Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 106
  1. #11  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    We should be the friend of liberty everywhere, but the guarantor and provisioner of ours alone
    Abandon your allies, and you will find yourselves alone. Abandon mutual defence treaties and find yourselves at the mercies of your enemies.

    Pretend the rest of the world does not exist, and that your defence and welfare comes with the cooperation of other nations, and you will be deaf, dumb and blind.

    Right now your satellites can relay information to you 24/7 because of relay stations.Those stations are on foreign soil as a result of defence treaties.

    Remove those stations and the moment they cross the plane of the ecliptic, you are an open, tempting target.

    No DEW line.
    No foreign intel.
    No SATINT.
    No SIGINT.
    No cooperation between your NSA / CIA/ DIA/ DEA and foreign governments.

    See that line called the Equator? You have enemies beyond that line.

    Who do you think it is that watches your back whilst you sleep?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    The welfare and safety of the American people is dependent on the good will and mutual defence treaties of its allies.

    Plain and simple.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member marinejcksn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Penn State
    Posts
    1,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnabend View Post
    The welfare and safety of the American people is dependent on the good will and mutual defence treaties of its allies.

    Plain and simple.
    Absolutely true that America benefits from mutual defence treaties of its allies. I know from the exercises we've held in the past that american-australian relations are something I'm definitely in favor of.

    One thing I'd like to add is the immediate need to withdraw the majority of American troops stationed abroad, now and forever. We've had Marine Corps bases in both Mainland Japan and Okinawa since the 40's...we've had bases in Germany since the fall of the Third Reich. Why? I've asked this question many times to my superiors, the answer I always get is to protect American interests in those countries. Why are we maintaining US bases on foreign soil (In over 130 countries to a tune of over a Trillion bucks a year by the way) that are currently our allies? What are we protecting? Isn't that why we have foreign US embassies?
    I know having troops in certain areas provides good things at times, such as when we provide humanitarian aid after national disasters like the Tsunami in 2004. But with our current military technology as well as our higher level of training due to past experience I cannot honestly believe we couldn't deploy at a moments notice to help our allies if need be, at a much reduced cost of doing business then keeping troops in foreign countries indefinitely.
    "Don't vote. It only encourages the bastards." -PJ O'Roarke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Goldwater
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnabend View Post
    Abandon your allies, and you will find yourselves alone. Abandon mutual defence treaties and find yourselves at the mercies of your enemies.
    One sided agreements that involve a country protecting another, but will never mean the smaller country doing the same for the larger ones are not mutual defence treaties, they are traps and I'll remind you thats how WW1 and 2 started.

    Agreements with Australia, the USA, Britain etc. - countries that actually work for each other, I can see sense to, putting Georgia in NATO - where is the sense?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    One sided agreements that involve a country protecting another, but will never mean the smaller country doing the same for the larger ones are not mutual defence treaties, they are traps and I'll remind you thats how WW1 and 2 started.
    And I will remind you who stopped the Japanese from turning New Guinea into a massive airbase from which to pound the living shit out of your island hopping campaign.

    Agreements with Australia, the USA, Britain etc. - countries that actually work for each other, I can see sense to, putting Georgia in NATO - where is the sense?
    Reread what Gator posted. The platform he espouses basically tells the US allies "so long, we dont need you."

    Or didnt you read the OP?

    We should be the friend of liberty everywhere, but the guarantor and provisioner of ours alone
    Therefore, we call upon the President, and Congress, to immediately commence a systematic withdrawal from these treaties and agreements
    Translation: "we are interested in US interests alone, and if one million Australians die, who gives a fuck? They're not Americans."

    Kiss the ENTIRE Pacific region, all trade and commerce GOODBYE.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    Ron Paul was an idiot, and here's why.

    He, like gator, the isolationist jackass who thinks that the calendar date is 1819, wanted to "tear up all trade and other treaties and write new ones"

    Quick tip. If you back out of treaties and renege on existing agreements..what the fuck makes you think that anyone will trust you to keep the new ones?

    A few months ago a certain international company had a trade agreement, bartered through the governments of two nations. A week later they reneged and wanted to organise a new deal with more preferential terms for them.

    Not one government in this region will take their calls now, and the commerce sphere has them down as ratbags who cant be trusted to keep their word.

    (How do I know this? The story is common knowledge...and eventually they will be let back in. IF they grovel enough.Their greed cost a thousand jobs and pissed off a LOT of people)

    All this is moot, anyway, as none of your leaders are stupid enough to want to piss off their allies and commit national seppuku.

    Bottom line.


    You need us.
    Last edited by Sonnabend; 09-18-2008 at 06:33 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by marinejcksn View Post
    Absolutely true that America benefits from mutual defence treaties of its allies. I know from the exercises we've held in the past that american-australian relations are something I'm definitely in favor of.

    One thing I'd like to add is the immediate need to withdraw the majority of American troops stationed abroad, now and forever. We've had Marine Corps bases in both Mainland Japan and Okinawa since the 40's...we've had bases in Germany since the fall of the Third Reich. Why? I've asked this question many times to my superiors, the answer I always get is to protect American interests in those countries. Why are we maintaining US bases on foreign soil (In over 130 countries to a tune of over a Trillion bucks a year by the way) that are currently our allies? What are we protecting? Isn't that why we have foreign US embassies?
    I know having troops in certain areas provides good things at times, such as when we provide humanitarian aid after national disasters like the Tsunami in 2004. But with our current military technology as well as our higher level of training due to past experience I cannot honestly believe we couldn't deploy at a moments notice to help our allies if need be, at a much reduced cost of doing business then keeping troops in foreign countries indefinitely.
    As usual you have it right.

    There is no logical reason for us to have troops stationed all over the world. There is no logical reason for us to be involved in every little conflict on the face of the earth.

    Non interventionism is not isolationism. We can still maintain alliances when it is in our interest to do so but that doesnít mean guaranteeing the security of shitbag countries and getting involved in conflicts that have nothing to do with our own security.

    The biggest foreign policy mistake we have ever made was getting involved in Middle East politics 40 years ago. The Soviets ate our lunch in the Middle East and gained all kinds of influence because we backed the wrong side in a conflict that had absolutely nothing to do with our own security. We have had our asses kick by a billion Arabs and it has cost us trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. We have got nothing for it but the Israelis and the Saudis sleep well each night on their silk sheets. As pointed out by you recently the Iraqis are making sweetheart oil deals with the Chinese while we are paying $4.00 a gallon for gas.

    Nowadays we donít need troops in countries like South Korea, Poland, Germany, Georgia, and many other places. We donít need to be guaranteeing the security of Japan and many other rich countries.

    We need to have a strong military and we need to kick ass when necessary. This bullshit of having the American taxpayer carry the defense requirements of dozens of countries in the world needs to stop.

    The Constitution Party has it right on this issue. Like I said, it pisses off the NeoCons.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    We can still maintain alliances when it is in our interest to do so but that doesnít mean guaranteeing the security of shitbag countries and getting involved in conflicts that have nothing to do with our own security.
    Oh?

    Care to elaborate?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnabend View Post
    Ron Paul was an idiot, and here's why.

    He, like gator, the isolationist jackass who thinks that the calendar date is 1819, wanted to "tear up all trade and other treaties and write new ones"

    Quick tip. If you back out of treaties and renege on existing agreements..what the fuck makes you think that anyone will trust you to keep the new ones?

    A few months ago a certain international company had a trade agreement, bartered through the governments of two nations. A week later they reneged and wanted to organise a new deal with more preferential terms for them.

    Not one government in this region will take their calls now, and the commerce sphere has them down as ratbags who cant be trusted to keep their word.

    (How do I know this? The story is common knowledge...and eventually they will be let back in. IF they grovel enough.Their greed cost a thousand jobs and pissed off a LOT of people)

    All this is moot, anyway, as none of your leaders are stupid enough to want to piss off their allies and commit national seppuku.

    Bottom line.


    You need us.
    Australia is one of these countries that just love to have the US provide a strong military in the Pacific because that means they can provide less. Although they are not as bad as Japan and South Korea they still would hate to foot 100% of their own defense bill.

    The average American spends about $2K a year for defense. We should at least have a rule that we donít guarantee the security of any country unless they spend as much per person on defense as we do. The South Koreans and Japanese spend about $1K each for defense and that is one of the reasons they have such strong economies. The Australians spend less than $1K. They have a population of about 21 million and they spend about $17 billion a year on defense. Do the math.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    Australia is one of these countries that just love to have the US provide a strong military in the Pacific because that means they can provide less. Although they are not as bad as Japan and South Korea they still would hate to foot 100% of their own defense bill.
    A huge slew of our budget is used in making sure YOU are secure. I might also add that the intel feed we give you alone is worth thousands of lives.

    We do foot our bills, and the US provides actually very little in the way of funding.

    The average American spends about $2K a year for defense. We should at least have a rule that we donít guarantee the security of any country unless they spend as much per person on defense as we do.
    So the life of an Australian is worth less than that of an American? Is that your stance?

    They have a population of about 21 million and they spend about $17 billion a year on defense. Do the math.
    Yeah right. Comparing the military budget of a nation of 300 million vs one of 21 million.

    You do the math.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •