4 ms·

so it's better to lose sovereignty now to the US than take the risk of a hypothetical Russian invasion? all these countries that have US bases in them are pract

so it's better to lose sovereignty now to the US than take the risk of a hypothetical Russian invasion? all these countries that have US bases in them are practically invaded without resistance. the US is friendly now but in 30 years who knows? imagine US being in a very tough situation. it's a no brainer for them to say "America first" and take whatever resources they can take from anywhere they can. look at Turkey, specifically about F35. they got cut off from it by the US on a whim. they spent a lot of money on the F35 probably, instead of investing in their own fighter program and now they got nothing.

Sevastopol 5y ago
> look at Turkey, specifically about F35. they got cut off from it by the US on a whim. Not really "on a whim." The implications/consequences of purchasing and using the S-400 were clear. It was a clear choice made by Turkey and the decision cost the US much more than Turkey ever invested in the program anyways. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_procurement#Turkey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/07/17/turkey-officially-kicked-out-of-f-35-program/ https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/07/17/turkey-officially...
Grustaf 5y ago
The risk of a Russian invasion is close to zero, has been for a while. It's more about wanting to be friends with the big super power, and frankly about our leaders being personally coopted.