• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US, NATO Troops Parade Near Russian Border in Estonia

Thats true but as I understand it he's still quite popular in Russia. And then there's that state run media.

Yes, state run media, something the US simply does not have. ;)
 
Serious question-what conflict do you not want to surrender to?

before we go any further, how much more are you personally willing to pay for a wartime tax rate?
 
before we go any further, how much more are you personally willing to pay for a wartime tax rate?

If this leads to general war there will be a good deal more to worry about than tax rates. We aren't just dealing with some tinpot raghead dictator with a few clapped out tanks this time
 
If this leads to general war there will be a good deal more to worry about than tax rates. We aren't just dealing with some tinpot raghead dictator with a few clapped out tanks this time

a lot of people seem to support a nearly constant state of war, with the US as the world's pro bono police force. before i get into in depth conversations with them about that, i like to find out whether they personally are willing to pay significantly higher tax rates in order to fund it.
 
before we go any further, how much more are you personally willing to pay for a wartime tax rate?

Where is that question every time a new lefty tax increase for domestic programs designed to buy votes is implemented?
Im willing to pay what it takes, and you dont have a choice.

Thank the big govt you champion.
 
a lot of people seem to support a nearly constant state of war, with the US as the world's pro bono police force. before i get into in depth conversations with them about that, i like to find out whether they personally are willing to pay significantly higher tax rates in order to fund it.

Yes we know-nothing except wealth redistribution and liberal pipe dreams are worth fighting for. Its that innate naivete of the left.
 
Where is that question every time a new lefty tax increase for domestic programs designed to buy votes is implemented?
Im willing to pay what it takes, and you dont have a choice.

Thank the big govt you champion.

i'm willing to pay more in taxes to fund single payer health insurance.

so, what does funding a continuous state of war look like? which marginal rates will go up, and by how much?
 
Maybe as an officer. It's definitely something of consideration.

Just some advice. If you decide to join the service, go to college and enlist as an officer, you'll be glad in the end.
 
i'm willing to pay more in taxes to fund single payer health insurance.

so, what does funding a continuous state of war look like? which marginal rates will go up, and by how much?

Everyone will have to pay something, comrade. Well those of us who actually do pay taxes.
 
You mean closet Nazis..

Fun fact, United States best of the best (special operations), learned everything from British SAS. US special operation will never be better then them.
No I highly doubt he means Nazis.

And to say that because 1 of our SOF elements was based in a Brittish design means that we can never be better than them is just pretty dumb. And they while we did learn from them originally that was a long time ago and not really relevant to how things are done now.

Look at it this way.
Not only does our SOF have a bigger budget which leads to better equipment and training funds, we also have a much bigger military pool to pull from allowing us to be more selective. We have also had been at war non-stop since 2001 gaining experience and validating and modifying tactics. That is a almost impossible advantage to beat.
 
So what do you propose be done other than complaining about Obama?

US Conservative has a special talent. He is able to connect every problem in the entire world to President Obama. It has actually become humorous to watch.
 

Terrible idea.

The Ukranian conflict is a direct result of NATO thinking that Russia couldn't do anything about Ukraine wanting to join the West. Russia wants, and will fight hard, to keep buffer states between her and the West. It's entirely reasonable policy on her part.

For actual enlightenment on this, you may want to read below...from my favorite foreign affairs expert (who nailed the Iraq war, incidentally) John Mearscheimer. Not liberal or conservative- but definitely an anti neo-con.

http://m.foreignaffairs.com/article...mer/why-the-ukraine-crisis-is-the-wests-fault
 
Elaborate on "best of the best."

Delta force? SEALS (who I thought get trained in Israel/with Israelis...)? Rangers?

Spec ops are a small facet of the larger picture. Even if the SAS were better, the British military is vastly inferior to that of the USA's military.

Best of the Best meaning SAS are the ones that Delta Force and Navy Seals (including DevGru) learn from and were born from. Delta is a more complete unit since most of their guys come from Rangers and Green Berets. Seals/ST6 on the other hand are very limited in their abilities. Seals aren't trained from the start in basic infantrymen tactics so when SHTF.. they could never turn from "operator to grunt" when it called for.

Delta is pretty close to SAS standards but not better then them.

Special Operations is a huge facet of the modern military. Long gone are the days of Division size units deploying. Brigade or smaller is the future. Inferior? I never said the whole British Army is better. Just what society deems best of bunch.
 
I support fighting the war and paying our debts.

what does that look like by income tax bracket? also, which wars, and for how long? some of these wars would require occupying and rebuilding nations for decades if not for generations. would you support a long term significantly increased wartime tax rate?
 
what does that look like by income tax bracket? also, which wars, and for how long? some of these wars would require occupying and rebuilding nations for decades if not for generations. would you support a long term significantly increased wartime tax rate?

In a war that had to be fought yes. And with the elimination of liberal wealth redistribution schemes, it would be much cheaper.
 
In a war that had to be fought yes. And with the elimination of liberal wealth redistribution schemes, it would be much cheaper.

but what do the wartime tax brackets look like? which wars should we participate in? how long will the US occupy and rebuild these nations? and which social safety nets would you cut in order to fund endless war, and by how much?
 
No I highly doubt he means Nazis.

And I am calling him a closet Nazi. For his comments: Nationalism, deal with it. There are American nationalists, that's a thing.

And to say that because 1 of our SOF elements was based in a Brittish design means that we can never be better than them is just pretty dumb. And they while we did learn from them originally that was a long time ago and not really relevant to how things are done now.

1? Rangers, Delta, and Green Berets were formed to mimic units the British created. Even CIA is models after MI6. That's be true if it wasn't for the fact the model for Delta Force for selection has been identical to SAS selection since the 70s. They still on a yearly basis have an exchange program where both sides sees what others are doing.


Look at it this way.
Not only does our SOF have a bigger budget which leads to better equipment and training funds, we also have a much bigger military pool to pull from allowing us to be more selective. We have also had been at war non-stop since 2001 gaining experience and validating and modifying tactics. That is a almost impossible advantage to beat.

LOL!!!!

Budget size doesn't matter in reality. On the ground they aren't saying "well they cut our budget or our budget is smaller we should just pack up and go home". Bigger military pool (people) but SAS is the most selective Special Operations unit in the world. They will cut you just for just one mistake, they gave a perfection or not at all attitude... and had a big issue with the US Navy Seals (ST6) failure in rescuing Linda Norgrove because the Seal who tossed the nade that killed her had done it previously in other missions.

If you think SAS hasn't be 100% active during the same period you are crazy. SAS was tasked with some of the most dangerous ops during Iraq and Afghanistan because of their ability. Stanley McChrystal and David Patraeus said the same stuff. SAS itself has been active all over the world for a better part of 75 years. Be it WW2, Malayan Emergency, Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation, Dhofar Rebellion (Battle of Mirbat), Northern Ireland which was 30 years of a **** storm, Sierra Leone (recuse of British peace keepers), then all NATO related operations.

So you want to talk about advantages? SAS has 75 years of it.
 
Terrible idea.

The Ukranian conflict is a direct result of NATO thinking that Russia couldn't do anything about Ukraine wanting to join the West. Russia wants, and will fight hard, to keep buffer states between her and the West. It's entirely reasonable policy on her part.

No it is not. In fact it puts her in breach of almost every bilateral and international agreement she has signed since WW2. NATO is a paper tiger and a shadow of what it once was 25 years ago. It can barely defend itself now much less threaten anybody. Putin knows this too thats why he feels able to get away with what he is doing in Ukraine. He is on an Empire rebuilding mission and other states must be very nervous about who will be next

For actual enlightenment on this, you may want to read below...from my favorite foreign affairs expert (who nailed the Iraq war, incidentally) John Mearscheimer. Not liberal or conservative- but definitely an anti neo-con.

http://m.foreignaffairs.com/articles...he-wests-fault

Unfortunately though his article is wrong on virtually all counts. Here Professor Alexander Motyl (perhaps the Wests leading expert on Ukrainian/Russian relations) comprehensively rebuts his assertions.

The Ukraine crisis according to John J. Mearsheimer: Impeccable Logic, Wrong Facts
 
Back
Top Bottom