russia/ georgia

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

As to the historical notes, even the best among us make mistakes. Still, the fact remains, the Russians faced what at the time were two of the best trained, most invincible armies the world ever saw, and thwarted both of them.

As far as battlefield strategy goes, I'm not going to get into C-130s and airstrikes and whatnot. The most I can muster on that subject was what I learned playing Risk, Statego, and Axis & Allies when I was 14 years old.

None of that really matters. You may be right that the Russians wouldn't do anything. Perhaps they're just talking and acting tough. But that's not the point. The issue I'm trying to address is this mentality that violence is the first answer, or that we'll "win" or "beat" the enemy in a conflict with such a casual attitude as though we're watching a football game.

The only thing that matters is making sure something like that never happens. Because regardless of which side ultimately prevails, tens of thousands of Americans would be killed. And for what? American blood spilled over 4.6 million Georgians in a part of the world where we never should have been in the first place?

No thanks.

We never should have been in Europe, helping to set up NATO, during the Cold War when the USSR was publicly saying it's goal was world domination?

You're losing me. You've made some good points in this thread, but you're starting to run yourself out of the inning here.

Besides, even if you don't agree with the politics behind our presence in Georgia and other parts of Europe, you have to acknowledge the immense peace of mind a strategically placed missile defense system brings to us here at home.

We know that Iran has no problems dealing with terrorists. We also know they are working towards nuclear capabilities. Should our diplomacy/tough talk fail to persuade them to give up their pursuits, it's a rather smart contingency plan to be able to protect Europe, Israel, and the US mainland by having the ability to shoot any ICBM's out of the sky.

If it's not Iran, it could be North Korea. If it's not them, it could be someone else who has an axe to grind with us.

And please don't suggest we shouldn't be protecting Europe or Israel in the first place, because then you'd render yourself entirely irrelevant.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

We never should have been in Europe, helping to set up NATO, during the Cold War when the USSR was publicly saying it's goal was world domination?

You're losing me. You've made some good points in this thread, but you're starting to run yourself out of the inning here.

Besides, even if you don't agree with the politics behind our presence in Georgia and other parts of Europe, you have to acknowledge the immense peace of mind a strategically placed missile defense system brings to us here at home.

We know that Iran has no problems dealing with terrorists. We also know they are working towards nuclear capabilities. Should our diplomacy/tough talk fail to persuade them to give up their pursuits, it's a rather smart contingency plan to be able to protect Europe, Israel, and the US mainland by having the ability to shoot any ICBM's out of the sky.

If it's not Iran, it could be North Korea. If it's not them, it could be someone else who has an axe to grind with us.

And please don't suggest we shouldn't be protecting Europe or Israel in the first place, because then you'd render yourself entirely irrelevant.

I've lost you? Doesn't seem like we've ever been on the same page with this issue. If fact, your response here doesn't seem to fit anything that I've said in the first place.

I've said nothing about the beginnings of NATO, or the reasons for setting it up. Given the circumstances that we helped create, I understand the need to begin an alliance to deter aggression.

In general, I favor a foreign policy of non-intervention. That means we would never have gotten involved in World War I -- we would never have tipped the balance of power in favor of the allies; there would never have been a Treaty of Versailles, the German people would never have been crushed to the point of giving rise to Adolf Hitler, the Russians wouldn't have fallen for the promises of Lenin, and World War II as we know it wouldn't have happened. That means no Cold War, and hence, no need for NATO.

With no secret operation in Iran to overthrow Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, there would never have been the oppressive Shah, followed by the Ayatollah Khomeni. Iran would have been just another friendly nation -- as they were for eons -- instead of a nation "who has no problem dealing with terrorists" capable (and they aren't) of lobbing ICBMs at Europe.

And no, unless I've missed something, Israel isn't the 51st state so we have no obligation to protect them, or any other European nation.