Comments by "King Ace" (@kingace6186) on "How NATO Solves Its Abandonment Problem" video.

  1. Slava Ukraini! And glory to freedom!
    26
  2. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    16
  3. For me, when I hear alliance abandonment, I think of the CSTO and how Armenia was left out in cold.
    15
  4.  @lommelykt5  That is blatant Islamaphobia! NATO's problem with Turkey is Erdogan's problematic leadership. NOT Turkey's religious demographic. Also, maybe you should read up on Mustafa Attaturk -- you might actually learn something about religion in Turkey.
    9
  5.  @lommelykt5  That is an excuse that Turkey can also use. But on September 12th, 2001, Turkey joined to trigger Article 5 (for the first time ever) and entered the Global War on Terror -- DESPITE being a majority Muslim country. And also, religion is not the same as culture. The UK is wildly different from France both culturally and ethnically despite only being one short channel apart and both being overwhelmingly Christian.
    6
  6.  @lommelykt5  Again. This is baseless speculation. Turkey has historically upheld its NATO commitments when they are needed. No need to slander the alliance based off of subjective concerns.
    6
  7. Putin is NATO's greatest ally lol
    5
  8.  @Real_MrDev  I don't know why this is so hard to understand. The heir to the AH crown was killed by a Serbian nationalist in Sarajevo. If an enemy's proxy kills a "vice president (for example)", then that is the spark of war. The Entente didn't recognize the unsanctioned assassination as aggression because they didn't want the responsibility of accidentally indirectly starting the war.
    4
  9. I wouldn't hold my breath on the "Tehran-Beijing-Moscow" alliance.
    3
  10. Thank you for clarifying. That's an embarrassing mistake.
    3
  11.  @huwenkai440  Russia is a paper tiger at heart. But I think Armenia can count on Iran... once Iran stabilizes that is. Jesus, it is a sad year to be Armenian.
    3
  12.  @huwenkai440  True. Everything you stated is objectively factual. But with so much attention being given to the war in Ukraine and other crises around the world, I feel like Azerbaijan-Turkey might continue until it is too late to help Armenia. Nonetheless, I will endeavor to stay hopeful.
    3
  13. I would! Honestly, Armenia's only ally was Russia. Now thanks to alliance abandonment, Armenia has no help or support other than France*.
    3
  14.  @lommelykt5  You are throwing out historical precedence & present unity for your subjective understanding of human sociology.
    3
  15.  @Real_MrDev  Actually, 1) Black Hand's involvement is alleged. 2) Even if Gabrilo Princip was really trained by them, Black Hand was also a secret military society spawned from the Serbian Military; not just simple terrorists. 3) What's more, the leader was an active Captain within the Serbian Military. In fact, Apis was promoted in 1916 to the rank of colonel before he was even charged with treason. 4) Apis and his Black Hand went further by creating the July Crisis. 5) AH sent the July Ultimatum to Serbia w/ point 6 being chief -- a role within the trial against the Archduke's killer + accessories. So AH tried to give Serbia a way out and only declared war after point 6 was refused. You're not really helping your case.
    3
  16. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    2
  17. i agree
    2
  18. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    2
  19. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    2
  20.  @Real_MrDev  Funny how you keep making up excuses and calling it common knowledge. And I am stating facts. If that makes you feel like I am an Austrian apologist, then maybe by that same logic you are a Serbian apologist. Since you keep repeating that Black Hand had no affiliation with the Serbian Army, how can you deny the leader's role as a Captain (and then as a Colonel) inside the Serb Army? Your subjective interpretation can't wash away objective historical facts.
    2
  21.  @Real_MrDev  1) Well at least you admit your bias. 2) For your information, I am glad AH and the German Empire fell. But I refuse to dilute history for my ends. . . . . 3) I grew up surrounded by military and even went to a military academy. So I understand that the actions of a soldier or group of soldiers reflect on the entire collective. If one soldier does not perform well, then the whole group is held responsible.
    2
  22.  @Real_MrDev  When confronted with the truth, you made a U-turn towards more nonsense. Take the L and walk away.
    2
  23.  @gluegobbler5740  Have you actually read the ultimatum? All 10 point technically violated their autonomy. But this is pre ww1 politics we are talking about. AH cared about point 6 the most, so if Serbia agreed to point 6 and violated point 3, the war might have not broken out. Serbian-affiliated nationals not only engaged in the plot to kill the Archduke, but they also refused to allow AH to be involved in the trials. (If the V POTUS were killed outside the US, the FBI would still be involved in the criminal procedure. So there shouldn't be a double standard.) Also, btw, I research before I speak so I have read that page and 10 other pages-- all of which are from credible sources.
    2
  24.  @Real_MrDev  Facts are facts. They don't alter regardless of how much you yell at them.
    2
  25.  @diegodessy9700  Your overgeneralization doesn't spare you from the truth that it was a way out for Serbia. But since we are generalizing: Anyone that reads the ultimatum themselves would see it as fairly reasonable, especially when the alternative was the Great war. I urge you not to view history in a vacuum.
    2
  26.  @Real_MrDev  It's cute how you warp reality.
    2
  27.  @Real_MrDev  LOL.
    2
  28.  @andresmartinezramos7513  I'm not trying to defend countries that don't even exist anymore LOL. Just stating facts and calling out bs. IDK why everyone is getting so offended over objective history. Whatever. I am more interested in modern warfare anyways.
    2
  29. Ich bin ein Berliner! These words still hold weight.
    2
  30. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    2
  31. Honestly, France has been playing ball since the war in Ukraine began. Although, its checkered history with NATO (especially during de Gaulle's reign) should not be easily forgotten.
    2
  32. Don't forget about how the Russian Federation betrayed Armenia a month ago.
    2
  33. Well said, Dio. Now if you don't me saying... "ZA WARUDO!!"
    2
  34.  @burningphoenix6679  Even if Moscow and Tehran maintain control underneath the same regime, there is no way they would join an alliance together. It doesn't matter if all of them find NATO to be an enemy. China and Russia's relationship is one of economic convenience. Iran and Russia's relationship is one of geographic convenience -- both want to stifle Turkey and the Caucasus. And Iran and China's relationship is frosty at best -- particularly because of Beijing's treatment of Muslims.
    1
  35.  @TN-bp2cf  Yes. But China can't wait forever. Because its hard power is projected to begin waning at the end of this decade.
    1
  36. fr
    1
  37. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    1
  38.  @burningphoenix6679  That is just a matter of subject semantics. If Ukrainians killed Putin's hypothetical son, that is tantamount to a declaration of war.
    1
  39.  @huwenkai440  I see.
    1
  40.  @diegodessy9700  Maybe the Kingdom of Italy did get treated poorly by the Germans & Austrians. But at the end of the day, the Austrian heir was assassinated by a nationalist of one of the Russian Empire's proxies. When the Austro-Hungarians were attacked, the German Empire upheld its part of the defensive pact, but the Italians did not. Whether Italy was justified is a matter of debate. But what is objectively true was that the Kingdom did not answer the call of war (a war that Austria-Hungary did not spark).
    1
  41.  @diegodessy9700  So all three are guilty of alliance abandonment at one point or another.
    1
  42. Hungary isn't a problem for NATO. Hungary is a problem for the EU. If NATO's problem was a nation it would be Erdogan's Turkey.
    1
  43.  @phantorang  If Article 5 was ever triggered in any meaningful way -- like say 9/11 -- I am sure the West can count on Turkey .... hopefully.
    1
  44.  @phantorang  But Orban really does concern me.
    1
  45. Everybody keeps saying that, during WW1, Italy was in the right and that it didn't abandon its alliance. BUT: Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    1
  46. Oh. I see. In any case, I do know that Germany has American nukes deployed on its soil.
    1
  47. If Ukraine was autocratic, only the US, the UK, & former warsaw/soviet states would care if it fell.
    1
  48.  @kennethferland5579  If the American vice president (aka heir presumptive) was "mErElY" assassinated by a Syrian "dIsSiDeNt", endorsed by elements of the Syrian military, is that not a direct act of war? NOTE: Using Syria as an example because they are a proxy backed by Russia Federation -- like Serbia was backed by the Russian Empire.
    1
  49. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    1
  50. Actually, the Austro-Hungarians and the Germans saw the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serb (Serbians were backed by the Russian Empire) as the start of the war. Therefore, the Kingdom of Italy was obligated to join in on the war as the defensive pact was triggered. Instead, Italy broke that promise, declared "nEuTrAlItY" and only joined in 1915 for its own territorial interests -- ultimately switching sides, again, for its own territorial interests. These are the objective facts.
    1
  51.  @davidsalcido383  ...what? Can I help you? Speaking proper English would help me understand!
    1
  52.  Walt Menc  Freedom that is achieved by kicking the Russian military out of ALL Ukrainian territory.
    1
  53. Remember how Trump said it would cut off American support to Ukraini if President Zelenskyy didn't somehow find dirt on (then candidate) Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden. I don't expect this type of behavior from the entire GOP but certainly do from the Trump-aligned so-called "Freedom Coalition". And if the war in Ukraini were to turn into a forever war and Trump gets reelected in 2024 (suspend your disbelief for a second), then we would have a serious problem on our hands -- not just for the war but for the entire NATO alliance.
    1
  54. NATO might need the US more, but the US still need NATO. US Military is the most powerful military in all history, but modern warfare means nothing without a coalition.
    1
  55.  @bayrujiagu3594  Exactly. A US without NATO is a national security risk for America. People often forget that the only time Article 5 was actually triggered was when the Twin Towers fell on 9/11.
    1
  56. SMH. Oh, shut up.
    1
  57.  @pawebielinski4903  No but an assassination of the next monarch is equivalent to a declaration of war. And that is the problem with the situation leading up to WW1. Everyone was super-militarized and had proxies that they couldn't control. And all it took was one disillusioned nationalist to ignite the flames of the Great War.
    1
  58.  @pawebielinski4903  Just because war wasn't declared immediately (because AH wants to give a chance to de-escalate) doesn't mean the assassination wasn't the reason the war began. Also, your entire argument is built on one of my phrase's semantics; not every strong solid ground to debate upon. SMH.
    1
  59.  @pawebielinski4903  1) It is fair that Italy isn't the best example of alliance abandonment, otherwise we wouldn't be having this educational debate. Ultimately, over the details, I think we are going to agree to disagree. And that's okay. 2) My assertion wasn't dubious at all. Most of the month of July was spent trying to de-escalate through diplomatic channels. Reading archives from, to, and between AH officials during this time proves this. 3) The assassination might have been an act of war but it wasn't a literal invasion so there was no need to mount a defense. AH asked GE for support in the attack because they wished to go on the offensive (not defensive) in a preemptive strike. People often take this last detail as an excuse to blame AH & GE for the entire war. But military doctrine suggests that a provoked preemptive strike can't be simply summed up as aggression. That's why Putin tried to make his invasion look like it was a response to a provocation against the Russian people by the west and "UkRaInIaN nAzIs".
    1
  60. The Articles of the NATO Alliance -- specifically Article 5 -- is the greatest piece of political writing since the very first Magna Carta Libertatum.
    1