Politics

[Tanks]

In regard to previous comment about uselessness of Presidential libraries. Here is a list of incoming events:

 

[RLD]

Thats a pretty weak argument...

Iran has admitted breach more times than I can count.. and as recently as June 2025 the UNSC found Iran non compliant. In Sept 2025 the UNSC then imposed sanctions against Iran..

Everyone on the planet, to include the Iranians know that the Iranians have never met the requirements of the non proliferation treaty.. and other than occasional slaps on the wrist, the UN historically has done nothing about it..

Then Consider that Russia and China are both perminant members of the UNSC.. Then consider that among the 10 non perminant members of the UNSC that are currently serving are Somalia, Pakistan, Liberia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.. and what you have is a joke of a security council serving what has become a joke of a global institution..

The UNSC is no resolution to the problem..

It's not an argument. It is just laying out the regulatory framework and suggesting it isn't working.

But you are right that the UNSC is useless on many levels.

 

[mdwest]

My point is that memo and assurances in it were toothless. Yes, Russia was sanctioned and people kept buying their oil, heck Trump just lifted the sanctions partially due to the Iran war.

You can't sanction a nation with one hand and give them money with the other.

I agree with you that its toothless... which was my point to RLD...

It was intentionally designed to be toothless.. thats why it was a memo, not a treaty.. and why it incorporated assurances rather than commitments..

the truth is Ukraine didnt really have any choice but to sign it.. they were getting pressured by both the US and Russia over its nuclear arsenal.. neither side was putting up with the idea of a nuclear Ukraine..

Im pretty sure they never expected anything to come of it.. if they did, 2014 proved otherwise..

2022 as such is completely inconsequential in terms of the Budapest Memo..

 

[Doug Hamilton]

Yes I do, but since he has allready managed to wreck it this much I think that he might succeed in wrecking it completely by the time his term is up.

Also there is no telling that another candidate with similar policies will not be elected again. I think that now when it has happened twice other nations has learned that they cant simply wait out his term...

I dont think it would be wise to make long term defense plans on a wish that the next president is more conventional...

There also seems to be reala possibility that if an future republican MAGA candidate endorsed by Trump loses the general election Trump will simply declare that the election was stolen again...

If I understand it correctly it was not the institutions that held but rather individuals last time and now he has made sure to have a vice president that most likely will not deny an order to refuse to certify the result etc...

Wisdom of another European Socialist?

 

[RLD]

First, they themselves bragged about enriching the existing 60% nuclear material to weapon grade within a month or so. The question is not whether they can reach the USA, but whether they can reach Israel. There is no doubt in my mind that if they were to get it, they would use it on Israel. Fanatics do not care about consequences.

If there is a proven breech, what can the UN security council can do? They already would have a nuclear weapon with missiles capable of reaching most European capitals and Israel is basically a layup.

Korea and Pakistan became nuclear nations by ignoring everyone else.

There are some reports of them bragging about having that capacity in a closed door meeting with I think one U.S. official, never verified.

Happy to see your source for it.

But considering the dishonesty of the current U.S. administration and the whole "WMDs" experience (and I kinda liked Bush) I would not suggest anyone risk Canadian lives on that tale.

The Israel question is a little dicier. I guess you think self defence can be invoked when any country you like feels threatened?

 

[RLD]

I agree with you that its toothless... which was my point to RLD...

It was intentionally designed to be toothless.. thats why it was a memo, not a treaty.. and why it incorporated assurances rather than commitments..

the truth is Ukraine didnt really have any choice but to sign it.. they were getting pressured by both the US and Russia over its nuclear arsenal.. neither side was putting up with the idea of a nuclear Ukraine..

Im pretty sure they never expected anything to come of it.. if they did, 2014 proved otherwise..

2022 as such is completely inconsequential in terms of the Budapest Memo..

Then there is no value to a U.S. written assurance. We all know what that means.

 

[RLD]

Wisdom of another European Socialist?

As opposed to an American fascist?

Funny...I just recall this really fruitful discussion about the lack of value in childish name calling.

 

[Russ16]

Question for our European ALLIES here. WHEN (not if) China decides to invade Taiwan to CONTROL 90% of products heading to Europe and 24% of total global maritime trade through the South China Sea, will European countries allow the US to use their bases or fly over their territory IF (and probably will) the US attempts to stop China's invasion of Taiwan? Or will it just be a US and probably Japan's and Australia's (because they could be next) "intervention" and "not our war"?. Sure, it's not Ukraine or Iran, but IT IS coming IMHO and probably much more disastrous, so that's why I'm asking.

I think the US intervening in a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is a 50/50 proposition at best at this point.

 

[Pondoro]

Question for our European ALLIES here. WHEN (not if) China decides to invade Taiwan to CONTROL 90% of products heading to Europe and 24% of total global maritime trade through the South China Sea, will European countries allow the US to use their bases or fly over their territory IF (and probably will) the US attempts to stop China's invasion of Taiwan? Or will it just be a US and probably Japan's and Australia's (because they could be next) "intervention" and "not our war"?. Sure, it's not Ukraine or Iran, but IT IS coming IMHO and probably much more disastrous, so that's why I'm asking.

That is a very good question.. It is idiotic to deny USAF acces to bases/airspace in Europe..but I think it was primarily a thank you for Trumps anti-Europe rethoric lately.. For instance, USAF currently invest $200 milion in an airbase in southern Norway..amongst other things.

Lets hope that US - NATO relations will normalise..

 

[Aaron N]

There’s a TON of yammering on here about how Europe needs to step up and look after itself, but does a united and powerful Europe really fall into Americas plan? What if the EU aligned together and created a military on par technologically
and capability wise. Would this not threaten Americas spot as the global strong arm? What if Americans were kicked out of every European base because they were no longer needed? Wouldn’t this limit their global reach?

 

[mdwest]

There are some reports of them bragging about having that capacity in a closed door meeting with I think one U.S. official, never verified.

Happy to see your source for it.

But considering the dishonesty of the current U.S. administration and the whole "WMDs" experience (and I kinda liked Bush) I would not suggest anyone risk Canadian lives on that tale.

The Israel question is a little dicier. I guess you think self defence can be invoked when any country you like feels threatened?

Iran admitted to possessing 60% enriched uranium and defended it saying 60% is not banned by the non proliferation treaty..

There is also an IAEA report that confirms Iran possesses more than 400 kg of 60% enriched uranimum..

https://www.iranintl.com/en/202506078822?utm_source=copilot.com

Analysis of IAEA Iran Verification and Monitoring Report — May 2025 | ISIS Reports | Institute For Science And International Security

isis-online.org

 

[mdwest]

Then there is no value to a U.S. written assurance. We all know what that means.

youd have to re-read prior posts..

the assurances written in the Budapest Memo have indeed been met.. roughly equally by the UK and the US..

there was never an assurance of military response..

the assurance was economic...

and the US has spent $114B on Ukraine since 2022.. which comparitively to the US economy vs the brit economy is about on par with Brit spending since 2022...

which as stated earlier.. is MORE than all of NATO outside of the US has contributed to Ukraine..

 

[mdwest]

There’s a TON of yammering on here about how Europe needs to step up and look after itself, but does a united and powerful Europe really fall into Americas plan? What if the EU aligned together and created a military on par technologically
and capability wise. Would this not threaten Americas spot as the global strong arm? What if Americans were kicked out of every European base because they were no longer needed? Wouldn’t this limit their global reach?

I guess the question is.. how exactly is Europe going to do that?

In 20 or 30 years? MAYBE.. but only if it decides to realign its entire political structure and spending priorities in the process..

There are plenty of smart Europeans out there that can design pretty incredible things.. and Europe has some excellent manufacturing capabilities..

But, much like Canada, it lacks the economy to create a military on par (manning, materials, or technology wise) with the US.. even if all of Europes militaries combined.. if it wants to continue to pursue its social welfare programs.. if it wants to continue to deal with its migrant crisis.. etc...etc..

Any country can rise to power over time.. certainly a group of countries can... the US wasnt always a world super power..

But it doesnt happen overnight.. and its not going to happen ever if Europe continues on the same path its been on for the last few decades..

 

[KJE81]

Wisdom of another European Socialist?

An european realist perhaps, I have voted for the conservative party here in Sweden ever since I got old enough to vote...but as I have been told here repeatedly it probably makes me more of a centrist in american policy?

 

[RLD]

Iran admitted to possessing 60% enriched uranium and defended it saying 60% is not banned by the non proliferation treaty..

There is also an IAEA report that confirms Iran possesses more than 400 kg of 60% enriched uranimum..

https://www.iranintl.com/en/202506078822?utm_source=copilot.com

Analysis of IAEA Iran Verification and Monitoring Report — May 2025 | ISIS Reports | Institute For Science And International Security

isis-online.org

We all knew that, which is fine, it is not banned. But wasn't there something from Witkoff about them saying they could make 11 bombs in about two weeks? Not too many people accepted his word on that.

 

[CoElkHunter]

That is a very good question.. It is idiotic to deny USAF acces to bases/airspace in Europe..but I think it was primarily a thank you for Trumps anti-Europe rethoric lately.. For instance, USAF currently invest $200 milion in an airbase in southern Norway..amongst other things.

Lets hope that US - NATO relations will normalise..

I also asked this question because I believe some/many countries' governments adhere to the philosophy that Taiwan is part of China and will hide behind that and not get involved in an effort to prevent China from controlling the annual $5.3 TRILLION in trade that passes through the South China Sea through its subjugation of Taiwan.

 

[Aaron N]

I guess the question is.. how exactly is Europe going to do that?

In 20 or 30 years? MAYBE.. but only if it decides to realign its entire political structure and spending priorities in the process..

There are plenty of smart Europeans out there that can design pretty incredible things.. and Europe has some excellent manufacturing capabilities..

But, much like Canada, it lacks the economy to create a military on par (manning, materials, or technology wise) with the US.. even if all of Europes militaries combined.. if it wants to continue to pursue its social welfare programs.. if it wants to continue to deal with its migrant crisis.. etc...etc..

Any country can rise to power over time.. certainly a group of countries can... the US wasnt always a world super power..

But it doesnt happen overnight.. and its not going to happen ever if Europe continues on the same path its been on for the last few decades..

Yes I was thinking decades down the line, but regardless, does it serve Americas best interests to get that ball potentially rolling? Or does it just make a good talking point

 

[mdwest]

We all knew that, which is fine, it is not banned. But wasn't there something from Witkoff about them saying they could make 11 bombs in about two weeks? Not too many people accepted his word on that.

Much of the enrichment process is classified for obvious reasons.. so nothing in the public domain is going to tell you how quickly 60% enriched uranium can be turned into 90%, which is considered weapons grade..

What is available in the public domain, without going into any measure of depth here on a hunting forum is..

the process to get to 60 is extremely difficult, extremely time consuming, and extremely expensive..

and the process to get from 60 to 90 is MUCH easier, much less time consuming, and not nearly as expensive..

the big hump to get over in the enrichment process is 60.. this is why IAEA considered 60% "near weapons grade" and why 60% is a very serious threat..

whether the truth is 2 bombs or 11 or 10,000.. and whether Iran can do it in 2, 3, or 10 weeks.. does it really matter?

what matters is.. the IAEA confirms they have more than enough on hand for 11 bombs already at 60%.. and that the IAEA absolutely confirms this is seriously dangerous.. and that getting from 60 to 90 doesnt take long (if youre the US it takes almost no time).. and that Iran is the largest participant in state sponsored global terrorism on the planet..

not to mention.. if everyone is bitching about them holding up traffic in the strait of hormuz with only conventional munitions.. what exactly does everyone think happens when Iran goes nuclear?

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

MAGA has become the new "racist"..

Every time a liberal wants to cry about something and you refute their BS with facts... youre "MAGA"...

Its actually comical and laughable..

"Hitler", "Racist", "Bigot", "Homophobe" and "Mysoginist" didnt work.. so lets try a new word lol..

I would argue a lot of the depends on context, mega can also be used to differentiate between right of centre and hard or alt rights. Maga seems to be a very hard right leaning movement with isolationist ideals. One could almost make the point that trump formed a coalition of sorts between centralists all the way to the far right. Atleast that has been my observation based on the opinions expressed on this forum.

 

[KJE81]

youd have to re-read prior posts..

the assurances written in the Budapest Memo have indeed been met.. roughly equally by the UK and the US..

there was never an assurance of military response..

the assurance was economic...

and the US has spent $114B on Ukraine since 2022.. which comparitively to the US economy vs the brit economy is about on par with Brit spending since 2022...

which as stated earlier.. is MORE than all of NATO outside of the US has contributed to Ukraine..

It does seem like the US spent roughly equal to the EU when only financial and military aid is considered? And quite a lot less when humanitarian aid is also calculated:

Who Spends More On Ukraine Aid: The US Or EU?

How much have the US, EU, and other allies spent on supporting Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022?

www.rferl.org

Cant find how much the Nato members outside EU has contributed right now but I guess they sent some aid aswell...