Naravno da ce Tucker dobiti priliku. On je svakako pro-putinovski i pro-ruski nastrojen, njegov show na Twitteru se cesto bavi Ukrajinom i jedan je od vecih generatora fejkova oko nje. Uz to, obiteljska im se tvrtka bavi lobiranjem i rade za madjarsku vladu. Otac mu je i sluzbeno registrirani kao agent Madjarske. A opce poznato je da Rusi cesto novac za PR prebacuju preko Madjarske. 

Inace za ilustraciju koliko je americka politika kompromitirana iz Moskve govori to da pored toga sto Republikanci rade sve da blokiraju pomoc Ukrajini, ukljucujuci i blokadu dogovora sto bi zatvorio njihovu juznu granicu, pomoc  Tajvanu i Izraelu, jucer je Trump rekao da ce ohrabriti Putin da napada i radi sto hoce drzavama koje "ne placaju". Ako on postane predsjednik NATO je u tom slucaju mrtav. E sad sto znaci to oni koji ne placaju? Najocitija stvar je tih famoznih 2% BDP za obranu, ali nije to bas tako. Ovo dolje je jedna od boljih kratkih analiza. Cilj je da se kao i s pomoc Ukrajini uvjeti micu sve dalje i dalje dok ne dodje do pucanje veza. Sad je 2% (kojih svi koji granice s Rusijom ispunjavaju), sutra ce biti 3% ili ce traziti nesto vise i vise.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Trump has said this multiple times now, though this version is expressed in a more callous way. Then again, all of our Eastern Flank allies are "fully paid up" (at or above 2% of GDP on defence) and some are far above what's been agreed (Poland most of all).

Hence, some colleagues may feel this position is manageable. If the Eastern Flank are defended, all of Europe is defended as far as land attacks are concerned. And in case of a Russian air campaign against both Poland and Germany, it seems hard to imagine the U.S. seeking to help Poland to defend against it but not Germany.

The real problem is whether Trump is looking to stabilise onto a rebalanced relationship, but one where we remain trusted allies nonetheless, or whether this is directional, i.e., part of a steady and deliberate erosion of our relationship, with rupture as the final destination.

It's like his agitation on Ukraine. He claims he can solve it in one day, but in practice he seems to want to yank Ukraine down to its knees by denying it vital arms and ammunition. That's what he's doing right now through the House Republicans. Goalposts are regularly shifted, always towards helping Ukraine less. And right now, there's no new assistance at all. As for NATO, one day Trump can say he won't protect unless the country spends the 2% (the commitment we all signed up to). Then he can say 2% is not enough, it should be 3%. Then he can pretend the spending isn't happening by using figures that are out of date. He already lied publicly about burden sharing in the help to Ukraine: he claimed the US was spending 10 times more than Europe. The reality to date: US is spending less than Europe. So, a distortion by a factor greater than 10. In sum, it would be more reasonable to assume that Trump is preparing the ground for abandoning Europe and for striking deals with Russia over our heads.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

On je vec lagao da NATO saveznici ne bi mogli Americi, iako jedinia zemlja koja je aktivirala clanak 5 jest Amerika i svi su priskocili. Uz to u Americkim ratovima NATO zemlje su izgubile 1400+ vojnika, dok je Amerika u europskim od 45te navamo izgubila 0. Lagao je da je Amerika dala 10 puta vise Ukrajini nego Europa, iako Europa je vec neko vrijeme dala znatno vise nego Amerika. To nisu slcajne lazi, vec aktivno sprema teren za razbijanje NATOa.