Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NATO / Russia military power and nuclear weapons

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    S2,
    I concur with you. However, it is your representatives who were giving incentives to other nations to behave like this. If at the time your guys said, sorry folks, Commies are closer to you and you should take your fair share in protecting your azzes...

    Another thought. By all accounts noone ever stopped the hardworking Joe to have the social security of the Europeans, it was all his free choice. He never paid Dannish taxes, so he could put money aside, as many of your compatriots did.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

    Comment


    • #32
      "...However, it is your representatives who were giving incentives to other nations to behave like this..."

      Incentives? Cop-out rationale ignoring clear self-defense investment benchmarks that were consistently missed. So if you feel that bad behavior was rewarded then you've truly bought into a cynical "narrow self-interest" at my expense.

      I resent that and, therefore, am an opponent of my nation contributing more than their fair share to an ungrateful Europe's defense. Right now my fair share will be cheers from the sidelines for the good guys...

      ...just as soon as I can figure out who they'd be.
      "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
      "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by S2 View Post
        "...However, it is your representatives who were giving incentives to other nations to behave like this..."

        Incentives? Cop-out rationale ignoring clear self-defense investment benchmarks that were consistently missed. So if you feel that bad behavior was rewarded then you've truly bought into a cynical "narrow self-interest" at my expense.
        I don't have to feel anything. Pure deduction will leave you with that. It is one thing to back up allies and help them when needed, it is totally another to keep spending, while they are perfectly capable to do it, but for whatever reasons they don't.
        No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

        To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

        Comment


        • #34
          I'll yield to your superb powers of deduction and agree that, going forward, it's a poor premise to presume Europe needs defense assistance comparable to previous endeavors. They've the means should this latest Russian challenge threaten their core interests.
          Last edited by S2; 14 Apr 14,, 14:34.
          "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
          "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Duellist View Post
            tantalus,

            The economic interdependence you describe is unlikely to avoid buckling in the face of core national interest, as Putin amply demonstrates with his willingness to threaten his main gas customers. Nationalism has arguably replaced ideology as the main divisive factor: China and Japan to name another prominent case the web of trade links is not preventing tension.
            In this situation you interpret it as "buckling", but I think it is more informative to interpret that the fact they are his main gas customers is holding him in check, we are taking the exact opposite from the same events. Likewise, one has to consider the possibility that the events in Japan/China would be far worse if it wasn't for increasing economic ties...

            I agree that nationalism is the replacement ideology, it always has been popular and I welcome it over some of its predecessors.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by S2 View Post
              I'll yield to your superb powers of deduction and agree that, going forward, it's a poor premise to presume Europe needs defense assistance comparable to previous endeavors. They've the means should this latest Russian challenge threaten their core interests.
              Nothing superb here kind Sir.
              No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

              To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by S2 View Post
                Ahhh...the ol' budget plea as a rationale for America to underwrite your defense? Much of western Europe has developed a social safety-net that's the envy of the world. Why? Because thirty to forty years ago (or more) Europeans saw that we'd underwrite the greater good and exploited it to their own narrow self interest. That largesse didn't go to assuming Europe's fair share for it's self-defense.

                You'd be amazed how many Americans awake each morning for work and grind their azzes off without one iota of the health and social welfare benefits available in Canada or elsewhere. And those tax dollars from that grind required to pick up your slack to boot?

                That's a bit, pardon the expression, rich.
                Leaving aside the cold war years, I find its a substantial over reach on your part to line up the defense budgets of america versus Europe, point to the threat of Russia and point at out social security nets and find a meaningful causative link.

                Since the fall of the Berlin Wall the shadows of the monster is now much bigger than the flesh. We don't need and haven't required substantial investment in defense for some time, and larger conventional forces over the last 20 years would not substantially altered the realities in the Ukraine. We may not have spent the money as well as we could, but I am glad we didn't spend it on defense.

                America has made a tremendous contribution to Europe, much of it was not self-serving, and credit is deserved, but as disappointing as our response to Russian aggression is, increasing investment in defense isn't the required response, or any kind of solution

                Originally posted by S2 View Post
                I resent that and, therefore, am an opponent of my nation contributing more than their fair share to an ungrateful Europe's defense. Right now my fair share will be cheers from the sidelines for the good guys...

                ...just as soon as I can figure out who they'd be.
                You know who the good guys are... as regard to resentment, fair enough, if you expect a certain amount of investment in response to your contribution, that's your prerogative, I would as soon see you keep some of that cash, and let us keep some of ours, perhaps you could invest it in social welfare.

                Originally posted by S2 View Post
                it's a poor premise to presume Europe needs defense assistance comparable to previous endeavors. They've the means should this latest Russian challenge threaten their core interests.
                Exactly and exactly.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by tantalus View Post
                  In this situation you interpret it as "buckling", but I think it is more informative to interpret that the fact they are his main gas customers is holding him in check, we are taking the exact opposite from the same events. Likewise, one has to consider the possibility that the events in Japan/China would be far worse if it wasn't for increasing economic ties...

                  I agree that nationalism is the replacement ideology, it always has been popular and I welcome it over some of its predecessors.
                  Economic interdependence can substantially alleviate but not altogether eliminate latent ethno-linguistic nationalist (and religious in some cases) tensions, as Ukraine amply demonstrates. The polar opposite interpretation of the above is also possible: strengthening economies allows those of a nationalist disposition to bide their time. The infusion of investment in the Russian economy from the likes of Germany has increased economic stability and productivity somewhat in Russia, certainly compared to the Yeltsin years. Oil and gas revenues have enabled Putin to accelerate his military build-up; similarly Japanese investment in China is one of the key enablers that made Beijing what it is today- it hasn't stopped tensions over the Senkaku.

                  Nationalism is a good and a bad thing, contingent on context. I'm not convinced the region has learnt any lessons from World War I. The Western/EU expansion to Russia's borders was asking for trouble, given the history between the Euros and Russia..

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X