Comments by "John Roberts" (@view1st) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

Why is the West still running with the idea that Russia isn't winning, that Ukraine is thrashing the Russians, and that Russian tanks are being destroyed left, right and centre. Stop with it already. Just stop! Surely more effective propaganda can be used.
10
They were already as good as members of NATO already. Formal membership would just be making it official. So nothing new there.
6
@doogus8728 they practice what is called benevolent neutrality. Officially they are neutral but in reality they support the US and its organisation NATO. They have always been opposed to Russia, the Soviet Union, communism and have whenever possible supported the EU and the United States.
3
Titou1384, the answer is simple. The USA should do what Korea wants and sign a peace treaty. That and removing their bases and letting the Koreas sort things out themselves. There, problem sorted.
2
@doogus8728 Yes, just like Japan is not part of NATO, but.... Or Israel, but....
2
Then don't do them if you're not capable. Fire off 2 nuclear missiles instead. Send a signal to the USA the way it sent a signal to the Soviet Union in 1945: hands off Taiwan, it's ours! When others complain use the excuse that an invasion would cost the lives of hundreds of thousands, that the Taiwanese will not surrender and are fanatical, willing to fight to the last man, woman and child to defend their god-emperor (Mammon). That's what the good old USA did.
2
@overcorpse Because it was the cold war and back then neither the USA nor the Soviet Union wanted to upset the status quo. In effect, the post war settlement was that Russia got the east (Warsaw Pact) and the USA got the west (NATO) and during that time neither side sought to upset the balance of power too much by encroaching on the others sphere of influence; borders were fixed, spheres of influence clearly demarcated. In the specific case of Finland the settlement between them and the Soviet Union at the end of world war 2 was that they would be allowed to keep their political and economic system but militarily they would stay neutral, which was a much better deal than what the rest of Europe got. This was called finlandization and Helsinki knew precisely where it stood vis‐à‐vis Moscow. And it worked! Staying neutral, even if that neutrality was decidedly pro‐EU, pro‐US (benevolent neutrality) has given the wonderful people of Finland the highest standard of living in the world. But now they want to change all that just because of some deliberately contrived provocation on Russia's border. For what! They are about to do the one thing that makes Russia more nervous, more defensive, and increases the likelihood of war further down the line.
1
@Olaf Sigurson I know. That's why the USA created it, to insult the Finns and goad them. Fortunately, they were sensible enough not to rise to the insult. What will the they get by joining NATO that they don't have already? If Russia ever decided to invade Finland I'm sure that it wouldn't take them long to subdue the country even with a NATO presence. It's just another flashpoint. Also, because the Russians are fully aware of their disastrous performance in the initial stages of the winter war in 1939 they will very probably go out of their way not to repeat them a second time around.
1
@kipo1456 Agreed.
1
Ghenghis Khan would like a word.
1
Probably automated trolls (bots) too because the corporatists don't want to pay their workers a living wage. Also, troll bots don't go on strike or question the motives of the elite.
1
Hopefully with any luck such scenarios as shown will never be necessary. The capability to destroy or at least inflict serious damage on an enemy's fleet should be enough of a deterrent to dissuade either side from serious, sustained naval warfare against each other, such navies being used primarily against second-rate adversaries in easily won battles.
1
I'd rather the USA be destroyed first so we can all live in peace.
1
When the USA officially declares bankruptcy will you still consider it number one in this hierarchy of yours?
1