Contemporary Wars

oh man!!! we're all family...

You think that Romania was forced (or maybe bribed) to join NATO. I don't see any sign of this. My guess is that Romania's leaders saw the US as a major world power and believed it was better for Romania to be seen as a friend. Maybe they were right, maybe wrong. As we all know, there are plenty of European countries that are not in NATO. From what I have have heard, Romania is making a valuable contribution, but it's not like the alliance will fall apart without it.

Just like the US crushed Canada, invaded Ireland, and forces the Japanese to dress in rags and live in huts made of scrap wood 60 years after WW2?

This is between you and your government. I'm sorry you feel so disillusioned with it. You have had a revolution fairly recently -- if your view is the mainstream, it sounds like you need another one.

As one of my former colleagues said, "I don't have a dog in this fight".

Of course it does not. As I said, countries can and do re-negotiate status of forces agreeements. South Korea and Japan both signed status-of-forces agreements with the US under much more unfavorable conditions than Romania, and they had many more US troops in them than Romania has or is likely to ever have. They were also devastated by war. Those agreements were changed later under public pressure. So it does happen.

This is between you and your government, so see my previous comment. I am not aware of any countries getting rich by building walls between themselves and the world economy, but maybe Romania can be the first. One thing you can be sure of: if Romania doesn't want American companies or American investment, they will go someplace else. There is no shortage of competition.

Amen to this.

That's the curse of living in a republic. Once we elect them, they can do any damn fool thing they want to (invade Iraq, sign contracts with Bechtel, etc.).

Certainly the public wins when they can hold their leaders responsible. Of course, the public can do what the US public did, and reelect the leaders who led them astray. Freedom sometimes mean freedom to do stupid things.

Okay. Quote one anti American stereotype in my 2 last posts. You can't find that.

But I glady confess an anti-republican bias

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on May 21, 2005 08:42 am

Okay. Quote one anti American stereotype in my 2 last posts. You can't find that.

But I glady confess an anti-republican bias

It was the atmosphere in general... not you particularly.
OK, I was afraid to quote Indrid... happy now?

do not worry about it. keep the discussion going!!

Just like the US crushed Canada, invaded Ireland, and forces the Japanese to dress in rags and live in huts made of scrap wood 60 years after WW2?

The US would never dare to invade Canada, for fear that the roughboys would sweep down and burn Washington again

i have been hearing some rough talk about the canadians made by some republican woman, Ann Coulter. maybe out americans friends can illuminate us about her political ambitions

She's just an attack dog for the hard-right Republicans. The only thing that makes her different is that she's a woman, and (by Republican commentator standards) moderately good looking (if you like blondes, that is). So, better than a fat middle-aged guy with a buzz-cut spewing stupidity, but not by much.

I predict you would hate her, but she has a nasty mouth, which you might like.

And it's not just the Canadians she talks trash about -- it is pretty much everybody who doesn't agree with her. Certainly I can't imagine her saying anything good about Europeans (West, East, South, Central, whatever).

I don't know if she has any personal political ambitions... maybe but I doubt it.

damn...looked pretty wild on that interview. about being good looking, haaaaa
come to europe if you wan to see nice women.

Hey! I did say "... by Republican commentator standards." Find a picture of Rush Limbaugh of you need some more specifics on what that means. It's no accident that these right-wing commentators are RADIO hosts rather than TV.

After having seen Alessandra Mussolini, I will admit that European fascist parties have better looking women than American ones. As for the general question of which country or continent has better looking women, I will leave that for another thread... both the US and Europe have their charms from my experience.

"Wild" is a very good word for Ann Coulter, IMHO. I can't even listen to her. She always sounds like she needs her medication adjusted.

well at least she is not so hard on the eyes...we have our barking people here as well, unfortunately they are all fat men. quite like Limbaugh

now going back to contemporary wars...

I've been wondering about Ann Coulter. Does she really believe all the shit she produces or does she cynically sell her writings talents to whoever can pay top bucks for her skills ?

Mmm that question ressembles this one : is she dumb or intelligent ?

Good question. Personally I think there is an element of both. She basically believes it, but exagerrates and paints things in very black-and-white terms just to stand out from the crowd. I don't think her target audience pays for subtlety.

I guess that adds up to "stupid" in your second question, although I would prefer to quote Robert Heinlein (from "Starship Troopers"): "... not stupid, merely ignorant and prejudiced by [her] environment."

There are two thing that always amuses me about conservative commentators blasting "the liberal media": (1) they are part of it, (2) it's all to sell products anyway.

Status by James Wolcott.

"When Rumsfeld leaves office, what will his successor inherit?

"A volunteer military without volunteers. The Army missed its active-duty recruiting goal in April by almost half. Guard and Reserve recruiting are collapsing. Retention will do the same as "stop loss" orders are lifted. The reason, obviously, is the war in Iraq. Parents don't want to be the first one on their block to have their kid come home in a box.

"The world's largest pile of wrecked and worn-out military equipment (maybe second-largest if we remember the old Soviet Navy). I'm talking about basic stuff here: trucks, Humvees, personnel carriers, crew-served weapons, etc. This is gear the Rumsfeld Pentagon hates to spend money on, because it does not represent 'transformation' to the hi-tech, video-game warfare it wrongly sees as the future. So far, deploying units have made up their deficiencies by robbing units that are not deploying, often National Guard outfits. But that stock has about run out, and some of the stripped units are now facing deployment themselves, minus their gear.

"A military tied down in a strategically meaningless backwater, Iraq, to the point where it can't do much else..."

"Commitments to hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of future weapons programs that are militarily as useful as Zeppelins but less fun to watch..."

"A world wary of U.S. intentions and skeptical of any American claims about anything. In business, good will is considered a tangible asset. In true 'wreck it and run' fashion, Rumsfeld & Co. have reduced the value of that asset to near zero. A recent survey of the German public found Russia was considered a better friend than the United States.

"Finally, the equivalent of an unfavorable ruling by a bankruptcy judge in the form of a lost war. We will be lucky if we can get out of Iraq with anything less than a total loss."

Mmm, who is James Wolcott ? A liberal whinnie ? A traitor ?