Comments by "David Houseman" (@davidhouseman4328) on "Channel 4 News" channel.

  1. 200 years Finland?
    9
  2. How would that help?
    4
  3.  @l.k.998  distract the domestic population, keep him in power.
    3
  4.  @kawsuc6564  It has nothing to do with that, the US hasn't put weapons in countries like the Baltics. Frankly it's not that bothered about short range weapons and a new INF treaty would be a much more effective solution.
    2
  5.  @l.k.998  It's unlikely there will be any change, but that's because he does things like this that he can sell as being a strong leader.
    2
  6.  @kawsuc6564  Missiles systems in Ukraine changes nothing, it isn't extra pressure, and if they wanted pressure from short range missiles they could get that without Ukraine using existing NATO members. Total red herring.
    2
  7.  @kawsuc6564  Ukraine is obviously the loser, because Russia annexed part of it's country! Ukraine is desperate for NATO support because of Russia not letting it chose it's own path.
    2
  8.  @teabagger1981  NATO didn't put nukes in any of the recent members why would you think Finland would be any different? Not that it would matter much anymore, ICBMs and SLBMs make the distances much less important.
    2
  9. Nor are the enough for the nuclear winter and radiation that would come even if they weren't part of the war.
    1
  10.  @kawsuc6564  Bored of arguing with you skewed world view.
    1
  11. The only way NATO enforces war is if a member is attacked.
    1
  12. Or they just call the bluff
    1
  13.  @clo5282  Russia isn't being attacked so adding Russia doesn't help in that regard but it does muddy the waters and compromise infrastructure. While this war is clear, 2014 was less clear particularly Russian actions Donbass.
    1
  14.  @clo5282  Russia happily lies, it would join NATO while planning an attack on a member without a second thought.
    1