Support NeoGAF

[buttnuggett]

Hundreds of NATO soldiers died in the Afghanistan war. Very blasé to call it just 'participation'.

I'm not even counting the Iraq war casualties here since that was not a NATO charter.

So a population that is way less did more of the heavy lifting in casualties. Keep in mind, that they were mostly staying in bases. Not all, mind you. Some of those soldiers actually had some balls. But it was mostly us...

 

[Three]

I'm not even bitching about NATO not sending ships to this arena. Their ships are old.

Tell me you're a Trump supporter without telling me you're a Trump supporter. Another Trump lie/talking point you're just accepting without fact checking. NATO countries, like the UK, have new war ships. Newer than the ones the US is using in the conflict at the moment.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

New is the incredibly poor form to try and liken it to a 'participation trophy'.

You (and some other people) are trying to say that USA is obligated to cater to Europe because Europe decided to join Afghanistan War on their own volition. But if you treat it that way then USA participation in WW2 makes things even. And in WW2 a lot of americans died.

The whole idea that somehow USA should be "forever grateful" for european participation sounds the same as Russian constant desire to bring back Russian Empire because 100 years ago it was Russian territory.

 

[buttnuggett]

Tell me you're a Trump supporter without telling me you're a Trump supporter. Another Trump lie/talking point you're just accepting without fact checking. NATO countries, like the UK, have new war ships. Newer than the ones the US is using in the conflict at the moment.

Aren't you under the UK banner? FFS, your navy is a fucking joke. I criticize Trump and I criticize anybody else. You have more admirals than warships.

 

[adamsapple]

You (and some other people) are trying to say that USA is obligated to cater to Europe because Europe decided to join Afghanistan War on their own volition. But if you treat it that way then USA participation in WW2 makes things even. And in WW2 a lot of americans died.

Who said US is obligated to cater to Europe? The US keeps and maintains bases in Europe because it's beneficial to us. The US pays its share to NATO because the intelligence and strategic opportunities that come out of it are beneficial to us. It's not done as a form of charity.

Also, no one likened the US deaths in WW2 to a participation trophy like you did with NATO deaths, so I'm not sure why even make that comparison.

 

[Forsete]

Tell me you're a Trump supporter without telling me you're a Trump supporter. Another Trump lie/talking point you're just accepting without fact checking. NATO countries, like the UK, have new war ships. Newer than the ones the US is using in the conflict at the moment.

Not to mention la petite vive la france.

 

[YCoCg]

How is it one sided? NATO has answered US's call when they asked for it by invoking article 5.

Unless you mean one sided in that Europe has never had to ask for US's help?

For the events happening right now, no NATO nation under threat of direct attack called for the article.

But Trump has revised the history, he said NATO and the EU have never helped America or has contributed very little worthless amounts. All those British soldiers who died in Iraq/Afghanistan were just nothing according to Trump.

 

[Jaybe]

NATO has benefited both Europe and the USA since its inception. Trump is made fun of for being stupid and ignorant on these alliance, thinking he's some mob boss owed protection money. Please don't lower yourself to his intelligence level. You are better than that!

 

[Tams]

Where was infrastructure in that post?

Do you honestly think Trump was planning on ordering random bombing of civilians? That he seriously was going to order Hiroshima/Nagasaki style nuclear bombing?

Really?!

No, it was just his nutty hyperbole.

 

[Clear]

Unfortunately it's gonna take probably the whole 4, or more, years of the next admin to mend relationships.

With whom? The terminally unpopular Eurocrats who are desperately clinging on to power despite being largely despised by their voters?

 

[buttnuggett]

But Trump has revised the history, he said NATO and the EU have never helped America or has contributed very little worthless amounts. All those British soldiers who died in Iraq/Afghanistan were just nothing according to Trump.

Little is a bit much, but most has been Base usage and political backing. Militarily? You're way behind. Although the former helps us build such a military.

 

[YCoCg]

Little is a bit much, but most has been Base usage and political backing. Militarily? You're way behind. Although the former helps us build such a military.

Oh I'm sorry, do more of our forces need to die before you count it?

 

[Tams]

Hundreds of NATO soldiers died in the Afghanistan war. Very blasé to call it just 'participation'.

I'm not even counting the Iraq war casualties here since that was not a NATO charter.

Trump has gone too far with his comments and that's a statistic where a higher number is not something to aspire to.

But notice how only two partners were in three figures.

This lines up with what each member was willing for their forces to do. Quite a few members refused to send troops to the more dangerous regions and some even to have their troops even really leave their bases.

 

[OLED_Gamer]

Do you honestly think Trump was planning on ordering random bombing of civilians? That he seriously was going to order Hiroshima/Nagasaki style nuclear bombing?

Really?!

No, it was just his nutty hyperbole.

Given his batshit crazy ideas- yes.

 

[buttnuggett]

Oh I'm sorry, do more of our forces need to die before you count it?

Not at all if we can just post up 50k or troops in a base and just chill there.

 

[Toons]

Vance is an enigma, Rubio is a possibility. Shapiro would be good for the democrats, but he's a jew, so that disqualifies him from the Hamas bros in your party.

Theres not enough hamas bros for that to become relevant. Most hamas bros don't vote anyway.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Who said US is obligated to cater to Europe? The US keeps and maintains bases in Europe because it's beneficial to us. The US pays its share to NATO because the intelligence and strategic opportunities that come out of it are beneficial to us. It's not done as a form of charity.

Also, no one likened the US deaths in WW2 to a participation trophy like you did with NATO deaths, so I'm not sure why even make that comparison.

It is beneficial to USA but if european countries started to close airspace when USA needs it, then it is already not beneficial as it means USA has bases but it can't use them.

It is like that all mess with UK and Diego Garcia. And Diego Garcia logic can be applied to any land really.

 

[YCoCg]

Not at all if we can just post up 50k or troops in a base and just chill there.

If only all those soldiers who died had just realised they could've just been chilling at bases.

 

[StueyDuck]

Not an IGRC sympathizer, but the whole Taco thing seems to be this weird thing where Trump puts pressure on himself or his people rather than on the people he is making deals with.
'I've made a crazy proclamation - you guys better figure out something before the deadline to get me out of it'
I think it's possible that we were more scared that Trump would actually go through with it than the Iranians were.

Oh I get the "joke" im just not sure what people want, did they want him to bomb everyone? Because the humor is he "chickened" out. So the funny people are saying that they laugh because he chickened out.

I thought wed be saying "thank god that didnt happen" but instead its taco taco from the funny boys so im just curious what outcome they wanted

 

[Ironbunny]

With whom? The terminally unpopular Eurocrats who are desperately clinging on to power despite being largely despised by their voters?

 

[buttnuggett]

If only all those soldiers who died had just realised they could've just been chilling at bases.

The problem with that quip is the soldiers that died weren't chilling at bases. Your soldiers started to chill at bases once the casualties started. Your governments wanted no part of this war. Not all countries, mind you.

 

[adamsapple]

Oh I get the "joke" im just not sure what people want, did they want him to bomb everyone? Because the humor is he "chickened" out. So the funny people are saying that they laugh because he chickened out.

I thought wed be saying "thank god that didnt happen" but instead its taco taco from the funny boys so im just curious what outcome they wanted

Ideally we wouldn't have anyone saying how they'll end entire civilizations at 8PM on Tuesday in the first place.

Trump has gone too far with his comments and that's a statistic where a higher number is not something to aspire to.

But notice how only two partners were in three figures.

This lines up with what each member was willing for their forces to do. Quite a few members refused to send troops to the more dangerous regions and some even to have their troops even really leave their bases.

I don't think anyone is questioning that the US had the most ground troops or the most casualties, the US has the biggest army out of all the NATO nations by many factors.

But it's perfectly fine to acknowledge that the rest of them also sent in troops, often close proportionally per capita to the US. Any soldier who dies in the line of duty is more than just a 'participation trophy'.

 

[YCoCg]

The problem with that quip is the soldiers that died weren't chilling at bases. Your soldiers started to chill at bases once the casualties started. Your governments wanted no part of this war. Not all countries, mind you.

Oh fuck off, Britain risked a lot to help America during that war to the point where they were mocked as Americas lap dog. You can spin on it if you really believe Trumps rendition of events.

 

[StueyDuck]

Ideally we wouldn't have anyone saying how they'll end entire civilizations at 8PM on Tuesday in the first place.

Yeah , but that doesnt change the taco joke... it still insinuates that funny boys wanted him to bomb the country.

Its just seems like a retarded position for people who didnt want mass death to get behind.

 

[buttnuggett]

Oh fuck off, Britain risked a lot to help America during that war to the point where they were mocked as Americas lap dog. You can spin on it if you really believe Trumps rendition of events.

I wasn't talking about Britain. Y'all actually showed nuts. Of course, now, it's probably different.

 

[calico]

No. They were completely batshit. While his argument that arguments, that the treaty was broken by Denmark by the way Greenlanders, invading them is way bad form.

It doesn't matter anymore. Nothing significant to American security can be left to the European nations.

As for Afghanistan, only a handful of allies were doing more than the bare minimum required. Many had a whole laundry list of caveats on their participation: can't go out at night, can't deploy in any dangerous region, can't engage in combat unless attacked etc. That is how you see such incredibly low numbers of deaths for most of them in a 20 year conflict.

 

[Gp1]

Just out of curiosity, to all, how long until China extend it's reach to Europe if the US withdraws from NATO?

You guys defending it already thought of that?

To be a superpower you have to act like one.

Just remember that history shows that one of the main threats to China is Russia, not the US.

China and Russia has common goals now, but that's definitely was not the case in the last 200-300 years.
And IMHO their next target, after Taiwan will be Russia eastern portion.

 

[adamsapple]

So was Shahbaz Sharif speaking out of his ass when he said Lebanon is part of the ceasefire yesterday, or did this escalate/change after that statement was made?

Ridiculous to think that we were just on the verge of a ceasefire and the Strait being opened again and it just got stopped dead in its tracks.

 

[Jaybe]

Looks like war will be back on the menu if Iran thinks their ten points was going to be de facto agreed to

 

[buttnuggett]

It doesn't matter anymore. Nothing significant to American security can be left to the European nations.

As for Afghanistan, only a handful of allies were doing more than the bare minimum required. Many had a whole laundry list of caveats on their participation: can't go out at night, can't deploy in any dangerous region, can't engage in combat unless attacked etc. That is how you see such incredibly low numbers of deaths for most of them in a 20 year conflict.

Until the dollar hegemony falls, it does. Which it should fall. Going off the gold standard fucked us middle class, with inflation, while making the billionaire class billions. Sure, they had inflation, but they could absorb it. FIAT currencies need to die. Pre- FIAT America, a single person could buy a home and support a family with reasonable expectations.

 

[Tams]

Oh fuck off, Britain risked a lot to help America during that war to the point where they were mocked as Americas lap dog. You can spin on it if you really believe Trumps rendition of events.

No need to get worked up over that. The Commonwealth Anglophone countries were the only ones to really take on any significant risk.

 

[FullMetalx117]

Until the dollar hegemony falls, it does. Which it should fall. Going off the gold standard fucked us middle class, with inflation, while making the billionaire class billions. Sure, they had inflation, but they could absorb it. FIAT currencies need to die. Pre- FIAT America, a single person could buy a home and support a family with reasonable expectations.

Many of those sub 80k homes are still available today. Just need to go to certain areas of cleveland, oklahoma, other southern/midwestern states. They would still have many of these amenities people cherished back then, like a bathroom.

 

[Jaybe]

So was Shahbaz Sharif speaking out of his ass when he said Lebanon is part of the ceasefire yesterday, or did this escalate/change after that statement was made?

Ridiculous to think that we were just on the verge of a ceasefire and the Strait being opened again and it just got stopped dead in its tracks.

My guess is he told both sides what they wanted to hear on Lebanon to get a 'ceasefire' announcement before 8pm deadline and we are now dealing with the consequences of him as a intermediary versus direct negotiation between parties

 

[Tams]

So was Shahbaz Sharif speaking out of his ass when he said Lebanon is part of the ceasefire yesterday, or did this escalate/change after that statement was made?

Ridiculous to think that we were just on the verge of a ceasefire and the Strait being opened again and it just got stopped dead in its tracks.

Everyone has just been saying what they want to hear.

So in other words sweet fuck all has been achieved.

 

[buttnuggett]

Many of those sub 80k homes are still available today. Just need to go to certain areas of cleveland, oklahoma, other southern/midwestern states. They would still have many of these amenities people cherished back then, like a bathroom.

Ya, but you could get those homes outside a ghetto, that weren't in dogshit shape. Well that, or Barnfart Kentucky. Either way, good luck finding a job that the wages in the latter. Outside a dying coal mine.

 

[calico]

It may take a few attempts to iron out the exact terms of Iran's capitulation. President Trump proved that Iran will blink when push comes to shove, which is an important step.

 

[buttnuggett]

It may take a few attempts to iron out the exact terms of Iran's capitulation. President Trump proved that Iran will blink when push comes to shove, which is an important step.

Without the final terms, we have no clue. This could be at least non-shitty. Although, with who we have on both sides, probably not. It'll probably be a plate of vomit that both sides will claim victory on.

 

[Ozriel]

Can you list them?

Not relevant. They'll have people for every open position.

Especially those who distinguished themselves in their hostile response in this war. Basically hardliners.

I'll say it again: nothing is over yet. I'm 95% certain that the attacks will resume in 3 weeks. And it's still unclear who's in charge now - it was not the IRGC that announced the ceasefire. We haven't seen the new Ayatollah yet, and I'm not sure we will.

The war is unlikely to resume. Trump has his off ramp.

If IGRC hand over the uranium - maybe. Otherwise, I don't see the point in prolonging this. The US-Israel will gather more intelligence, plan their next operations more thoroughly and strike again.

The Iranians will have buried their missiles better, and will quickly move to bring in better Chinese air defence missiles and way more MANPADS.

Not to mention do more to fortify against ground troops.
This was pretty much it.

You shouldnt confuse parts of Europe and the UK as the rest of the world...

And thats exactly whats going to happen the rest of the world is going to come forward and the EU and UK are going to live in the 70s hippy mindset forever

The future is going to be NA/SA and the Middle East in a strong alliance.

BRICS is forming like the literal legion of doom

The future isnt looking good for the EU, Russia has a nice big crosshair on most of europe and the one country who could genuinely help you guys are pushing away, because meanie doo doo man made a wacky tweet.

I just hope you enjoy the future you dream for, infinite inflation, infinite illegal immigrants, more stricter laws on your free speech. Two tiered justice, gonna be a hell of a time, your leaders have some fun surprises for you just you wait.

Dogs are next, its not gonna be long till theres heavy legislation on pet ownership, especially Dogs. A certain group of people dont like dogs.

I'm not sure why you're incapable of seeing how the U.S. standing has been weakened in the Middle East, or why you imagine all South American countries are eager to line up behind the U.S. the way Europe has for ages.

Imagine throwing away staunch and steadfast allies for shaky marriages of convenience.

Russia still has to struggle through Ukraine, much of Western Europe is under a nuclear umbrella and a united Europe can resist Russia on their own.

Pursuing a policy of isolation will certainly make the U.S. weaker. Especially in an age where China is rising.

I'm not even bitching about NATO not sending ships to this arena. Their ships are old. OTOH, if one party is doing the lion's share of the defensive work, it would make sense to let them use your bases, and stay within range of political goals. Yes, Trump is a blowhard idiot, I won't deny that, but refusing base access for a one-sided affair is certainly a choice.

Base access would have come with political consequences, and retaliation from Iran.

Same countries Musk and his proxies are trying to effect regime change?

Anti-NATO commentary is basically shilling for Russia at this point.

 

[buttnuggett]

Not relevant. They'll have people for every open position.

Especially those who distinguished themselves in their hostile response in this war. Basically hardliners.




The war is unlikely to resume. Trump has his off ramp.



The Iranians will have buried their missiles better, and will quickly move to bring in better Chinese air defence missiles and way more MANPADS.

Not to mention do more to fortify against ground troops.
This was pretty much it.



I'm not sure why you're incapable of seeing how the U.S. standing has been weakened in the Middle East, or why you imagine all South American countries are eager to line up behind the U.S. the way Europe has for ages.

Imagine throwing away staunch and steadfast allies for shaky marriages of convenience.

Russia still has to struggle through Ukraine, much of Western Europe is under a nuclear umbrella and a united Europe can resist Russia on their own.

Pursuing a policy of isolation will certainly make the U.S. weaker. Especially in an age where China is rising.




Base access would have come with political consequences, and retaliation from Iran.

Same countries Musk and his proxies are trying to effect regime change?

Anti-NATO commentary is basically shilling for Russia at this point.

No. Anti NATO commentary is just both sides expressing their grievances with one another.

 

[Muffdraul]

Do you honestly think Trump was planning on ordering random bombing of civilians? That he seriously was going to order Hiroshima/Nagasaki style nuclear bombing?

Really?!

No, it was just his nutty hyperbole.

Safe bet a lot of what you think is just "nutty hyperbole" is actual stupid shit he would have done if left to his own devices. And it's a well known fact that he has WAY fewer "handlers" surrounding him this term than he did in the first. So yeah, forgive us for being nervous that there's a toddler waving around a loaded .357 magnum in the living room.

 

[lachesis]

The same applies in Russia. Two weeks is long enough.

Fair point and noted - but also think of terrain and conditions too. Iran is like 4times larger than Ukraine, rugged terrain. Maybe in Tehran, the roads and railways would be fixed relatively quickly - but other remote bases in the mountains or whatnot - it would take long time to really supply material and all. But will see in 2 weeks whether the country is back up and running. I still think it's not nearly enough.

The problem is that it's not just oil that flows through the strait.
And 20% doesn't seem like a scary figure until you're part of that 20% and 100% dependent on it. And once again, you're overlooking the infrastructure - the other routes (infrastructure and logistics) are designed for the current routes, so it won't be possible to reallocate/rebuild them quickly. Just look at the Europeans, who haven't been able to completely phase out Russian gas in 5 years and won't be able to do so until 2027 (and it's not certain they'll succeed).

Sure fertilizer exports - and also food for Iranians (Rice, wheat) - and even US uses it to supply the US base.
Like a lot of things in life - water flows to the path of least resistance... so I think it wlll go that way. Places like South Korea, they import most from their oil from middle east - and only 1 company who deals with Aramco in Saudi Arabia have been getting steady oil supply thru red sea. I'm sure other oil importers are scrambling to secure red sea route, or import from Russia, or increase import from Canada or US.

Japan got a few ships passed already (I think it had dual nationality type of ownership?) - and Japan's government announced they have secured enough oil that could last till early next year already.
Other countries would import them from Russia (if neededed to be) or whatnot.

Infrastructure - you are absolutely correct. They are not there to replace Hormuz, and some are probably bombed already. Again, taking South Korea an example they pretty much entirely import LNG from Qatar, and Qatar let SK government know that their export deal is off due to uncontrollable conditions, leaving SK looking for alternative source of the LNG, whether there's infrastructure or need to pay extra $$$, whether they import from US/Canada or Brazil or Russia etc.

To those countries like Japan and South Korea - I think Strait of Hormuz is probably the last option to go back. I think 20% is a indeed scary figure - but at the same time I think other infrastructure/route can and will be able to absorb some those need. Not to the all of that 20%, but I don't think other routes and infrastructure handle 5-10% extra for temporary measure - is unreasonable estimate.

 

[demigod]

I'm pretty sure it's already over. The strait is closed again. Iran assumed Lebanon was part of the deal, which the Pakistani PM specifically said yesterday, today morning Trump is saying it was not part of the deal.

So we're back to yesterday morning.

What a clown show.

 

[Meicyn]

The meaning is the same - a small number of drones implies technology transfer, not that the IRGC would use them for strikes. I highly doubt this will happen.


All this information started coming out of Ukraine 3–4 weeks ago

International News | Latest World News, Videos & Photos

Get the latest international news and world events from Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and more. See world news photos and videos at ABCNews.com

abcnews.com

https://www.reuters.com/business/wealthy-moscow-cuts-investment-revealing-russias-deeper-budget-problems-2026-03-06/

How Saudi Arabia Tamed Russia - The American Prospect

The political economy behind recent OPEC oil production cuts

prospect.org

Zelensky fails to secure Tomahawk missiles at talks with Trump

Following the meeting, Trump calls for Kyiv and Moscow to "stop where they are" and end the war.

www.bbc.com

An attack on bridges and power plants would most likely have taken place. The rest of what he said is a massive exaggeration, as usual.

OK, now we're cooking! I appreciate you providing references that inform your perspective. The problem is that your sources don't reinforce your original statement. You said Russia doesn't have drones to spare. Your updated response is that a small number of drones implies a tech transfer. Is it no drones, or some drones? I've been consistent this entire time while you have not.

Regarding the Zelensky interview, I don't understand what you specifically mean by Ukrainian bias regarding these drone shipments. Of course Zelensky is going to be biased when it comes to Iran or Russia. But where would bias apply with regard to Russia sending drones to Iran? Zelensky's goal is to increase US support in Ukraine, because his concern was the redirecting of weapon systems to deal with Iran, leaving less (or none) for Ukraine. Information that Russia is sending drones to Iran works against that goal, because more drones in that theater means there needs to be more defenses shifted to the Middle East. Just trying to understand your logic here.

 

[HRK69]

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

No. Anti NATO commentary is just both sides expressing their grievances with one another.

Trump never wanted NATO to be a part of this. His sudden and seemingly incoherent about face from "we don't want you" to "why aren't you helping us" and back to "ha, we never wanted you in the first place" was just part of his years long side quest to leave NATO.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

No. They were completely batshit. While his argument , that the treaty was broken by Denmark by the way Greenlanders, invading them is way bad form.

After the Diego Garcia situation and countries closing their airspace, the situation with Greenland has to be questioned one way or another. Any moment now you can have a situatiion where a country, region or island might decide to close the airspace or borders.

 

[buttnuggett]

Trump never wanted NATO to be a part of this. His sudden and seemingly incoherent about face from "we don't want you" to "why aren't you helping us" and back to "ha, we never wanted you in the first place" was just part of his years long side quest to leave NATO.

I never disputed that fact. But there were some base denials. Those base denials probably started his whole rant.

 

[near]

 

[buttnuggett]

After the Diego Garcia situation and countries closing their airspace, the situation with Greenland has to be questioned one way or another. Any moment now you can have a situatiion where a country, region or island might decide to close the airspace or borders.

No, not if we get our missile defense and space force up. Unless they deny it. That'll piss us and Canada off. The whole problem with Greenland was Denmark differed to Greenlanders on shit(against treaty). We were getting denied shit since the 70's. Of course, there was better ways to express our grievances.

 

[adamsapple]

"I've seen a lot of inaccurate coverage from the media ..."

Bruh ... POTUS himself retweeted Iran's message about the US accepting the 10 point proposal framework, lol.

And directly acknowledging that the US can work with that.

These guys really can't keep a single story straight, can they?