LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 06-10-2011, 03:47 PM   #1
ansarigf

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
359
Senior Member
Default Robert Gates on NATO
It is pretty pathetic that France and the UK, permanent members of the Security Council, can barely sustain a combined bombing campaign against a North African dictatorship.
ansarigf is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 05:57 PM   #2
Nothatspecial

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
574
Senior Member
Default
It is pretty pathetic that France and the UK, permanent members of the Security Council, can barely sustain a combined bombing campaign against a North African dictatorship.
FWIW, I think Russia and China would do an even worse job.
Nothatspecial is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 06:19 PM   #3
TriammaMade

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
380
Senior Member
Default
Russia and China aren't nearly as close to North Africa as the Brits and French are.
TriammaMade is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 06:26 PM   #4
onlineslotetes

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
415
Senior Member
Default
Georgia? That would be like a French invasion of Belgium. They'd have no problem with that.
onlineslotetes is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 06:29 PM   #5
Srewxardsasv

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
420
Senior Member
Default
Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae.
Srewxardsasv is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 07:05 PM   #6
Nautilus

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
446
Senior Member
Default
The US defence secretary, Robert Gates, has delivered a blistering attack on European defence complacency, declaring that Nato has become a "two-tiered" alliance of those willing to wage war and those only interested in "talking" and peacekeeping. It's a sad indictment of the US when they're whining that no one else is "willing" to wage war and is more interested in peacekeeping.

I'd say this thread backfired from the very first quote, to anyone reasonable.

BTW, remind me which countries are not involved with the Libya actions right now?
Nautilus is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 07:14 PM   #7
shinesw

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
477
Senior Member
Default
And the shots at Europe from a country that couldn't defeat North Vietnam, took 10 years to kill a hermit, and still struggles in Iraq is amusing considering the difference in scale of the militaries.
shinesw is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 07:26 PM   #8
peemovvie

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
561
Senior Member
Default
Why didn't the US occupy North Vietnam? I've never understood that.
peemovvie is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 08:52 PM   #9
Evelinessa

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
490
Senior Member
Default
And the shots at Europe from a country that couldn't defeat North Vietnam, took 10 years to kill a hermit, and still struggles in Iraq is amusing considering the difference in scale of the militaries.
18 consecutive years of Stanley cup winning and counting
Evelinessa is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 11:01 PM   #10
Metalhead

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
366
Senior Member
Default
18+ years of Stanley cup winning and counting
Canadian spies winning the cup still counts for Canada.
Metalhead is offline


Old 06-10-2011, 11:03 PM   #11
JorgiOLusinio

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
440
Senior Member
Default
Canadian spies winning the cup still counts for Canada.
We import a lot of things.
JorgiOLusinio is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 02:06 AM   #12
RuttyUttepe

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
430
Senior Member
Default
deja vu?
RuttyUttepe is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 04:55 AM   #13
CathBraun

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
502
Senior Member
Default
Cort Haus
CathBraun is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 03:17 PM   #14
DoctorIrokezov

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
430
Senior Member
Default
It's a sad indictment of the US when they're whining that no one else is "willing" to wage war and is more interested in peacekeeping.

I'd say this thread backfired from the very first quote, to anyone reasonable.
QFT
DoctorIrokezov is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 05:28 PM   #15
lungumnentibe

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
487
Senior Member
Default
When the war is instigated by our allies, it'd be real nice to see them fight it without needing to bring us into it.
lungumnentibe is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 05:38 PM   #16
EvonsRorgon

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
438
Senior Member
Default
What Drake said. We appreciate the help we've been given, but we're capable of fighting our wars without allied assistance. Britain and France can't make that claim.
EvonsRorgon is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 06:19 PM   #17
leahjhburton

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
393
Senior Member
Default
If the US didn't want to help in Libya, they could do what they did then.
Pull the plug.
leahjhburton is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 07:08 PM   #18
Michaelnewerb

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
622
Senior Member
Default
What did NATO ever do for us? Disband it already see if I care.
Michaelnewerb is offline


Old 06-11-2011, 08:03 PM   #19
jenilopaz

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
399
Senior Member
Default
Of course it is. Only Australia, Canada, France, and the UK can really offer anything in a fight, and even they have very real limitations, as is being shown in Libya.
Every developed country can mount a credible defense.
That few are able to conduct interventions abroad is a damn
good thing.
jenilopaz is offline


Old 06-12-2011, 05:19 AM   #20
PrareeLor

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
400
Senior Member
Default
You think a nuclear deterrent isn't credible?

Or are you referring to the "any developed country" bit?
PrareeLor is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:56 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity