Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Russia's Clandestine Alliance?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="coastie" data-source="post: 314009" data-attributes="member: 1924"><p>True the US did support the Taliban... in order to subdue Russian power in the middle east.</p><p></p><p>US supported Iraq o subdue the Iranian shaw.</p><p></p><p>No one can claim that the US wasn't aware of the risks of doing this. They knew the evil that they were supporting.</p><p></p><p>Whether it was due to lack of foresight or a calulated risk I don't know.</p><p>It could have been both.</p><p></p><p>My opinion is that the USSR would have fallen even if we hadn't supported the Taliban, so yes, it was a bad idea in retrospect.</p><p></p><p>As for Iran and Iraq. It's a tough call. I would have preferred that the US not gotten involved at all. Especially since it impowered Hussein.</p><p></p><p>However, that was then and now Iraq is in the cross-hairs. I doubt Russia would directly atack the US if war is to break out. I'm sure they would do what they can to support Iraq, but getting too deeply involved with the US could be quite detrimental to them.</p><p></p><p>However, Bush seems to be back peddling a little over attacking Iraq. It seemed like he was locked and cocked on them now it seems like he's turning down the heat a little.</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure why, probably a big reason was the negative feed-back he was getting from other members of NATO and UN officials.</p><p></p><p>Maybe it's time he reconsidered the weapons inspections. </p><p></p><p>However, this is purely hypothetical, he may have turned up the heat to encourage a UN weapons insepction instead of the other option of a US inspection since that would have raised the hairs on the backs of more than <em>one</em> nation.</p><p></p><p>In which case, while losing international favor, he may have gained a little more leverage by causing them to worry.</p><p></p><p>I hope that the US doesn't go in and take Iraq now, at least until they have a concrete reason. I'm sure that the intelligence community is advising against it for now.</p><p></p><p>But something that everyone should keep in mind is that the president doesn't really have final say about whether or not we attack Iraq. There are issues with other nations that are more pressing now, and the UN pretty much has the US by the tail until the other matters are tended to.</p><p></p><p>It would have saved much more face had we taken Saddam out the first time we had the chance.</p><p></p><p>Things are going to boil over soon, and if we wait until Israel is in over their heads, we may save some face (if not for the fact that Israel isn't very popular globally right now either).</p><p></p><p>Either way, Bush needs to cool his guns and wait a few minutes before committing to something like this. I've heard on the news that our troops are scattered all over the place, and it would be bad to see the US spread out over so many different fronts.</p><p></p><p>So with all of this hypothetical rambling, I'm just trying to say that Russia isn't the biggest problem right now. The biggest problem is public opinion. </p><p></p><p>Blaming Bush for past US mistakes will cause more harm than good. What needs to be done is some foreign relations improvement.</p><p></p><p>While Europe grinds their teeth over just about every thing the Americans do, we shoudln't be picking fights with more people. Otherwise, the terrorists who attacked the World trade centers will be accomplishing exactly what they wanted.</p><p></p><p>Zach</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="coastie, post: 314009, member: 1924"] True the US did support the Taliban... in order to subdue Russian power in the middle east. US supported Iraq o subdue the Iranian shaw. No one can claim that the US wasn't aware of the risks of doing this. They knew the evil that they were supporting. Whether it was due to lack of foresight or a calulated risk I don't know. It could have been both. My opinion is that the USSR would have fallen even if we hadn't supported the Taliban, so yes, it was a bad idea in retrospect. As for Iran and Iraq. It's a tough call. I would have preferred that the US not gotten involved at all. Especially since it impowered Hussein. However, that was then and now Iraq is in the cross-hairs. I doubt Russia would directly atack the US if war is to break out. I'm sure they would do what they can to support Iraq, but getting too deeply involved with the US could be quite detrimental to them. However, Bush seems to be back peddling a little over attacking Iraq. It seemed like he was locked and cocked on them now it seems like he's turning down the heat a little. I'm not sure why, probably a big reason was the negative feed-back he was getting from other members of NATO and UN officials. Maybe it's time he reconsidered the weapons inspections. However, this is purely hypothetical, he may have turned up the heat to encourage a UN weapons insepction instead of the other option of a US inspection since that would have raised the hairs on the backs of more than [i]one[/i] nation. In which case, while losing international favor, he may have gained a little more leverage by causing them to worry. I hope that the US doesn't go in and take Iraq now, at least until they have a concrete reason. I'm sure that the intelligence community is advising against it for now. But something that everyone should keep in mind is that the president doesn't really have final say about whether or not we attack Iraq. There are issues with other nations that are more pressing now, and the UN pretty much has the US by the tail until the other matters are tended to. It would have saved much more face had we taken Saddam out the first time we had the chance. Things are going to boil over soon, and if we wait until Israel is in over their heads, we may save some face (if not for the fact that Israel isn't very popular globally right now either). Either way, Bush needs to cool his guns and wait a few minutes before committing to something like this. I've heard on the news that our troops are scattered all over the place, and it would be bad to see the US spread out over so many different fronts. So with all of this hypothetical rambling, I'm just trying to say that Russia isn't the biggest problem right now. The biggest problem is public opinion. Blaming Bush for past US mistakes will cause more harm than good. What needs to be done is some foreign relations improvement. While Europe grinds their teeth over just about every thing the Americans do, we shoudln't be picking fights with more people. Otherwise, the terrorists who attacked the World trade centers will be accomplishing exactly what they wanted. Zach [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Russia's Clandestine Alliance?
Top
Bottom