tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16816866.post703083738111895823..comments2024-02-29T02:10:56.878-08:00Comments on J O S H U A P U N D I T: Israel And Iran; Closer To The EdgeFreedom Fighterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13649470110087808596noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16816866.post-3250848742472408712008-12-18T07:12:00.000-08:002008-12-18T07:12:00.000-08:00FF,Again thanks for the replies to my post. I'm g...FF,<BR/><BR/>Again thanks for the replies to my post. I'm going to need to do some research on the instances you mention. <BR/><BR/>"...after their man allende was assainated." If we listened to the main stream media all of the time as our sole source of information we would think that the US is the only country to ever support corrupt foreign leaders when it served their interests. <BR/><BR/>Of course you and I know the media has fed us a line of bull over the years on that. Of course if he is an American ally, he is called "puppet." If he is a Russian ally the media calls him a "patriot."<BR/><BR/>The Allende situation also indicates that Russia has always been trying to gain a foothold in Central and South America. Their current actions seem to be nothing new other than the fact that their current actions have been highly successful. Russia now has more influence in South and Central America than America does!! The Russian presence in this region also goes way beyond America's presence in former Soviet Republics and the Russian presence has gone on much longer and it would likely continue even if Aemrica withdraws from these areas and allows Russia to re establish a de facto Soviet Union. The notion that Russia is only doing what it is in response to an American action is a bold faced lie and the media has allowed them to get away with it and has even assisted them in some ways.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16816866.post-18069129935893573922008-12-17T20:40:00.000-08:002008-12-17T20:40:00.000-08:00Here are some instances in which the Soviets backe...Here are some instances in which the Soviets backed off ( and their are many) The 1973 Yom Kippur War (the Soviets threatened a military strike at Israel and were warned off by Nixon), Grenada, Helsinki when Reagan walked out on them, the US installing MIRV misslies in Europe under Reagan, Greece and Turkey in the 1950's, their threat to invade Poland to destroy the solidarity movement, our involvement in Korea, the Russian threat to get involved in Chile after their man Allende was assassinated..like I said, almost every time they were forcefully confronted..which doesn't include the Cuban Missile Crisis, as far as I'm concerned.<BR/><BR/>Regards,<BR/>ffFreedom Fighterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13649470110087808596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16816866.post-19041583542820966332008-12-17T19:32:00.000-08:002008-12-17T19:32:00.000-08:00FF,Thank you for the reply to my post. You are ri...FF,<BR/><BR/>Thank you for the reply to my post. You are right. We have had this conversation before and we will probably have it again. Actually this is kind of fun. It would not be any fun, if we agreed on every thing now would it?:)<BR/><BR/>I don't know where exactly the Russians ever backed off. America has. For example in the Cuban missle crisis Russia agreed to remove their missles and in exchange Aemrica agreed not to attack Cuba. Russia removed nuclear missles. Russian nuclear missles on the Russian main land or launched from nuclear submarines were/are just as much an existential threat to America as missles launched from Cuba would be. Russia essentially gave up nothing. By agreeing never to attack to Cuba the US has been forced to live with a perpetual thorn in its side all of these years. MASSIVE ADVANTAGE to Russia here.<BR/><BR/>The high tech toys and military porn you reference here are the most advanced weapons systems on earth. This is not somehting to be taken lightly. Russia is rapidly upgrading their military. America does not seem to be introducing new weapons or weapons systems to the battlefield. At least we are not doing so at the rate that Russia is.<BR/><BR/>I admit that I could be over estimating Russian conventional capabilities. I think Russia's highly advanced nuclear arsenal and its first rate intellegence service negates any conventional military edge that America may have.<BR/><BR/>While it is likely true that Russia spent many weeks and probably months planning the invasion of Georgia, as I do not believe the Russian propaganda that Georgia started the fight. We don't even have the troops available to launch an invasion of any one right now. Our troops are a little busy in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, and elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>Givne that the troops are not available, there seems to be no way that we could launch an invasion of a country like Georgia comparable to the one that Russia launched within 72 hours. The troops to do it are unavailable. It would likely take several months and possibly a year or more. The troops would first need to be drafted and trained. Last but not least the American public will not approve of additional military deployments over seas. As such, the Russians pulled off an invasion of Georgia that the Aemricans would be unable to duplicate within 72 hours or many moths for that matter. <BR/><BR/>To[ Pentagon officials recently shrugged off Russian military manuvers in the Caribean and South America. In my opinion, these military officials should be fired for gross negligence. But perhasp America does not wish to be a major world power. If this is the case, such moves by Russia can possibly be ignored. What does seem clear is if Aemrica does wish to remain a major world power it must find a way to counter these moves and others made by the Russians. In order to do this, America must find a way to close the massive military gap that Russia has opened up between themselves and the Americans. <BR/><BR/>Btw, the beauty of the resolution to the Cuban missle crisis is both sides get to save face even the reality of it is Russia won handily.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16816866.post-9834318756282906412008-12-15T18:17:00.000-08:002008-12-15T18:17:00.000-08:00Hi Poster,We've had this conversation before...tru...Hi Poster,<BR/>We've had this conversation before...trust me, the Russian military during the Cold War was no great shakes, which is why they backed off everytime they were forcefully confronted.<BR/><BR/>The same is true today.<BR/><BR/>The thing to look at is not the hi-tech toys and military porn they advertise, but at how the average typical Russian unit is equipped in the field...with mostly antiquated and poor condition weapons and equipment, except for a handful of elite units.<BR/><BR/>A number of military obswervers have remarked on this.<BR/><BR/>Another weak point is logistics. The Russian army had to spend weeks putting together enough units to invade neighboring Georgia with its relatively weak military..and they sharea land border withthem and already had a number of troops in the region because of Chechnya.<BR/><BR/>Our guys could have been in position an dready to rockn'roll in 72 hours.<BR/><BR/>Regards,<BR/>ffFreedom Fighterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13649470110087808596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16816866.post-62129105854990025722008-12-15T17:45:00.000-08:002008-12-15T17:45:00.000-08:00"...because they realized how far behind the West ..."...because they realized how far behind the West they were in this area." Actually that's not true. American prowess and power in the world has often been exagerated. This is necessary. If America's enemies over state the power of America, it makes easier to vilify it. While the media has not always been directly supportive of enemy propaganda efforts, they have done nothing or very little to actually counter this and too often the American government has been asleep at the wheel while this was going on.<BR/><BR/>The truth is throughout most of the Cold War the Soviets enjoyed a lop-sided lead over the Aemricans in virtually every area. The only thing that kept Aemrica and the West alive and free was the nuclear deterrent. Without the nuclear deterrent Soviet Russia would have very easily defeated Aemrica and Western Europe. <BR/><BR/>Even today Russia enjoys a lop sided edge in almost every area over Aemrica and the West. The only thing keeping Russia in check is an aging Aemrican nuclear arsenal. If we are going to stay competetive, we need to develop a new generation of nuclear war heads and ICBMS and we will need to dramatically increase our human intellegence capabilities. <BR/><BR/>Keeping competitive with Russia may mean the difference between whether our country survives or not. In order to do so, we will need to rethink how we think about nuclear weapons. For example when a politician or want to be politician talks about working to rid the world of nuclear weapons or about decreasing Aemrica's nuclear arsenal, he or she gets wild applause from the audience. It is going to be impossible to rid the world of nuclear weapons. We should be expanding and upgrading our arsenal. Right now our nuclear weapons arsenal is the only thing keeping our country free. Our enemies have vastly superior conventional weapons, better human intellegence, and their troops are better trained and better led than ours.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com