Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
www.bloomberg.com

The worst-case scenario is now a possible one: European troops fighting off an invasion largely alone.

It’s by no means clear the Europeans would succeed. Romanian and other European officials at the exercise in Cincu, about 260 kilometers (162 miles) north of Bucharest by road, voiced concerns about how long it would take for NATO allies to make it to the front.

French four-star General Philippe de Montenon said he’s confident Europe could prevail, even without the US on side. “The direction of history is a progressive disengagement of the United States from the European continent,” he said.

archive

  • Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.comEnglish
    21·
    4 hours ago

    NATO expanding into Poland as per Wikipedia article on controversy of NATO expansion eastwards.

    NATO was a defence pact

    …which has historically been used to bomb considered enemy nations such as Yugoslavia or Libya.

    the idea was to prevent something like what happened in the first world war where everyone ended up fighting each other

    Not true. Per Wikipedia’s article on NATO: “Throughout the Cold War, NATO’s primary purpose was to deter and counter the threat posed by the Soviet Union and its satellite states, which formed the rival Warsaw Pact in 1955”.

    NATO has a policy of never initiating an attack

    Ask Libyans or Yugoslavians what they have to say about that. And that’s just official NATO interventions, without counting Iraq or Afghanistan, in which some but not all NATO members participated.

    There is zero reason for Russia to consider NATO a threat.

    This is absolutely delusional, it’s patently obvious that you have never talked to a Russian person, and I say this as a Spaniard. NATO has consistently been a formation hostile to Russia, and has for the longest time been carrying out “simulacrum exercises” in the Baltic sea and regions near Russia.