Putin Meeting Lifts the Veil?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Its an embarrassment that after 73 years the NATO countries seem unable to financially provide for their common defense and enjoy social spending on civilian side while U.S. taxpayer gets soaked year after year and DOE'S NOT ENJOY social programs many Europeans hold up to us in mock superiority.

I linked to a worse case story on spending levels,

U.S. Pays 22.5% of NATO Budget

Story goes on to say Germany 14.5% and U.K. under 10% - the rest are a pittance.

Used to be more liberal among us supported anything that reduced U.S. military spending in favor of social programs - now liberals argue for more U.S, spending,

I think its loss of principles due extreme case of TDS.

High time NATO stood on its own two feet and not depend on U.S. for essentially what is economic support for their social spending.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You have a lengthy prelude that does not lead to the conclusion you are trying to draw. Yes, the FBI has it out for Putin. That's their job. The fact that Russia has been openly, blatantly, backing Trump is cause for alarm. Given that Trump brazenly met with Putin with no Americans present-- not even a translator-- a closed door meeting between the two is a terrible idea. Even if Trump is not a Russian puppet, the "optics" are unbelievably bad and will only make his situation worse.

a reply to: Phoenix

Used to be more liberal among us supported anything that reduced U.S. military spending in favor of social programs - now liberals argue for more U.S, spending,

Where are liberals arguing for more military spending? Certainly not in this world.

a reply to: Justso

Just to point out every single paper I have read shows that we have the better healthcare system than you.
We even live longer.

a reply to: Phoenix


When was the last time NATO used military action against an adversary, to protect a NATO member? Don't know?

The last time NATO used military action to protect a NATO nation from attack, after that nation in invoked their aide through Article 5, was on behalf of the United States of America, after the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001.

The organization now plays a prominent role in Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks in the United States invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty which deemed the attacks to be an external attack on all NATO members under the idea of collective defence. Aside from continuing efforts in Afghanistan NATO has participated in a wide range of roles including relief effort, counter-piracy, enforcing no-fly zones and naval blockades.
en.wikipedia.org...

www.mapsofworld.com...

a reply to: DJW001

If you argue that NATO should not raise its contributions to long agreed amounts, yes you are arguing for continued military spending by the U.S. by simple default.

I think we need to pull our military out of Europe, charge all colluding DNC/RNC members with high treason and hold military tribunals for all former administrations for the last 30-40 years and hold them accountable for war crimes and impose death sentences on them.

I think your assessment is correct that clearly the Russian intelligence group, the Clinton's and DNC were all working together. How much more clear could it be?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Not disparaging individual contributions or sacrifice by any soldiers participation how much contribution was that by percentage?

@TheRedneck. Looks like your OP theory has the usual left leaners, never-Trumpers, and those suffering from clinical TDS a tad worried. Well done!

a reply to: DJW001

You have a lengthy prelude that does not lead to the conclusion you are trying to draw.

I see the correlations. Can you show a reason you do not?

Yes, the FBI has it out for Putin. That's their job.

That is also the exact opposite of what I am hypothesizing, at least in the recent past. Their purpose now may be to stop Russia from revealing their own collusion.

The fact that Russia has been openly, blatantly, backing Trump is cause for alarm.

I still have not seen evidence of that 'fact.' Can you provide some?

Given that Trump brazenly met with Putin with no Americans present-- not even a translator-- a closed door meeting between the two is a terrible idea. Even if Trump is not a Russian puppet, the "optics" are unbelievably bad and will only make his situation worse.

I fail to see where this is such a bad idea. You are aware that any two world leaders can simply pick up a phone and call their counterpart in another country? In those cases, no one would even know a meeting was held. Donald Trump has presided over the most transparent administration in my memory in any case. He tweets his plans and thoughts on issues every single day; the media coverage on his every action is non-stop, to the extent that this administration has been plagued since the election with uncontrolled leaks (many of those from within the FBI according to the IG report). We know that he gets two scoops of ice cream on his cake, for crying out loud! Do we need full color HD when he goes to the bathroom too?

I am certain there will be a full press conference directly afterwards with both participants answering questions.

Translators are only needed if there is not a common language. Does Trump know Russian? I don't think so, but I do think Putin speaks some English.

I am trying to remember a President who never met in a closed-door meeting with another world leader. I can't think of any. Care to educate me?

TheRedneck

a reply to: bastion

Teresa May is a pornstar Trump credited on twitter for her actions in the UK.

Trump and his porn stars eh !

Perhaps she could negotiate a better Brexit deal with those crusty old men in Brussels.

4 pages in and the Lefties have completely ignored the subjects of Strock, Page, the DNC, Kavanaugh, the FBI or anything else, to focus on "TRUMP IS BAD!".
[ oh and that Op got the name of an old building wrong...mustn't forget that! eyeroll ]

Deflect.
Defend.
Deny.

Repeat as necessary.

a reply to: toysforadults

I think we need to pull our military out of Europe, charge all colluding DNC/RNC members with high treason and hold military tribunals for all former administrations for the last 30-40 years and hold them accountable for war crimes and impose death sentences on them.

An hour ago I would have said that was a little extreme; now I tend to agree with you. We need a purge.

But I'm sure I'll be back to my senses soon enough. I am also sure that it is more important to purge those who are corrupt and active in government affairs than to go after past administrations out of power. The former is justice; the latter teeters on the brim of revenge.

I think your assessment is correct that clearly the Russian intelligence group, the Clinton's and DNC were all working together. How much more clear could it be?

Well, it has been openly admitted that the Clinton campaign and the DNC were funding the Steele Dossier which was using Russian intelligence to 'acquire' (read: invent) dirt on Trump. I am saying that I believe the FBI is involved with Russian collusion as well. As far as I can remember, the DNC leaders have opposed every single disciplinary action taken or threatened against any member of the FBI, more vehemently as time went on. That tells me there is some collusion there as well.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Lab4Us

It would appear I have hit a nerve... and this nerve seems eerily familiar to the one that others have hit whenever they dared question the integrity of individuals within the FBI caught red-handed in compromising positions.

It also seems the Democrats in the Strzok hearing were utilizing a new method of obstruction: keep deflecting to subjects you can then make accusations on that tend to make others want to correct them. It seems to be effective strategy for closing down debate.

TheRedneck

a reply to: DAVID64

Yeah, and OP left an 'h' out of a name, too... guess that blows the whole theory!

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Skyfloating
@Thread Topic:

My humble view is that a good relationship with Russia is KEY to a stable world and reasonable levels of peace.

We've been in a "cold war" with these people for 70 years or more, as if there were some Hidden Hand wishing to keep these two superpowers divided.

I agree that the meeting with Putin will lift the Veil on many things that have been happening and perhaps also on the crazed fervor with which Dems + NeoCons have been wanting division from Putin.

We are still at war with them, though it’s cyber not nukes. They are still attacking us. The Russian government is not in any way our ally. They are winning the war, too. But because of a massive active measures campaign including promoting an enemies list, the truth is buried under lies for those who want to believe.

I will say that love is the answer, in that I agree. But we unfortunately fundamentally disagree on who the White Hats are - we live in alternate realities. It is very sad. I have a bunch of people I love who watch Fox News and Hannity, who listen to Rush spew his cathartic anger at “the libs,” and Newt “truth is what you feel -facts don’t matter” Gingrich.

It’s depressing. But I wish you well, and I wish for the arc of history to bend towards truth and justice, sooner rather than later, no matter what that truth or justice looks like. It would be good to agree on at least that, no?

a reply to: AboveBoard

Perhaps we can agree that justice is all people, regardless of color, gender, age, or political affiliation, being treated equally under the law?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Not disparaging individual contributions or sacrifice by any soldiers participation how much contribution was that by percentage?

That's like thanking an individual soldier everything the Pentagon does! The individual contributions of any soldier has nothing to do with NATO nations sending their own military troops and resources to fight and die for American interests! American interests have benefited more from NATO alliances than any other NATO nation.

ETA As far as percentages, you posted them yourself, right? Aprox 78% of NATO's controbution to defending the USA after 911 was non-USA controbution.

a reply to: TheRedneck

If you don't see an issue with him meeting Putin one on one with the current events I'm not really sure you understand what might be going on.

You have suspiscion of Russian collusion, and he does this? How many times did he do this before he was president? How many private phone calls has he had.

a reply to: DJW001

You mean we saw Trump take credit for the agreements the Obama administration got

And lie about how he got them to agree to increase it too.
What a diplomat.