• 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!

Putin suspends nuclear pact, raising stakes in row with Washington

MaggieD said:
Hillary Clinton's whole JOB was establishing a working relationship with him and other world leaders. Ask her as well.
Click to expand...

Yes her too........

Thanks for the observation I missed
 
Jack Hays said:
I believe we're already providing weapons and direct US troop support in the Baltics.
Click to expand...

We are. It's insufficient to defend the region in the event of a Russian attack, and especially so since Russia has declared the use of tactical, low yield nukes as an option they will consider. I'd really rather not see that possibility entertained. I think the US and others have committed 4,000 troops - as of last June, I think.
 
humbolt said:
We are. It's insufficient to defend the region in the event of a Russian attack, and especially so since Russia has declared the use of tactical, low yield nukes as an option they will consider. I'd really rather not see that possibility entertained. I think the US and others have committed 4,000 troops - as of last June, I think.
Click to expand...

Sounds right. Our troops are a tripwire.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sounds right. Our troops are a tripwire.
Click to expand...

They are, for now. We have some time while Russia remains tied up in the south. We will eventually have to increase those levels if we wish to avoid a confrontation there. Honestly I'd take 4,000 of ours to 10,000 Russian troops any day, but Putin can put 40,000 conscripts on the border there and our 4,000 will be crushed. We'll have to make it more painful for him to consider.
 
humbolt said:
They are, for now. We have some time while Russia remains tied up in the south. We will eventually have to increase those levels if we wish to avoid a confrontation there. Honestly I'd take 4,000 of ours to 10,000 Russian troops any day, but Putin can put 40,000 conscripts on the border there and our 4,000 will be crushed. We'll have to make it more painful for him to consider.
Click to expand...

The critical thing is to make him understand an attack on our NATO allies and/or our own troops in the Baltics would bring on a full US response. I fear Putin may not believe BHO is up to that.
 
Jack Hays said:
The critical thing is to make him understand an attack on our NATO allies and/or our own troops in the Baltics would bring on a full US response.
I fear Putin may not believe BHO is up to that.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That's my concern as well, and I think it's a well founded one. It's not what we can do. It's what our adversaries believe we will do.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Agreed. I never ever thought Soviet communism was about economics. It was always about power and control. Way back in the Cold War days, and now with Putin. Soviet/Russian communism is power and control.
Click to expand...

Can't argue with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom