Support NeoGAF

[AJUMP23]

It took a total of 48 hours from France going from condemning the war in Iran to full nuclear arsenal and learning how to do a US style "Coalition of the Willing" with any European country that wants to come along

The EU is useless and should be dissolved. I'm also not sure how this is supposed to work when NATO already exists but it's hilarious to imagine

BTW France has about ~300 nuclear warheads in their arsenal. They are quietly one of only a handful of countries with a triple digits nuke count. They also operate the world's only nuclear aircraft carrier which isn't in the US Navy

All well and good until France becomes a Muslim majority country.

 

[EviLore]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

 

[jason10mm]

Nearly 20% of China's oil came from Venezuela and Iran. All geopolitical chess moves.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/02/iran-us-strikes-china-oil-supply-charts-00806415

Wasn't cutting global strategic oil the reason Japan cited for going into WW2?

 

[StreetsofBeige]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

All those Muslim votes in the UK must be bigger then we think.

 

[Kacho]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

 

[winjer]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

Can you blame European countries for that, after the POTUS threatened to invaded a European sovereign country, just a month ago?

At any other time, the UK would immediately join the USA. And there are dozens of situations in past decades to show that.
Betraying the trust of your own allies, one that took over a century to forge, was a mistake.

 

[jason10mm]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

won't, or "is unable to due to poor training, maintenance, and lack of weapons and fuel"?

Flying to hit a country half a continent away is no small endeavor.

 

[winjer]

won't, or "is unable to due to poor training, maintenance, and lack of weapons and fuel"?

Flying to hit a country half a continent away is no small endeavor.

The UK has 2 brand new air craft carriers. And despite all the cuts that the British armed forces have suffered in the last decades, they are still a force to recon and can project force.
But their concern at the moment is Russia. Not Iran.
Besides, after the current POTUS threatened to invade Greenland, the UK-USA relations have taken a dive for the worst.

 

[Zacfoldor]

Can you blame European countries for that, after the POTUS threatened to invaded a European sovereign country, just a month ago?

At any other time, the UK would immediately join the USA. And there are dozens of situations in past decades to show that.
Betraying the trust of your own allies, one that took over a century to forge, was a mistake.

Yes.

Also, perhaps you are equating two non-related things.

Are you asserting that the UK refuses to join in not because they disagree with the US ideologically but because we broke their trust feelings over Greenland comments?

Perhaps they simply disagree with the invasion ideologically?

You are sure they are staying out of this because of Greenland comments?

 

[jason10mm]

The UK has 2 brand new air craft carriers. And despite all the cuts that the British armed forces have suffered in the last decades, they are still a force to recon and can project force.
But their concern at the moment is Russia. Not Iran.
Besides, after the current POTUS threatened to invade Greenland, the UK-USA relations have taken a dive for the worst.

what could russia possibly do to the UK?

 

[sono]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

You wanted indepence in 1776.

Reap it

 

[DeepEnigma]

It has nothing to do with Greenland.

You wanted indepence in 1776.

Reap it

And now you'll have to fight for your own independence from Islam. Again.

One day.

This time, much harder from within.

 

[Lord Panda]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

Time for regime change in the UK.

 

[Forsete]

Can you blame European countries for that, after the POTUS threatened to invaded a European sovereign country, just a month ago?

At any other time, the UK would immediately join the USA. And there are dozens of situations in past decades to show that.
Betraying the trust of your own allies, one that took over a century to forge, was a mistake.

 

[winjer]

Yes.

Also, perhaps you are equating two non-related things.

Are you asserting that the UK refuses to join in not because they disagree with the US ideologically but because we broke their trust feelings over Greenland comments?

Perhaps they simply disagree with the invasion ideologically?

You are sure they are staying out of this because of Greenland comments?

You understand that threatening to invade a sovereign country in Europe, is an obvious break of trust.
An ally does not, ever, threaten to invade another ally. This should be plainly obvious to any person.
The UK, or any other European country have no reason to go along with the USA, due to this.

There is another thing. Did you notice there was no NATO meetings to set some accord in relation to this war on Iran?
With any other previous administration, the ones that did not betray their allies with threats of invasion, most NATO members would at least listen to the POTUS.
And most would probably agree to help out. Like they did in so many similar situations in recent times.
But there was no NATO talks. No reunions with the leaders of all NATO members. TRUMP just decided to do it all by himself.

 

[Chittagong]

I think it's not well appreciated just how much USA will win even in a scenario where the regime change fails and this becomes a forever war.

Wins regardless of outcome

• Chinese energy security permanently compromised — discounted Iranian crude gone or unreliable
• China's military distracted from Taiwan, luring them into the gulf
• Russia loses drone supplier and perhaps its last meaningful strategic ally
• Axis countries proven completely inept and unable to protect each other
• US shale repriced upward on risk premium alone
• Iran's proxy network loses its central node
• Gulf states are now locked into US security dependence for a generation
• Abraham Accords is more or less a given
• USA military-industrial complex at full utilisation to cover depletion and future arms race in the Middle East
• Iran's nuclear programme stays degraded
• Nuclear proliferation deterrent set for every mid-tier non-ally

The few wins that require actual regime change success:

• Huge reconstruction market with fourth-largest oil and second-largest gas reserves
• US companies in first position on Iranian energy and infrastructure rebuild
• Friendly regime as permanent strategic foothold between Russia, China, and the Gulf

In this calculus nukes and liberation seem mere talking points, perhaps because it would be a bit indelicate to present "got mine" as the motivation for the action.

 

[thefool]

There is another thing. Did you notice there was no NATO meetings to set some accord in relation to this war on Iran?
With any other previous administration, the ones that did not betray their allies with threats of invasion, most NATO members would at least listen to the POTUS.
And most would probably agree to help out. Like they did in so many similar situations in recent times.
But there was no NATO talks. No reunions with the leaders of all NATO members. TRUMP just decided to do it all by himself.

Surely that would have been fantastic for Iran leaders, they would all still be alive because someone leaked the plans to smoke them.

 

[winjer]

what could russia possibly do to the UK?

The UK has been a victim of constant invasions of it's airspace and even naval space, by Russian ships and planes.
Constantly provoking and probing the UKs sovereign land and sea.
Also, several attempts, some successful, to damage European under sea infrastructure. The most obvious example are the cuts to fiber cables in the sea bed by Russian ships.

 

[AJUMP23]

You understand that threatening to invade a sovereign country in Europe, is an obvious break of trust.
An ally does not, ever, threaten to invade another ally. This should be plainly obvious to any person.
The UK, or any other European country have no reason to go along with the USA, due to this.

There is another thing. Did you notice there was no NATO meetings to set some accord in relation to this war on Iran?
With any other previous administration, the ones that did not betray their allies with threats of invasion, most NATO members would at least listen to the POTUS.
And most would probably agree to help out. Like they did in so many similar situations in recent times.
But there was no NATO talks. No reunions with the leaders of all NATO members. TRUMP just decided to do it all by himself.

It is now all part of the "Bored" of peace group. Join the Bored, get informed.

 

[winjer]

Surely that would have been fantastic for Iran leaders, they would all still be alive because someone leaked the plans to smoke them.

Really, after so many decades with the UK being a highly reliable ally with the USA...

 

[Warspite]

All those Muslim votes in the UK must be bigger then we think.

They all voted green last week

There has been so many ways he could have support America without getting involved but Starmer is amazing in the way he can fuck up every opportunity along the way. Not only would this man miss an open goal but he would somehow punt it into his own net. Remember ladies and Gentlemen, sometimes you just need to be in the right place at the right time to get into power.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Really, after so many decades with the UK being a highly reliable ally with the USA...

The UK is too busy facing an internal crisis of their own making by allowing millions of violent 3rd world immigrants to be able to do anything abroad

This is actually a problem in all of Western Europe, if France wants to be a serious nuclear power they need to address their immigration crisis as well since the nukes could very well fall into the hands of people friendly with the likes of Iran

 

[kruis]

 

[Boo Who?]

Really, after so many decades with the UK being a highly reliable ally with the USA...

The UK is not the only country in NATO. But, yeah, the UK is not the same UK from 10-20 years ago.

 

[thefool]

Really, after so many decades with the UK being a highly reliable ally with the USA...

Like you said, relations are (probably) shaky after greenland. Besides, the UK is not a monolith, just look how Starmer behaved last few days.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

This has nothing to do with Iran and all to do with Russia.
Ever since Trump threatened to invade Greenland, that the EU started to view the USA as a unreliable ally. Something that didn't happen for over a century.
Because of this European countries are starting to consider that if Russia attacks, that the USA will no longer cover Europe with it's nuclear umbrella.
So for several months, it was speculated that France and the UK would expand their nuclear umbrella to include the rest of Europe.
In a lot of ways, this is to avoid having more countries developing their own nuclear program. A good example of this would be Poland, which is right next to Byelorussia and a prime target for invasion by Russia, once again.
Avoiding nuclear proliferation is an important point to avoid a nuclear war, as it reduces the amount of fail points.
This is something that the USA did for more than half a century, to good success, by offering it's nuclear protection to it's allied countries.
With the USA now being viewed as an unreliable partner by most countries, you can be sure that there are more nations considering getting their on nukes.
Some more examples include Japan and South Korea. Which are right next to 2 aggressive countries with nukes, North Korea and China.
Ukraine is also very likely considering starting a nuclear program to get some insurance against the next Russian invasion.
Ukraine, Poland, Finland are able to get assurances from a nuclear umbrella from France and the UK. But Japan and South Korea do not have a nearby ally with nukes, that could do the same assurance.
Even a country like Germany, could start considering restating it's own nuclear weapons program.

This explanation doesn't make sense when the Russia-Ukraine war has been going on for 4 years but France decided to wait until 2 days after the Iran war to announce this initiative

It looks a lot more like to do with Iran than Russia

 

[FullMetalx117]

Ahmadinejad is still alive? I speculate he was one of the few Trump would've ok'd to rule

 

[LordCBH]

All well and good until France becomes a Muslim majority country.

Yea I'm not exactly thrilled about the eventual French Caliphate having nukes. The future British Caliphate will have them too.

 

[jason10mm]

The UK has been a victim of constant invasions of it's airspace and even naval space, by Russian ships and planes.
Constantly provoking and probing the UKs sovereign land and sea.
Also, several attempts, some successful, to damage European under sea infrastructure. The most obvious example are the cuts to fiber cables in the sea bed by Russian ships.

Man, sure sounds like y'all could use a strong neighbor, maybe "Redwhiteandblue-land" next to you with a really strong navy and airforce to help out

 

[EviLore]

You wanted indepence in 1776.

Reap it

Think we'll manage somehow

 

[AJUMP23]

Really, after so many decades with the UK being a highly reliable ally with the USA...

I think the UK is still mostly aligned with the US. But the current leadership PM/Gov are not reliable allies to the current US administration. There are some complicated geopolitics going on behind the scenes. I don't think the US administration believes it can trust the UK administration currently. Keir has been an awful PM, and the only reason he made it to office is because of how bad the previous administration was.

 

[LordCBH]

Think we'll manage somehow

As someone who can actually trace my family history back to ye olde England, fuck em. Japan is a better modern friend anyway lol

 

[Rentahamster]

Wasn't cutting global strategic oil the reason Japan cited for going into WW2?

One of several. At the end of the day, it's usually about oil, whether it's them or us.

Japan invaded Indochina in 1940, Japan was embargoed in August 1941, and in December they attacked Pearl Harbor as a means to continue their imperialist, warmongering campaign.

 

[EviLore]

Beauty

 

[winjer]

This explanation doesn't make sense when the Russia-Ukraine war has been going on for 4 years but France decided to wait until 2 days after the Iran war to announce this initiative

It looks a lot more like to do with Iran than Russia

You still don't understand that the Russian nuclear threat is the constant and the USA betraying the EU is the catalyst that changed how the EU sees it's nuclear umbrella.

 

[lachesis]

Nearly 20% of China's oil came from Venezuela and Iran. All geopolitical chess moves.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/02/iran-us-strikes-china-oil-supply-charts-00806415

It is true but you also have to consider they've been stockpiling the oil reserve for past few years.
I read China have at least 140 days worth of oil in reserve, and they also buy shit ton of oil from other countries including Russia, Brazil and other places. 20% is a really big deal though - especially they've been buying the crude oil for dirt cheap price.

I think this could shorten their plan to invade Taiwan (to avoid running out the oil) in worst case - which I'm somewhat concerned. US is likely to deplete a lot of missiles and bombs - and maybe Xi may think it's time to strike. South Korea's government seem to be siding with China, so only real ally for U.S. in the region maybe Japan and Philippines.

 

[AJUMP23]

Cold.

You still don't understand that the Russian nuclear threat is the constant and the USA betraying the EU is the catalyst that changed how the EU sees it's nuclear umbrella.

no one has been betrayed, just not informed. Betrayal would be turning the EU ( A group of un-elected bureaucrats) over to their enemies. I think the NATO treaties and the mutual defense treaties are all still intact and working fine. Nord Stream was done by the British SAS right? That was less than ideal for the world.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

no one has been betrayed, just not informed. Betrayal would be turning the EU ( A group of un-elected bureaucrats) over to their enemies. I think the NATO treaties and the mutual defense treaties are all still intact and working fine. Nord Stream was done by the British SAS right? That was less than ideal for the world.

I've read now that Nord Stream was done by the Russians, the Americans, the Ukrainians, the Brits, and God knows who else

No one is ever going to admit they were the ones that did it, though apparently the Ukrainians got pretty close

Let's not ever forget that it was the US that told Germany that Nord Stream was a really bad idea but the Germans famously laughed at Trump and went ahead with it anyways

 

[winjer]

no one has been betrayed, just not informed. Betrayal would be turning the EU ( A group of un-elected bureaucrats) over to their enemies. I think the NATO treaties and the mutual defense treaties are all still intact and working fine. Nord Stream was done by the British SAS right? That was less than ideal for the world.

Yes, threatening to invade an ally country is a betrayal.
Imagine Japan threatening to invade Hawaii. This would definitely worsen the USA-Japan relations. Anyone could understand this.
And it's not the only Greenland situation. The current US administration removed support for the defense of Ukraine, including stopped sharing intel.
Remember that the USA gave security assurances to Ukraine, 3 decades ago, if they relinquished their nuclear arsenal.
So that is 2 major betrayals in just a few months. And now you expect that the EU will go to war along side the USA, like the old days. Come on, don't be so naive.

 

[DeepEnigma]

no one has been betrayed, just not informed.

 

[Jaybe]

We can swap out the UK for Japan on the best friend list

Seems silly to cast shade on the UK here. To my knowledge, they weren't involved in the war planning and they are helping in defensive operations to limit damage from Iran's missiles and drones in the area.

 

[AJUMP23]

Yes, threatening to invade an ally country is a betrayal.
Imagine Japan threatening to invade Hawaii. This would definitely worsen the USA-Japan relations. Anyone could understand this.
And it's not the Greenland situation. The current US administration removed support for the defense of Ukraine, including stopped sharing intel.
Remember that the USA gave security assurances to Ukraine, 3 decades ago, if they relinquished their nuclear arsenal.
So that is 2 major betrayals in just a few months. And now you expect that the EU will go to war along side the USA, like the old days. Come on, don't be so naive.

Are you talking about Greenland? I think that is what you are talking about. That was just tactics. No one was going to invade Greenland, but by going big up front Trump got the compromise he needed for access to Greenland.

Maybe the Danes should stop their imperialistic practices and let Greenland determine their own future.

The US has supported Ukraine with munitions. I think the biggest betrayal the US committed in Ukraine is destabilizing the government and getting Zelensky elected. That is the one that bothers me. I think Russia leaves Ukraine alone if that doesn't happen.

I do not expect the EU to be involved in the Iranian mission. I do not think their involvement will matter to the US at all. Other people may expect it, but I do not. What I am concerned with is a land war in Iran. I do not want troops in Iran. I will arm Iranian citizens to fight the Revolutionary Guard, but I do not want US soldiers doing it.

Iran could be rich and prosperous just like the Saudis and UAE if they can get it figured out.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Can you blame European countries for that, after the POTUS threatened to invaded a European sovereign country, just a month ago?

At any other time, the UK would immediately join the USA. And there are dozens of situations in past decades to show that.
Betraying the trust of your own allies, one that took over a century to forge, was a mistake.

Oh please. UK was trying to sell the Chagos Islands with the american base using "the international law" to the pro-China aligned country. All while building a huge chinese consulate in UK.
Spain not allowing to american bases and UK just validated Trump's position - Europe is an unreliable ally.

And also when Obama and co., and Trump later applied sanctions on Iran, Europe was not willing to sanction Iran and was trying to find an alternative way (a parallel payment system) to pay while avoiding the sanctions. And all of that while Europe was still asking USA to pay for defenses while having buying tons of resources from Russia. Trump has been proven right over and over again.

This has nothing to do with Iran and all to do with Russia.
Ever since Trump threatened to invade Greenland, that the EU started to view the USA as a unreliable ally. Something that didn't happen for over a century.
Because of this European countries are starting to consider that if Russia attacks, that the USA will no longer cover Europe with it's nuclear umbrella.
So for several months, it was speculated that France and the UK would expand their nuclear umbrella to include the rest of Europe.
In a lot of ways, this is to avoid having more countries developing their own nuclear program. A good example of this would be Poland, which is right next to Byelorussia and a prime target for invasion by Russia, once again.
Avoiding nuclear proliferation is an important point to avoid a nuclear war, as it reduces the amount of fail points.
This is something that the USA did for more than half a century, to good success, by offering it's nuclear protection to it's allied countries.
With the USA now being viewed as an unreliable partner by most countries, you can be sure that there are more nations considering getting their on nukes.
Some more examples include Japan and South Korea. Which are right next to 2 aggressive countries with nukes, North Korea and China.
Ukraine is also very likely considering starting a nuclear program to get some insurance against the next Russian invasion.
Ukraine, Poland, Finland are able to get assurances from a nuclear umbrella from France and the UK. But Japan and South Korea do not have a nearby ally with nukes, that could do the same assurance.
Even a country like Germany, could start considering restating it's own nuclear weapons program.

You are forgetting a single biggest elephant in the room - the control over nukes. The fundamental issue - the same as with the "promised" european army - is the right to control the nukes. American umbrella worked because USA was controlling everything. In case of other countries, who will allow France to have a sole control over nukes in the Netherlands or Germany? If not sole control then how they are going control them? We see how ineffective the coalitional governmance is where they spend time deciding to act like this or that. French nukes in other countries turn the country into a "vassal" essentially where France controls the trigger or have "the most influence". And in Europe nobody wants to be a vassal of other country due to historical reasons. It never worked historically and only worked due to USA having a huge common enemy at that time - USSR. So by and large, other countries will start building nukes independently. People should stop treating Europe as a unified entity - it has never been without foreign control.

I do not expect the EU to be involved in the Iranian mission.

They will - not as block - but as separate countries. Simple to save face and to maintain the facade. Imagine if the conflict resolves fast without them pretending to do something and Trump will get new Abraham accords or Cyrus accords or some new Board of Peace: Iran edition thing. European countried declined the invitation at that time.

Are you talking about Greenland? I think that is what you are talking about. That was just tactics. No one was going to invade Greenland, but by going big up front Trump got the compromise he needed for access to Greenland.

Maybe the Danes should stop their imperialistic practices and let Greenland determine their own future.

The situation with Chagos and Spain now essentially validated Trump's point - Greenland is an area that allow to control the launch of Russia nuke - too far away from ballistic missiles (unlike Norway, the defenses cannot be breached fast), while also reachable to destroy the strategic missiles before they reach the higher orbit. Plus situation with Canada demonstrates how unreliable those countries are when the push comes to shove.

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

Yes, threatening to invade an ally country is a betrayal.
Imagine Japan threatening to invade Hawaii. This would definitely worsen the USA-Japan relations. Anyone could understand this.
And it's not the Greenland situation. The current US administration removed support for the defense of Ukraine, including stopped sharing intel.
Remember that the USA gave security assurances to Ukraine, 3 decades ago, if they relinquished their nuclear arsenal.
So that is 2 major betrayals in just a few months. And now you expect that the EU will go to war along side the USA, like the old days. Come on, don't be so naive.

To add to this, the Trump admin has made it clear that they don't value multilateralism and that they see NATO as a burden, so I'm not sure why there's so much hand wringing from Americans about the Europeans not committing to this war.

 

[Little Mac]

 

[winjer]

Are you talking about Greenland? I think that is what you are talking about. That was just tactics. No one was going to invade Greenland, but by going big up front Trump got the compromise he needed for access to Greenland.

Maybe the Danes should stop their imperialistic practices and let Greenland determine their own future.

The US has supported Ukraine with munitions. I think the biggest betrayal the US committed in Ukraine is destabilizing the government and getting Zelensky elected. That is the one that bothers me. I think Russia leaves Ukraine alone if that doesn't happen.

I do not expect the EU to be involved in the Iranian mission. I do not think their involvement will matter to the US at all. Other people may expect it, but I do not. What I am concerned with is a land war in Iran. I do not want troops in Iran. I will arm Iranian citizens to fight the Revolutionary Guard, but I do not want US soldiers doing it.

Iran could be rich and prosperous just like the Saudis and UAE if they can get it figured out.

There is no tactics in threatening to invade an allied country.
Greenland was already an ally of the US. That allowed the USA to put a military base in their country. And that would easily accept to have more troops stationed there.

The previous US administration supported Ukraine. Not the current one.
Trump stopped helping Ukraine and cut off intelligence.
This is a big betrayal, against the promises that the USA made to Ukraine 3 decades ago.
And a betrayal to the EU allies that relied on USA assistance in curbing Russian agression.

You also forget that the EU and the UK were not called on to help with the attack on Iran, even when most countries would agree with it.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I think it's not well appreciated just how much USA will win even in a scenario where the regime change fails and this becomes a forever war.

Wins regardless of outcome

• Chinese energy security permanently compromised — discounted Iranian crude gone or unreliable
• China's military distracted from Taiwan, luring them into the gulf
• Russia loses drone supplier and perhaps its last meaningful strategic ally
• Axis countries proven completely inept and unable to protect each other
• US shale repriced upward on risk premium alone
• Iran's proxy network loses its central node
• Gulf states are now locked into US security dependence for a generation
• Abraham Accords is more or less a given
• USA military-industrial complex at full utilisation to cover depletion and future arms race in the Middle East
• Iran's nuclear programme stays degraded
• Nuclear proliferation deterrent set for every mid-tier non-ally

The few wins that require actual regime change success:

• Huge reconstruction market with fourth-largest oil and second-largest gas reserves
• US companies in first position on Iranian energy and infrastructure rebuild
• Friendly regime as permanent strategic foothold between Russia, China, and the Gulf

In this calculus nukes and liberation seem mere talking points, perhaps because it would be a bit indelicate to present "got mine" as the motivation for the action.

Also this

The previous US administration supported Ukraine. Not the current one.

Because the Ukrainian conflict provides the most benefits to Europe - due to Russia stuck there they can take their sweet time militarizing themselves while also making USA spend missiles, money in Ukraine. Keep in mind that until recently they were buying Russian resources directly and indirectly.

Greenland was already an ally of the US.

Yet the chinese investments have been creeping in..

Chinese investments in Greenland raise US concerns

Strictly business?

www.diis.dk

Just like with South America, Panama etc.

That allowed the USA to put a military base in their country.

And Diego Garcia is an american base...Did not stop UK from selling the islands because UN told them that.

And a betrayal to the EU allies that relied on USA assistance in curbing Russian agression.

Thesame allies that has been buying Russia gas for years?

There is no reason to act as if EU is some innocent player here, a force of good or something.

 

[AJUMP23]

There is no tactics in threatening to invade an allied country.
Greenland was already an ally of the US. That allowed the USA to put a military base in their country. And that would easily accept to have more troops stationed there.

The previous US administration supported Ukraine. Not the current one.
Trump stopped helping Ukraine and cut off intelligence.
This is a big betrayal, against the promises that the USA made to Ukraine 3 decades ago.
And a betrayal to the EU allies that relied on USA assistance in curbing Russian agression.

You also forget that the EU and the UK were not called on to help with the attack on Iran, even when most countries would agree with it.

I agree he could have done it better on Greenland. But Trump is different than most people. He doesn't act like people expect or have in the past. You take the good criticize the bad. But even the EU president called him Daddy.

Zelensky is a terrible leader, and the US was foolish to back him years ago. the Ukraine betrayed the US when they used the aid we sent them to fund their minister and launder it through their government. Ukraine betrayed Ukraine. US sent them billions, the leaders of the country stole a great portion of it. I mean they were giving kickbacks to Biden's son. They screwed themselves. You steal billions from the US, you don't deserve to continue to steal from the US.


Well most people would agree with the eradication of the Iranian caliphate. But I bet the mayor of London doesn't, we know the mayor of NY doesn't, and I am sure all the kids named Mohamed in the UK do not.

 

[Mozza]

Stop derailing the thread.

O.k.... I thought it was linked in a way...

 

[AJUMP23]

I liked it when Swartzcof just straight up lied to them.