Trump seems to question US commitment to defending all NATO allies - Polidicks

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/17/politics/trump-nato-fox/index.html The dumbest part: >"Why should my son go to Montenegro to defend it from attack?" Carlson inquired. >Trump responded: "I've asked the same question. Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people. ... They are very strong people. They are very aggressive people, they may get aggressive, and congratulations, you are in World War III."

What in the fuck? this comes from the man who was ready to start another korean war just 3 months ago over the objections of literally everyone who doesn't have a walrus mustache

http://puu.sh/AYoJZ/a69eabbd52.jpg Talk about a picture worth a thousand words

Didn't Trump literally push the Montenegro leader out of the way in 2017? Not that strong then.

starting to make sense now. Russia causes a complete collapse of NATO, or at least remove the strongest parties from the board so that the russians can annex these countries.

Finland and the breakaway states/former satellites should form the FRTO, the Fuck Russia Treaty Organization.

We don't live in the same fucking universe as the Gauls from Asterix n' Obelix, you fraudulent Dipshit in Orange.

What are the chances that NATO without the US can defend against a full scale Russian invasion? That's gonna end up in so much Guerrilla shit it's not even funny.

Losing US support for NATO would be a huge blow, but there are still other NATO nations who have strong and capable militaries who do not rely totally on the US. France, the UK, Germany, hell, even god damn Turkey. But the smaller countries, especially Denmark, are completely dependent on US (and Canadian) supplies for weapons, munitions, body armour, vehicles (although we do get most of our tanks and IFV's from Germany and Sweden I believe)... The only thing Denmark produces itself are our ships for the Navy, which, while highly advanced, are generally small ships and not very numerous. Our largest class of ship is a couple of frigates. NATO would lose a lot of territory in the first few months of a potential (conventional) war, but would eventually be likely to make a meaningful response. The greatest threat, and a threat which Russia could probably use, would be nuclear devastation.

And two months ago promised a dictator that he would completely pull out all US troops from its closest ally in Asia.

People who loves playing with the idea about "Russia conquering Europe in a blink of an eye" for their stories tends to forget that we are talking about more of 27 countries agaisnt a single one. Sure, the first months all the countries close to Russia will be conquered, as well as them rushing into Germany ( the industrial heart ), but there's still the rest of countries being able to chunk out units. Hitler was sucessful on covering so much territory at first because almost everybody thought they wouldn't be invaded because they were neutral / had alliances with other countries so they would wait for their help, so their armies had no problem conquering a country each time. As soon as the allies started producing units, they outnumbered the German army ( although at this time they already started to had their ass kicked by the URSS at then ). The only way I see Russia being the winner without using WMDs is moving in the shadows to finish the already weak economy of the south european countries, then allowing an economic crash to weak the armies of the rest ( without somehow not being weakened as well ) and having great logistics and ways to both march across thousands of kilometers while impeding reinforcements from outside ( either economical or military assets ). Or somehow managing to confuse the USA enough to make them go into their side and attacking our west, that would be disastrous ( obviously this is just almost impossible to happen, but considering what happened in the last two years, anything is possible ).

What's more likely to happen is Russia will continue playing the long game they're already doing, undermine trust in alliances while slowly chipping away at the border states. It's very easy to get NATO members divided, indecisive, and apathetic towards each other, with that accomplished the alliance loses most if not all of its functions. NATO today is not the unified front it once was, and that makes it vulnerable enough for Russian interests.

I don't believe Russia has any interest in a military conflict anywhere in the world. I strongly believe they intened to manipulate and continue the strategy of Kompromat that they've used for the last 20 years with great success.

You're right. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLuwf00Sg2U Then looked past him with his 'I'm the important one here but don't actually know what I'm doing' face