[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse" "Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD" "Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy" Woodworking and Construction Hacks "CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination" "NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law" "Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing" Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn. After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending. Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar” "Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny" "Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is" Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner. Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally "It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive' (Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl "Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race" He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom! "Kamala’s Inane Talking Points" "The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics" Easy Drywall Patch Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind" Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’ Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer? hurricanes and heat waves are Worse 'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA. Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence. Status: Not Logged In; Sign In International News See other International News Articles Title: Poland would like a permanent U.S. military base Source: HotAir URL Source: https://hotair.com/archives/2018/05 ... e-permanent-u-s-military-base/ Published: May 28, 2018 Author: Jazz Shaw Post Date: 2018-05-28 19:02:28 by Tooconservative Keywords: None Views: 9147 Comments: 100 Word has leaked out that Poland has delivered a proposal requesting a permanent American military base in their country and they’re willing to put up a couple of billion dollars to help make it happen. What should have been a fairly normal diplomatic request, however, has turned into a complicated mess before it could even be officially announced. Questions were immediately raised as to not only how or if this should happen, but even who came up with the proposal in the first place. (Politico) Poland wants a permanent U.S. military presence — and is willing to pony up as much as $2 billion to get it, according to a defense ministry proposal obtained by Polish news portal Onet. The Polish offer reflects a long-standing desire in Warsaw to build closer security relations with the U.S. and put American boots on the ground. The push dates back to Poland’s entry into NATO in 1999, but has taken on added urgency in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region four years ago and aggressive posture toward the alliance. Coming just over a month before NATO leaders gather in Brussels for a summit, the Polish initiative is bound to anger Russia, and will be looked at with skepticism by European allies that want to improve relations with Moscow, such as Italy and at times Germany. The first, and strangest thing about this proposal is that it was already sent to Washington, but it came directly from the Polish Defense Ministry. That may not sound all that unusual since their Defense Department would obviously be involved in such planning, but Defense never even told their Foreign Ministry about it, nor did they consult with President Andrzej Duda. Much the same as with the United States government, Duda is Poland’s Commander in Chief. You’d think someone would mention it to him before they committed to spending $2B constructing a foreign military base on their own soil. Duda has had a fairly good relationship with President Trump thus far and, as a NATO ally, has taken a bit more of an adversarial approach toward Russia. But that complicates the picture even further. Poland is justifiably worried about the situation with Putin ever since the hostilities in Ukraine began. Poland shares a border with Ukraine and only has Belarus as a buffer between themselves and the Russian border. But given that things are a bit “tense” between us and the Russians at the moment, it makes entering into such an agreement even more complicated. And, of course, the Russians jumped on the story almost immediately expressing their disapproval. (Reuters) The Kremlin said on Monday that gradual NATO military expansion towards its borders did not improve security or stability in Europe as it commented on media reports Poland is seeking to secure a permanent U.S. military presence on its territory. “When we see the gradual expansion of NATO military structures towards our borders…, this of course in no way creates security and stability on the continent,” Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call on Monday. Do we really even need another base over there right now? We’re supposedly focusing on closing and consolidating bases in that region to tighten up the Defense budget. Even with the Poles kicking in a couple of billion, this is still going to cost us some cash and we already have a rotating military presence in their country anyway. We’ve supposedly been on track to close 15 more bases in Europe, including some in Germany, since 2015. Assuming we’re still moving forward with that plan, how do we justify a new base in Poland unless we want to officially ramp up the cold war yet again? We have a solid ally in Poland and cooperation with them probably isn’t a bad idea. But a permanent military base? The benefit to Poland on any number angles is obvious, but I’m not sure what it really does for us. Perhaps we should hold off until Duda has had a chance to make his official position known and set up a call with Trump to discuss this. Poster Comment: The Poles are begging Trump to Make Poland Great Again. I can't recall any of our allies offering to pay billions to build a new base for us to flock to. Maybe the Qataris did for our navy base but I don't recall that they paid either. I think the Poles are hoping to woo us out of Germany where Merkel has gotten more unfriendly and has an embarrassing military. Poland's military is scrappy with good equipment for the most part. Poland would like to be our new military hub in Europe instead of Germany. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Comments (1-15) not displayed.       .       .       . #16. To: sneakypete (#12) I fully expect to see the violence,kidnappings,and murders to start happening again. I wouldn't. The Catholics of Ireland took longer, but they've lost their religion like the rest of Europe. It's all secularizing. With Brexit, Ulster is going to get poor unless it breaks free of England and joins Ireland to remain in the EU. Scotland may do the same. The old religious reason that the Irish could not get along is fading, not because the Catholics or Presbyterians won, but because both religions are dying fast in the face of secularism, and without the religious differences, there are no real differences between the Irish, or the Scottish and the the English, etc. Christianity is dying. It has poisoned itself on its own hypocrisy. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   10:25:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #17. To: sneakypete (#14) Even cheaper to bring them back home,where they belong. And put them on the Mexican border instead of building a big, stupid, expensive white elephant of a wall. Use troops to guard the border - and the air force to fly patrols over it, and the navy to float around offshore to interdict arrivals. Use the military FOR something useful, instead of just having it sit there like a giant beast that is unused. Use it to guard the border and save the money on the wall. Use the savings to balance the budget. With a balanced budget, the debt is eventually paid off. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   10:27:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #18. To: Tooconservative (#10) They may need further American supervision of their petty tribal squabbles. What are we,their daddies? Let them settle their own shit,and just deal with the survivors if they don't want to listen to verbal reasoning and/or the UN. In some cases,like any case involving Muslims,sell or even give infantry weapons to anyone killing them. Including both sides of any Muslim vs Muslim conflict. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-29   10:27:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #19. To: sneakypete (#18) In some cases,like any case involving Muslims,sell or even give infantry weapons to anyone killing them. All of those boat people coming from Africa, and those people coming out of Syria. Put them in camps, train them as a military, fully arm them, and send them back with a supply line to overthrow the oppressive regimes they fled and take over. Then they go home and stay there. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   10:29:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #20. To: Vicomte13 (#17) (Edited) And put them on the Mexican border instead of building a big, stupid, expensive white elephant of a wall. WRONG! If you want to see a Civil War break out in America,just have all the TeeBee networks showing American soldiers,many of whom have Spanish names,gunning down illegal alien men,woman,and children trying to come to America for a better life. This is a problem with controlling our borders,not an actual war against an invading army. Build the wall,and have the border patrol guard it. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-29   10:44:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #21. To: Vicomte13 (#19) All of those boat people coming from Africa, and those people coming out of Syria. Put them in camps, train them as a military, fully arm them, and send them back with a supply line to overthrow the oppressive regimes they fled and take over. Then they go home and stay there. Works for me! I've been saying that for years. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-29   10:45:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #22. To: sneakypete (#11) It is the equivalent of Russia putting a base in Canada. Poland borders Belarus, not Russia. We have other NATO allies closer to Moscow than Poland is. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-29   11:00:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #23. To: sneakypete (#20) WRONG! If you want to see a Civil War break out in America,just have all the TeeBee networks showing American soldiers,many of whom have Spanish names,gunning down illegal alien men,woman,and children trying to come to America for a better life. This is a problem with controlling our borders,not an actual war against an invading army. Build the wall,and have the border patrol guard it. I'm figuring the Army won't really be SHOOTING anybody, they'll just be THERE, in large numbers, rounding up the folks who cross. And that with all of that focused Air Force surveillance and so many troops in the field, that not all that many will get across. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   12:00:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #24. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete (#19) All of those boat people coming from Africa, and those people coming out of Syria. Put them in camps, train them as a military, fully arm them, and send them back with a supply line to overthrow the oppressive regimes they fled and take over. Then they go home and stay there. I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs?     : ) We've tried it elsewhere too, along with setting up our own fake governments-in-exile and all the rest. That is how we got into Iraq to begin with. Maybe this is the kind of thing we should try to avoid. All our meddling in troublespots like the Mideast seem to bring rather bad results. Reagan was smart enough to keep out of it, at least he was after the Beirut airport bombing. If we only make things worse, we should try to minimize or eliminate our presence in these countries. Other than trying to stabilize them against organized bandit/terrorist elements like ISIS, we should play no roles and keep very quiet. I still don't know how we will ever get out of Afghanistan. It's a real problem, our special forces are being exhausted by these unending campaigns. We can't win a final victory over the Pashtun/Taliban unless we kill every last one of them. And they won't ever give up the fight until we leave. Then they subjugate Kabul and the rest of Afghanistan and reimpose full sharia law. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-29   14:44:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #25. To: Tooconservative (#24) I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs? : ) We've tried it elsewhere too, along with setting up our own fake governments-in-exile and all the rest. That is how we got into Iraq to begin with. We didn't follow up the Bay of Pigs with air support and naval gunfire support. Should have. If the government is bad enough that we're willing to arm people and send them in to overthrow it, then we should be using our airpower and logistics power to make sure they win. We did it in Nicaragua, and we won. We did it in Honduras, and we won. We turned Allende's government in Argentina. We stopped the Communists in Greece. Iraq was a mess because we pulled out before we nation-built, but we DID win in the end: Iraq IS a US ally, we have forces there. They're sullen, but we are there, and while they're religiously similar to the Iranians, Iran does not rule Iraq. In the Koreas, it took a long time, but it looks as though we're going to win that one in the end too. From where I sit, the only one we really LOST was Vietnam, and that was by choice. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   14:50:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #26. To: Tooconservative (#24) I still don't know how we will ever get out of Afghanistan. Break the vials in the rivers. Tell the surrounding nations to be ready to repel the fleeing natives at the borders. Wait three weeks, and just make sure you inoculate the people you send into resettle it. Easy peasy lemon-squeezy. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   14:52:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #27. To: Tooconservative (#24) We can't win a final victory over the Pashtun/Taliban unless we kill every last one of them. You only have to kill all the males over age 7. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   14:52:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #28. To: Vicomte13 (#25) We did it in Nicaragua, and we won. We did it in Honduras, and we won. We turned Allende's government in Argentina. We stopped the Communists in Greece. If your threshold for declaring victory is low enough, I suppose you could say that we won eventually. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-29   15:26:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #29. To: Vicomte13 (#26) Break the vials in the rivers. Tell the surrounding nations to be ready to repel the fleeing natives at the borders. Well, it is a direct solution. You must realize there are some squeamish political doves that would throw a fit at the very idea. So not a realistic solution. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-29   15:28:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #30. To: Tooconservative (#28) If your threshold for declaring victory is low enough, I suppose you could say that we won eventually. We lost Vietnam. We are still in a holding pattern in Korea and Cuba. Eventually we will win both: they will become part of the world system that orbits around us, and the world of countries were freedom, peace and prosperity are possible expands. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   17:18:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #31. To: Tooconservative (#29) You must realize there are some squeamish political doves that would throw a fit at the very idea. So not a realistic solution. Obviously you can't tell anybody you're doing it. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-29   17:19:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #32. To: Tooconservative (#22) Poland borders Belarus, not Russia. Seems to me that until very recently,Poland was a vassal state of Russia. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-29   23:46:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #33. To: Tooconservative (#24) I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs? : ) No. The Kennedy's did what all Kennedy's always do,and punked out and denied themthe bombers that were promised to keep the Cuban army from swarming the beach before they could establish a beachhead. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-29   23:48:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #34. To: Vicomte13 (#30) We lost Vietnam. No,we just gave up. There is a difference. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-29   23:50:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #35. To: Vicomte13 (#16) Christianity is dying. It has poisoned itself on its own hypocrisy. I have to wonder if Ireland gave in due to the moral relativism of Pope Frank and his constant stream of non-orthodox statements (which he then retreats from or claims he was misunderstood). When the head of the church constantly acts like he doesn't really believe in the religion, the faithful aren't going to fail to notice. Maybe Ireland didn't want to be more Catholic than the pope. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-30   1:36:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #36. To: Tooconservative, Vicomte13, sneakypete (#24) I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs? In Machiavelli there are answers to almost all political questions, (the most of them in his Discourses on Livy): How dangerous it is to trust to the representations of exiles. It seems to me not amiss to speak here of the danger of trusting to the representations of men who have been expelled from their country, this being a matter that all those who govern states have to act upon almost daily; and I touch upon it the more willingly, as Titus Livius gives a most memorable instance of it, though in a measure foreign to the subject he treats upon. When Alexander the Great went with his army into Asia, Alexander of Epirus, his brother-in-law and uncle, came with his army into Italy, having been called there by the banished Lucanians, who had held out the hope to him that by their means he would be able to seize that whole country; and when Alexander, upon their assurances and the hopes held out by them, had come into Italy, they killed him, because they had been promised by the citizens of Lucania permission to return to their homes if they would assassinate Alexander. We see, then, how vain the faith and promises of men are who are exiles from their own country. As to their faith, we have to bear in mind that, whenever they can return to their country by other means than your assistance, they will abandon you and look to the other means, regardless of their promises to you. And as to their vain hopes and promises, such is their extreme desire to return to their homes that they naturally believe many things that are not true, and add many others on purpose; so that, with what they really believe and what they say they believe, they will fill you with hopes to that degree that if you attempt to act upon them you will incur a fruitless expense, or engage in an undertaking that will involve you in ruin. The example of Alexander of Epirus, just cited, will suffice to prove the truth of this; but I will add that of Themistocles the Athenian, who, having been declared a rebel, fled to Darius in Asia, and made such representations and promises to him if he would attack Greece, that Darius allowed himself to be persuaded to undertake it. But when Themistocles found that he could not fulfil those promises, he poisoned himself, either from shame or from the fear of punishment. And if so eminent a man as Themistocles could commit so great an error, we may judge to what extent men of less virtue allow themselves to be misled by their desires and their passions. A prince therefore should be slow in undertaking any enterprise upon the representations of exiles, for he will generally gain nothing by it but shame and serious injury. And as cities are rarely taken by surprise or by means of secret intelligence with those within, it seems to me it will not be out of place if I treat of this in the following chapter, and at the same time give some account of the method practised by the Romans in taking cities. (Discourses, 2nd book, chapter XXXI) A Pole  posted on  2018-05-30   3:29:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #37. To: sneakypete (#34) No,we just gave up. There is a difference. You know, I agree with you on that. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-30   6:26:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #38. To: A Pole (#36) My writings often resemble Machiavelli in their political realism. They are not popular here among the moralists. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-30   9:36:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #39. To: Vicomte13 (#38) They are not popular here among the moralists. Nothing but the Party Line is ever popular with moralists. That way they can avoid having to do all that hard thinking stuff. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-30   21:01:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #40. To: sneakypete (#39) They are not popular here among the moralists. You're agreeing with Vic who only a few posts back on this thread was suggesting the way to solve the Pashtun problem in Af/Pak is by using bacteriological weapons to poison their water supplies and create a genocide, confining the intended victims within their geographical area until they all die, then resettling the land. If that isn't a Final Solution, I don't know what is. I suppose that makes me a hopeless moralist to some people who have no problem with the idea of America applying Nazi extermination policies to entire populations. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-30   22:03:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #41. To: Tooconservative (#40) They are not popular here among the moralists. You're agreeing with Vic who only a few posts back on this thread was suggesting the way to solve the Pashtun problem in Af/Pak is by using bacteriological weapons to poison their water supplies and create a genocide, confining the intended victims within their geographical area until they all die, then resettling the land. I agree with him as often as not,but I will never agree with him or anyone else on mass murder. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-31   0:32:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #42. To: Tooconservative (#40) (Edited) I suppose that makes me a hopeless moralist to some people who have no problem with the idea of America applying Nazi extermination policies to entire populations. The Nazis were neither as smart nor as technologically advanced as we are. Nor were their enemies as deserving of death as ours are. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   10:52:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #43. To: sneakypete (#41) I agree with him as often as not,but I will never agree with him or anyone else on mass murder. I assume you know that I don't REALLY want to unleash a descolada on Afghanistan to wipe the place clean and start over. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   10:53:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #44. To: Vicomte13 (#42) The Nazis were neither as smart nor as technologically advanced as we are. So we could kill them all off as long as we were subtle about it and maintained a veneer of plausible deniability. Nor were their enemies as deserving of death as ours are. An arbitrary distinction that doesn't mask the actual policy of appropriation of private property, genocide, and illegal population transfers. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-31   11:01:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #45. To: Tooconservative (#44) (Edited) So we could kill them all off as long as we were subtle about it and maintained a veneer of plausible deniability. An arbitrary distinction that doesn't mask the actual policy of appropriation of private property, genocide, and illegal population transfers. You've gotta break some eggs to make an omelet. They started a war by attacking me. They are the enemies. I want my enemies dead. They inflicted loss on me and mine. Taking their stuff after they are dead compensates somewhat for the costs they inflicted on me. None of it had to happen at all if they had not attacked me and tried to kill me. But they did. And they failed. Now I have the right to kill them, and anybody who picks up a weapon to fight alongside of them. They started it. I'll finish it. We both could have lived. You leave me alone, I'll certainly leave you alone. But if you attack me and mine, you are going to die. And anybody who takes your side is going to die with you. That's the way it is. If God doesn't like it, he can intervene to stop it. The Muslims are relying on him to do so. Now, of course, I can't actually unleash a descolada on them. If I could, I would have already. Since I cannot permanently solve the problem, I'll just continue to politically support a forever war on them, and whatever sort of internal surveillance and intelligence is necessary to stop the Muslims from ever doing it again - their human rights are superseded by my right to protect myself, to the extent necessary. I'll support the party that keeps the army in the field over there, and the pay the taxes to do so, and support the military and intelligence that does so. I'll do so until I get war weary and am ready to give up. I'm nowhere near war weary there. Nope. War in Afghanistan is not really all that expensive. And it's hands on combat training for the troops. I will that it should continue for as long as it takes. That could very well be forever, just like the war on organized crime. There will always be more criminals, so we will always be at war with them. We will never be able to disarm the police and close the prisons. Likewise, we will have to keep an armed paramilitary in the field forever, for all ages, and pay for it by taxes, because the alternative - letting the criminals win - is unacceptable. In Afghanistan it's the military versus the domestic paramilitary. Other than that, I see no distinction. If we have to be there forever, then we're there forever. We have the money for it. It's very much like Israel and the Palestinians. The Palestinians claim they will fight forever. Ok. Then they'll have to be fought forever. Budget for it, and do it. Some enemies are a chronic disease that has to be managed on an ongoing basis by force. Force costs money. So you raise the taxes and spend the money in perpetuity. So be it. So what? Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   11:23:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #46. To: Vicomte13 (#43) I assume you know that I don't REALLY want to unleash a descolada on Afghanistan to wipe the place clean and start over. I barely know what I mean anymore,so I mostly assume that others mean what they write. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-31   11:44:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #47. To: Vicomte13 (#45) (Edited) They started a war by attacking me. They are the enemies. I want my enemies dead. They tolerated a rich Saudi who had inherited about $300M that he spent on clinics/schools. Especially fundamentalist schools. Bin Laden attacked us from his Afghan compounds where he was comparable to a minor warlord. There is no evidence that the Taliban government knew or approved of his 9/11 attack. Our invasion of Afghanistan was to eliminate him and his gang of terrorists. In Afghanistan it's the military versus the domestic paramilitary. Other than that, I see no distinction. If we have to be there forever, then we're there forever. We have the money for it. We are exhausting our special forces across the Mideast. It's a serious problem for the Pentagon who have issued repeated warnings that we are overstretched. Now, of course, I can't actually unleash a descolada on them. If I could, I would have already. Fine. You admit what your moral standard actually is. And it sounds a lot like being a Nazi to me. I'm not sure why you're using an obscure term from an old sci-fi novel to disguise your real intent. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-31   11:59:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #48. To: Tooconservative (#47) We are exhausting our special forces across the Mideast. It's a serious problem for the Pentagon who have issued repeated warnings that we are overstretched. Hire more. The country is full of young poor people who want a way out. So create the job, fund it, train them. If you create the force structure, the people will come to fill it. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   12:22:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #49. To: Tooconservative (#47) Fine. You admit what your moral standard actually is. And it sounds a lot like being a Nazi to me. Nazi-schmatzi. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   12:23:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #50. To: Vicomte13 (#48) Hire more. The country is full of young poor people who want a way out. So create the job, fund it, train them. If you create the force structure, the people will come to fill it. 75% of America's young people are physically unfit for military service. We've been told this repeatedly. And the ones who are fit enough have a lot of other choices. Were it not for family loyalties to serve in the military, I think we'd already be in deep trouble with staffing special forces. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-31   12:35:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #51. To: Vicomte13 (#49) Nazi-schmatzi. Being a subtle Nazi is still being a Nazi. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-31   12:36:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #52. To: Tooconservative (#50) 75% of America's young people are physically unfit for military service. We've been told this repeatedly. No we haven't. We're told that 71% of youth are not fit for military service, for all reasons, including lack of a high school diploma, criminal records, ear adornments. A great number of the requirements are simply the prejudices of the guys who run the military enacted into requirements. Change the requirements, and you can fill the ranks. The other big reason is obesity, but that's not a reason at all. You can extend basic training to include a fitness period, and within a year any young person can be fit for military service. Sure, as with all other things, if the pinheads who currently set the standards are allowed to continue to enforce their own prejudices, we can make it such that nobody can qualify, but if we need to qualify huge numbers of people, we can, by opening up the standards. Physical fitness is something that can simply be imposed upon young people, no matter how fat they are, by controlling their food supply and making them exercise. Yeah, you won't get combat ready in six weeks. It may take a year, but you certainly can get there, if you need to. But if we don't change the standards and have insufficient special forces, we can buy a lot more drones and fly them all over those valleys, day and night, and zap whoever moves. We're in Afghanistan to stay. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   13:10:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #53. To: Tooconservative (#51) Being a subtle Nazi is still being a Nazi. I win the thread due to Godwin's Law. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   13:11:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #54. To: Vicomte13 (#53) I win the thread due to Godwin's Law. Godwin's law only applies when people aren't advocating actual Nazi policies. For instance, by definition David Duke can never win an argument by Godwin's law. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-31   13:19:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #55. To: Vicomte13 (#52) No we haven't. We're told that 71% of youth are not fit for military service, for all reasons, including lack of a high school diploma, criminal records, ear adornments. We read reports from the military in recent years that they're simply too fat, too physically limited, or in too delicate health to be soldiers. The numbers are worse than you admit. And that is for ordinary military service, not even addressing the high need for recruits with the physical and mental qualities of special forces troops. Tooconservative  posted on  2018-05-31   13:21:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #56. To: Tooconservative (#54) Godwin's law only applies when people aren't advocating actual Nazi policies. Didn't realize that the Nazis ever advocated biological warfare in South Asia. Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-31   13:23:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply         .       .       . Comments (57 - 100) not displayed. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com