Biden Issues Order To Send 3,000 U.S Reserve Troops To Europe
WASHINGTON DC (WSAU) - The Pentagon will be able to call up to 3,000 military reservists for deployment to Eur...
You're viewing a single thread.
This is exactly what you do if you want to give Russia a reason to attack NATO.
If they didn't attack non-threats, then they wouldn't have attacked Ukraine.
Have they ever waited for a reason?
Russia is getting it's ass kicked by NATO toys delivered via slow roll. They really aren't stupid enough to actually attack NATO.
Oh I completely agree... But you can be the biggest baddest dude on the planet... Backing a honey badger into the corner isn't a good idea.
I doubt Russia could ever "win". But it can sure fuck shit up on it's way out. And if it feels that NATO is a threat, then that might be the direction the munitions go. I'd rather not see any war at all. I just simply don't see what 3000 more soldiers will accomplish EXCEPT to act as a threat to Russia, which is just shoving them further into a corner.
it is 100% a dominance thing
fucking bunch of high schoolers these governments are
Couldn't the same be said for the other NATO countries sending help to Ukraine?
Sending 3000 reservists to Europe?
Shit, I'm going there on vacation in a few weeks, that's definitely provocative.
I wish they'd try something, they need to learn a lesson about screwing around in Europe.
Surprised russia sending troops "on vacation" to Crimea wasn't a reason for nato to bomb half of Russia to shit.
Crimea was Ukrainian territory... It's not in NATO. Thus not protected by NATO treaty.
So wait, your argument is invading another sovereign country isn't a provocation, but sending reservists into an allied country that welcomes them is?
Man, Russian logic is complex.
I'm pro Russia in this war and I want Russia to attack NATO. Hopefully cucktin will get deposed and a proper hawk will take his place.
Congrats. I hope you live in a country that espouses the values that you preach here...
But just so you know... Every single country with those values live significantly below the typical western country.
Also, Russia's performance against Ukraine alone already has proven that Russia cannot win a war against just about any other country on this planet. Forget the aggregation of the top countries on the planet.
Nukes or not... Russia can't "win" against Nato. The only question becomes how much damage could Russia do before it gives up. And I would even suggest that Nuclear response is likely off the table for Russia, there's serious concerns that Russian nukes haven't been maintained and thus no longer viable.
I’m overjoyed then.
Yes, more senseless war! Ukraine is in the right to protect their territory. But outright wishing for senseless war is stupid as hell.
deranged comment
Hope you're ready to die in a foreign war then
You do realize there's like 80,000 troops already there in europe? We have bases around the world. I'm not sure how these 3,000 national guard make a difference in your mind, but okay.
This is just the start. It's the exact same way the "weapons assistance" went. First small, then billions of dollars worth of weapons being sent on the regular. It's to get us used to the idea of even more troops being sent over. The fact that there's 80k US troops on a foreign continent already doesn't make it any better. If anything, it provides the context for why Russia is acting irrationally as it is being surrounded by an adversaries military
No offense but you sound like a teenager
No offense but you sound like an idiot.
I have just as much a right not to die fighting a foreign war as a Ukrainian has to die fighting for their country.
Advocating for an increase in US military involvement in a foreign war sounds like someone hasn't studied the great 20th century conflicts. If you'd like, I am a practicing historian and I can give you a reading list at your literacy level to give you some context for current world events.
So "I have the right to safety and the Ukranians have the right to die" sums up your position?
If you want the conflict to end then why aren't you advocating for Russia to cease their hostility and invasion of a sovereign nation? You seem to only be concerned with people opposing this Russian aggression and the war that they started.
Ukraine is more than capable of defending itself. The US has no obligation whatsoever to that country. I would love if Russia just decided to stop, but I don't think that's a likely scenario. What does seem likely is if the us directly commits troops this will escalate the current situation dramatically. Any US involvement will trigger a declaration of war by Russia on the us. That will trigger article 5 of NATO brining all members of the alliance into war. Both side have nuclear weapons which will be used barring some sort of miracle rendering plutonium inert or something.
I have just as much a right not to die over some territory on the other side of the world as the Ukrainians do defending their land. Didn't know that was controversial. Hope you're ready to die for Ukraine then
The US did make an agreement with Ukraine (the Budapest Agreement), Russia, and the UK that stated if they gave up their nuclear arsenal, we'd guarantee their security. Russia violated that agreement with their invasion and now we're holding up our end of the bargain by offering security.
I highly doubt Russia would declare war on the US (and by extension NATO) as there is no way for them to win such a war when they're already struggling to capture former USSR nations. You stating that nuclear war is inevitable is just sewing FUD and has little basis in reality. Putin might be unhinged but I doubt his military leaders are willing to make the entire planet unlivable just to further his agenda.
You wanting to sit on the sidelines is no guarantee of safety. Russia isn't going to stop with Ukraine if we allow them to do as they please. They could just as easily attack the US next whether we get involved or not, so what will you say as Russian bombs fall on your home because we decided to let them expand their power unchecked?
The Budapest memorandum of which you speak provides no obligation for the US to provide any security assurances, but provudes justification of action is taken. It is in no way legally binding the US to provide any sort of military obligation to Ukraine.
I highly doubt Russia would declare war on the US (and by extension NATO) as there is no way for them to win such a war when they’re already struggling to capture former USSR nations.
And your whole argument for increasing us military intervention is containing Russia yet you admit they could not in any way do that with their current military capacity. You even admit as much later in your comment contradicting yourself when you say
Russia isn’t going to stop with Ukraine if we allow them to do as they please. They could just as easily attack the US next whether we get involved or not, so what will you say as Russian bombs fall on your home because we decided to let them expand their power unchecked?
It's incredibly nieve to think Russia wouldn't declare war on the US if that committed military assets in direct active warfare against theirs.
You stating that nuclear war is inevitable is just sewing FUD and has little basis in reality. Putin might be unhinged but I doubt his military leaders are willing to make the entire planet unlivable just to further his agenda.
It is rooted in historical factuality. Russia has a nuclear arsenal that they are willing to use. Not against Ukraine because they're not too stupid to provoke a nuclear exchange like that but a hot war with NATO would leave them little option but to use the nukes because as we've both acknowledged, they lack the capacity for a wide scale conventional war in Europe.
Even if it is FUD, do you really want to roll the dice on wether on not this could trigger a nuclear event? I don't want to get anywhere close to that. While you seem to be yeehawing like Major Kong
So the only situation where a Russian bomb falls on my house is when it's an ICBM launched because the US escalated themselves into full on war over Ukraine.
No offense but you sound blue-eyed and idealistic when history has shown this to be a typical outcome.
Actually the typical outcome was letting hitler take the sudatenland while doing nothing.
This is us stopping the typical outcome.
that's not what they mean
they mean "America sending troops over to a foreign country to 'save them', and then sending more, and OOPS now we've started a war there and we're already racking up those war crimes, and now the civilians there literally see us as goddamn evil and they're not even wrong to think that way because it turns out that we were basically there mainly doing heinous shit so that the nation was in a position where they kinda had to let us have a share of their resources so rich old white men back home can add an extra 3 zeroes to their bank accounts" was something we literally did for the last 2 decades
it is very much the one of the likely historical outcomes of "now the US gets militarily involved"
There are only 2 possibilities here:
In either case, si vis pacem, Para bellum.
It feels like you're treating the US as a force of nature here, rather than like a nation who is acting in this way because it's convenient and in their interests
like the US could just like go "hey, please do peace talks, a lot of people are dying", but they're not doing that
and if the US really is that more powerful than Russia as you say, then they could rather easily start facilitating the above but once again they are not doing that
but I mean, we did basically that already
like relatively recently
in the middle east
In the middle east, we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Here, Russia is the invader. The two situations aren't comparable.
To me, the issue is that it increased. Whether by a small amount or not is rather meaningless if your complaint is that troops are being committed at all. It could have increased by 30 troops and (although it wouldn't have made news) it would bother me.
Okay I just realized what instance I'm on. Time to unsubscribe.
People are mean to me that I'm advocating for a senseless war with a nuclear element. Since obviously I can't be wrong I'm taking my ball and hiding in my echo chamber
"I'm happy that Russia invaded Ukraine and I want nothing to do with it, I'm sure they'll be fine".
Not happy about Russia invading Ukraine but also not happy about the US potentially escalating to WW3. Ukraine is not worth a nuclear Holocaust
LMFAO Like this is a valid excuse. Only 2 people in this comments section is from Lemmy.ml. Everyone else is commenting here from different servers.
What a truly stupid take.
For real, I had to do a double take when I read that. Buddy probably thinks this is lemmygrad
lemmy.ml is federated with lemmygrad.ml, and both are old instances (also run by the same people but that's less relevant here). Point being is that all the people on tankie central are subscribed to !worldnews@lemmy.ml for their worldnews community and thus you get a certain voting pattern you don't see in other worldnews communities even if you don't see any lemmygrad.ml users commenting.
Maybe take some time to inspect the votes? They're not coming from lemmygrad. It's all public info
For values of "public info" that involve running an instance and inspecting the database. Also lemmy.ml itself has quite a high proportion of tankies as it's the instance that tankies tend to use to interact with instances defederating lemmygrad.ml.
I'm guessing you are in voluntary reserves then, right? Because to advocate for sending others to die in a needless war, when you yourself aren't volunteering to do exactly that, is hypocritical and frankly ghoulish.
Nuclear Armageddon is good actually!
