Tweet
Originally posted by Ecthy
The US guaranteed peace in Europe until 1991
The US guaranteed peace in Europe until 1991
-
It still does, unfortunately. Keeping a unified Deutscheland in line.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891 -
We're more than willing to increase our defense budget if you so wish
I have no idea what you're talking about. The EU is an institution of peace.
Keeping Russia in check should be easy too, the same for Serbia. What do you still do over here?Comment
-
It's pretty simple. The security of European countries is in no way contingent on the existence of 'strategic assets' or 'power projection capabilities'. Not that I know what those are, I expect you don't either. Keeping things vague always helps win debates, doesn't it?Originally posted by DanS
Sandman: Let's see you describe and defend this distinction.Comment
-
Not that I know what those are
Thank you for admitting that you're clueless
Comment
-
Enlighten me, instead of parroting buzzwords.Comment
-
According to the DoD:
The ability of a nation to apply all or some of its elements of national power - political, economic, informational, or military - to rapidly and effectively deploy and sustain forces in and from multiple dispersed locations to respond to crises, to contribute to deterrence, and to enhance regional stability.
e.g. our ability to park an aircraft carrier in the Formosa strait when the Chinese start making aggressive moves.Comment
-
The Formosa straight isn't in Europe either. We're not questioning the meaning of the term but the concrete relevancy in Europe.Comment
-
Oh?Originally posted by Ecthy
The Formosa straight isn't in Europe either. We're not questioning the meaning of the term but the concrete relevancy in Europe.
Originally posted by Sandman
It's pretty simple. The security of European countries is in no way contingent on the existence of 'strategic assets' or 'power projection capabilities'. Not that I know what those are, I expect you don't either. Keeping things vague always helps win debates, doesn't it?Comment
-
You're moving on the spot. I'm intriguing on concrete US power projection necessities in Europe and I hope so is he.
How about answering the question as clarified by me? Why do you guys continue using places outside of Europe as examples?Comment
-
Thanks for clarifying those buzzwords you parroted, Kuciwalker. Right, carriers to threaten China with. Great. One example. Not exactly defence of Europe, is it?Comment
-
pwnd!!!1!!!!!1!
You Yurpeans are gonna look so stupid when you have no defenssees cos you spend lots on ****ty sattelittes and go to beg for mercy from a powerful Russian military machine run by Serb that picks a fight 5 years from now. You'll row the day that you said **** off Uncle Sam and became uncle Joe's latest bioyatcher.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
Kuci is one of the most stupid among the posters playing clever. The result is rather boring.Comment
-
I was answering his question, not yours.Originally posted by Ecthy
You're moving on the spot. I'm intriguing on concrete US power projection necessities in Europe and I hope so is he.Comment
-
Corrected.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I was making an ass of myself.Comment
-
He asked for a definition, I gave him one.Comment
Comment