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.
I have no idea whose running for nomination at the moment, but Palin would be a disaster for the world and I say that as a Non-American, as she's far too
This recent comment by Palin clearly demonstrates that she has no concept of what diplomacy entails. Indeed diplomacy has never been more important with more countries set to acquire nuclear weapons this century and new powerful economies and nations also emerging. Sabre Rattling and Warmongering is not going to win over China, Russia or the Middle East and Islamic world. As Winston Churchill once stated "To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war".
But it is China, North Korea, Iran and Russia who is building up their arsenals. You have to combat those threats with a strong tough leader who will stand up to these nations and force them to back down. Palin would do that using the 'Peace Through Strength' type of diplomacy backed by the might of the United States military's conventional and nuclear arsenals. That is the type of diplomacy that kept us out of nuclear war during the 'Cold War' which Russia is trying to revive at this moment. Obama is just not the type of guy to get the job done. We don't need cowards like him in the oval office. He is the Neville Chamberlain (a true coward of your country in his time) of our time.
Nobody said war. Russia doesn't want it either. However...
Diplomacy alone will not achieve desired goals.
To think otherwise, is naive.
Now, please stay on topic. We are talking about Palin, her keynote address at CPAC and how well it was received.
I am trying to stay om topic, so will make this my last post.
In terms of diplomacy and sanctions it may well not achieve the desired outcome but the alternative is to engage the Russian Military and risk war, so surely the former is preferable to the latter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britt Reid
But it is China, North Korea, Iran and Russia who is building up their arsenals. You have to combat those threats with a strong tough leader who will stand up to these nations and force them to back down. Palin would do that using the 'Peace Through Strength' type of diplomacy backed by the might of the United States military's conventional and nuclear arsenals. That is the type of diplomacy that kept us out of nuclear war during the 'Cold War' which Russia is trying to revive at this moment. Obama is just not the type of guy to get the job done. We don't need cowards like him in the oval office. He is the Neville Chamberlain (a true coward of your country in his time) of our time.
The US spends more money on Defence than any other nation by a long way, so can hardly criticise others, indeed China only spends 2% GDP on Defence. I also don't really agree with your analysis of the Cold War, indeed in many ways US policy only made relations with the Russians worse.
It's interesting to note that the highly respected veteran journalist Andrew Alexander blames much of the Cold War on the Americans, who he accuses of provoking the Russians and writes as much in his 2011 book. It could be argued that without the Americans that relations between Western European countries and Russia might have have been far better.
Obama is just not the type of guy to get the job done. We don't need cowards like him in the oval office. He is the Neville Chamberlain (a true coward of your country in his time) of our time.
So you would risk a nuclear war rather than use tact diplomacy and global sanctions just to prove America is some kind of tough guy?
Got any idea how many would die in such a conflict?
I dont look at avoiding a nuclear holocaust as being cowardly i look at it as being smart and having some compassion for the billion+ lives that would be lost in such a war.
But it is China, North Korea, Iran and Russia who is building up their arsenals. You have to combat those threats with a strong tough leader who will stand up to these nations and force them to back down. Palin would do that using the 'Peace Through Strength' type of diplomacy. That is the type of diplomacy that kept us out of nuclear war during the 'Cold War' which Russia is trying to revive at this moment. Obama is just not the type of guy to get the job done. We don't need cowards like him in the oval office he is ineligible for Constitutionally. He is the Neville Chamberlain (a true coward of your country in his time) of our time.
Huh, the Russians are trying to start a cold war? No wonder you like Palin so much you will gulp up any nonsense that comes along. What 2 countries funded protestors in Ukraine 2 months before a election? Not the Russians. Same thing in Georgia who attacked first. It seems to me the the U S and the west provoke Russia and then they react. Give us a example of Russia trying to start a cold war.
When you say peace through strength do you mean putting nuclear weapons right on Russia's border? that seems to be the objective. Wonder how the U S would re act? see Cuban missile crisis. Tell us what Palin would do or suggest about Ukraine, this should be good.
But it is China, North Korea, Iran and Russia who is building up their arsenals. You have to combat those threats with a strong tough leader who will stand up to these nations and force them to back down. Palin would do that using the 'Peace Through Strength' type of diplomacy backed by the might of the United States military's conventional and nuclear arsenals. That is the type of diplomacy that kept us out of nuclear war during the 'Cold War' which Russia is trying to revive at this moment. Obama is just not the type of guy to get the job done. We don't need cowards like him in the oval office. He is the Neville Chamberlain (a true coward of your country in his time) of our time.
I know that conservatives like Britt yearn for the Cold War days of Reagan when we were on the brink of nuclear destruction. As for the sane among us, we hope to avoid such a situation. And let me guess, Palin would be so much better at handling such a situation. First you'd have to point out where Crimea was on the map.
It would be a guaranteed win for the Dems if she did run.
I think Rand Paul is the most likely candidate for the GOP,
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.
