ariesbull:
NATO was created in 1949 to stand up to the Soviet Union.

If the West would just make peace with Russia, which Putin is willing to do, then there would be zero need for NATO.

The only people who don’t want this, are NATO weapons manufacturers, and their bought politicians. NATO exists solely to enrich itself. Their business model is war, and our tax dollars are their life source.

The best solution for humanity is to disband NATO, for Trump to make peace with Russia/China, then build a multipolar world, in which every country has a fair say. The days of the US/NATO waging war without consequence, must come to an end.

Russia and China just want a seat at the table, and want the West to stop waging wars all over the globe for financial and geopolitical gain. They just want us to stop building our military bases around their civilizations.

Peace is possible with diplomacy.[b][/b]

ariesbull:
no..I am interpreting your mindset

Masterviolence:

A simple answer to that question would've been an eye opener to you.

ariesbull:
let's not forget Ghost of Kiev

ariesbull:
let's not forget Ghost of Kiev

ariesbull:
The idea that NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is "obsolete" has been a topic of debate, often influenced by shifting geopolitical dynamics. Here are some arguments that critics might use to support this perspective in today's global world:

1. Shift in Security Threats

NATO was created during the Cold War to counter the Soviet Union. Today, threats are more diverse, including cyberattacks, terrorism, climate change, and pandemics, which require global cooperation rather than a regional military alliance.


2. Increased Multipolarity

The world is no longer dominated by the US and its European allies. Rising powers like China, India, and Brazil play significant roles in global politics. NATO's focus on the North Atlantic region might seem less relevant in a multipolar world.


3. European Security Autonomy

Some European nations argue for a stronger, independent European defense capability. Organizations like the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) suggest that Europe can address its security needs without relying on NATO.


4. Internal Fractures

Disagreements among NATO members, such as Turkey's policies or differing defense spending levels, have raised questions about the alliance's unity and effectiveness.


5. Limited Relevance in Global Conflicts

NATO’s role in conflicts outside its traditional area, such as in Afghanistan or the Middle East, has been criticized for lacking clear objectives or outcomes.


6. Cost of Maintenance

Maintaining NATO's military and operational infrastructure is expensive. Critics argue that these resources could be better allocated to address modern challenges like climate change or economic inequality.


Counterarguments

Despite these critiques, supporters argue that NATO remains crucial for:

Deterring Aggression: Particularly with Russia's actions in Ukraine.

Adaptability: NATO has expanded its scope to address cyber threats and terrorism.

Strategic Alliances: It strengthens transatlantic ties and promotes stability.


In conclusion, whether NATO is "obsolete" depends on one's perspective on global priorities and the evolving nature of security challenges. It may require reforms to remain relevant rather than outright dismissal.

ariesbull:
I am hereby calling on Putin and Zelensky to meet with me and get this terrible war between Russia and Ukraine solved. We have never been closer to a nuclear WWIII than we are right now. We must stop the killing and prevent World War III.

NO WORLD WAR 3


Donald Trump

Procashtips:


Trump can as well fly to Russia to meet with the number one man on earth if he wishes to be heard.

Gbadebo19:

When we see AI generated articles, we can easily identify them.

WriteerNg:



Let's not forget Zelensky's "I don't need a ride, I need ammunition"

The same clown media still debunked it, saying Zelensky never said that.

2022 was peak Ukrainian clownery.

Gbadebo19:
Still baffles me how the pro Russian bots here still think the patriot air defense is the best air defense system the USA has.
Many don't even know that the patriot does not stand at par with the THAAD and the Aegis? Ignorance is really a disease.

Gbadebo19:
Still baffles me how the pro Russian bots here still think the patriot air defense is the best air defense system the USA has.
Many don't even know that the patriot does not stand at par with the THAAD and the Aegis? Ignorance is really a disease.

Gbadebo19:
Still baffles me how the pro Russian bots here still think the patriot air defense is the best air defense system the USA has.
Many don't even know that the patriot does not stand at par with the THAAD and the Aegis? Ignorance is really a disease.

Gbadebo19:

Rest!!! If you understand human nature and power, you wouldn't be seeking any unrealistic multipolar world. Take it or leave it, no matter how you try to spread control between several nations, there will always be one that will have more power than others. And by nature, that most powerful will continue to dictate things until another seizes power from it and the cycle continues. It's not only humans, it is in animals and everything that exist.
I don't believe in God, but if you believe, can you tell me why we have a God in the first instance? Why don't we have several gods so that we can have a multipolar spiritual realm.
It is nature, multipolarism is a futile endeavour.
Let China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc all stand up to America, there will still be one out of the above mentioned that will influence or dictate to the remaining.

WriteerNg:
🇺🇸

dermmy:


They are damn scared. That weapon looks like the wrath of God. So fast as if angels were touching down on earth. I don't think any other country have that kind of weapon.

ariesbull:


You sound intellectually ignorant...trust me

The best air defense systems in the world today come in different shapes and sizes, depending on what you need them for. Here are some of the top ones:

1. S-400 Triumph (Russia): This one is heavy-duty! The S-400 is like an all-rounder, protecting against aircraft, missiles, and drones from up to 400 kilometers away. It's so powerful that countries like India, Turkey, and China have added it to their arsenals【8】【9】.


2. Patriot Missile System (USA): If you’re looking for something reliable and long-standing, the Patriot has been around for years and is still very much in use. It’s known for handling both planes and ballistic missiles. The U.S. and many of its allies, like Germany and Japan, rely on it, we have seen it shattered in Ukraine


3. Iron Dome (Israel): This one’s quick and effective, especially for short-range threats like rockets and mortars. It's like a defense magician, intercepting projectiles mid-air. Israel has used it successfully in real combat, and it’s been a lifesaver in situations where other systems might fail... Hamas and Hezbollah disgraces it


4. THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, USA): THAAD is perfect for high-level threats. It’s a heavy hitter when it comes to intercepting missiles in space during the final stages of their flight. It’s mainly used by the U.S., but other nations have shown interest...not that war tested and it's fabcyv


5. Aster 30 SAMP/T (France/Italy): This European option is mobile and versatile, able to take down everything from aircraft to missiles. It's a great choice for a range of aerial threats


6. David's Sling (Israel): Sitting comfortably between the Iron Dome and the bigger Arrow systems, David’s Sling is great for handling medium- to long-range missiles. It’s been a valuable tool in protecting Israel from varied aerial threat..Na so

dermmy:


They are damn scared. That weapon looks like the wrath of God. So fast as if angels were touching down on earth. I don't think any other country have that kind of weapon.

ariesbull:
okay let's assume they are..how wrong is it ? Oga identifier

Gbadebo19:

It's not matter of assumption. You only need to be humble enough to accept that you are not as intelligent as you want people to believe.

Ghostagain:
Ok, I'm just going to say it. The Russian missile which hit dnipro is a marvel of science. It has motivated me in my research. Also Russian missile technology is decades more advanced than USA's.

All I want to say is "wow" 😲 to that missile technology. 👏🏿 👏🏿 👏🏿 👏🏿

If it wasn't known that that missile was Russian, I would have thought Zeus or an alien race was striking the earth. Since Peter the great, Russia has been moving science forward. Two of my professors were Russians, the scientific world will always owe Russia.

Gbadebo19:

The scientific world will always owe Russia yen yen yen. Really many ignorant people on this thread.
What's so special about Oreshnik? Speed of Mach 10 which is just above the average for any Intercontinental ICBM is what you are jubilating about? What a pity?
What exactly has your scientific Russia independently produced that has contributed to the benefit of humanity?
The Oreshnik or whatever you call it is not any marvel to USA. The USA was indeed a partner in the production of that weapon but pulled out. I don't know anything special about the narrative you want to be spewing here.