Comments by "" (@badluck5647) on "" video.

  1. @Connor Lonergan A better question is why eastern European seeks the protection from a military alliance, while the US's neighbors don't feel the need.
    12
  2.  @dcanedemboyz7431  The Taliban's foreign wing attacked the US (2000+ dead civilians) and NATO responded due to Article 5. NATO was never in Iraq.
    7
  3.  @dcanedemboyz7431  Everything you said is untrue. AQ was the Taliban battalion of foreign fighters until 9.11, then the Taliban claimed that they are unrelated. The Taliban refused to hand over Bin Laden to American, and their "compromise" is the Taliban said they will hand him over the terrorist to a Muslim country of the Taliban's choosing for a trial. NATO is a defensive alliance, so America and Britain couldn't compel NATO countries to send forces to Iraq. That is why NATO was not involved in the Iraqi invasion. It is true that the democratically elected government of Iraq did request a few NATO trainers, but that is hardly NATO expansion.
    2
  4. @Connor Lonergan It was a rhetorical question that is obvious to all non-Russian trolls.
    1
  5. It keeps Russia from sending troops into the Baltic countries like Russia's other neighbors.
    1