Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Why America must go it alone
The next time somebody argues that America should only fight wars alongside large numbers of soldiers from its "traditional allies," ask them whether they are serious, or disingenuously demanding an impossible prerequisite to military action.
26 Comments:
By 
Alexis, at
Thu Mar 01, 12:01:00 AM:
Or, they may simply regard the United States as a colony of the European Union whose only reason for existence is to provide for European security.
By 
, at
Thu Mar 01, 05:26:00 AM:
Nah ... we'll go it alone while the rest of the world degrades into the one-world-order, UN worshipping entity that's going to stop that asteriod from destroying the planet. That is ... once they beg the funding to pay for it.
Meanwhile, the rest of the violent world, including those run by statemen, including the Norks, Iranians, China, etc. are downsizing too, right?
There are 6.5M people on this planet. Most of them pollute it, are destitute, have little or no food to eat, shelter, freedom. We fight, and flex our muscles, lest we be overrun by them. And we "fight" to create economies in those places to improve the quality of life for them.
By , at
Thu Mar 01, 11:55:00 AM:
Hey, the US funds the majority of the R&D that happens in pharmaceuticals, so why shouldn't we provide other countries with security so they can let their military spending lag also?
To tell the truth, were I a friend of America and I had budget problems, I would cut my military spending also, as I know that my friends in America would not let anything happen to me. Course, Israel is our friend and they have not taken that path, but whatever.
By , at
Thu Mar 01, 01:33:00 PM:
The Max Boot article makes some strong points about the lack of investment in the British military. However I'm not sure that comparing the UK to Eritrea (nearly an entire country under arms following a debilitating independence war) and Burma (a military dictatorship reliant on brute force) is particularly useful. Of course, if either Eritrea or Burma posed an imminent threat to the UK, the argument might be more powerful.
In the end, though, the entire article is undermined by his final point: "Unless the other NATO members are willing to step up their spending... there is scant chance that their gripes about American unilateralism will ever be rectified." Surely those gripes are not that they're being left out of American military adventures, but that they sincerely wish that those adventures weren't happening in the first place?
I love the rest of the comments, btw. Classy.
By , at
Thu Mar 01, 01:48:00 PM:
The degree of insanity in the UK at present, represented by the insanity of the PC correct left wing morons, knows no bounds
They hasten the day of reckoning, and the civil war.
By , at
Thu Mar 01, 02:27:00 PM:
The Daily Mail is one of the highest selling papers in the UK; but I wouldn't take it too seriously as a source of hard news, if I were you.
Can somebody explain to me how relocating a single prison service office "hasten[s] the day of reckoning"? I knew the prison service was a mess, but I didn't realise it was apocalyptic.
By allen, at
Thu Mar 01, 02:30:00 PM:
Since I know that to all real patriots the welfare of America’s heroes can never be off-topic, I submit the following:
Hospital Officials Knew Of Neglect
So, where are Hewitt, Malkin, and Captain Ed? Where is the word of wisdom from Reynolds? Why no Fox News expose by Geraldo and O’Rilley? Come on, guys, if the Washington Post is full of it, why the silence?
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
___Johnson
“But there is something even worse: it is the first, last, and middle range of fools.”
___Mencken
For those with access to any of the big guns named above, get them on the story, if they dare.
By , at
Thu Mar 01, 06:28:00 PM:
Can somebody explain to me how relocating a single prison service office "hasten[s] the day of reckoning"?
It was also in the Daily Express.
It's not the fact of a particular dept of the "messy" prison service, or it's relocation, it's the thinking behind it. Reverse discrimination, - if you prefe, but to a cancerous minority.
Specifically, the prison service is a revolving door of shorter sentences - no where to put 'em, and no more places for a looooooooooooong time. Sentences that are never fulfilled. More walk-aways, no checks on illegals, no deportations of those recommended. More crazy legislation creating more crimes, coupled with an overall failure to enforce existing legislation, let alone PC, misunderstood/misapplied/illthought out new legislation.
The entire service is far worse than a "mess". Clint Eastwood would call it a "Cluster Fuck".
I'm sure you understand.
By Paul Edwards, at
Fri Mar 02, 12:19:00 AM:
Some points:
1. I think the US should make moves to announce that its contribution in foreign aid will be its global security umbrella which protects the free world, and that the Europeans can be the ones who do humanitarian food aid etc since they're not pulling their weight militarily.
2. The NATO countries plus Australia should stop trying to do territorial defence and instead have a doctrine on relying on the US for heavy-lifting, and concentrate their existing defence budgets into force projection so that they can actually do something useful, helping out the US when they think it is appropriate.
3. We really need a new concept for these coalitions. If a member of the free world, such as Australia, thinks that liberating Iraq is a good idea, and is going anyway, then surely the other members of the free world, such as Germany, should tag along, even though they disagree in principle? Why make Australia fight "alone"? Why would Germany leave Australia defenceless? If it's important to Australia, it should be important to Germany. Germany can act on Australia's behalf, even if it doesn't feel a need to act on its own behalf.
By Purple Avenger, at
Fri Mar 02, 01:16:00 AM:
as I know that my friends in America would not let anything happen to me.
Perhaps. Perhaps not. I have no problem with backing away from faux-friends.
By , at
Fri Mar 02, 09:11:00 AM:
"blogger" - you sound like a parody of the Daily Mail, and your comment about a "cancerous minority" is clearly racist, unless you'd care to qualify it.
Paul Edwards - I find your argument pretty weak. "If a member of the free world, such as Australia, thinks that liberating Iraq is a good idea, and is going anyway, then surely the other members of the free world, such as Germany, should tag along, even though they disagree in principle?"
This isn't the school yard. Just because my mate is going to start a chess club or smash a few windows, doesn't mean that I have to go along with him. That's why we have democracy, remember? And if I believe that he's going to smash a few windows, I actually have an obligation of sorts to try and persuade him not to.
By , at
Fri Mar 02, 03:04:00 PM:
"blogger" - you sound like a parody of the Daily Mail, and your comment about a "cancerous minority" is clearly racist, unless you'd care to qualify it.
No, I don't care to explain it. The fact are obvious, even to someone as sharp as you, who asks questions for other reasons than the answeres!
And moving the creation of jobs from a predominently white area to a centre of ethnic minority is not racist??
Realise what is happening, The town involved has well known problems.
Get real "merkur"
By , at
Fri Mar 02, 03:08:00 PM:
parody of the Daily mail
I take it you are an avid reader of the Daily Mail, in order to make such a comment.
If it can't be relied on for "hard news", why do you bother?
By Purple Avenger, at
Fri Mar 02, 06:29:00 PM:
I actually have an obligation of sorts to try and persuade him not to.
And they can correspondingly feel free to abandon your sorry ass when you might need some help in the future too, right?
By , at
Fri Mar 02, 06:43:00 PM:
Blogger: "No, I don't care to explain it. The fact are obvious, even to someone as sharp as you, who asks questions for other reasons than the answeres! And moving the creation of jobs from a predominently white area to a centre of ethnic minority is not racist??"
I happen to agree that the story - without knowing all the facts - is pretty disturbing. What I object to is your apparent racism, combined with your risible idea that this is hastening the (presumably inevitable) march towards civil war.
"I take it you are an avid reader of the Daily Mail, in order to make such a comment. If it can't be relied on for "hard news", why do you bother?"
For the horoscopes.
By , at
Fri Mar 02, 06:43:00 PM:
Purple Avenger: "And they can correspondingly feel free to abandon your sorry ass when you might need some help in the future too, right?"
Yes.
By Purple Avenger, at
Fri Mar 02, 07:20:00 PM:
Then the euros better think about quadrupling their defense spending if the Americans decide to sit a few out.
That Bosnia thing didn't go well for them until we showed up to do the heavy lifting, and France seems to have a civil issue that's stuck to them like gum on a shoe for a while now.. NATO has trouble scraping up a few spare helicopters or planes to do anything at all.
Good luck. I'm all for American isolationism when it comes to dolts who need hard lessons.
By , at
Fri Mar 02, 07:30:00 PM:
Purple Avenger: we certainly do need some hard lessons. Just like in the movies! OohRah!
By the way, how's Iraq working out for you? Afghanistan? How about those bilateral talks with North Korea? Oh, and I see that you'll be sitting down with Iran and Syria soon, that'll be nice. And I assume you'll be dropping out of the WTO as well?
Get back to me when you realise the world is a little more complicated than your pipe dreams.
By , at
Fri Mar 02, 07:36:00 PM:
Why America must go it alone, Recap:
If the Brits (weighing in at just under 1% of the world population) can't contribute soldiers ('cause once they're down to only 190,000ish) we have to go it alone.
Brilliant!
-LankyB
By , at
Sat Mar 03, 01:41:00 PM:
"I take it you are an avid reader of the Daily Mail, in order to make such a comment. If it can't be relied on for "hard news", why do you bother?"
For the horoscopes.
My, My, that's an intelliget answer!
If you only read the horoscopes, how can you say that "you sound like a parody....."
Ever tried speaking the truth "merkur?"
By , at
Sat Mar 03, 01:52:00 PM:
I happen to agree that the story - without knowing all the facts - is pretty disturbing.
Be carefull, "merkur"
You're coming close to offering an opinion, rather than castigating other commenters.
By , at
Sat Mar 03, 02:37:00 PM:
So saying that I agree that the story is disturbing isn't offering an opinion? And objecting to your barely-veiled racism isn't offering an opinion? And the first comment I made, and the subsequent response to Paul Edwards and the Purple Avenger aren't offering opinions?
Oh, and would it be possible for you to actually talk about the original blog post?
By , at
Sun Mar 04, 06:33:00 AM:
"Disturbing" is hardly an opinion. Care to qualify it?
Objecting to "racism" (which it wasn't by the way, except in your dreams) is hardly an opinion.
Care to qualify it?(clue:- too racist, - not enough racist).
Your comments to other commenters are irrelevant to our dialogue, however I will say that your comment to purple avenger Get back to me when you realise the world is a little more complicated than your pipe dreams.
was not an opinion, but a command mixed with an insult!
You did not address the question of why if you only read the horoscopes (Gee, you believe those things, - you are "disturbed"), you are able to make the comment "you sound like a parody...").
By , at
Sun Mar 04, 08:34:00 AM:
Dear blogger,
Earlier in the thread, you referred to a "cancerous minority". From your reference, it seems you were referring to either a) a specific ethnic group, or b) a specific political group. That was why I asked for you to qualify it, which you refused to do. If it was a), I stand by my remarks about racism; if it was b), I apologise but would ask you to clarify exactly who you mean in any case.
On my opinion that the story is disturbing; why isn't that an opinion? Saying it's disturbing as far as I'm prepared to go on the basis of a quick read of a few articles on the internet; I'm not going to go off at the deep end until I can find out more.
On my comment to purple avenger: It wasn't a command, it was a suggestion. I'm not actually expecting him/her to do that; I was seeking a response from him/her, using a pointed remark. However you might want to read the text above that remark, which was again intended to provoke a response, but which pretty clearly indicates that I strongly disagree with him/her.
Oh, and I don't only read the horoscopes. That was just an off-hand remark, so I wouldn't read too much into it. I grew up in a household that only read the Daily Mail, and I read it occasionally when it's lying around.
I can't help but notice that you still don't seem to have expressed an opinion about the actual article that Tigerhawk originally posted, by the way.
By , at
Sun Mar 04, 05:17:00 PM:
Dear "merkur"
Earlier in the thread
1)I posted an article to show the insanity of certain socialist led departments to add emphasis to the original TH.
2)You said"...highest selling paper...not to be trusted on hard news...explain how single department..."
3) I answered
4)you chose to attack and question my answer "parody of daily mail....racist..."
5)I said "No idon't care to explain". Can't you read. I have no need to explain anything to you, as the remark was made in general.
Your remarks however, were made specifically to myself, which is why I wanted clarification.
I will remind you once again
What would cause you to say "....parody of the daily mail...."
6) You then attempted to revisit the questions again. Once again, can't you read? Then you apparently lied about your topics of reading, then attempt to explain it with a little story.
How can anything you say be taken as the truth, when you would lie about such things.
So to summarise.
a) You impute meaning into my statements, then demand an explanation.
b)You make statements about me/to me "...parody..etc" and refuse to explain their basis.
Take a hike, little man. I have no need of further dialogue with someone like you.
You are on "ignore"
By , at
Sun Mar 04, 07:35:00 PM:
You've certainly put me in my place, blogger, using a combination of humor and humility to put forward an argument that simply can't be refuted.
