Comments by "" (@charliemoore2551) on "Why NATO may have to stop a Russian invasion - without the US" video.

@TonyM540 No. He's a racist. He means immigrants.
16
@roghider319 Not in this context. Read what he says.
2
Sigh! Russia's invasion of Ukraine was brought to a halt by Ukraine even before it received help from the West. Even if it had succeeded it would have been impossible to hold it. If it couldn't defeat a handful of Jihadists in Afghanistan, what chance would it have had against a heavily armed and organised resistance movement which could be supplied directly from Western countries? The argument applied equally to the US/UK invasion of Iraq. It's all very well staging a successful invasion. Occupying and holding an unwilling country is another matter entirely. Putin is a crook: A very nasty piece of work indeed. He runs Russia like a mafia fiefdom. But how stupid would he have to be to think that he could use his already overstretched army to over-run an entire wealthy continent, several of whose countries have equivalent armed forces to his own after he failed to overcome one of the poorest, most corrupt and poorly armed countries in Europe - which has fought him to a standstill?
1
@incurableromantic4006 You do know that was originally a Zionist slogan? It literally meant that ALL Christians and Muslims would be removed from Palestine. When it was adopted by the PLO back in the 1970s, it was to call for a single multi-ethnic democracy. As for "internal threats", THAT's the claim of the people my Dad went to France to fight in 1939. The "other" they were attacking was different but the aim was the same.
1
Not only could NATO do it, most Western European countries could defeat Russia on their own!
1