• 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!

Russia/Egypt - close military deal; closer ties at expense of USA

Agreed. Russia is now in a more influential position in the ME than the US is, in spite of all the blood and treasure we have spent there.

Another sterling performance by Obama and Kerry in the international political arena. (sarcasm)
I suppose you can't expect better from a community organizer and a liberal elitist.



Heya Eorhn that's what the minister of Egypt is talking about.


Egypt: FM - Russia-Egypt 2+2 Talks Allow Coordinating Positions On Int'l, Regional Issues

"Russian hospitality is sufficient reason as it is for this visit, but I would like also to note that this format of talks involving the foreign and defense ministers reflects fully positions of negotiating parties on regional and international issues," Fahmy said.

Fahmy noted that Egypt and Russia have many issues, which should be discussed at talks on Thursday, including international problems, primarily the situation in the Middle East as well as different aspects of bilateral relations, including ties in trade and economic, cultural and humanitarian spheres and development of military-technical cooperation.

The minister also noted that ongoing meetings in Moscow "reflect Egypt's support to Russia's position over preserving stability in the region of the Middle East and North Africa and averting attempts at destabilizing the situation.".....snip~

allAfrica.com: Egypt: FM - Russia-Egypt 2+2 Talks Allow Coordinating Positions On Int'l, Regional Issues
 
Heya Eorhn that's what the minister of Egypt is talking about.


Egypt: FM - Russia-Egypt 2+2 Talks Allow Coordinating Positions On Int'l, Regional Issues

"Russian hospitality is sufficient reason as it is for this visit, but I would like also to note that this format of talks involving the foreign and defense ministers reflects fully positions of negotiating parties on regional and international issues," Fahmy said.

Fahmy noted that Egypt and Russia have many issues, which should be discussed at talks on Thursday, including international problems, primarily the situation in the Middle East as well as different aspects of bilateral relations, including ties in trade and economic, cultural and humanitarian spheres and development of military-technical cooperation.

The minister also noted that ongoing meetings in Moscow "reflect Egypt's support to Russia's position over preserving stability in the region of the Middle East and North Africa and averting attempts at destabilizing the situation.".....snip~

allAfrica.com: Egypt: FM - Russia-Egypt 2+2 Talks Allow Coordinating Positions On Int'l, Regional Issues
"reflect Egypt's support to Russia's position over preserving stability in the region of the Middle East and North Africa and averting attempts at destabilizing the situation.".....snip~
appreciate this find MMC, I just do not trust the Russians for "stability" in the ME, anymore then I do the US/NATO in Libya..

Times change I suppose. and surely Egypt can make it's own decisions/partners
 
We shouldn't be arming any country other than ourselves.
I don't have any problem selling arms, we buy tank parts from Germany.
I do have major problems with interventionist WARS, but a robust hi tech military, that is used for defense... can actually deter skirmishes ..(.I know I know.. counterintuitive)
 
Heya Eorhn that's what the minister of Egypt is talking about.


Egypt: FM - Russia-Egypt 2+2 Talks Allow Coordinating Positions On Int'l, Regional Issues

"Russian hospitality is sufficient reason as it is for this visit, but I would like also to note that this format of talks involving the foreign and defense ministers reflects fully positions of negotiating parties on regional and international issues," Fahmy said.

Fahmy noted that Egypt and Russia have many issues, which should be discussed at talks on Thursday, including international problems, primarily the situation in the Middle East as well as different aspects of bilateral relations, including ties in trade and economic, cultural and humanitarian spheres and development of military-technical cooperation.

The minister also noted that ongoing meetings in Moscow "reflect Egypt's support to Russia's position over preserving stability in the region of the Middle East and North Africa and averting attempts at destabilizing the situation.".....snip~

allAfrica.com: Egypt: FM - Russia-Egypt 2+2 Talks Allow Coordinating Positions On Int'l, Regional Issues

Obama is such a trusted ally in international circles, everyone is running to the Russians at their first opportunity. Yet more failures by this president and this administration.

So much for the reset with Russia and the world wide apology tour which should have "changed the image of America around the world" and made the U.S. "safer and stronger." Obama and Kerry think they know the world and know what they are doing, but it's as far from the truth as you could possibly get.

Not only utter failure on the domestic front but utter failure on the foreign policy front. This administration is a failure, and there's 3 years left.

I'm just frustrated as hell with this track record of continual failure and continual dodging and continual lying from this administration and this president. The US electorate deserve better than this. They deserve results. Not this. crap.
 
I don't have any problem selling arms, we buy tank parts from Germany.
I do have major problems with interventionist WARS, but a robust hi tech military, that is used for defense... can actually deter skirmishes ..(.I know I know.. counterintuitive)

No I agree. As I said, we should arm ourselves. We should invest heavily into military research and development in the hopes we never have to use it. But humanity isn't at the point yet where we can all trust each other. I just don't think we should be arming others or involved in interventionist wars. The best offense if oft a great defense, and we should have the best. Just be limited in use and not involve ourselves heavily in the military affairs of others.
 
No I agree. As I said, we should arm ourselves. We should invest heavily into military research and development in the hopes we never have to use it. But humanity isn't at the point yet where we can all trust each other. I just don't think we should be arming others or involved in interventionist wars. The best offense if oft a great defense, and we should have the best. Just be limited in use and not involve ourselves heavily in the military affairs of others.
we do have alliances, George Washington's Farewell Address warning notwithstanding ( where he warned against "permanent alliances"),
commonly referred to as 'entangling alliances' (s.i.c.)
NATO as our first permanent alliance, and should be our last. I agree with you/alliances of convenience are OK, getting into a ME or other's civil wars are not.
 
we do have alliances, George Washington's Farewell Address warning notwithstanding ( where he warned against "permanent alliances"),
commonly referred to as 'entangling alliances' (s.i.c.)
NATO as our first permanent alliance, and should be our last. I agree with you/alliances of convenience are OK, getting into a ME or other's civil wars are not.

I have always thought with the break up of the USSR and the disbandment of the Warsaw Pack, NATO should have been disbanded a few years after.
 
It makes me happy if Russia helps Egypt!!
 
I have always thought with the break up of the USSR and the disbandment of the Warsaw Pack, NATO should have been disbanded a few years after.

don't think getting out of NATO is possible. Too many integrated weapons systems ( Joint Task Strike Fighter F-35), as well as overlapping security duties.
If this is all the alliances, I can live with that even with the demise of the Warsaw Pack.
 
don't think getting out of NATO is possible. Too many integrated weapons systems ( Joint Task Strike Fighter F-35), as well as overlapping security duties.
If this is all the alliances, I can live with that even with the demise of the Warsaw Pack.

Perhaps if it was its original size, just the countries of Western Europe, but with the addition of most of the former Eastern European Countries that made up the Warsaw Pact, it is just way too big and is liable to get us involved in what should be just an European Affair at sometime or another. NATO served its purpose, it deterred aggression from the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. SEATO and CENTO, other treaty organizations from that same time period are gone, NATO should join them.
 
Perhaps if it was its original size, just the countries of Western Europe, but with the addition of most of the former Eastern European Countries that made up the Warsaw Pact, it is just way too big and is liable to get us involved in what should be just an European Affair at sometime or another. NATO served its purpose, it deterred aggression from the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. SEATO and CENTO, other treaty organizations from that same time period are gone, NATO should join them.
good point. the addition of the Eastern block countries does cause (legitimate) friction with Russia.

NATO is more then east v west though; it is a partnership in global security. I personally despise the over-reach in Libya, but it shows we act as a coordinated entity with Europe.
I'd prefer the old organization too though, not a good idea to incorporate countries not in western Europe.
 
good point. the addition of the Eastern block countries does cause (legitimate) friction with Russia.

NATO is more then east v west though; it is a partnership in global security. I personally despise the over-reach in Libya, but it shows we act as a coordinated entity with Europe.
I'd prefer the old organization too though, not a good idea to incorporate countries not in western Europe.

I agree. NATO has been around since the end of WWII and you can't get anything more permanent that that as far as alliances are concerned.
 
I agree. NATO has been around since the end of WWII and you can't get anything more permanent that that as far as alliances are concerned.
yes. Odd how it violates the Washington admonition not to engage in such;
I still think it's rather benign ( not the correct word?) compared to the old SEATO which was far beyond any of our concerns.
 
yes. Odd how it violates the Washington admonition not to engage in such;
I still think it's rather benign ( not the correct word?) compared to the old SEATO which was far beyond any of our concerns.

Perhaps, but both had the same mission, just different parts of the globe. Containment and to stop the expansion of Communism. Now the importance of doing that might be different to different people and as for importance wise, Europe probably triumphs Asia. At that time anyway. Things and events are viewed differently by western and eastern eyes.
 
Perhaps if it was its original size, just the countries of Western Europe, but with the addition of most of the former Eastern European Countries that made up the Warsaw Pact, it is just way too big and is liable to get us involved in what should be just an European Affair at sometime or another. NATO served its purpose, it deterred aggression from the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. SEATO and CENTO, other treaty organizations from that same time period are gone, NATO should join them.


Absolutely great point Pero!
 
I agree. NATO has been around since the end of WWII and you can't get anything more permanent that that as far as alliances are concerned.

Or more permanent in its menacing, as in Libya most recently, like annata pointed out.
 
Or more permanent in its menacing, as in Libya most recently, like annata pointed out.

Exactly, enough is enough. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don't. Khadaffi, Aasad perhaps, maybe. Time will tell.
 
Thank You, there are times I wish we would just keep our nose out of other countries business. This from a life long military man.

Hey, some people learn. Good for you!
 
Obama is such a trusted ally in international circles, everyone is running to the Russians at their first opportunity. Yet more failures by this president and this administration.

So much for the reset with Russia and the world wide apology tour which should have "changed the image of America around the world" and made the U.S. "safer and stronger." Obama and Kerry think they know the world and know what they are doing, but it's as far from the truth as you could possibly get.

Not only utter failure on the domestic front but utter failure on the foreign policy front. This administration is a failure, and there's 3 years left.

I'm just frustrated as hell with this track record of continual failure and continual dodging and continual lying from this administration and this president. The US electorate deserve better than this. They deserve results. Not this. crap.
Russia is no longer a Superpower but Putin has managed to convince everyone it is. America is a Superpower but Obama has managed to convince everyone it isn't.
 
And it's not necessarily a bad thing.
 
Hey, some people learn. Good for you!

My friend, a lot of people think military men like/love war, most don't. They hate it, but do their job. The military's job is to break things and kill people, we are really good at that. But we are lousy at nation building, that is something the military has never been trained on. That is a job for diplomats and the police. You want us to win a way, okay we will do that and we did so fairly easy in Iraq and Afghanistan. But we aren't equipped to nation build. That is the stark truth.
 
My friend, a lot of people think military men like/love war, most don't. They hate it, but do their job. The military's job is to break things and kill people, we are really good at that. But we are lousy at nation building, that is something the military has never been trained on. That is a job for diplomats and the police. You want us to win a way, okay we will do that and we did so fairly easy in Iraq and Afghanistan. But we aren't equipped to nation build. That is the stark truth.

I don't disagree with that, though I fail to see how it speaks to my comment on your earlier comment.
 
My friend, a lot of people think military men like/love war, most don't. They hate it, but do their job. The military's job is to break things and kill people, we are really good at that. But we are lousy at nation building, that is something the military has never been trained on. That is a job for diplomats and the police. You want us to win a way, okay we will do that and we did so fairly easy in Iraq and Afghanistan. But we aren't equipped to nation build. That is the stark truth.


Tink Tink......No not underalls!
needcowbell.jpg
.....
werd.gif


Lean.....Mean.....Killin Machin!
drills.gif
 
Back
Top Bottom