Phaed

2.3K posts

Phaed

Phaed

@Phaed

شامل ہوئے Mart 2008
18 فالونگ89 فالوورز
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@ScottJenningsKY Scott, I know it's your job, but please stop pretending that demolishing the EW to build that giant box of a kitsch monstrocity is normal. Not even MAGA buys that, let alone everyone else.
English
0
0
0
1
Scott Jennings
Scott Jennings@ScottJenningsKY·
I simply cannot understand why people are so angry about a ballroom that future Presidents will enjoy and is 100% privately funded. President Trump could save a kitten from a tree and it would still be a scandal.
English
4.4K
6.3K
45.3K
587.3K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@passcoderonald "Hey remember you sadd you needed those bases to DEFEND NATO according to the alliance's terms? And now you want NATO to blindly follow you to a war you started in the ME no questions asked, and even go fight for you because you can't take the political cost of more casualties?"
English
0
0
4
708
homans top guy
homans top guy@passcoderonald·
“Hey remember you told us we didn’t need Greenland because we can use those bases whenever we want” “Yes” “So can we use those bases?” “No”
English
155
1.4K
15.3K
237K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@lollo_cau @CliffordDMay Yup. Which were supposedly "obliterated" but now we learn they were still "hidden under mountains". Trump repeatedly said Iran's "nuclear potential" and "hopes" were "obliterated" In June. He was lying then. Or lying now. Or both.
English
0
0
0
8
Clifford D. May
Clifford D. May@CliffordDMay·
Let me sum up in two sentences: Iran's rulers were building a conventional weapons shield -- a huge arsenal of missiles and drones -- to protect their nuclear weapons facilities which were being built and hidden under mountains. So, if Iran's rulers were not taken on now, when would have been a better time?
Ryan Saavedra@RyanSaavedra

Secretary of State Marco Rubio gives an excellent explanation on why the U.S. needed to strike Iran It's less than 2 minutes and is worth the watch

English
26
42
236
56.1K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@atrupar Tell that to the families of all the soldiers from NATO, that died helping the US in Afghanistan and Iraq, you inebriated joke.
English
0
0
0
134
Aaron Rupar
Aaron Rupar@atrupar·
Hegseth indicates reopening the Strait of Hormuz is not a core US objective: "We've been willing to lead, President Trump has led the entire time, but it's not just us. You might want to start learning how to fight for yourself."
English
693
356
1.3K
903.5K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@realgeorgie @StateDept What comes next? Probably more single-sentence-spaced-paragraphs posts on X about how the US will leave NATO anytime now. But not much more.
English
0
0
0
13
George
George@realgeorgie·
Day 1 of the Iran war: I asked who would show up. 🎯 Day 31 — Secretary of State Rubio asks: “Why are we in NATO if they won’t let us use those bases?” 🤔 One month. One loyalty test. One answer that will reshape American foreign policy forever. 🌍 The alliance as we knew it is over. What comes next is up to them. 🇺🇸 @StateDept #NATO #Rubio #IranWar#MAGA #AmericaFirst #TrumpDoctrine
English
11
1
10
453
Department of State
Department of State@StateDept·
SECRETARY RUBIO: Why are we in NATO? You have to ask that question. Why do we send trillions of dollars and have all of these American forces stationed in the region, if in our time of need, we won't be allowed to use those bases?
English
539
1.1K
4.4K
65.9K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@StateDept Maybe read the terms of the agreement, Lil' Marco?
English
0
0
0
11
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@rokbranch @bonchieredstate @neoavatara No. Allies don't help their ally "by default" when they decide to invade a country. Especially if they're in a *defensive* agreement. And Trump literally asked other countries to send ships to the straits- and even said they were on their way. You sure you've been following this?
English
0
0
0
8
R. K. Branch
R. K. Branch@rokbranch·
@Phaed @bonchieredstate @neoavatara Yes "allowing", which is what allies do by default. And there is no "Hormuz demand". Just Trump correctly pointing out that if EU countries try to hinder US attempts to open the strait, then they can either do it themselves or live with the high oil prices.
English
1
0
0
18
Bonchie
Bonchie@bonchieredstate·
I refuse to believe you guys don't see the problem here. It's one thing for the Europeans not to provide direct support for the operation. It's another for France to deny the use of its airspace for cargo deliveries or for the UK to muddle over domestic base usage. There is no point in being in an alliance that can't provide such basic guarantees of cooperation.
Pradheep J. Shanker, M.D.@neoavatara

@AstorAaron @JewishWarrior13 It also is giving up on Pax Americana. MAGA is dead.

English
445
537
5.1K
326.9K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@rokbranch @bonchieredstate @neoavatara Those words sure do some heavy lifting there. "Refraining from banning"... AKA *allowing*. Allowing offensive actions through their airspace. If someone did that against the US, you'd be more than eager to call it "jumping into war". And still nothing about Trump's Hormuz demand.
English
1
0
0
16
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@King20Femi @LokiJulianus And, again; Trump wants Europe to "go into the straits". Is that not active involvement? One that does have considerable risk, rather than rerouting flight paths?
English
0
0
0
10
Femi King
Femi King@King20Femi·
@Phaed @LokiJulianus Europe has argued it is not involved in the war against Russia despite providing more than logistics & support. We are asking to fly through your territory ffs. Turning us down puts our military at risk, the same guys that will be ordered to defend you if you come under attack
English
2
0
0
12
Just Loki
Just Loki@LokiJulianus·
“We want the Americans to re-open the Straits but they can't use our airspace or their own military bases in our country to run the logistics of any of that”: our European “allies.”
English
615
935
7.9K
237.6K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@King20Femi @LokiJulianus Except you play the part of Russia in this. The US has attacked Iran, for better or worse. Providing support in an offensive war is taking part in the offense.
English
0
0
0
24
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@HilzFuld Read the founding terms of the Alliance.
English
0
0
0
2
Hillel Fuld
Hillel Fuld@HilzFuld·
I don’t understand why the US doesn’t immediately leave NATO. What is NATO for if not for moments like this?
Hillel Fuld tweet media
English
939
196
1.4K
41.1K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@King20Femi @LokiJulianus As for "only defend us and you get nothing", go ask the relatives of those who died in Afghanistan and Iraq. See what they say.
English
0
0
0
12
Femi King
Femi King@King20Femi·
@Phaed @LokiJulianus "bases supposedly functioning defensively in Europe". Alliance to Europe only means you defend us, and you get nothing. Flying over your country isn't participating in the war ffs.
English
2
0
0
15
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@C_3C_3 Just don't expect your MIC to keep selling their weapons to Europe and making a ton of money. It will be hard for europe, but they'll adapt one way or another. Hopefully the purses of lockheed and McDonnel Douglas will adapt too, and won't seek you taxpayers to bail them out.
English
0
0
0
208
C3
C3@C_3C_3·
Are you sitting down? The American taxpayer is responsible for 62% of NATO’s defense budget. It’s way past time America leaves NATO. Let them fend for themselves. Most NATO countries are not our allies. Facts.
English
1.4K
4K
15.5K
110.5K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@bonchieredstate @92huskies @neoavatara Then the purpose of the alliance for the US was never truly defensive, and the US *should* leave NATO and form whatever other protection racket they can.
English
0
0
0
226
Bonchie
Bonchie@bonchieredstate·
I’d assume people like you are missing the point intentionally. No one is asking them to defend us or strike Iran. We are not asking for Article V action. We are just asking for them stay out of our way and help logistically. If NATO countries can’t do that for the US, then the alliance serves no purpose for the US. A defense pact is supposed to be mutually beneficial. If it doesn’t at least guarantee base usage and the ability to transit airspace for the US, then Europe can defend itself from Russia and China.
English
15
27
222
4.4K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@bonchieredstate @neoavatara If the US do not actually want a defensive agreement, but rather one where they have vassal states that just jump into war whenever they tell them to, they are free to do so. But in the end, that will not work that well for their global position.
English
1
0
1
205
Bonchie
Bonchie@bonchieredstate·
1. We couldn't risk losing the element of surprise, and since they weren't being asked to be direct participants, they didn't need to know prior. 2. Trump involved them the moment the attack started. 3. You're just repeating the same claim at this point. 4. There is no point in being in a "defense pact" that is so one-sided. We don't need France to help us if Mexico invades Texas. It's a ridiculous premise. If NATO isn't going to provide passive cooperation when we need it, there is no point in it existing. Sorry, I know Trump is brash, but that's the reality. Alliances are not supposed to be one-way welfare streets.
English
95
81
1K
21.7K
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@bonchieredstate @neoavatara Oh shut it. Europe helped the US *when they were attacked*, and paid the price in blood in Afghanistan and Iraq. Go tell the families of the fallen about this "one-way welfare" and see where that gets you.
English
0
0
0
192
Phaed
Phaed@Phaed·
@King20Femi @LokiJulianus Also, the fact that the US does "not actually need any help" makes Trump's demands for help even more petty and cowardly. Yes,Trump could do it on his own, but he cannot face the *political* cost of having any substantial casualties. So he wants other countries to take that risk.
English
0
0
0
6
Femi King
Femi King@King20Femi·
@Phaed @LokiJulianus Trump said many times - we don't actually need any help - not that Europe could do much anyway. But denying us the ability to fly logistics to our men and women in uniform through your territory is a very hostile act.
English
2
0
0
10