http://metsantarinoita.blogspot.com/p/the-problem-in-democracy-is-leaders.html
Kimmo Huosionmaa
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin two most powerful men in the world are meeting together here in Helsinki. And the problem is that another one must ask voters, what they want this man to do. Donald Trump's internal political problem is that maybe he would make the decisions better way if the meetings with Kim Jong-Un and Vladimir Putin would happen during his second period as the President of the United States. There is another season for making bad decisions, but getting there must Trump confess that he would be the man, who makes something else than begins the war in somewhere. This is the problem in the international politics. If Trump would continue the threatening North Korea, would this man marked as the maniac. And when he wanted to talk with North Korea he mentioned in descriptions as the supporter of Kim Jong-Un.
The voters are the problem for Trump because if this man would not be satisfied the people of the United States, the second period as the president would not have existed, and in the second period the President Of The United States would make uncomfortable decisions, and that means that this man would give something to his supporters. Putin must just come to the meeting, and show something that this man wants. But we must remember that Russia should not leave alone. The isolation made possible that Joseph Stalin raised in power of that nation. When we are talking about the western world, we must make another confession. NATO needs the nuclear force of USA for supporting it, and the advantage what went the world to this point is the political resistance against nuclear weapons.
Only The United Kingdom and France have national nuclear armaments and the United Kingdom would operate with United States origin Trident missiles. That means Europe must start to develop own nuclear arsenal if it would want to kick the USA out of that coalition. France has national nuclear missiles, and other equipment, that makes it the nuclear power. But is those two countries nuclear power enough big threat and does it have enough firepower, that it can replace the United States nuclear missiles in the arsenal of NATO? This is the question, what allows Trump to act in the NATO as he wants.
The doctrine in NATO is, that the military equipment would be produced in another side of the Atlantic Ocean in the United States territory and they would carry to Europe if there is a conflict in Europe, and the own forces would get support from the strategic nuclear forces of the USAF. And the war would happen in Europe. This strategy is the straight copy of the allied production strategy from the Second World War, and the nuclear weapons are the only difference with that strategy.
That's why Russia has developed many submarines, what can attack deep inside the USA with the nuclear cruise- or ballistic missiles. The purpose of those strikes would destroy the production units inside the United States or Canada. And the convoys are also the targets of those submarines, what would first shoot their missiles, and then start to act against NATO convoys with torpedoes and missiles. And the major problem with NATO is that most of its equipment is of American origin, what gives the very much political influence for the United States in that union.
The ruling position in the production of the military equipment would give the USA the position, where it can almost order the equipment, what other countries will use, and that makes the position of the USA very interesting in NATO. Other NATO countries might believe, that the aid would come automatically in the form of military equipment if the Russia attacks against NATO. And this is very problematic for Trump. If the USA and Russia would begin the war, there are two nuclear states on the opposite side of the conflict, what would grow the global nuclear war.
And the truth is, that if that equipment would not come at the right time, must Europe go to conflict alone. And then is metering, how good threat the European nuclear weapons are for the attacker. I mean that NATO is the defense union and some of its member countries must face the attack before NATO can come to fight with it. And if some NATO country begins the war, other would not defend it. This is the idea of NATO-co-operations. The small countries are strong together, but they need the nuclear power of the USA to guarantee that the attack against NATO would not allow somebody to attack in the area of NATO countries, meanwhile, those countries are working against terrorists.
