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.
So, you'd favor saber-rattling bluster? THAT's really worked well in the past.
Saber rattling did the job of making sure WW3 never happened during the cold war. Some people need to open a history book!
That said, I'm opposed to this shield for one reason: why are we still subsidizing the EU's defense? These are European countries and they should be the EU's responsibility to defend. I'm all for missile shields but base them in North America and in ships closer to trouble points.
Saber rattling did the job of making sure WW3 never happened during the cold war. Some people need to open a history book!
That said, I'm opposed to this shield for one reason: why are we still subsidizing the EU's defense? These are European countries and they should be the EU's responsibility to defend. I'm all for missile shields but base them in North America and in ships closer to trouble points.
I don't think many would agree with your highly hypothetical scenario.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,419,437 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by decafdave
Saber rattling did the job of making sure WW3 never happened during the cold war. Some people need to open a history book!
That said, I'm opposed to this shield for one reason: why are we still subsidizing the EU's defense? These are European countries and they should be the EU's responsibility to defend. I'm all for missile shields but base them in North America and in ships closer to trouble points.
Not really, the closest we came to WW III was probably the Cuban Misslie Crisis, and that was solved by good old fashioned horse trading (missiles in Turkey for missiles in Cuba) more than by saber-rattling. That's what the history books say.
Obama is in the process of destroying long time relationships with sound allies, preferring to remake our policies so they'll be "acceptable" to the likes of Russia, Iran and Venezuela. These actions and his blind admiration of the U.N. are truly worrisome.
The leaders of those countries are much tougher with more "street smarts" than Obama and are playing him like a fine tuned violin, but he's too naive and too much of an egotist to realize that. He is, however, a bully and a bully always backs down from a bigger bully.
I believe that he truly sees himself as some sort of "global" president and is willing to do what is necessary to change the landscape of America to make it more acceptable to his marxist, communist and socialist heroes. His enormous ego will cause him to gravitate toward those that seem to admire him the most without realizing that he is no more than a pawn. He is totally unable to see himself as anything but the center of importance.
Hugely dangerous traits that threaten this country and our military.
Said it better than I could, agree with your posting.
Saber rattling did the job of making sure WW3 never happened during the cold war. Some people need to open a history book!
That said, I'm opposed to this shield for one reason: why are we still subsidizing the EU's defense? These are European countries and they should be the EU's responsibility to defend. I'm all for missile shields but base them in North America and in ships closer to trouble points.
I partially agree with your observation. I think the placement where planned was a good idea, but agree that the European countries need to contribute more to the overall defense concept, and NATO. We have allowed them to really get away with inadequate financial participation the past few decades, and they need to make a bigger contribution.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,419,437 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizNJ
Obama is in the process of destroying long time relationships with sound allies, preferring to remake our policies so they'll be "acceptable" to the likes of Russia, Iran and Venezuela. These actions and his blind admiration of the U.N. are truly worrisome.
So, he's a bully but the offense that has the whiners up in arms now is he's not acting like a bully, dictating to the world the way it's gonna be. Doesn't it get uncomfortable sitting on both sides of the fence?
"Hope is not a good national security policy". The only ones who are happy about this are Russia, Iran, North Korea and the totally naive liberal statist pacifist a$$ clowns on this forum........
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.
