Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Mar 16, 2009 16:57:40 GMT -5
Furthermore, saber-rattling is not the proper response to every foreign policy situation. I don't see how responding with militaristic bluster would make the Russians less likely to base bombers in Cuba. I couldn't agree more with this sentiment. See my comments above. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Mar 16, 2009 18:55:05 GMT -5
Who, exactly, is calling for saber rattling or militaristic bluster? There's a world of a gulf between militaristic bluster and silence.
Also, I always thought two (or more) kinds of threats were more severe than one kind. Seems to me that's why the U.S. has long, medium and short range missiles (launched from land, sea and undersea), intercontinental bombers, shorter range land and sea-based attack aircraft carrying bombs, rockets, drones, etc. It's also why we have overseas bases and aircraft carriers cruising in key places. To say that, because the Russians have ICBMs, we need not worry about bombers close to our shore, is naive at best.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Mar 16, 2009 19:09:47 GMT -5
I'm saying we don't have to worry about bombers close to our shore because they already have bombers close to our shore. They've been there on 24 hour patrols for a few years now, and they were there for the entire Cold War.
JFK didn't challenge the Soviets over the missiles in Cuba in order to look strong, he did so because the missiles changed the strategic picture in a huge way. Bombers in Cuba doesn't change the strategic picture at all.
As far as a mutli-pronged attack, a nuke is a nuke, no matter how it arrives. The Russians already can hit us with all the nukes they want with their ICBM capability (which was NOT the case in 1962). We have no defenses against that. The only reason you have alternative strike methods is in case one method gets taken out in a first strike.
Anyways, strategic bombing is mostly dead. Any nation with jet aircraft and guns can shoot down a Tu-95, and a reasonably advanced air defense system can shoot down all the cruise missiles without much trouble.
The Russian bombers are purely symbolic. Should we be afraid of the things they symbolize? Maybe. But we shouldn't be afraid of the bombers themselves.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Mar 16, 2009 20:02:00 GMT -5
Ed, you're criticizing Obama for not saying anything, but nowhere have you said what you'd like him to say. The only thing you've done is praise Kennedy's response. Absent any explanation, I'd have to say that threatening to blockade Cuba to prevent Russian bombers from hosting there would count as saber rattling.
Furthermore, it needs to be noted that nothing we are talking about has any connection to reality. The Russian Air Force head made some hypothetical comments (that is, no one's currently moving anything). The Kremlin quickly walked away from them. For all intents and purposes, this issue has already been resolved.
The only person sensing a threat is Charles Krauthammer, who cobbled together this incident and the general and purely symbolic opening in relations between Russia and Venezuela that has been going on for some time now into a club to bash Obama with.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Mar 17, 2009 9:07:14 GMT -5
Ed, you're criticizing Obama for not saying anything, but nowhere have you said what you'd like him to say. The only thing you've done is praise Kennedy's response. Absent any explanation, I'd have to say that threatening to blockade Cuba to prevent Russian bombers from hosting there would count as saber rattling. Furthermore, it needs to be noted that nothing we are talking about has any connection to reality. The Russian Air Force head made some hypothetical comments (that is, no one's currently moving anything). The Kremlin quickly walked away from them. For all intents and purposes, this issue has already been resolved. The only person sensing a threat is Charles Krauthammer, who cobbled together this incident and the general and purely symbolic opening in relations between Russia and Venezuela that has been going on for some time now into a club to bash Obama with. I don't know what I want Obama to say. I'm criticizing his saying nothing. He has access to all the latest intel and a slew of advisors on the implications of whatever he says or does. I don't have such access. And, bear in mind this is the first of many things that will come up in Obama's watch. If China makes a move on Taiwan, will this also be accompanied by silence? Or North Korea taking aim on South Korea? You seem to think the only thing that could possibly happen between Russia and the U.S. is a nuclear confrontation but the more likely scenario would be non-nuclear. As I said earlier, it's true Russian bombers have been flying by the U.S. for some time but they are severely limited because they have to fly from Russian (or allied) territory and they use all but about 30 minutes of fuel just making the round trip. From Cuba they could be on patrol continuously. And this is primarily now for the purpose of gathering intel such as the comings and goings of our sub fleet and the levels of training activity, much of which is at Guantanamo Bay Cuba. Most today think GITMO is nothing more than a place where enemy combatants are held but it is the primary Atlantic Ocean training facility for our Navy. I speak from personal experience having been aboard ships that went through GITMO training twice. |
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Mar 17, 2009 12:13:54 GMT -5
Whoa. Obama's silence on a Russian refueling base means he'll also be silent if two major American friends are invaded? That's a bit of a jump!
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Mar 17, 2009 13:22:56 GMT -5
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Mar 18, 2009 10:01:45 GMT -5
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Mar 18, 2009 11:58:28 GMT -5
So let me get this straight - some AIG Computer Programmer that makes $80K donates $2,300 to Obama in Q1 2008 and he's supposed to return that because why exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Mar 18, 2009 12:51:33 GMT -5
Sure, the day Bush/Cheney return any money they received from companies that squandered/misused/outright stole money awarded for contracts in Iraq. |
|
H2Oya 05
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Let's go Hoyas!
Posts: 298
|
Post by H2Oya 05 on Mar 18, 2009 13:02:43 GMT -5
Sure, the day Bush/Cheney return any money they received from companies that squandered/misused/outright stole money awarded for contracts in Iraq. So Strummer, are you saying that both Bush and Obama are corrupt? That is bound to upset everybody, from TC to EasyEd. |
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Mar 18, 2009 13:34:41 GMT -5
This is kind of about Obama (who I think is doing an okay job, generally): I haven't heard many US senators and representatives using that phrase "uniquely qualified" lately.
The things I feel are hurting the administration are, generally speaking, failures of both the White House and the Congress. Interesting that Obama criticized a Congress without cojones for approving the Iraq AUMF during his campaign. The Congress has yet to grow cojones. I am hoping they drop soon. If not, I may vote Republican in 2010 just for some freaking balance.
ON EDIT: To clarify, what the Republican opposition has been doing lately doesn't show cojones or sense. It has merely been making noise. I'm merely in favor of evening out the numbers in the (dim) hope of some actual and productive discussion.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Mar 18, 2009 14:18:57 GMT -5
to upset everybody, from TC to EasyEd. My point is what easyed is citing is the individual campaign contributions of AIG employees from last year bundled up into one heading. So for example, when you go and drill down and query for the individual contributions, you see that some Computer Programmer gave $2300, you see some Human Resources lady gave $1050. I'm not sure what his point is - is it that we should be retroactively seizing the property of people who worked for AIG before the bailout occured in some act of retributive populist vengeance? Some of these people probably were even laid off from AIG. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Mar 18, 2009 14:29:29 GMT -5
Populism run amok* leads to lots of crazy ideas.
*which is pretty much what we have going on now, IMO, not to mention gov't. spending run amok. Others may disagree.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Mar 18, 2009 14:37:29 GMT -5
This thread is getting kinda unwieldy. Could we possibly split it up into new threads based on each separate issue? Unless everyone wants a giant "I don't like the President/Oh yeah, well I do!" thread.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Mar 18, 2009 15:16:18 GMT -5
This is kind of about Obama (who I think is doing an okay job, generally): I haven't heard many US senators and representatives using that phrase "uniquely qualified" lately. The things I feel are hurting the administration are, generally speaking, failures of both the White House and the Congress. Interesting that Obama criticized a Congress without cojones for approving the Iraq AUMF during his campaign. The Congress has yet to grow cojones. I am hoping they drop soon. If not, I may vote Republican in 2010 just for some freaking balance. ON EDIT: To clarify, what the Republican opposition has been doing lately doesn't show cojones or sense. It has merely been making noise. I'm merely in favor of evening out the numbers in the (dim) hope of some actual and productive discussion. Exactly, right now we have a majority paralyzed by the sheer enormity of the problem and lack of inspired direction and a minority who is gleefully in the minority - by which I mean they are just lobbing rhetorical grenades with no accountability. I'm going to vote Repub in congress, just to knock some sense into both sides. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Mar 18, 2009 15:29:02 GMT -5
"Knock Some Sense Into Congress - Vote Republican!" I like it! J/K ;D Stream of consciousness is never a bad thing, Bando. Let the thread flow where it flows, baby.  |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Mar 18, 2009 15:38:19 GMT -5
After eight years of hearing libs and other Democrats throwing lobs at George W., it's fun to have some payback time.
|
|
H2Oya 05
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Let's go Hoyas!
Posts: 298
|
Post by H2Oya 05 on Mar 18, 2009 15:38:50 GMT -5
Is there a way we could tie this thread in with the thread about the tv show "Kings"?
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Mar 18, 2009 17:06:23 GMT -5
Ian McShane was on The Daily Show last night!
|
|
