Trash attacking NATO (kneeling to Pootin's strategy)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

Lol reasonable assumption.

---

you make assumptions of me here all the time... i'd wager my assumption of you used as a pawn on bigPharma's chessboard is dead on. why do i think i hit the nail on the head, because you keep deflecting or outright not answering. it's ok blake; we can all tell how nuts you are by what you post here so you don't have to answer the question after all.

sorry if that's the case though because our society has been riddled with pills for everything 10 fold the past couple decades. i remember when i was a kid and you knew of this kid in school on ritalin but didn't know the kid personally. then it went to everyone becoming bi-polar when i got into college and now everyone is on something because the world is cruel and dealing with issues with pills is an easier solution but a worse outcome in the end.

good luck blake. :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

So let me get it straight. 100,000 troops are marching inside your border and you will blow your load on russian cities.

Do you think that will make the 100,000 troops walk back? :lmao

You dont think they will take it out on your women and children and create Russia v2.0 in baggetteland?

No thats not what nukes are for idiot. Nukes are there to prevent other countries from nuking you. Its called Mutual Assured Destruction

---

I'm done with you, you are not worth it :lol

the point of having nuclear strike is to prevent to have 100 000 dudes marching on your border.. why in hell Russia would take the risk to put in danger 80 M of his people to invade France ?

Mutual assured destruction is one part of the equation and works for Russia and USA not for France... again why would Russia, China or USA want to erase France from the map ?... France nuclear dissuasion has never been designed for mutual assured destruction for the simple fact France does not have the necessary amount of nukes to destroy Russia entirely. French arsenal is limited and designed to specific targets and is not aimed at destroying an entire country

you have absolutely no clue of what you are talking about but I'm not particularly surprised... :lmao

but yeah go ahead hater and make it sound you know your shit about nuclear dissuasion or nato :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

:lmao there were no nukes in 1940 retard :lol

We are discussing Frances current nukes not ones used on Japan

You have fail written all over you just move on :lmao

---

:lol Today's Pavlov

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brazil

I'm done with you, you are not worth it :lol

the point of having nuclear strike is to prevent to have 100 000 dudes marching on your border.. why in hell Russia would take the risk to put in danger 80 M of his people to invade France ?

Mutual assured destruction is one part of the equation and works for Russia and USA not for France... again why would Russia, China or USA want to erase France from the map ?... France nuclear dissuasion has never been designed for mutual assured destruction for the simple fact France does not have the necessary amount of nukes to destroy Russia entirely. French arsenal is limited and designed to specific targets and is not aimed at destroying an entire country

you have absolutely no clue of what you are talking about but I'm not particularly surprised... :lmao

---

Then why is France in NATO retard? :lmao

If nobody will dare attack France because they have nukes whats the point of them being in it for 50+ years?

And dont tell me to help its neighors. Pussy France did not lift a finger when Hitler took Poland, Switzerland and Luxemburg :lmao

Without US or Russia, Erdogan would have the confidence to go for the jagular in mainland europe.

Europeans need to be thankul daddy USA is protecting them because either putin or erdogan mean business.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dh7NbIjVAAAwO4q.jpg:large

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by apalisoc_9

Without US or Russia, Erdogan would have the confidence to go for the jagular in mainland europe.

Europeans need to be thankul daddy USA is protecting them because either putin or erdogan mean business.

---

Yup pretty much

Erdopig would first open his borders to let the black/brown barbarian hordes of refugees flood entire europe and then hed march his 100,000 Turks all the way to champs delyses while Brazil is looking for the nuclear button in his pants :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

Then why is France in NATO retard? :lmao

If nobody will dare attack France because they have nukes whats the point of them being in it for 50+ years?

And dont tell me to help its neighors. Pussy France did not lift a finger when Hitler took Poland, Switzerland and Luxemburg :lmao

---

:lol I see you continue to be stupid

explain to me how mutual assured destruction works in the case of France ?

France left NATO and returned under special agreement to be part of a global aliance between Europe and USA to defend both interests all over the world for instance in Africa or even in Europe where NATO acted (badly btw) in the issue of ex yugoslavia... certainely not because France is afraid of a Russian invasion.

you are making a fool of yourself in this thread.. stick to soccer forum and your takes on US internal affair.. again not sure why a fucking colombian is spending his time defending Trash

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by apalisoc_9

Without US or Russia, Erdogan would have the confidence to go for the jagular in mainland europe.

Europeans need to be thankul daddy USA is protecting them because either putin or erdogan mean business.

---

:lol

Erdogan doesn't have means to attack Europe. and what would be the point, the objective?

He's commandeered Turkey, will steal $Bs like all autocrats do. He's got his hands full with the Armenians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koriwhat

you make assumptions of me here all the time...

---

I assume you're a druggy because you literally say you use drugs on a regular basis.

That's why my assumption of you is reasonable.

Quote:

---

i'd wager my assumption of you used as a pawn on bigPharma's chessboard is dead on. why do i think i hit the nail on the head, because you keep deflecting or outright not answering. it's ok blake; we can all tell how nuts you are by what you post here so you don't have to answer the question after all.

---

1. I've never mentioned I'm on any kind of medication. Your assumption is completely irrational. You simply made it up because you're clearly angry.

2. I've answered twice now with a "no".

3. What the fuck is wrong with you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

:lol

Erdogan doesn't have means to attack Europe. and what would be the point, the objective?

He's commandeered Turkey, will steal $Bs like all autocrats do. He's got his hands full with the Armenians.

---

Erdogan is the strongest NATO memeber that isnt an american pet. :lol

All erdogan have to do is spread confusion and disaray. They would lose if all Europe not including russia fought together and cooperated but thats not going to happen.

Russia will most likely take over eastern euro

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koriwhat

...and now everyone is on something because the world is cruel and dealing with issues with pills is an easier solution but a worse outcome in the end.

good luck blake. :tu

---

You smoke dope, moron.

Smh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

I assume you're a druggy because you literally say you use drugs on a regular basis.

That's why my assumption of you is reasonable.

---

i can conclude you'd be right but it really depends on your definition of what a druggy is exactly. you drink coffee, smoke cigarettes, or any other vices? i'd say you're a druggy too if that's the case.

my definition of a druggy is one that loses all sense of reality around them due to a substance which has taken over their lives. mostly methheads, crackheads, cokeheads, pill poppers, etc but i don't consider bud a problem unless you make it so(those that have to smoke just to take a piss or put on their socks... lol).

it all depends really but i totally understand where you're coming from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

1. I've never mentioned I'm on any kind of medication. Your assumption is completely irrational. You simply made it up because you're clearly angry.

2. I've answered twice now with a "no".

3. What the fuck is wrong with you?

---

it might be irrational but so is your assumption that i'm clearly angry when i'm not. i simply ask you questions and because we butt heads doesn't mean i have any anger towards you at that specific moment or at any time. you are an anonymous person on the net. i don't get angry with yall i just smh. yall see me replying as anger, melting down, etc because i get it; it's yalls tactic to make it look like yall are getting under my skin and others. i don't care for any of yall personally and i don't get all flustered by anything posted her tbh.

btw, i must have overlooked your answer of "no" both times. my bad! :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brazil

:lol I see you continue to be stupid

explain to me how mutual assured destruction works in the case of France ?

France left NATO and returned under special agreement to be part of a global aliance between Europe and USA to defend both interests all over the world for instance in Africa or even in Europe where NATO acted (badly btw) in the issue of ex yugoslavia... certainely not because France is afraid of a Russian invasion.

you are making a fool of yourself in this thread.. stick to soccer forum and your takes on US internal affair.. again not sure why a fucking colombian is spending his time defending Trash

---

:lmao you just said nobody will dare attack france cause they have nukes

And now uou said they are in NATO to defend their interests :lmao

Pick a lane niga :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koriwhat

i can conclude you'd be right but it really depends on your definition of what a druggy is exactly. you drink coffee, smoke cigarettes, or any other vices? i'd say you're a druggy too if that's the case.

my definition of a druggy is one that loses all sense of reality around them due to a substance which has taken over their lives. mostly methheads, crackheads, cokeheads, pill poppers, etc but i don't consider bud a problem unless you make it so(those that have to smoke just to take a piss or put on their socks... lol).

it all depends really but i totally understand where you're coming from.



it might be irrational but so is your assumption that i'm clearly angry when i'm not. i simply ask you questions and because we butt heads doesn't mean i have any anger towards you at that specific moment or at any time. you are an anonymous person on the net. i don't get angry with yall i just smh. yall see me replying as anger, melting down, etc because i get it; it's yalls tactic to make it look like yall are getting under my skin and others. i don't care for any of yall personally and i don't get all flustered by anything posted her tbh.

btw, i must have overlooked your answer of "no" both times. my bad! :tu

---

Tldr don't care and I probably disagree any way.

Sorry, druggy. :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

You smoke dope, moron.

Smh.

---

dope huh? again, what's your definition or are you out of your league even discussing drugs, users, vices, etc?

i didn't smoke yesterday at all and wasn't freaking out to find any nor smoke any. i dropped everything for 2 yrs before just for the fuck of it. last time i checked, druggies can't do such a thing without chills, vomiting, emotional mood swings, death...

you're out of your league man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

Tldr don't care and I probably disagree any way.

Sorry, druggy. :tu

---

so i try to have a nice back and forth with you but you just "tl;dr"? what's the point then right? fuck your side then. rot in hell!

Lol "nice back and forth"

Stfu, druggy piece of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koriwhat

i didn't smoke yesterday at all and wasn't freaking out

---

Wow congrats man

Atheist Blake, the party pooper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Atheist Blake, the party pooper.

---

Fake Christian Chris apparently wants to party with a tattoo drawing druggy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

Lol "nice back and forth"

Stfu, druggy piece of shit.

---

you're mad because you really have no leg to stand on.

so i'm a druggy and you're a spineless sissy "man". i'm fine with that. :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Atheist Blake, the party pooper.

---

nah chris, he's just trying to act like he's never done anything so no one can call him out on his bs hypocrisy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koriwhat

so i'm a druggy.....i'm fine with that. :tu

---

Step 1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koriwhat

nah chris, he's just trying to act like he's never done anything so no one can call him out on his bs hypocrisy.

---

You tried to pin addiction to pharmacy drugs on me.

You're a piece of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

You tried to pin addiction to pharmacy drugs on me.

You're a piece of shit.

---

have you done any drugs in your life time? do tell druggy!

with your own definition we can include caffeine, tobacco, and plenty of other overthecounter stuff. lets see who the real druggy is here after all. are the epilepsy kids on cbd/thc oil druggies?

you're worse than a bible thumper if you truly believe smoking bud constitutes as being a druggy. i'd agree that some have a problem with moderation but i don't. aren't druggies those that can't and won't even pause for a min with whatever vice they choose? so you think i'm in the same category as a methhead or a heroin junkie because i smoke bud? lmao you're ridiculous.

ps: btw i still don't believe you about the meds but that's neither here nor there.

How German News Covered Trump's NATO Visit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aZXPAHpGC8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

How German News Covered Trump's NATO Visit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aZXPAHpGC8

---

that was dumb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

that was dumb

---

Trash is world-infamous for his pee-pee tape, tatooed with it forever, along with pussy grabbing, his legacy so uplifting to America's place in the world.

What's fucking DUMB is Trash's cult, not knowing who has fucked them for decades into unfuckabability, thinking Trash was going to fuck those fuckers.

Trash (self-annointed as Mr Brexit) claims victory at NATO despite allies' denials, then ignites furor in Britain by attacking prime minister

President Trump declared a much-disputed victory at the annual NATO summit Thursday, after throwing it into crisis by forcing an emergency session

suggesting the United States could leave the nearly 70-year-old alliance and then suddenly dropping his demands that allies immediately spend more on their militaries. :lol

After claiming success in Brussels at an impromptu news conference, Trump flew to London — but not before setting a time bomb ahead of his meetings with an embattled Prime Minister Theresa May.

In an interview with a British tabloid before boarding his plane, Trump attacked May, touted her rival Boris Johnson as a “great prime minister” and said

immigration had cost Europe its culture.

“I think it changed the fabric of Europe and, unless you act very quickly, it’s never going to be what it was, and I don’t mean that in a positive way,” Trump told the Sun, a tabloid owned by his sometime ally Rupert Murdoch.

“Allowing the immigration to take place in Europe is a shame.”

certain to fuel a growing revolt against her within her Conservative Party. Johnson, who resigned earlier this week from the job of Foreign Minister, has been weighing a challenge to May over her handling of the Brexit talks.

The comments — an extraordinary intervention by a U.S. president in an allied country’s politics

French President Emmanuel Macron, in his own closing news conference, said

NATO members generally had made no new commitments.

He also said that Trump “never at any moment, either in public or in private, threatened to withdraw from NATO.”

Trump told the tabloid that May had mishandled Brexit —

“I (iow, Pootin :lol ) actually told Theresa May how do to it, but she didn’t listen to me” — and that her plan for it “is a much different deal than the one the people voted on.”

The president added that she’d probably ended chances for a new trade deal with the U.S. as well. Her plan, he said, “will definitely affect trade with the United States, unfortunately in a negative way.”

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-n...12-story.html#

So Trash is going to "hurt" UK for not doing a "hard Brexit", for not following his orders?

Pootin and his mafiya are laughing their asses off as their "intelligence asset" Trash spreads chaos in Russia's rivals of EU and NATO, just as Pootin ordered him to do, while degrading USA in the world's eyes, to Russia's benefit.

Up next? Trash and Pootin "take a walk in the woods" in Helsinki

https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/pr...5bc643cd47.jpg

Trump blatantly lies about NATO, then reveals he doesn’t understand the purpose of the alliance

"Why should my son go to Montenegro to defend it from attack?"

During an interview with Tucker Carlson that aired on Tuesday night, President Trump blatantly lied about NATO, claiming the United States covers 90 percent of the costs of the alliance.

“We’re not going to pay 90 percent of the cost to defend Europe,” Trump said

Trump’s claim is a brazen lie.

The United States, which spends more than twice as much on defense as the second biggest-spending country in the world (China),

currently covers about 22 percent of the cost of NATO.

But Trump’s lie about NATO illustrates how

he uses repetition to launder lies.

Before he left for the NATO summit last week, Trump tweeted that “By some accounts, the U.S. is paying for 90% of NATO.”

Trump expressed profound confusion about the very purpose of the alliance.

“Membership in NATO obligates the members to defend any other member who has been attacked,” Carlson said to him. “Let’s say Montenegro — which joined last year — is attacked. Why should my son go to Montenegro to defend it from attack?”

Trump suggested he shouldn’t.

Though the president seems to think NATO is about the American military protecting Europe from Russia,

the entire purpose of NATO is that member countries defend each other.

This is something former President Ronald Reagan understood.

In 1988, Reagan said

“our first priority is to maintain a strong and healthy partnership between North America and Europe…

We will never sacrifice the interests of this partnership in any agreement with the Soviet Union.”

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-nato...-9059477679d4/

Trash is aasstupid, ignorant as all y'all Trash fellators

lol boutons propping himself up on Ronald Reagan and defending the imperial status quo