2016 Election Thread Part Deux

#927
#927
carlos86 said:
You think the U.S. Participationin NATO is expensive? Compare it to costs of World Wars I and II. Deterrence is bargain compared to major wars.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you're talking about with the expenses of WW2. The US emerged as the richest nation the world had ever seen. We had practically all the gold on the planet at a time when the world was on the gold standard.

The trick is to have the nations of Europe destroy each other while we sell them supplies. Then swoop in toward the end and conquer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#928
#928
Gramps said:
You shouldn't be to proud since lying Ted is polling at 53%.
Click to expand...

It was partly in jest (I agree Cruz is weakass) and it's more of a statement on the moral repugnance of Trump, as opposed to picking a quality candidate.
 
#929
#929
Posters in favor of fundamentally restructuring (if not disregarding altogether) our European security architecture, I'm curious what your thoughts are on this Israel-masturbation fest some call "AIPAC" that CNN is currently airing.

My personal thoughts are that it is an absolute disgrace and injustice how much time, energy, and money Israel consumes in our own domestic politics. I'll say that again: OUR OWN DOMESTIC POLITICS just for emphasis. No other country on Earth has managed to co-opt our own domestic politics like Israel.

Although I have become far more conservative in recent years, one thing I will never forgive Republicans for is having Bibi speak before Congress a year or two ago, behind our president's back. That was a move befitting European pansies and not Americans. If you're going to make a whorehouse out of our country, at least do it in private so as not to embarrass us in front of the entire world.
 
#932
#932
If we removed troops from Europe and Asia, where do we plan on putting them? Build new bases in the US? Down size the military even more? Right now there are roughly 65,000 US military troops stationed throughout Europe, a little over 50k in Germany. We have about 35-40,000 in South Korea and more than that in Japan.

These countries can't afford to pay us to be there and moving American Forces out of these countries would be detrimental to the economy of these places. Same goes for bases in the US, the majority of the small cities and towns rely on the military to keep the town afloat.

As far as the distribution of wealth countries receive from the US, it's not a shocker that the Middle East receives about 65% of foreign military financing that the US gives out each year. Africa is 2nd with about 23%...The total is around $4.5 Billion
 
#934
#934
volprof said:
No one is claiming it is a perfect situation for us; I'm certainly not. I think Europe has become a largely pathetic continent, and if we're going to be an empire regardless, there are times, quite frankly, when I wish we received tribute and other payment like the honest-to-god empires of the past.

That being said, this isn't about them. It's about us. It is a national security matter. Instead of worrying about wasting money in Europe and Asia, we need to be more worried about pulling back and cutting waste in stupid Middle East warring, using money to fight a war against jihad Johnnies that should largely be merely a matter of good intelligence tracking in the first place.

If we pull back in Europe, all that is going to happen is that the Europeans will gravitate towards Russia. Russia will then forge its own alliances with our old partners, and from there, who knows what they do. Perhaps they retain the status quo, or perhaps they won't something more. The point is that we just don't know, and that uncertainty is enough to warrant us keeping our foot in the door.

The important thing to understand is that the natural hegemon of Europe is not the United States; it is the Russian Federation. Russia is right across the border, making it much easier for it to operate within Europe, should it so choose. The US, on the other hand, is across 4,000 miles of ocean. The only thing keeping us the actual hegemon at the moment is that network of alliances currently in question. Once that strategic advantage is lost, for one reason or another, getting it back again, at whatever costs, will be far more difficult. You don't just sail a military across 4,000 miles of ocean in a time of war and forge sustainable beach heads and bases on the cheap, especially when all your great adversary has to do is just start rolling armored columns across a porous land border.
Click to expand...

Report: Russia Defeats NATO in Baltic War Game | Military.com
 
#935
#935
Trump is on CNN looks tired. Doing well but looks tired. Not surprising I am sure he is keeping up a hellish pace.
 
#936
#936
The more the media calls his supporters idiots, the more supporters he will get. They call him a monster yet are as responsible as anyone for creating him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#937
#937
volprof said:
Rule 1 of geopolitics: never assume your adversary has good intentions, even if currently "peaceful."

Even in an era of nuclear deterrence, phenomena like "hybrid war" (what we've seen in Ukraine) can occur with impunity. Besides, is the US really willing to risk a nuclear war with Russia, a continental-sized power with a peer arsenal, for the Baltics, Poland, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, hell, even Germany, Italy, or France? The UK is the only country in Europe for which I am confident any American leader would be willing to cross the nuclear threshold with Russia. The rest of them, even the NATO members, would probably not warrant crossing that point and would, instead, require a conventional response.

Conventional deterrence (NATO, US stationing in Europe, etc.) is like infrastructure spending, to give an analogy. You can either go ahead and spend a lot of money on it now, money which is admittedly hard to come by, and ensure that your economy will still be growing and expanding in the future, or you can forestall that spending, admittedly save some money in the process, but wait until the problem is then so bad that the bill will be exponentially larger than it would have been before. The US can either keep its foot in the door now at a high cost, or it can risk having to get its foot back in the door at a much greater cost later. It's a gamble. The keen great power strategist would go with the former option ideally, but sometimes political context takes that decision out of his hands.

What the US should be doing instead is finding ways to punish stragglers in NATO and/or incentivize more European defense spending by European defense partners. Europe admittedly has a problem, and it needs to be fixed, but it should not be by abandoning Europe. People that think we should abandon our largest trading bloc (by a huge margin) to the devices of a land-based potential regional hegemon just right across the border in Russia don't understand how great power struggle works. You either pay now for favorable status, or you pay much more later for regaining that status.
Click to expand...

Actually I think that should probably be Rule Number 2, and Rule Number 1 should be never assume that today's ally will be tomorrow's ally. Although it does look like western Europe is pretty stable. Anyway, I'm not at all for abandoning NATO - just frustrated by the fact that we seem to be putting in more than our share. We decimated our military after WW I and were unprepared for WW II; then we repeated the same process after WW II and were unprepared for Korea. It would indeed be stupid to repeat that. I think you did misunderstand my stance on the military, though; my dad, my brother, and my wife are all retired military officers. As for me, that was the plan, but the military doesn't care much for people without 20/20 vision. I very much support the military, but our "best and brightest" in Washington haven't allowed it to be used effectively in a very long time.

To me the concern is that people are looking the wrong way. Yes, we do build most of our weapons systems here, but we've offshored so much manufacturing that supports those systems. Can we even build basic electronic components here these days? With the amount of unemployment and underemployment and thereby, lack of skilled labor, could we even gear up to produce like we did in WW II? Can we be assured that we won't be fighting against our own weapons systems in the future, or that all components for those systems will will be available if manufactured by our allies? And there again is part of the problem; if we don't sell weapons systems to other countries in the iffy column, our European buddies will. And then the best part - aid to the enemy? It is incredible the assistance we've provided China (again with a little help from our friends in Europe), and it's hard to see how anyone can consider China friendly, but we gotta have all the electronics and other stuff that we don't make anymore. Suppose we fought a war with China as an adversary, what about all those nifty drugs we need that all our friendly drug companies manufacture there? Our "best and brightest" have really done the strategic planning, but you have to wonder just which side they are on.
 
#938
#938
mrorange211 said:
The more the media calls his supporters idiots, the more supporters he will get. They call him a monster yet are as responsible as anyone for creating him.
Click to expand...

Lol Hillary Clinton now has a 10 lead over Trump. 20% of Republicans say they will not vote for Trump.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    19.9 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#939
#939
Any bets on whether Obama attempts to give up Guantanamo Bay while he's in Cuba.
 
#940
#940
Obsessed said:
VIDEO: BLACK COP Shocked by 'Evil' Behavior of Trump Protesters; Praises Restraint of Trump, Tucson Supporters - The Gateway Pundit


Some of yalls heads will explode over this.
Click to expand...

I hope this video opens some people's eyes. This kind of BS goes on every election cycle.

Rabid leftists stir up dissension, the media propagates a false narrative that redefines the provocateurs as victims and heroes, and then together they demand a mea culpa from conservatives for provoking the tensions.

And almost always a portion of the protesters are being paid for their services.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#941
#941
AM64 said:
Actually I think that should probably be Rule Number 2, and Rule Number 1 should be never assume that today's ally will be tomorrow's ally. Although it does look like western Europe is pretty stable. Anyway, I'm not at all for abandoning NATO - just frustrated by the fact that we seem to be putting in more than our share. We decimated our military after WW I and were unprepared for WW II; then we repeated the same process after WW II and were unprepared for Korea. It would indeed be stupid to repeat that. I think you did misunderstand my stance on the military, though; my dad, my brother, and my wife are all retired military officers. As for me, that was the plan, but the military doesn't care much for people without 20/20 vision. I very much support the military, but our "best and brightest" in Washington haven't allowed it to be used effectively in a very long time.

To me the concern is that people are looking the wrong way. Yes, we do build most of our weapons systems here, but we've offshored so much manufacturing that supports those systems. Can we even build basic electronic components here these days? With the amount of unemployment and underemployment and thereby, lack of skilled labor, could we even gear up to produce like we did in WW II? Can we be assured that we won't be fighting against our own weapons systems in the future, or that all components for those systems will will be available if manufactured by our allies? And there again is part of the problem; if we don't sell weapons systems to other countries in the iffy column, our European buddies will. And then the best part - aid to the enemy? It is incredible the assistance we've provided China (again with a little help from our friends in Europe), and it's hard to see how anyone can consider China friendly, but we gotta have all the electronics and other stuff that we don't make anymore. Suppose we fought a war with China as an adversary, what about all those nifty drugs we need that all our friendly drug companies manufacture there? Our "best and brightest" have really done the strategic planning, but you have to wonder just which side they are on.
Click to expand...

They're on the side of their wallets.

I never took your previous posts as "anti-military." My apologies if that's how my response came across. Even if they were, that would be your prerogative.
 
#944
#944
JCP201 said:
You are probably right. Even the ladies on THE VIEW said he sounded reasonable in his statement this morning. (I didn't hear it)
Click to expand...

Probably proceeding the Rapture if anyone on The View agrees with Donald Trump.

I'm pretty sure that's specifically mentioned in the Book of Revelations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#946
#946
Grand Vol said:
Probably proceeding the Rapture if anyone on The View agrees with Donald Trump.

I'm pretty sure that's specifically mentioned in the Book of Revelations.
Click to expand...

The rapture's already a work in progress. It's been going on for the past few months as important intellectuals and celebrities are off-loaded to the space station. Bowie? You really think he's dead. Nah, it's the rapture.

In short, the View's position should be no surprise.
 
#948
#948
Although they hate Trump much more, people hate Hillary enough that, combined with a terrorist attack near election time, Trump could very well win the presidency. His is an entire campaign built off of fear, and it can do the work to make a terrorist attack(s) work for it come voting time.

On a somewhat related note, Cruz was on CNN about an hour ago, talking with Anderson Cooper about this event. After getting through the obligatory "It's all Obama's and liberal's fault" nonsense, he then starting channeling his inner-Donald and waxing (poorly) poetic about how he desires strong police presence, patrolling, and monitoring of Muslim communities here in America. Anderson kept pressing him about what specifically he meant, because Cruz was admittedly being fairly vague, and Cruz just kept responding, "Look, Anderson, it's real simple...." At this point, he would then be extremely vague and talk incoherently how we can't let Muslim communities get out of hand and that we need to police them, whatever that means specifically.
 
#949
#949
Trump back on "Wolf Blitzer" advocating for war crimes again.

When asked about Cruz's earlier incoherent statements about policing Muslim communities, Trump then went on to make equally incoherent statements about how that was a good idea and how, if they were just allowed, local police could solve the problem nearly overnight.
 
#950
#950
volprof said:
Although they hate Trump much more, people hate Hillary enough that, combined with a terrorist attack near election time, Trump could very well win the presidency. His is an entire campaign built off of fear, and it can do the work to make a terrorist attack(s) work for it come voting time.

On a somewhat related note, Cruz was on CNN about an hour ago, talking with Anderson Cooper about this event. After getting through the obligatory "It's all Obama's and liberal's fault" nonsense, he then starting channeling his inner-Donald and waxing (poorly) poetic about how he desires strong police presence, patrolling, and monitoring of Muslim communities here in America. Anderson kept pressing him about what specifically he meant, because Cruz was admittedly being fairly vague, and Cruz just kept responding, "Look, Anderson, it's real simple...." At this point, he would then be extremely vague and talk incoherently how we can't let Muslim communities get out of hand and that we need to police them, whatever that means specifically.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking Cruz is talking about using surveillance programs like the NYPD used on Mosques.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top