Why you don't pay your fair share for NATO?

Question

If you pay then no need to answer, exept you are from Bulgary.
WTF Bulgary, why 3.3%GDP?

Answer 1

andreasderjuengere | 2.9K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

Personally, I paid nothing - and would not. The NATO treaty does not have my own signature; nor does it have my support.
About fairness: If I no longer want to agree to a contract I made once, then it's my right to just... brexit. Isn't it.

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
you are not in NATO and paying 2% GDP is a condition to be part of the aliance, whitch many country don't respect it.
andreasderjuengere

1 mo
My original country (Germany) is a member.
I grew up in the shadow of the late cold war. Once the Warsaw pact collapsed I met numerous 'bad' Russians - and figured out that we have been told lies all the time. 'The enemy' is not some sniper behind the border, but it's our own leaders and politicians; they use us.
Later on: when my supposed to be allies brawled in the Falklands, or kicked Iraqi arses for oil... that's not my business at all. And allies like this: I don't need them, nor do I want them.
...
If many countries don't 'respect' the agreement, then to me it indicates regret to have made these agreements in the first place. So I might say that being unhappy about the way it is - is not from your side only.
I suggest to end this farce. And if others prefer to continue to play cops and robbers - they are free to set up a new club for that.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
The oil teory is just a conspiratory one. The war in midle east is not for oil. Is for external and internal security for and of the region
Show All Show Less
andreasderjuengere

1 mo
'Oil' is rather meant as a spaceholder for -say- national interests. Example: ''there is nothing to get from Ethiopia or Myanmar - so why would be do something about it?''
I don't try to find a conspiracy: I see it as a 'general attitude' that is shared by most nations with some sort of 'power'.
On a similar level I don't support the NATO: there's no benefit any longer.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
You are not even part of Europ, your opinion doesn't mather as long you will never joyn the grup or even have the posibility to do it.
andreasderjuengere

1 mo
Canada, the U. S. and Turkey aren't European either.
You may have missed my previous post: I was born and raised in Northern Germany; my passport is German and my (recorded) family 'history' is German since 600 and something years. I do feel qualified to have a word here :)
The fact that I meanwhile live/work in Thailand (the profile says it) does not change my past.
I had served a military time in my youth (which I now see as a mistake) and was in touch with NATO military as well ('BFG', naval airwing, Italy and Norway) so it's not that my views and impressions come from nowhere.
The trouble with NATO (my view) is that it has outlived its original idea and purpose - but the involved active members (military and politicians) would be jobless and so try to keep it alive; on the expense of the taxpayer, who in return still is safe from foreign military aggression - where foreign 'aggression' -where it exists- meanwhile has become an economic one.
And as you, rightly so, commented: outside of NATO-land there can be no interests. So let me ask you: what the heck is NATO doing in Afghanistan, Somalia, or Iraq and elsewhere?
(my own answer: kissing the feet of the U. S.)

Answer 2

Alexandrubaschet08

you are not in NATO and paying 2% GDP is a condition to be part of the aliance, whitch many country don't respect it.

Answer 3

andreasderjuengere

My original country (Germany) is a member.
I grew up in the shadow of the late cold war. Once the Warsaw pact collapsed I met numerous 'bad' Russians - and figured out that we have been told lies all the time. 'The enemy' is not some sniper behind the border, but it's our own leaders and politicians; they use us.
Later on: when my supposed to be allies brawled in the Falklands, or kicked Iraqi arses for oil... that's not my business at all. And allies like this: I don't need them, nor do I want them.
...
If many countries don't 'respect' the agreement, then to me it indicates regret to have made these agreements in the first place. So I might say that being unhappy about the way it is - is not from your side only.
I suggest to end this farce. And if others prefer to continue to play cops and robbers - they are free to set up a new club for that.

Answer 4

Alexandrubaschet08

The oil teory is just a conspiratory one. The war in midle east is not for oil. Is for external and internal security for and of the region

Answer 5

andreasderjuengere

'Oil' is rather meant as a spaceholder for -say- national interests. Example: ''there is nothing to get from Ethiopia or Myanmar - so why would be do something about it?''
I don't try to find a conspiracy: I see it as a 'general attitude' that is shared by most nations with some sort of 'power'.
On a similar level I don't support the NATO: there's no benefit any longer.

Answer 6

Alexandrubaschet08

You are not even part of Europ, your opinion doesn't mather as long you will never joyn the grup or even have the posibility to do it.

Answer 7

andreasderjuengere

Canada, the U. S. and Turkey aren't European either.
You may have missed my previous post: I was born and raised in Northern Germany; my passport is German and my (recorded) family 'history' is German since 600 and something years. I do feel qualified to have a word here :)
The fact that I meanwhile live/work in Thailand (the profile says it) does not change my past.
I had served a military time in my youth (which I now see as a mistake) and was in touch with NATO military as well ('BFG', naval airwing, Italy and Norway) so it's not that my views and impressions come from nowhere.
The trouble with NATO (my view) is that it has outlived its original idea and purpose - but the involved active members (military and politicians) would be jobless and so try to keep it alive; on the expense of the taxpayer, who in return still is safe from foreign military aggression - where foreign 'aggression' -where it exists- meanwhile has become an economic one.
And as you, rightly so, commented: outside of NATO-land there can be no interests. So let me ask you: what the heck is NATO doing in Afghanistan, Somalia, or Iraq and elsewhere?
(my own answer: kissing the feet of the U. S.)

Answer 8

msc545 | 1.8K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

Good question. I think they don't pay because they don't have to. One of the few things Trump actually understood, although he did nothing about it.

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
He made some country to increes the %. Befor Trump only UK and USA invest the minimum 2%.
My country Romania give 2%, i voted for that.
Poland , Estonia, Greek and moust of the country on the map.
And we are East European whitch mean we have a low economy but still try to suport our aliance. But Western country are so lazy and not serios. They don't care but themself because the danger is not close to them.
msc545

1 mo
The danger is as close to us as the range of an ICBM, which means any country on the planet with those missiles can attack us.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
Yes but Country like Wester Europ and USA don't have Russia at 2 days whit the car next to them. They will damn suport the aliance when they hear situations like in Crimea more close to them.
2% of GDP is the same level of dificulty for each country to keep it. Witch is not fair only 10 country to make that from all your aliaces

Answer 9

Alexandrubaschet08

He made some country to increes the %. Befor Trump only UK and USA invest the minimum 2%.
My country Romania give 2%, i voted for that.
Poland , Estonia, Greek and moust of the country on the map.
And we are East European whitch mean we have a low economy but still try to suport our aliance. But Western country are so lazy and not serios. They don't care but themself because the danger is not close to them.

Answer 10

msc545

The danger is as close to us as the range of an ICBM, which means any country on the planet with those missiles can attack us.

Answer 11

Alexandrubaschet08

Yes but Country like Wester Europ and USA don't have Russia at 2 days whit the car next to them. They will damn suport the aliance when they hear situations like in Crimea more close to them.
2% of GDP is the same level of dificulty for each country to keep it. Witch is not fair only 10 country to make that from all your aliaces

Answer 12

Anonymous

America should just get out of NATO, and bring all of our troops home from around the world.

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
And then 100% of the Third World War will come again.
You will be attacked again by other countries and many people will die because of your ignorance. So it was in the Vietnam War and the Cold War.
The United States is the most important state in keeping Europe stable. Two World Wars came from here + other colonial ones before them. The great wars start in Europe when there are too many different plans and interests.
And this has affected you in the past and will affect you in the future if you do not want to get involved.
Opinion Owner

1 mo
Tough shit.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
Yes, tough shit.
That is why NATO must not fall apart.
Show All Show Less
Opinion Owner

1 mo
Keep it together, and leave the US out of it.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
Sorry, but that can't happen. Whatever great war followed, the United States would be involved sooner or later. So it was in the first but also in the second.
Opinion Owner

1 mo
Let the United Kingdom deal with it. We need to use our money for healthcare, not policing the world.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
If you do not police the world, then the world will prevail over you.
You US invest more in the national army than NATO, the US pays 3% of GDP. It is of equal economic difficulty to all members.
Your problem with investing in the military is not the same as NATO.
You have the highest GDP in the world, 2% would be enough on your part for NATO. And the remaining 1.4% would be incredibly good to make some reforms in the medical system and education.
Not to mention your tax-free corporations and all the tax-exempt billionaires. That's your hole.
Opinion Owner

1 mo
The UK can police the world.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
You mean in the 18th century.
Opinion Owner

1 mo
America should just care about America.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
That's the stupidest thing an American can say.
Opinion Owner

1 mo
LOL Do you have any clue how much stupid shit I hear on this site by Brits?
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
I believe you, I'm glad I'm not British.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
UK is just my location, not my country or nationality :P
Levin

1 mo
To be fair the US spends a lot on healthcare. Isn't it around 20% of GDP? Whereas we spend around 10% of ours in the UK and have universal coverage, and people not going bankrupt or being scared to see a doctor for the bill they might end up with.
Levin

1 mo
It's worth bearing in mind that the US has gargantuan military spending largely to further its own strategic interests throughout the world, not out of care and concern for other nations.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
@Levin in UK is a terible healt sistem, they have a lot of birocraty that put the pacients to do it. It take like 5 to 10 min to call an ambilance and like 2 weeks to see a doctors.
In Romania, wher is not a good medical sistem you get bether healt care then in UK. UK is one of the moust horible healt sistem in Europ
Levin

1 mo
There's definitely a lot wrong with the UK system but terrible is rather unfair. Generally speaking, if I have a problem, I can get it sorted. And urgent problems will garner an urgent response. Although likely all of that has gone to shit with the covid con.

And yes, its a creaking system with not enough spare capacity.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
@Levin In Romania they ask wher you are, what happen who you are and to say some ID numbers and they come to you take like 1-2 min and in 1-2 min Ambulance is at you.
In UK ask you what happen, who you are, wher are you, please confirm you ID at the phone, when the problem start, why do you think it stat, when is your birth day, phone number and alll the susless questions in the world so lather afther like 10-15 min conversation wher you olso exercise the alphabet at last come an ambulance in 5-10 min

Answer 13

Alexandrubaschet08

And then 100% of the Third World War will come again.
You will be attacked again by other countries and many people will die because of your ignorance. So it was in the Vietnam War and the Cold War.
The United States is the most important state in keeping Europe stable. Two World Wars came from here + other colonial ones before them. The great wars start in Europe when there are too many different plans and interests.
And this has affected you in the past and will affect you in the future if you do not want to get involved.

Answer 14

Opinion Owner

Tough shit.

Answer 15

Alexandrubaschet08

Yes, tough shit.
That is why NATO must not fall apart.

Answer 16

Opinion Owner

Keep it together, and leave the US out of it.

Answer 17

Alexandrubaschet08

Sorry, but that can't happen. Whatever great war followed, the United States would be involved sooner or later. So it was in the first but also in the second.

Answer 18

Opinion Owner

Let the United Kingdom deal with it. We need to use our money for healthcare, not policing the world.

Answer 19

Alexandrubaschet08

If you do not police the world, then the world will prevail over you.
You US invest more in the national army than NATO, the US pays 3% of GDP. It is of equal economic difficulty to all members.
Your problem with investing in the military is not the same as NATO.
You have the highest GDP in the world, 2% would be enough on your part for NATO. And the remaining 1.4% would be incredibly good to make some reforms in the medical system and education.
Not to mention your tax-free corporations and all the tax-exempt billionaires. That's your hole.

Answer 20

Opinion Owner

The UK can police the world.

Answer 21

Alexandrubaschet08

You mean in the 18th century.

Answer 22

Opinion Owner

America should just care about America.

Answer 23

Alexandrubaschet08

That's the stupidest thing an American can say.

Answer 24

Opinion Owner

LOL Do you have any clue how much stupid shit I hear on this site by Brits?

Answer 25

Alexandrubaschet08

I believe you, I'm glad I'm not British.

Answer 26

Alexandrubaschet08

UK is just my location, not my country or nationality :P

Answer 27

Levin

To be fair the US spends a lot on healthcare. Isn't it around 20% of GDP? Whereas we spend around 10% of ours in the UK and have universal coverage, and people not going bankrupt or being scared to see a doctor for the bill they might end up with.

Answer 28

Levin

It's worth bearing in mind that the US has gargantuan military spending largely to further its own strategic interests throughout the world, not out of care and concern for other nations.

Answer 29

Alexandrubaschet08

@Levin in UK is a terible healt sistem, they have a lot of birocraty that put the pacients to do it. It take like 5 to 10 min to call an ambilance and like 2 weeks to see a doctors.
In Romania, wher is not a good medical sistem you get bether healt care then in UK. UK is one of the moust horible healt sistem in Europ

Answer 30

Levin

There's definitely a lot wrong with the UK system but terrible is rather unfair. Generally speaking, if I have a problem, I can get it sorted. And urgent problems will garner an urgent response. Although likely all of that has gone to shit with the covid con.

And yes, its a creaking system with not enough spare capacity.

Answer 31

Alexandrubaschet08

@Levin In Romania they ask wher you are, what happen who you are and to say some ID numbers and they come to you take like 1-2 min and in 1-2 min Ambulance is at you.
In UK ask you what happen, who you are, wher are you, please confirm you ID at the phone, when the problem start, why do you think it stat, when is your birth day, phone number and alll the susless questions in the world so lather afther like 10-15 min conversation wher you olso exercise the alphabet at last come an ambulance in 5-10 min

Answer 32

Astarlessnightsky | 1.3K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

Same reason super rich guys and huge companies don't pay their fair share in taxes "We don't want to."

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
then put sanctions

Answer 33

Alexandrubaschet08

then put sanctions

Answer 34

Jonathanlama

Xper 6

Because we should leave nato, as my president stated, nato is brain dead

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
We are in NATO you should pay 2%, is unacceptable the East Europ can make such a sacriface, even more admirable from Bulgary and big nation like Germany and France show theyr interes for this aliance that need to prezerv peace in Europ.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
It's up to the United States to fire us, they just have to do it, which I absolutely won't mind. The defense of Europe? You have NATO and since you have spent a larger budget than France on the army, you should be able to have an acceptable army to defend yourself
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
is 2% that doesn't meen much more then a western country.
You guys have even more then us and don't want to invest them
Show All Show Less
Jonathanlama

1 mo
NATO is useless to us, so I feel once again that we should leave it. If countries like Romania want to stay in NATO, it's up to them to do so, and since they respect the 2 percent, it is still very good for them, but to stop wanting France to remain in NATO.
Levin

1 mo
With the greatest of respect @jonathanlama. I'm not sure what good it would do to have France on your fighting side!
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
If the Western power live the aliance 100% the 3 WW will come, nothink will be able to stop Russia from taking all the east part of Europ and com to the border whit Germany +/- France.
If France will live it will be a destabilization of the aliance in thous time.
Stop suporting France to live!
Jonathanlama

1 mo
@Levin We are as useful as the Perfidious Albion😉
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
who is Albion?
Jonathanlama

1 mo
@Alexandrubaschet08 It’s England, it’s a French expression, Perfide Albion ”is a pejorative expression used in the context of international relations to refer to England and, by extension, Great Britain and the United Kingdom, referring to Albion , its old name. It refers to acts of diplomatic maneuvering, duplicity, treachery and therefore infidelity
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
UK pay 2% the same number tha France should do as well.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
It doesn't change anything lol
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
If all members will 2% our need for USA will be more low and it will be a bether defence sistem because USA need olso to take care of theyr hospitals and schools.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
I don't think. the USA has so much military power that with all the best efforts in the world, European countries will never be able to have less need of the USA.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
Of course we can. If all European countries and Canada respected the 2% agreement, the USA would not have to make additional efforts, and the trust and relations between the members would only gain.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
@Alexandrubaschet08 Honestly, I want you to explain to me why you want France to stay in NATO. In NATO you have the USA, then England and Germany, there is absolutely no need for France, and Romania remains protected by all these countries. And once, you told me the French were cowards, referring to WWII, nobody wants a coward in their team😉
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
France must remain in NATO because:
- Can ensure the passage of Portuguese and Spanish troops to the east
- It is the closest country with nuclear weapons to the NATO border.
- It has the largest nuclear arsenal after the USA at the disposal of Europe
- In order not to reduce the continent's nuclear arsenal
- It has one of the best medical systems that can support a massive number of injured
- Ensures a better fluidization of the transport at continental level

These are the arguments of a non-specialist, me.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
Yes, except that it is not because France would leave NATO that it would not help other countries in the event of a problem, before there was no NATO and that did not prevent countries from helping
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
Yes, there is no common goal, the defense of the North American and European continent. No one is interested in helping a non-Allied country.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
If, for example, France leaves NATO, in the event of a problem it will always be on the side of the Westerners for obvious reasons. Moreover, when Charles de Gaulle made France leave NATO and that he renvoyed the American troops present on French soil, we were still on the side of the Americans against the USSR.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
But if the Wasava pakt whas attaking West Berlin you will not go to war to stop the USSR influence.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
The Russians will never do that because it would start WW3
Levin

1 mo
Haha, French people really don't want to fight, eh? You can't expect the British people to do all the hard work for you!
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
Russia don't care about it. Putin declar he is not afraid to us nuclear bombs for the Baltic states and when Sweeden start to think to get in NATO Russia imidietly violate the teritory of Sweeden whit some armys and nuclear bombs in order to intimidate them. Russia is olso invadin many time the air space of the Baltic states as well even if it's NATO air space and that should mean to bomb thous airplanes. Rusia ocupate many teritorys whit theyr armys and hold an intervention one time on Rep. Moldova to cros the river Nistru for an exercise of invazion. They ocupate Crimea whitch put in danger Ukrain, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia, the last one have olso ocupate teritory.
Jonathanlama

1 mo
@Levin Do the English fight? You know very well my friend that the English rarely fight, on the other hand they give money to the other countrys of Europe so that they fight in their place😉
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
I don't minde if UK give East Europ like 50. billions GBP to buy some army :) and fight for ourself :)
Jonathanlama

1 mo
Sorry, but when Putin first came to power, the Americans promised the Russians that they would not extend NATO to other countries and especially to countries close to Russia, the Americans betrayed their promises, and they seek to break in Russian influence by integrating its countries into NATO. The Crimea has always been Russian, and there is a large Russian population there.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
Crimea was not always Russia's. There's a mix of people there. Crimea belonged to several states. In fact, at one time it was administered by the Duchy of Moldova during the time of Stephen the Great.
We are glad and do not regret the fact that the US violated that agreement at all. Russia has absolutely no rights over our countries and we are free to do what we want. I personally support Ukraine's accession to NATO and the EU, the dethronement of the dictatorial president of Belarus. Russia to go to hell.
The US is not officially an idiot, we countries that you say were under "Russian influence" have asked to be part of these alliances. The fact that it doesn't suit Russia to suck our cocks and fuck her ass alone.
We are not the toys of the great powers, let it be clear.
We were allies and enemies with Russia, none of the options suited the Russians and we did not like to deal with them. WE DON'T DEBT ANYTHING TO THE RUSSIANS EVEN THE FEW SLAVE WORDS IN OUR LANGUAGE!
Jonathanlama

1 mo
It was the Russians who gave Crimea to Ukraine, and they got it back for strategic reasons, but what did the allies of Ukraine do to prevent Russia from annexing Crimea?🤣 for so much the Ukrainian president asked for help from western countries

Answer 35

Alexandrubaschet08

We are in NATO you should pay 2%, is unacceptable the East Europ can make such a sacriface, even more admirable from Bulgary and big nation like Germany and France show theyr interes for this aliance that need to prezerv peace in Europ.

Answer 36

Jonathanlama

It's up to the United States to fire us, they just have to do it, which I absolutely won't mind. The defense of Europe? You have NATO and since you have spent a larger budget than France on the army, you should be able to have an acceptable army to defend yourself

Answer 37

Alexandrubaschet08

is 2% that doesn't meen much more then a western country.
You guys have even more then us and don't want to invest them

Answer 38

Jonathanlama

NATO is useless to us, so I feel once again that we should leave it. If countries like Romania want to stay in NATO, it's up to them to do so, and since they respect the 2 percent, it is still very good for them, but to stop wanting France to remain in NATO.

Answer 39

Levin

With the greatest of respect @jonathanlama. I'm not sure what good it would do to have France on your fighting side!

Answer 40

Alexandrubaschet08

If the Western power live the aliance 100% the 3 WW will come, nothink will be able to stop Russia from taking all the east part of Europ and com to the border whit Germany +/- France.
If France will live it will be a destabilization of the aliance in thous time.
Stop suporting France to live!

Answer 41

Jonathanlama

@Levin We are as useful as the Perfidious Albion😉

Answer 42

Alexandrubaschet08

who is Albion?

Answer 43

Jonathanlama

@Alexandrubaschet08 It’s England, it’s a French expression, Perfide Albion ”is a pejorative expression used in the context of international relations to refer to England and, by extension, Great Britain and the United Kingdom, referring to Albion , its old name. It refers to acts of diplomatic maneuvering, duplicity, treachery and therefore infidelity

Answer 44

Alexandrubaschet08

UK pay 2% the same number tha France should do as well.

Answer 45

Jonathanlama

It doesn't change anything lol

Answer 46

Alexandrubaschet08

If all members will 2% our need for USA will be more low and it will be a bether defence sistem because USA need olso to take care of theyr hospitals and schools.

Answer 47

Jonathanlama

I don't think. the USA has so much military power that with all the best efforts in the world, European countries will never be able to have less need of the USA.

Answer 48

Alexandrubaschet08

Of course we can. If all European countries and Canada respected the 2% agreement, the USA would not have to make additional efforts, and the trust and relations between the members would only gain.

Answer 49

Jonathanlama

@Alexandrubaschet08 Honestly, I want you to explain to me why you want France to stay in NATO. In NATO you have the USA, then England and Germany, there is absolutely no need for France, and Romania remains protected by all these countries. And once, you told me the French were cowards, referring to WWII, nobody wants a coward in their team😉

Answer 50

Alexandrubaschet08

France must remain in NATO because:
- Can ensure the passage of Portuguese and Spanish troops to the east
- It is the closest country with nuclear weapons to the NATO border.
- It has the largest nuclear arsenal after the USA at the disposal of Europe
- In order not to reduce the continent's nuclear arsenal
- It has one of the best medical systems that can support a massive number of injured
- Ensures a better fluidization of the transport at continental level

These are the arguments of a non-specialist, me.

Answer 51

Jonathanlama

Yes, except that it is not because France would leave NATO that it would not help other countries in the event of a problem, before there was no NATO and that did not prevent countries from helping

Answer 52

Alexandrubaschet08

Yes, there is no common goal, the defense of the North American and European continent. No one is interested in helping a non-Allied country.

Answer 53

Jonathanlama

If, for example, France leaves NATO, in the event of a problem it will always be on the side of the Westerners for obvious reasons. Moreover, when Charles de Gaulle made France leave NATO and that he renvoyed the American troops present on French soil, we were still on the side of the Americans against the USSR.

Answer 54

Alexandrubaschet08

But if the Wasava pakt whas attaking West Berlin you will not go to war to stop the USSR influence.

Answer 55

Jonathanlama

The Russians will never do that because it would start WW3

Answer 56

Levin

Haha, French people really don't want to fight, eh? You can't expect the British people to do all the hard work for you!

Answer 57

Alexandrubaschet08

Russia don't care about it. Putin declar he is not afraid to us nuclear bombs for the Baltic states and when Sweeden start to think to get in NATO Russia imidietly violate the teritory of Sweeden whit some armys and nuclear bombs in order to intimidate them. Russia is olso invadin many time the air space of the Baltic states as well even if it's NATO air space and that should mean to bomb thous airplanes. Rusia ocupate many teritorys whit theyr armys and hold an intervention one time on Rep. Moldova to cros the river Nistru for an exercise of invazion. They ocupate Crimea whitch put in danger Ukrain, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia, the last one have olso ocupate teritory.

Answer 58

Jonathanlama

@Levin Do the English fight? You know very well my friend that the English rarely fight, on the other hand they give money to the other countrys of Europe so that they fight in their place😉

Answer 59

Alexandrubaschet08

I don't minde if UK give East Europ like 50. billions GBP to buy some army :) and fight for ourself :)

Answer 60

Jonathanlama

Sorry, but when Putin first came to power, the Americans promised the Russians that they would not extend NATO to other countries and especially to countries close to Russia, the Americans betrayed their promises, and they seek to break in Russian influence by integrating its countries into NATO. The Crimea has always been Russian, and there is a large Russian population there.

Answer 61

Alexandrubaschet08

Crimea was not always Russia's. There's a mix of people there. Crimea belonged to several states. In fact, at one time it was administered by the Duchy of Moldova during the time of Stephen the Great.
We are glad and do not regret the fact that the US violated that agreement at all. Russia has absolutely no rights over our countries and we are free to do what we want. I personally support Ukraine's accession to NATO and the EU, the dethronement of the dictatorial president of Belarus. Russia to go to hell.
The US is not officially an idiot, we countries that you say were under "Russian influence" have asked to be part of these alliances. The fact that it doesn't suit Russia to suck our cocks and fuck her ass alone.
We are not the toys of the great powers, let it be clear.
We were allies and enemies with Russia, none of the options suited the Russians and we did not like to deal with them. WE DON'T DEBT ANYTHING TO THE RUSSIANS EVEN THE FEW SLAVE WORDS IN OUR LANGUAGE!

Answer 62

Jonathanlama

It was the Russians who gave Crimea to Ukraine, and they got it back for strategic reasons, but what did the allies of Ukraine do to prevent Russia from annexing Crimea?🤣 for so much the Ukrainian president asked for help from western countries

Answer 63

Bananaman177

Guru

Same reason I don't pay for pizzas I didn't order.

Because I DIDN'T ORDER IT, ASSHOLE.

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
But it is convenient for you to receive valuable inheritances.
Don't inherit duty from your acestors, you ASSHOLE.
You weren't interested in the second war either, until you were attacked. If you had been part of the League of Nations from the beginning, World War II would not have happened.
Likewise with NATO, why not prevent such events? Why form alliances in the last moments when we can prevent major catastrophes.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
olso, USA PAY 3% :P
Bananaman177

1 mo
My country fought on the WRONG SIDE in WW2 and the current world order is the direct result.
Show All Show Less
Bananaman177

1 mo
And don't even think of talking shit, YOUR country fought on BOTH sides and LOST both ways!
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
WTF? You want to say AXA whas the right side?
Bananaman177

1 mo
WTF? You want to say Soviet Union under Stalin was?

LOL.
Bananaman177

1 mo
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
You are aware that you do not have all the information and mental skills to understand what we are talking about, right?
Do you know about the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact? I see that you are somehow aware that Stalin was evil, but do you know that Hitler was too?
My country was like Poland divided between several parts, it did not disappear from the map but Germany (AXA) and the USSR (Entente) took territories from my country, Germany gave the territories to Hungary and Bulgaria.
It was best to support 1 of the 2 plans that were proposed and you did not accept them.
1. A landing in the Balkans and the takeover of the eastern front under US and UK control. You refused and insisted on a landing in Normandy (France)
2. Failure to support the "unthinkable plan" proposed by Churchil to continue the war, but this time against the USSR, in order to liberate the occupied countries of the USSR / Russia, both allied and neutral.
If you think that the situation in the Second World War was so simple that you had to choose the AXA or Entente camp, then you have serious shortcomings in terms of history. My country also fought against Russia and Germany. Who did Poland have to fight to win the war and have the territories from 1939? Czechoslovakia as well... My country helped the Allies in the Entente more than France did in 1939, which capitulated, more than Italy, which fought against Germany after changing sides.
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
It's clear you're an ignorant ignoramus. People like you have brought the United States into the situation it is. And people like you have stormed the Senate like fools.
Bananaman177

1 mo
You mean The People's House? You're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about, fucko.
Bananaman177

1 mo
Changing sides in the middle of a war makes you a worthless ally no matter how much apologia you can rattle off. Berlusconi should have deported you to Africa.

Answer 64

Alexandrubaschet08

But it is convenient for you to receive valuable inheritances.
Don't inherit duty from your acestors, you ASSHOLE.
You weren't interested in the second war either, until you were attacked. If you had been part of the League of Nations from the beginning, World War II would not have happened.
Likewise with NATO, why not prevent such events? Why form alliances in the last moments when we can prevent major catastrophes.

Answer 65

Alexandrubaschet08

olso, USA PAY 3% :P

Answer 66

Bananaman177

My country fought on the WRONG SIDE in WW2 and the current world order is the direct result.

Answer 67

Bananaman177

And don't even think of talking shit, YOUR country fought on BOTH sides and LOST both ways!

Answer 68

Alexandrubaschet08

WTF? You want to say AXA whas the right side?

Answer 69

Bananaman177

WTF? You want to say Soviet Union under Stalin was?

LOL.

Answer 70

Bananaman177

Why you don't pay your fair share for NATO?

Answer 71

Alexandrubaschet08

You are aware that you do not have all the information and mental skills to understand what we are talking about, right?
Do you know about the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact? I see that you are somehow aware that Stalin was evil, but do you know that Hitler was too?
My country was like Poland divided between several parts, it did not disappear from the map but Germany (AXA) and the USSR (Entente) took territories from my country, Germany gave the territories to Hungary and Bulgaria.
It was best to support 1 of the 2 plans that were proposed and you did not accept them.
1. A landing in the Balkans and the takeover of the eastern front under US and UK control. You refused and insisted on a landing in Normandy (France)
2. Failure to support the "unthinkable plan" proposed by Churchil to continue the war, but this time against the USSR, in order to liberate the occupied countries of the USSR / Russia, both allied and neutral.
If you think that the situation in the Second World War was so simple that you had to choose the AXA or Entente camp, then you have serious shortcomings in terms of history. My country also fought against Russia and Germany. Who did Poland have to fight to win the war and have the territories from 1939? Czechoslovakia as well... My country helped the Allies in the Entente more than France did in 1939, which capitulated, more than Italy, which fought against Germany after changing sides.

Answer 72

Alexandrubaschet08

It's clear you're an ignorant ignoramus. People like you have brought the United States into the situation it is. And people like you have stormed the Senate like fools.

Answer 73

Bananaman177

You mean The People's House? You're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about, fucko.
Why you don't pay your fair share for NATO?

Answer 74

Bananaman177

Changing sides in the middle of a war makes you a worthless ally no matter how much apologia you can rattle off. Berlusconi should have deported you to Africa.

Answer 75

bolverk | 673 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Xper 7

I think you mean Bulgaria mate, but with a map from Bloomberg who knows!

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
In romanian i say as well Bulgaria, but i don't now in English.

Answer 76

Alexandrubaschet08

In romanian i say as well Bulgaria, but i don't now in English.

Answer 77

007kingifrit | 1.2K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Xper 7

bulgaria is worried about a turkish invasion

Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
They have the Balkan for that one :)) Turkey will never ever be able to take Balkans again. Whit Romania, Serbia and Greek they should keep calm
007kingifrit

1 mo
i suspect that theory will be tested in the next 5 to 15 years
Alexandrubaschet08

1 mo
I don't think so.

Answer 78

Alexandrubaschet08

They have the Balkan for that one :)) Turkey will never ever be able to take Balkans again. Whit Romania, Serbia and Greek they should keep calm

Answer 79

007kingifrit

i suspect that theory will be tested in the next 5 to 15 years

Answer 80

Alexandrubaschet08

I don't think so.

Why you don't pay your fair share for NATO?

Most Helpful Guys

Most Helpful Girl

What Girls & Guys Said

Related myTakes