Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Deterrence, rather than the actual use of force, was by far the most successful strategy applied in the Cold War; and over the past seventy years, two of the three theaters in which the United States suffered its highest casualties (Vietnam and the Second Gulf War) have been most affected by domestic dissent once the military approach bogged down. There's an important lesson to be learned from this.
As for Trump, it might be worth remembering that we don't know how much of his strategy is bluff -- and whether some of it might be deliberate deception; in stud poker, some of the cards are face-up and in plain view of all the players, and some aren't.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 08-11-2017 at 07:35 PM..
The strategy could be applied to a number of rogue states, but with Hugo Chavez removed from the picture, I don't see Venezuela as much of a problem. But I'm sure that there are a few here who are as ready to lionize any petty Marxist as they are to demonize Trump.
I have no interest in lionizing Chavez, and please don't preach to me about liberals who are or have, because I am under no obligation to agree with them.
My point is, first of all, we have more important things to be concerned about right now, and second, isn't avoiding unnecessary wars one of the things Trump ran on? I was listening when he said that, and I would have agreed, had I trusted him. The thing is, I didn't, as he also spoke of how much he "loves" war. It appears to me that is the side of his personality that is winning out.
Deterrence, rather than the actual use of force, was by far the most successful strategy applied in the Cold War; and over the past seventy years, two of the three theaters in which the United States suffered its highest casualties (Vietnam and the second Gulf War) have been most affected by domestic dissent once the military approach bogged down. There's an important lesson to be learned from this.
As for Trump, it might be worth remembering that we don't know how much of his strategy is bluff -- and whether some of it might be deliberate deception; in stud poker, some of the cards are face-up and in plain view of all the players, and some aren't.
Bluff? There's a little more at stake in the world right now than a few chips on a poker table.
Can we draft one or more of his children to go to the front lines? Maybe Trump should personally lead the troops because he knows more than the generals.
Can we draft one or more of his children to go to the front lines? Maybe Trump should personally lead the troops because he knows more than the generals.
That's what I would like to see. Since Trump is so eager for all of this, how about sending his sons?
Bluff? There's a little more at stake in the world right now than a few chips on a poker table.
Agreed. But it's the North Koreans who have the most to lose by calling it (and that does not necessarily imply the use of nuclear weapons by the United States -- simplistic caterwauling over there in Left Field to the contrary).
It's the South Koreans who have the most to lose in this scenario, and if they opt for passivity and surrender, it's their call. But so far, they have not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ms. Tarabotti
Can we draft one or more of his children to go to the front lines? Maybe Trump should personally lead the troops because he knows more than the generals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
That's what I would like to see. Since Trump is so eager for all of this, how about sending his sons?
Simplistic, emotional half-truths -- for simplistic, emotional minds.
Back during the Republican debates, Trump defeated his opposition, one by one, by pointing out their own indecisiveness. Whether this strategy can be applied globally remains to be seen. But he prevailed in the general election mostly due to the revulsion felt by many of us against the arrogance and self-righteousness of the Democrats. (And as I've stated previously. my own vote went to Johnson).
And I'll remind everyone over in LeftyLand ready to complain about a "stolen" election that the popular vote total for the four "conservative" candidates exceeded that for the two "progressive" candidates; Hillary Clinton had the largest single plurality, but it was not a clear (50%+1) vote majority, even if Stern's component is added to it.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 08-11-2017 at 07:36 PM..
Agreed. But it's the North Koreans who have the most to lose by calling it (and that does not necessarily imply the use of nuclear weapons by the United States -- simplistic caterwauling over there in Left Field to the contrary).
It's the South Koreans who have the most to lose in this scenario, and if they opt for passivity and surrender, it's their call. But so far, they have not.
Simplistic, emotional half-truths -- for simplistic, emotional minds.
In your opinion what does Kim want? Does he want to conquer the world? Spread communism? Has he made overtures about South Korea? As far as I can tell by just listening to experts on the matter he wants a seat at the table meaning to be treated as a the ruler of the country, acceptance into the international community, lifting of sanctions etc. Kim does not mince words, he hasn't said I want to reunify Korea and take it over. If we pull out of South Korea let the international community defend them via the UN, if a conflict arises then China and Russia ( countries close to them) can deal with it or not (not our problem). If we preemptively attack north Korea which is what is being discussed now, we destroy South Korea, if we pull out of South Korea and nk attacks then we are where we are now (weighing an attack on a nuclear power). As far as I am concerned we don't intervene unilaterally anywhere unless we are attacked first.
if he doesn't want our territory then let the international community deal with it.
And his sons haven't served either. Trump has no concept of what he is talking about whether it is Venezuela or anywhere else.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
