I really can’t understand how the narrative “Russia is going to invade us” is so spread around.
First of all, Russia has struggled for 3 years to only conquer a 20% of Ukraine. How are they supposed to try to attack any NATO country, which would create for them a WW3 against an army more than twice their size?
Not speaking about Russia attacking our beloved Belgium (first they would have to pass Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Poland, etc…)
I am in favor of an EU organized army, independent from USA, but if we take in account together all the EU military investment, that counts nowadays as even more than the Russia’s one. Why should we invest even more in military then?
And what type of military organization is NATO? there is actually no coordination whatsoever between NATO country members?
Why we were told that public pensions were “unsustainable” but now we are told that there is no problem for us to invest whatever it takes in weapons? I don´t know, Rick…
It’s a false choice. We can and should fund a strong enough army to fulfill our obligations to NATO. Which is definitely necessary. Wars are no longer about boots on the ground, and Russia has been at war with us in that sense for a long time.
But it’s not a choice between that and social security unless you believe politicians who want reasons to cut social security for any reason anyways, or Russian apologists like this guy. And it’s incredibly annoying because stuff like this means PVDA literally makes them an unviable party to vote for. Either they are dumb and naive, or they’re smart enough and deceptive.
I really can’t understand how the narrative “Russia is going to invade us” is so spread around.
First of all, Russia has struggled for 3 years to only conquer a 20% of Ukraine. How are they supposed to try to attack any NATO country, which would create for them a WW3 against an army more than twice their size? Not speaking about Russia attacking our beloved Belgium (first they would have to pass Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Poland, etc…)
I am in favor of an EU organized army, independent from USA, but if we take in account together all the EU military investment, that counts nowadays as even more than the Russia’s one. Why should we invest even more in military then?
And what type of military organization is NATO? there is actually no coordination whatsoever between NATO country members?
Why we were told that public pensions were “unsustainable” but now we are told that there is no problem for us to invest whatever it takes in weapons? I don´t know, Rick…
It’s a false choice. We can and should fund a strong enough army to fulfill our obligations to NATO. Which is definitely necessary. Wars are no longer about boots on the ground, and Russia has been at war with us in that sense for a long time.
But it’s not a choice between that and social security unless you believe politicians who want reasons to cut social security for any reason anyways, or Russian apologists like this guy. And it’s incredibly annoying because stuff like this means PVDA literally makes them an unviable party to vote for. Either they are dumb and naive, or they’re smart enough and deceptive.