Does the U.S. need to make a new global organization with like minded nations?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ned
Frogger, France and Britain failed to enforce Versailles and instead engaged in a pattern of appeasement about 16 years later.

This brand of weakness caused WWII.

Yes. And whose Sudetenland has France given away again?

[Ned]

Sure, Frogger. Saddam is a lovable lapdog, just like Adolf. One can negotiate binding deals with such people.

Remember Munich?

"Peace in our Time."

[KrazyHorse]

You're a bad caricature, Ned.

[Wezil]

*sigh* Ned, Ned, Ned......

No Ned, the US is not in danger. The danger being set up is for Turkey. It is rather disengenuous to put Turkey at risk (with their bribed consent of course) then be critical of others for not defending them don't you think?

[Ned]

I gotta go, Frogger. Have a nice day.

[KrazyHorse]

Bye, creampuff.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Frogger
...the axis of weasel

Easy there Frogger.


Ned - Go ahead and attack Saddam. I think it is well past due. I just don't buy the arguments and tactics being employed by the GWB administration. Quite frankly, the longer this foreplay to war goes on the more pathetic and sad GWB and his Cabinet appear. Just DO IT ALREADY!!! While you're there maybe you might want to deal with the other despots and tyrants in the region (including the US supported ones).

Good night all.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Agathon


You'd better shut up then, eh Bro?

that makes no sense

anyway, NATO is not gonna break up. It might be reorganized or somethn, but not be dissolved. Its just a bump in the road.

[Kramerman]

12 years later? You missed the boat.

i dont understand, is there a time limit?

[KrazyHorse]

Yes.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Frogger
NATO is not in the business of facilitating aggressive wars.

Kosovo? Bosnia?

[KrazyHorse]

Both of those were set in motion by the bosnians/serbians themselves, though. The refugee crisis and border security weren't effects of the intervention; they were the causes of it.

Going above and beyond what was necessary to preserve the integrity of NATO countries is never part of the NATO mandate, and is symptomatic of the fact that the West thought for a long while after 1991 that NATO could become the template for some sort of international police force.

With the amount of influence the US exerts in NATO and the fact that it's basically composed of haves with no representation from the have nots makes me happy that idea's dying right now.

[Agathon]

The US needs NATO a lot more than France and Germany do.

See, Brezinski, Z, "The Grand Chessboard".

[KrazyHorse]

Agreed on that one, ag.

I want NATO to die, but what I really want is for the US to kill it in a fit of pique.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ned
Frogger, be serious. This is exactly like Britain defending Poland, winning, and then insisting that Nazi Germany disarm.

The danger is Nazi Germany.

How come somebody always brings up the Nazis? Do they know nothing of Godwin's law?