Sorry, but .38% isnt a "ridiculous" overestimation so great it damages his credibility lol
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Kapture1 View PostSorry, but .38% isnt a "ridiculous" overestimation so great it damages his credibility lol
Also, if you're bitching that we waste too much money policing the world, giving a standing cheer to Trump for calling for a significant increase in military spending is also ridiculous.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
If you're having trouble getting countries to contribute 2%, suddenly demanding they do 4% instead, when our own levels are at 3.62%, is ridiculous.
Also, if you're bitching that we waste too much money policing the world, giving a standing cheer to Trump for calling for a significant increase in military spending is also ridiculous.
and no .38% isn't a real over exaggeration, just an excuse for progs to bitch and cry.
Last edited by Kapture1; July 11, 2018, 05:59 PM.
- Top
Comment
-
"Putin's cock holster" berates Germany for signing a multi-billion dollar natural gas pipeline deal with Russia. Germany will eventually purchase 70% of its energy from Russia and will be vulnerable to a Russian "shut-down" of German energy needs. This situation certainly harms the NATO alliance. But we are still expected to militarily protect Germany from Russia, while the Germans increase their reliance on Russia.
The whole NATO alliance should be re-evaluated. It is senseless to think that the US will go to war, possibly nuclear war, in order to protect Latvia or Albania. Since Reagan won the Cold War, the fear of massive formations of the Red Army speeding through the German plain is no longer a worry. It would be best for all concerned if a realistic mutual defense commitment were reached.
Besides, even if the socialist countries like Germany, Belgium, or France DO begin spending 2% of GDP on defense, there is still the fact that "defense" spending in these countries is basically another welfare program. What kind of military force can Germany or France field in an actual shooting war pitting NATO against Russia and China? Another problem is that if only 7 of Germany's 128 fighter aircraft are immediately operable, the Germans do not have the option of fighting a conventional war. It is nuclear war or nothing, and that is a bad position to be in.
- Top
Comment
-
- It is laughable, even with what we know at this point (still laughable 8 months ago, when much less was known), to take this point about Germany to serve as some sort of equivalence to Trump's affinity/undeclared relations with Putin/Putin proxies. I don't say this in defense of the poor position Germany has leveraged themselves in -- they are just two different discussions being conflated as one. I imagine this will be another projection/soften-the-blow-of-reality approach.
- You are calling for a re-evaluation of NATO when you are demonstrating that you view it as something closer to The Avengers than what it is.
- Point above is re-affirmed when you discount Germany's existence in NATO on the basis of "7/128 immediately operable". Vague statistic. Only 7 can fly? Only 7 mission capable? Only 7 mission capable w/ command directed exception? I doubt the case is dire as you left it there for people to think.
- conventional warfare contains 3 domains... Uhh, unless you are really into Trump's battlefield theory and count his newly minted fourth. That being said, expectation of NATO alliance isn't that all participating countries be capable of multi-domain operations. Why? What would be the point? NATO allies don't assemble in a rainbow like fashion on the battlefield, in lockstep columns. It doesn't look like infinity war or the Olympic opening ceremonies.
- Top
Comment
-
My dearest Vladdie -
I'm on my way to England, to grab the Queen by her pussy (women like that you know). I've brought a blank NDA with me, just in case.
I've run down your list and I think you'll be very proud of me.
Pull out of trade agreements that benefit US workers? Check!
Alienate North American friends and allies? Check!
Cause anger and dissension within NATO to Russia's benefit? Check!
Throw away leverage with North Korea and abandon exercizes with S. Korea for a photo op? Check!
Castigate and deny the investigation into your demonstrated and obvious meddling in our elections? Check!
Lie like Stalin to the American people? Check!
Inflame US citizenry by degrading large segments of the population (women, muslims, non-native born, etc). Check!
Make America like East Germany with border walls and minefields? Almost check! (#MALEG)
Proudly be an incompetent, delusional, narcissistic, lying blowhard to severely divide the American people? Check!
Abandon Asian influence to China? Check!
Can't wait for my next set of orders, snuggums! Tell me what you want and I'll step and fetch it !!
Wuv you,
Donnie
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
the executive and congressional braches and entire conservative media cares about page and strozak and comey and the emails and the texts and the high likelihood in fact certain likelihood that the buck didn't stop with McCabe and comey
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by crashcourse View Post
no body cared about bannon
the executive and congressional braches and entire conservative media cares about page and strozak and comey and the emails and the texts and the high likelihood in fact certain likelihood that the buck didn't stop with McCabe and comey
Bannon definitely knows a lot, but the treatment of him v. others like Manafort/Flynn/Poppa would seem to suggest he stayed relatively clean. Probably why he forced his way out in some kind of cleansing tirade.
Page and Strozak are hilarious. So many closed door/private convos are taking place every day within administration about how insane Trump is. Just riding the pig until he flames out.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by Da Geezer View Post"Putin's cock holster" berates Germany for signing a multi-billion dollar natural gas pipeline deal with Russia. Germany will eventually purchase 70% of its energy from Russia and will be vulnerable to a Russian "shut-down" of German energy needs. This situation certainly harms the NATO alliance. But we are still expected to militarily protect Germany from Russia, while the Germans increase their reliance on Russia.
The whole NATO alliance should be re-evaluated. It is senseless to think that the US will go to war, possibly nuclear war, in order to protect Latvia or Albania. Since Reagan won the Cold War, the fear of massive formations of the Red Army speeding through the German plain is no longer a worry. It would be best for all concerned if a realistic mutual defense commitment were reached.
Besides, even if the socialist countries like Germany, Belgium, or France DO begin spending 2% of GDP on defense, there is still the fact that "defense" spending in these countries is basically another welfare program. What kind of military force can Germany or France field in an actual shooting war pitting NATO against Russia and China? Another problem is that if only 7 of Germany's 128 fighter aircraft are immediately operable, the Germans do not have the option of fighting a conventional war. It is nuclear war or nothing, and that is a bad position to be in.
- Top
Comment
-
It would genuinely be really interesting to see what European and Canadian military spending would be like in a post-NATO world. Obviously the US isn't the only place where the mil-ind complex is a serious issue, but if the process started with threat assessment and designing modern militaries around those threats, one could see a lot of good coming from that process. A chance to fully rethink how Western/liberal countries approach techenhanced types of threats and weapons, rather than an evolving reaction.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by crashcourse View Post
no body cared about bannon
the executive and congressional braches and entire conservative media cares about page and strozak and comey and the emails and the texts and the high likelihood in fact certain likelihood that the buck didn't stop with McCabe and comey
I don't imagine they would let Page off that easy. Because different rules apply to Trump's 'enemies'.
Why are House Republicans hiding the 11 hour-transcript of testimony Strzok already gave behind closed doors? According to Dems on the Committee, Republicans asked almost no questions about the Mueller investigation but had at least 25 questions specifically about his affair with Page.
- Top
Comment
Comment