Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 58 of 58

Thread: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

  1. #51
    Student
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:53 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    255

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    It's not all that interesting.

    Do you buy into this opinion piece?
    it offers a rationale for the foreign policy behavior of Israel which I find different from what I read before and therefore interesting to me.

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by youknowwho View Post
    it offers a rationale for the foreign policy behavior of Israel which I find different from what I read before and therefore interesting to me.
    How do you feel about the foreign policies, and domestic policies, of Israel's neighbors?

  3. #53
    Student
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:53 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    255

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    How do you feel about the foreign policies, and domestic policies, of Israel's neighbors?
    that's a very generic question. do you have any special country in mind?

  4. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by youknowwho View Post
    that's a very generic question. do you have any special country in mind?
    All you need do is look at a map to discover who Isarel's neighbors are. It's in the Middle East.

  5. #55
    Student
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:53 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    255

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    All you need do is look at a map to discover who Isarel's neighbors are. It's in the Middle East.
    I don't need a map. I lived for 24 years in that region of the world. the problem is that each country has a unique situation and all of them have different doctrines for domestic and foreign relationships, and different social and political structures. one can write books about your single question. if you like to ask me a question about a particular country please do so. if you like information about all of them you need to do the research yourself.

  6. #56
    Student Vapor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Last Seen
    03-18-13 @ 01:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    150

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    It has been clear for decades now that Israel is always held to much higher standards than their neighbors who, as we all know, have no real standards at all. At least none from a recent century.

    There are real problems going on in the Middle East, and North Africa, while the US president muses about women in the military, or Gay weddings. Obama has led the US military to defeat in two important areas of the world. He intends to weaken this military further with huge spending cuts, and now no one fears them. Other militarizes are growing. He ignores the debt, ignores the international problems and is instead looking at social issues. He is not a man of the world, he is a man of a medium sized community.

    This is the guy who gave the Muslim Brotherhood 22 fighter jets and over 200 tanks, while insulting and undermining the leader of Israel. He is abandoning former allies while cozying up to the Russians and Islamist nutjobs.

    Barrack Obama has been a horrible mistake, and it will get worse.
    Higher standard my ass. They've ignored countless UN resolutions telling them to cease the expansion of Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory without repercussion. Iraq refused to comply with one inspection and was promptly invaded by NATO. Every time Israel gets into a scuffle with another nation, our government and media brush it off as "self-defense." These "defensive" actions wouldn't be necessary if they had some inkling of respect for Palestine; all Arabs are understandably outraged when they brush off UN admonitions without consequence, especially considering that they are pushing tens of thousands of men, women, and children out of their homes. I fail to see how Israel's expanded settlements are any different from Germany's quest for Lebensraum.

    In what areas have we been defeated? We established a stable republic in Iraq and continue to play whack-a-mole with militants in Afghanistan (on par with the efforts of the Bush administration); we provided vital air support that led to the overthrow of a despotic regime in Libya. Our military budget cuts have been negligible at worst - around $5 billion from a $550 billion budget. We still spend more on defense than the next 13 nations combined; if you think a 1% budget cut is enough to make our military less feared or respected, you're delusional. If people did not fear our military, China would be making active military maneuvers to undermine our interests - more so than squabbling with Japan over some rocks in the Pacific. Russia would be intervening with military units in Syria, Pakistan would cut off all support for our Afghanistan efforts, Iran would actively threaten our allies, and North Korea would do more than just dance around in a corner waving a missile launch. Even if we cut our military spending by half, we'd still outspend every foreign nation by a wide margin.

    We shouldn't ignore the issues of equal rights simply because other things are happening in the world. Should Kennedy and Johnson ignored the Civil Rights Movement simply because the Soviet Union was a threat, or because we were fighting in Vietnam? The very point of government is to be able to handle multiple aspects of society at once; foreign affairs, economy, defense, and social issues. An administration that focuses on just one aspect is bound to be a bad one. Obama has done nothing that Bush didn't do, save for putting some daylight between Israel and the US, and I, for one, don't see how that is a problem. Israel is less likely to be the cause of a major war if they know the US will only defend them, not back an offensive war.

    Don't mistake this for defending Obama - he's just another puppet of two-party, moneyed politics. But he's done nothing to weaken America's position in the world.

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Vapor View Post
    Higher standard my ass. They've ignored countless UN resolutions telling them to cease the expansion of Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory without repercussion. Iraq refused to comply with one inspection and was promptly invaded by NATO. Every time Israel gets into a scuffle with another nation, our government and media brush it off as "self-defense." These "defensive" actions wouldn't be necessary if they had some inkling of respect for Palestine; all Arabs are understandably outraged when they brush off UN admonitions without consequence, especially considering that they are pushing tens of thousands of men, women, and children out of their homes. I fail to see how Israel's expanded settlements are any different from Germany's quest for Lebensraum.
    Nonsense!
    In what areas have we been defeated?
    Afghanistan and Iraq.

    We established a stable republic in Iraq
    Wrong.
    and continue to play whack-a-mole with militants in Afghanistan
    Barrack Obama has already announced when the US is retreating, which begs the question of why honorable men and woman are still stationed there. Why are their lives still being risked?

    (on par with the efforts of the Bush administration); we provided vital air support that led to the overthrow of a despotic regime in Libya.
    To be replaced that one that kills Americans and their Ambassador. The Libyan government, like the US, did nothing to stop it and said almost immediately that it was the work of well-prepared terrorists. Of course the Obama administration lied and the American people appear to accept this.
    Our military budget cuts have been negligible at worst - around $5 billion from a $550 billion budget.
    $550 billion with more to come, And other countries are increasing their military.
    We still spend more on defense than the next 13 nations combined
    Yes, but never use it. And your enemies know it. There is even a debate about "enhanced interrogation". The US is training people to kill them.
    if you think a 1% budget cut is enough to make our military less feared or respected, you're delusional.
    The US military is obviously neither feared or respected. Why should they be? How many victories have they had? They know that the American public will lose interest quickly and urge retreat. US enemies never insist on an "exit strategy". Only Americans want that.
    If people did not fear our military, China would be making active military maneuvers to undermine our interests
    In fact China is increasing the size and strength their military. You can look it up.

    more so than squabbling with Japan over some rocks in the Pacific.
    You're more likely to be squabbling on the US mainland within the next generation.

    Russia would be intervening with military units in Syria, Pakistan would cut off all support for our Afghanistan efforts, Iran would actively threaten our allies, and North Korea would do more than just dance around in a corner waving a missile launch. Even if we cut our military spending by half, we'd still outspend every foreign nation by a wide margin.
    If spending won wars the US wouldn't be retreating from Afghanistan or Iraq. Sad fact is that the US shows little interest in winning, only attacking, winning the first round, and then sitting on their heels until they finally retreat
    We shouldn't ignore the issues of equal rights simply because other things are happening in the world.
    No, of course not but Obama is spending more time talking about social issues rather than genuine and urgent matters. What difference will Gay marriage make (and I support it) when the country goes bankrupt, or when there are more terrorist attacks?
    Should Kennedy and Johnson ignored the Civil Rights Movement simply because the Soviet Union was a threat, or because we were fighting in Vietnam?
    No, but of course Vietnam was another Afghanistan and Iraq. They were able to handle different issues while Obama cannot. He was reelected by people who should have known better. It makes it interesting to watch history in the making but, given the greatness that was America, and what it once stood for, is hard to accept.

    The very point of government is to be able to handle multiple aspects of society at once; foreign affairs, economy, defense, and social issues. An administration that focuses on just one aspect is bound to be a bad one.
    A government must set priorities also. Gay marriage, or the role of women in the military, are not among them.
    is not one of them.Obama has done nothing that Bush didn't do, save for putting some daylight between Israel and the US, and I, for one, don't see how that is a problem.
    I believe you.

    Israel is less likely to be the cause of a major war if they know the US will only defend them, not back an offensive war.
    The US is losing many of its former allies while picking up a few new ones, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. I see that trend continuing.

    Don't mistake this for defending Obama - he's just another puppet of two-party, moneyed politics. But he's done nothing to weaken America's position in the world.
    You should read more foreign media rather than rely on the US MSM.
    Last edited by Grant; 02-03-13 at 10:30 PM.

  8. #58
    Student Vapor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Last Seen
    03-18-13 @ 01:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    150

    Re: Russia concern at Israeli 'air strike' on Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Nonsense!
    Study: Israel leads in ignoring Security Council resolutions - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper
    And that was just up until 2002.

    Afghanistan and Iraq.
    Neither of those were defeats. In Iraq, our goal was to overthrow Saddam and establish a democracy, while finding proof of WMDs. We accomplished 2/3 of those, and the third wasn't Obama's fault.

    In Afghanistan, the goal was to eliminate Osama bin Laden and curb al-Qaeda's influence in the nation. We killed Osama, but our own heavyhanded tactics in the region have done nothing but strengthened al-Qaeda's recruitment. That is a failure of both Bush and Obama.



    Wrong.
    Do tell.


    Barrack Obama has already announced when the US is retreating, which begs the question of why honorable men and woman are still stationed there. Why are their lives still being risked?
    We had 120,000 soldiers stationed in Afghanistan, plus supporting personnel, supplies, and ordnance. Withdrawal isn't a matter of one day saying "Let's go home." You have to steadily draw troops out in such a way that our previously-achieved objectives are not compromised and allow for a smooth transition of authority to Afghan military forces. Even then, under our wasteful policies, we'll be leaving hundreds of millions of dollars of equipment behind because it's "too costly" to ship back home. That is the nature of US warfare since Vietnam.



    To be replaced that one that kills Americans and their Ambassador. The Libyan government, like the US, did nothing to stop it and said almost immediately that it was the work of well-prepared terrorists. Of course the Obama administration lied and the American people appear to accept this.
    How much do you expect from a government that is still struggling to assert control over a divided nation, which is still trying to disarm dozens of militias? The Libyan government had no active hand in the attack, and their resources were stretched too thin to cover every single embassy. Besides, Benghazi has been the only attack against an American diplomatic mission under Obama; there were twelve under Bush. Were you howling from the rooftops after each of those attacks?


    $550 billion with more to come, And other countries are increasing their military.
    We don't NEED a military as large as we have. All it does is make our economy more dependant upon an industry that profits from killing and fear. Eisenhower, a general, warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex, and we have ignored every bit of that advice. Defense cuts are just as necessary as social spending cuts; when we have a trillion-dollar deficit, we cannot afford to keep building bigger bombs.


    Yes, but never use it. And your enemies know it. There is even a debate about "enhanced interrogation". The US is training people to kill them.
    "Never use it?" What the hell world do you live in?

    1890 - US Navy dispatched to defend consulate in Argentina
    1891 - US Army deployed to Haiti
    1893 - US military overthrows Hawaiian government
    1894 - US military deployed to Brazil and Nicaragua to defend economic interests; troops deployed to China as peacekeeping force after Sino-Japanese War
    1898 - Spanish-American War
    1899-1913 - US military suppresses Filipino rebellion
    1900 - Boxer Rebellion fended off by multinational peacekeeping force, including US
    1901-1914 - US intervention in Panamanian separation from Columbia
    1910 - US occupies Nicaragua
    1912-1941 - Increased US presence in China
    1914-1917 - Undeclared war with Mexico
    1915-1934 - US occupation of Haiti
    1916-1924 - US occupation of Dominican Republic
    1917-1918 - World War One
    1918-1919 - Further US military action in Mexico
    1918-1920 - US and Allied Expedition in support of White Russians
    1932 - US military under MacArthur opens fire upon WW1 vets in the Bonus Army at Washington, DC
    1941 - US establishes protectorates over Greenland and Iceland
    1941-1945 - World War 2
    1945-1947 - 50,000 US Marines deployed to China
    1945-1952 - US participation in occupation of Germany, Austria, and Japan
    1944-1946 - Reoccupation of the Philippines
    1945-1949 - Occupation of South Korea
    1946 - US troop presence along Yugoslav-Italian border increased
    1947 - US intervention in Greek Civil War
    1950-1953 - Korean War
    1950-1955 - US Navy deployed to end hostilities between Taiwan and China
    1955-1975 - US involvement in Vietnam
    1958 - Lebanon Crisis
    1962 - US troops deployed to Thailand; Cuban Missile Crisis
    1962-1975 - Operations against Communists in Laos
    1965 - Operation Power Pack; 20,000 US troops invade Dominican Republic
    1970 - Cambodian Campaign
    1976 - Additional forces deployed to Korea
    1983 - US invades Grenada
    1986 - US bombs Libya
    1987-1988 - US intervention in Iran-Iraq War
    1988 - US military action against Nicaragua; increases presence in Panama
    1989 - US military overthrows military junta in Panama
    1990-1991 - Gulf War
    1992-1995 - US involvement in Somali Civil War
    1993-1995 - No-fly zone established over Bosnia
    1994-1995 - US troops deployed to Haiti
    1995 - US begins bombing Bosnia
    1998 - US bombing of Iraq
    1998 - US cruise missile strikes on Afghanistan
    1999 - US & NATO bombing of Serbia
    2001- War on Terror begins
    2003-2011 - War in Iraq
    2004 - US begins drone strikes in Pakistan
    2011 - Bombing of Libya


    This is not taking into account smaller military actions and all military actions before 1890.

    The US military is obviously neither feared or respected. Why should they be? How many victories have they had? They know that the American public will lose interest quickly and urge retreat. US enemies never insist on an "exit strategy". Only Americans want that.
    Damn near every war the US has been involved in was a military victory. The only decisive defeat we suffered was in Vietnam. If our military was not feared or respected, do you really think the world would put up with this?




    In fact China is increasing the size and strength their military. You can look it up.
    Yet they still spend far less per capita on defense than we do. Increasing your military as your economy grows is a far cry from actively challenging the US.



    You're more likely to be squabbling on the US mainland within the next generation.
    Oh, please. If China were to go to war against the United States, they would have to fight the entirety of NATO and most of SEATO as well, and if they failed to punch in a decisive victory within the first year or so, their society would completely collapse. Furthermore, if China goes to war with America, they won't be able to collect on our debt to them. Stop listening to Alex Jones so much.



    If spending won wars the US wouldn't be retreating from Afghanistan or Iraq. Sad fact is that the US shows little interest in winning, only attacking, winning the first round, and then sitting on their heels until they finally retreat
    Okay, then why are you adverse to cutting defense spending?


    No, of course not but Obama is spending more time talking about social issues rather than genuine and urgent matters. What difference will Gay marriage make (and I support it) when the country goes bankrupt, or when there are more terrorist attacks?
    Bread and circuses, my friend. Gay marriage is a real issue, but it should have been resolved eons ago. So long as the government is engaged in unpopular wars and failing to act on important issues, they need these big social issues to distract the public. Don't know why they bother...cable TV does wonders on that account.


    No, but of course Vietnam was another Afghanistan and Iraq. They were able to handle different issues while Obama cannot. He was reelected by people who should have known better. It makes it interesting to watch history in the making but, given the greatness that was America, and what it once stood for, is hard to accept.
    You got Obama because he was the lesser of two evils. If Romney were president, we'd be facing the same problems and the same lack of action, except we'd have a president less popular with our allies. If we had a nation with real choices, you might have had a Gary Johnson or Jill Stein for president, someone who would develop a foreign policy based on mutual respect rather than heavy-handed threats. America didn't stop being great spontaneously when Obama was elected; it stopped being great sometime after Kennedy, when politics and foreign policy were determined by the interests of the wealthy and it became "wasteful" to vote for anyone but the two big parties.



    A government must set priorities also. Gay marriage, or the role of women in the military, are not among them.
    I beg to differ. If all people had equal rights in all aspects, then we would no longer have to worry about that debate. It is not the place of anyone, Republican or Democrat, Christian or atheist, to deny those rights to others.



    The US is losing many of its former allies while picking up a few new ones, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. I see that trend continuing
    .
    Who have we lost? Pakistan? They've been a fickle ally at best. NATO stands by us as solidly as ever. We were allies with the despotic regime of Mubarak, so how is it more unethical to ally with the Islamic government of Egypt today?

    You should read more foreign media rather than rely on the US MSM.
    I should say the same to you. My primary news sources are Deutsche Welle, BBC, and al-Jazeera. The only American news I watch or read are my own local station. I have no delusions about the righteousness of our government or the benevolence of special interest groups. I'm not an Obama supporter and never will be, but I don't particularly care for exaggeration. Don't worry yourself about his foreign policy. Why don't you start fretting about his very real assault on your civil liberties?

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •