tanks on the streets of Paris, but it will be Russian tanks making a mess All over Eastern Europe.

Obviously yes but also NATO would stop existing. Seriously where within how NATO is structured are you getting that the loss of the US would be a shrug?

Erm because Nukes wipe out whole cities? We are talking literal WMDs here, what of that screams “yeah we totally are willing to be the first to launch a strike.”

Given Russia is looking to take Ukraine and likely the other former Soviet countries and now we have the US is eyeing for the western hemisphere you are going to need NATO as a whole.

As for nuclear deterrence that only works if you are willing to use it. And I doubt France or the UK is willing.

Russia also needs Oil to sell which is becoming hard between Ukraine hitting Russian facilities in Russia and now we have confirmation the US is not exempting the Shadow Fleet from having Russian ties

Weapons production is private sector. And if there is anything the MIC isn’t known for it’s selling bogus weapons (after all such a thing tends to piss off clients present and possible future.)

Whelp Nobel Peace Committee what do you have to say about giving the award to a boot licker

Yes it would come back but it would be a good long while because we are having to start from the bottom all over again.

That’s the part you seem to not be getting. We are talking a process that would take YEARS to get done, if it would even happen at all.

Ok read the article and seriously WTH. How are the statues “pro-prostitution.”

This is like saying a statute to memorialize and pay respect to the lynched is “pro-lynching.”

I mean I only responded to the specific account once in the chain 🤷🏻

Actually it is. You are the one saying not to trust the service.

Ok, please present us the material that causes you to mistrust.

Proton has been involved in some situations but it’s like the scenario I provided.

Accounts having an unencrypted line of entry “we can’t get the information off the Proton Server but the account is connected to a Google server so let’s go to Google instead.”

Or Proton not particularly putting up a hard fight against a government request. (Mind you no information is being handed over just an account being turned off with no means to recover)

Unlike those “we will delete your data for you.” Services. Proton operates under a Zero Knowledge Encryption, I.E. no one even themselves can read your emails.

Is it perfect? No obviously, if you use a recovery email that is not properly secured (say a Gmail account.) then congratulations your now vulnerable via the State asking Google.

But the privacy focus IS genuine

Treaty reason and NATO Policy Planning. Greenland is a very strategically important location and the increase interest in the Arctic only increased that.

In effect the Troops can only be removed if the US is removed from NATO (aka NATO Disbanded.)

It’s voluntary yes but the US isn’t just the largest member but it’s baked into the system the US is in charge.

Think it like the situation with Amazon Web Services. When it shut down it took out roughly 2/3 of the websites with it. Essentially for all intents and purposes the core of the internet was gone and that had a nasty ripple effect.

That’s obstinately what would happen if the US was removed from NATO.

The US wasn’t alone and did gather other NATO nations to invade Iraq.

But as to why NATO proper was not used it’s simply Iraq wasn’t a NATO member and the US (though not from lack of trying) couldn’t connect Iraq to 9/11 well enough to justify Article V’s use.

Nope the Turkey Vs Greece was Turkey invading the Island of Cyprus which was considered independent of Greece, thus legally not a trigger for Article V.

Greece would of course come to the defense of Cyprus (the population was majority Greek Cypriote after all.) but still for all intents and purposes there was an argument that a NATO member wasn’t attacked.

Actually it does. That’s how ingrained the US is. NATO despite claiming shared corporation and use of unanimous voting is functionally set up so the actual governing and administration pillars are US controlled.

It’s not like the EU where the loss of the UK (only nation to leave after all) was just a shrug and move on like nothing happened.

If NATO lost the US multiple key institutions would be vacant till the remaining nations amend and restructure. A process that would take years to iron out

So if the US genuinely invade that would be considered triggering Article V as the article doesn’t have an exemption clause of said invader being a different NATO Member.

Furthermore the way NATO is structured is it can’t function unless the US is at the steering wheel.

So forget NATO being weakened it would genuinely collapse. And as for replacements it would take years and the ball to transition hasn’t started rolling.

But late for that. The Ballroom is bound to demolish more than the West Wing given Trump’s obsession of size