03-06-2025, 12:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-06-2025, 01:06 PM by Duneranger.)
(03-03-2025, 10:33 PM)Vle045 Wrote:(03-03-2025, 06:05 PM)Duneranger Wrote:(03-03-2025, 11:02 AM)Vle045 Wrote: What Would It Take for MAGA to Stop Supporting Trump?NATO is a joke, the EU and friends have smugly praised their "robust" social systems for years while also riding the coattails/coffers of the US for YEARS. Neglecting their defense and siphoning the US for everything we are worth. Pretty crappy allies if you ask me. ONLY now do they realize how complacent they have been when the US doesn't want to play their games anymore. I TRAINED with NATO forces, they literally leeched off of us for every training exercise and took nothing seriously.
Serious question, folks. I’m trying to figure out what, exactly, would make MAGA say, “You know what? Maybe this guy isn’t the one.” Because so far, it seems like nothing is a dealbreaker. Let’s review:
Adding trillions to the national debt? ️ Deficits only matter when a Democrat is in office, I guess.
Praising dictators while trashing U.S. allies? ️ Reagan must be rolling in his grave, but hey, Putin sends his regards!
Mocking POWs and Gold Star families? ️ But sure, “Support the Troops.”
Selling out America’s intelligence agencies in favor of Russia? ️ Remember when conservatives were the “law and order” party? Yeah, me neither.
Trying to overturn a democratic election? ️ Nothing screams “patriot” like sending an angry mob to ransack the Capitol.
Encouraging the government to seize private property for a wall that never got built? ️ But hey, Eminent Domain is only bad when the other guys do it.
Handing out pardons to corrupt cronies and war criminals? ️ “Drain the swamp” apparently meant “move it into the White House.”
Siding with pharmaceutical companies over lowering drug prices? ️ But sure, let’s keep pretending he’s “for the little guy.”
Calling to terminate parts of the Constitution? ️ But remember, it’s Biden who is the real threat to democracy.
Bullying a wartime ally in the Oval Office? ️ Watching Trump and Vance gang up on President Zelenskyy like schoolyard bullies was a new low. Because nothing says "leader of the free world" like publicly humiliating the guy fighting off an invasion.
Spitting on NATO and cozying up to autocrats? ️ Undermining the alliance that has kept global peace for decades while giving dictators a free pass. Reagan's "peace through strength" has morphed into "chaos through capitulation."
At this rate, Trump could replace the Statue of Liberty with a golden Trump Tower and some would hail it as a bold move against "globalist elites."
Or maybe, Trump could personally bulldoze Mount Rushmore and replace it with a golden statue of himself and some folks would be out there defending it as a bold stand against the Deep State
So, what's the breaking point? Is there anything that would make MAGA supporters reconsider, or is the new motto "In Trump We Trust, no matter the cost"?
Just pondering the depths of unconditional loyalty here.
Let EUROPE's defense be on the EU no more siphoning the US over and over. Only now does the EU propose a peace deal after doing nothing for 3 years, and that peace deal still needs US backing per the UK. Shocker lol. The EU and the rest of NATO are pathetic as is the UN. The US holds the cards as Trump said.
Ukraine has objectively lost and the stalemate will result in the deaths of hundreds and hundreds of thousands. Its easy to talk tough when you are not getting blown to pieces. I have seen the videos, its a gritty trench style warfare reminiscent to WW1. The Dems and EU are pro-war and death, what an interesting turn the world has made. Putin is a dictator who only values strength instead of honor, both of the latter have none of either. The war needs to end and yes Ukraine WILL lose territory. There is absolutely no way they can drive Russia out at this point. Absolutely ZERO.
The rest of your "points" are either straight-up lies or twisted out of context attempts at smears. Try again.
Ah yes, the classic “NATO is a joke” take—because clearly, the best way to ensure America’s security is to weaken the alliance that has kept global stability for decades.
Let’s break this down:
Bottom line? Weakening NATO only helps Russia. And propping up Trump as some geopolitical mastermind is pure delusion.
- “Europe has leeched off the U.S. for defense” – You mean the same Europe that has steadily increased defense spending since 2014? The same NATO allies that now meet or exceed their 2% GDP defense spending commitments? If Trump did anything, it was scare them into accelerating that process—but pretending they’ve done nothing is just ignoring reality.
- “The U.S. holds the cards” – Sure, if by “holds the cards” you mean undermining allies, empowering dictators, and making America look unreliable on the global stage. Trump’s idea of “strength” is alienating our closest partners while giving Putin and Xi everything they want: a divided, weakened West.
- “Ukraine has objectively lost” – Objectively? Last I checked, Russia wanted to take Kyiv in three days, and here we are over two years later with Russia bleeding resources. Have you seen their casualty rates? Their economy is held together with duct tape and oil exports to China. Ukraine is outmatched in firepower but far from defeated.
- “The EU just now wants peace” – Because peace talks should have started when exactly? When Russia was trying to erase Ukraine off the map? When Putin was talking about restoring the Soviet empire? “Peace” means Russia stops invading its neighbors, not rewarding them with land grabs.
- “The rest of your points are lies or smears” – Ah yes, the classic “I have no rebuttal, so I’ll just call everything fake” move. Look, if you’re fine with golden sneakers, porn star hush money, and praising dictators as long as they “show strength,” that’s your prerogative. But don’t pretend the guy who bent over backwards for Putin is the one who’s “tough.”
Whether he meant to or not, Trump’s meeting with Zelenskyy gave Russia exactly what it wanted. The Kremlin is now spinning it as proof that U.S. support for Ukraine is wavering, using it for propaganda, and pushing the idea that aid will dry up—putting Ukraine in a weaker position.
Read more here: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgro...mp-meeting
Truly a clueless thought process here. Have you ever been in the military? Have you ever worked with NATO or participated in NATO exercises? Have you ever deployed with NATO forces in Iraq or Afghanistan? Ask any vet about the Italians or Germans overseas. Join up and participate in one and tell me who bankrolls and prop up NATO. We are being conned. We don't need NATO, they NEED us. Don't get it twisted.
1. In 2021, most of the NATO forces did not even meet the 2% benchmark and even in 2025 over 1/3 STILL didn't meet the bare minimum. We have consistently given more to Ukraine than all of the EU combined. This is all for a country not even in our sphere of influence. That is pathetic. Europe does not have the industrial capabilities to keep up since they basically deindustrialized in the 70s and 80s and have relied on US hegemony ever since. They did nothing for decades and a small uptick the last couple of years does not erase that, stop obfuscating REALITY. We are tired of Europe and Ukraine siphoning billions on a losing effort and they sit on their smug laurels.
2. Trump cares about preventing pointless deaths. Who in their right mind would want to deploy to the front of a losing war? GO join up and head to the meat grinder if you so choose. No one thinks Putin is a good guy but Putin doesn't respect weakness. Something everpresent within the Dems and Biden/Obama which is why he invaded. The US military could end Russia in a few weeks in Ukraine but this isn't our war. This is Europe's problem and despite the EU's backing and the US massive monetary and equipment backing, the Russian invasion has not been repulsed. Not wanting a swift peace at this point is being pro war and pro death. Ukraine will have to make concessions. That is reality.
3. Again, more obfuscation. Ukraine has lost. Russia's initial objectives in 20233 are irrelevant. Ukraine has not made significant territorial gains in over a year and their Kursk offensive has stalled and backfired. Russia is slowly gaining ground and Ukraine has no current capability to push them outside of the captured territory. They are barely holding and have no ability for offensive maneuvers at this point. This is an objective reality. Its a stalemate resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands in a best case scenario.
4. What are you even talking about? The EU and NATO have lollygagged around for 3 years as Ukraine has been pushed back and only when Trump comes out with an ultimatum, do they scramble for an emergency peace summit to try and hastily form a plan. They are in "OH SHIT" mode as Daddy US has lost interest in funding death and destruction. Where was this peace summit the last 3 years? Where were these boots on the ground talks? They didn't exist because the US was subsidizing their efforts.
5. Ah yes more word salad strawman vomit. The rebuttals are all above. I am not pro war/death, you must be....
(03-05-2025, 07:42 AM)MrNicky Wrote: How is NATO a joke, please explain. And by this i mean, write down, with words, logic and proper reasoning your opinion. (Can i just remember what Bill Bullard once said, "Opinion is really the lowest form of human knowledge", especially since you don't even hold yourself accountable for your opinions).Weird ramblings.
From my perspective and actual knowledge and doing proper, non biased (ex: "Why is nato bad?" on google) research and actually understanding the world and geopolitics, NATO has been instrumental in the relative peace we have seen for the last 80 years, which has allowed the USA to mantain a global super power status since it was seen as the police of the world and one of the most stable countries due to the sheer defensive potential, two allies border the USA and had complete NATO backing, it made the USA basically an untouchable country since it would be so hard to attack and an attack would trigger a response from half the world. This in turn also let the USA spend less on defending itself and defending others to mantain free trade and trade routes, example: patroling the coast of Taiwan to make sure they have access to chips, patrolling the strait of Mallaca and Singapore to make sure trade can flow. Which by the way, this patrolling has a ROI (Return on invesment) of over 10x, the USA makes 10x the amount it spends by mantaining these trade routes. And once again, since NATO exists, European countries have been more lax regarding their own safety as it is secured behind NATO, in other words since you're a republican and i cannot trust you to understand english these countries have reduced their own territorial forces so they can project force on other regions since they have no necessary need to mantain huge armies in their own territories since NATO exists and all of NATO needs to respond to protect any country in the alliance, so countries like Portugal have been patrolling Africa with their armed forces, effectively mantaining trade routes open and opening peace possibilities, which in turn leads to more trade and more money coming in to the countries that have protected them and easier investment which has a very high ROI. If you haven't understood so far, without NATO, the USA would be closer to current North Korea than a 1st world country. The USA has massively benefitted from the power projection it has, especially with NATO and it has resulted in 80 years of getting cheaper resources, better deals, more soft power, more hard power, more control, more money. The USA has basically had free reign to do whatever in the world for the last 80 years cause the existance of NATO has allowed the USA to have military bases in basically all the world and project basically infinite power, no one could mess with the USA cause they would get a swift answer due to having bases all over the world, bomb the USA and you get retaliory bombs in 15 minutes. And all of this has basically made the defense industry a no risk investment which has led to a immense ammount of money from all over the worldd of agents ( Agent means, individual, business or partnernship, not spy) investing in the USA and so the USA getting disporportional ammounts of money compared to the rest of the world which has hyper accelerated the USA's economy. For the last 50 years, everywhere in the world, the number 1 investment recomendations have been USA's defence and S&P500, which means every other country has been investing in the USA due to what NATO has allowed it to acheive.
I also trained with NATO forces, these exercises are of great benefit to everyone involved. The data NATO has due to trainings in for example Finland has been imense, data they would otherwise not have. And btw, the USA constantly and consistently loses in every snow exercise against the nordic countries, so if the USA ever gets competent at snow it's thanks to those exercises. And this allows the USA to project power in more countries. The USA also fails so many other exercises, it's like a big buff dude with all the strenght in the world but a inteligence stat of negative one, sure you have atomic bombs, but you lose against farmers and you can't actually use your full strenght cause it will 100% backfire so you're mostly just a paper tiger. To be fair the USA has only fought since 1898 with Allies and never alone and NATO has allowed a very high ammount of allies, which has covered a lot of the USA's weakness and allowed a supply chain that has allowed them to be fighting useless wars halfway across the world.
Also you might refer spending to NATO and own denfense, the USA spends the most, because it has the most, if we take a look at fair statistics, like how much of their own GDP countries spend, there are countries that their total GDP is less than the USA's spends on defence each year, yet they spend more as a percentage, Poland and Estonia are examples. Should Poland and Estonia call the USA useless cause it doesn't spend the same percentage of GDP as them?
EU's donation to Ukraine is super disengenous to compare, the EU has been spending billions on refugees that is never accounted for in the money for Ukraine, but it's basically just money to help them (20 billion btw). Between that and percentage of GDP, the USA is being outmatched by a LOT. And this only even accounts the money coming from the EU institutions, not individual EU countries which are also giving money. We should add all of those together when reporting.
The USA holds 0 cards as of right now, Trump got dealt a Royal flush and he flushed it down the toilet and now has a 3 and a 8, basically the USA has a bluff, nothing else. ANd Trump is acting exactly that way, bluffing on everything and countries are realising that and acting accordingly. The USA was profiting imensely from all the Ukraine aid, because it wasn't going to Ukraine's companies, it was all on old stock being sold as new from USA's defence companies. The USA has profitted probably 2 to 1 on Ukraine so far, i'd guess even more. From old stock being sitting and needing maintenance and never being used, to actual data of use, no longer paying maintenance and even getting money to sell them, the defense industry in the USA has profited so much from this which has propeled the whole USA. If you do not understand this, them i'm sorry, i'm sure if Trump didn't just cancel a bunch of grants to research there would've been a team of scientists that would've figured out a way to give you the extra brain power to be of the necessary IQ to understand what is going on and the repercussions of such things, aka 10% below average.
Ukraine has by no accounts lost, if you believe Ukraine has lost you are either lying to yourself, have no experience, are being disengenous or a russian plant, AKA republican. Ukraine has been contained consistently by the USA, the USA has been forbiding the use of weapons offensively for Ukraine, and now that the USA is deciding to go the North Korea way of life, Ukraine might actually get consent from other countries to launch a true offensive and not just keep all their best weapons for defensive operations. It's a constructed stalemate. Are the Dems pro war or are they pro countries being allowed to exist? Imagine, what if Russia invaded the USA and it was on the same situation as the Ukraine is right now? Would you like aid or would you also say to just let Russia conquer the whole of the USA? I mean you'd probably say nothing, you're already a R(ussian)epublican. I simply cannot wait for the USA to get out of NATO and seeing the USA's GDP contract by trillions for years. And just seeing the EU's GDP being bombarded with money. And even better, now the peace deal wouldn't need the US cause the US is no longer NATO, and the defense guarantees would be exclusive to NATO.
See my other response. This is all delusional nonsense. Ukraine has not made significant gains in over a year and out of nowhere, they are going to magically drive out Russia with their own manpower without concessions? Even with MASSIVE US and EU support at best its a bloody stalemate with Russia slowly inching forward and thousands dying for no reason. To deny this and wanting to continue this blood bath is being pro death/war. No one likes Russia and Ukraine has fought valiantly but this is madness to continue at this point.
Regardless of % GDP spent (hurrr durr Poland spends more % wise so obviously Poland is the strongest NATO ally right?) , the NATO and EU rely on US hegemony. We are always there as a backup in or outside of NATO. What would Germany do if the US was invaded? Send some broken Leopard 2s and 3k men? We have to defend ourselves and the rest of the world. Your take is a poor and simplistic one. On or off paper the Western world relies on the US for defense. Even after the White House spat the UK admitted they needed US approval for a joint NATO peace plan. SHOCKER. They have no teeth and know they need our support or their little plan would fail.
PLEASE Mr. Armchair general, tell me how Ukraine is going to do push Russia out without concessions. As a former operations officer, I would LOVE to know.
Side note. You have never worked in military logistics. Shipping and refurbishing mothballed old equipment is a massive cost drain for the US, not a profit. There is a reason why we left most of our equipment in Afghanistan. You have clearly no idea what you are talking about here.
Your entire post is a smug" you don't know what you don't know" situation.
![[-]](https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb/images/collapse.png)
