PDA

View Full Version : Elections Palin: War will be necessary if Russia invades another country


Pages : [1] 2

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:25 PM
:spock:

http://abcnews.go.com/wn

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:27 PM
And people say I have nothing to hold up as evidence for my scared shitlessness.

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:28 PM
Yes, let's purge the terrorists that live in Russia!

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:30 PM
I really can't believe she said this.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:31 PM
Ok now I can

ABC: Palin Warns of War With Russia If It Invades Another Country (http://thepage.time.com/2008/09/11/abc-palin-warns-of-war-with-russia-if-it-invades-another-country/)

http://markhalperin.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/gibsonpalin2.jpg?w=360&h=235
ABC News
The network releases the first headline from Charlie Gibson’s interview with the vice presidential candidate.
Clips to be aired on Thursday’s “World News” and “Nightline,” as well as Friday’s “Good Morning America” and a “20/20″ special.

Mr Luzcious
09-11-2008, 03:32 PM
I miss the days when we didn't meddle in every single war another country took part in.

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:33 PM
I miss the days when we didn't meddle in every single war another country took part in.

Pretty much vanished when we sided with Israel. If only we could cut ties....

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:33 PM
Pretty much vanished when we sided with Israel. If only we could cut ties....

This has nothing to do with Israel.

This is about an incompetent person closing in to be our next VP

MichaelH
09-11-2008, 03:34 PM
Might as well. The US has spent years trying to convert a 3rd world battle field into a democracy. We should now dictate what Russia is going to do.

Saggysack
09-11-2008, 03:34 PM
She is clearly out of her league.

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:35 PM
Pretty much vanished when we sided with Israel. If only we could cut ties....

Israel is like a third of the size of the state of Missouri. It's sometimes hard for me to fathom how so little a place can cause so much of a shitstorm worldwide.

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:35 PM
This has nothing to do with Israel.

This is about an incompetent person closing in to be our next VP

I was referring to the good ole days when we didn't get involved in others' wars.

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:35 PM
I assume was referring to NATO?

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:36 PM
I was referring to the good ole days when we didn't get involved in others' wars.

Ok but let's not sidetrack this thread.

This is a major gaffe\statement by a person who has no clue

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:36 PM
When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:37 PM
I assume was referring to NATO?

I doubt she knows what NATO is

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:38 PM
When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

Hello Georgia is not part of NATO. Hell even I knew that

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:39 PM
She's just working through her sexual tension of looking Russia in the face all those years in the Tundra.

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:40 PM
Hello Georgia is not part of NATO. Hell even I knew that

Read the question she was responding to, again.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:40 PM
Maybe I should be VP I am smarter than her

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 03:42 PM
I miss the days when we didn't meddle in every single war another country took part in.Don't worry, soon they will be mingling in our business, and it will all be Bush's fault.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:42 PM
Read the question she was responding to, again.

Do you think that if Russia invades Georgia again, that we should go to war with Russia on behalf of Georgia?

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:42 PM
Read the question she was responding to, again.

I did. Georgia is not part of NATO or wasn't the last time I checked.

The question When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded:

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:43 PM
Don't worry, soon they will be mingling in our business, and it will all be Bush's fault.

At least you recognize what the problem is.

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 03:43 PM
Hello Georgia is not part of NATO. Hell even I knew that


When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

'IF' is two letters, but it's a big word.

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 03:43 PM
Israel is like a third of the size of the state of Missouri. It's sometimes hard for me to fathom how so little a place can cause so much of a shitstorm worldwide.Maybe, just maybe, there is a reason for it.

Gee, I wonder what it is?

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:43 PM
Do you think that if Russia invades Georgia again, that we should go to war with Russia on behalf of Georgia?

If they become a full NATO member? Yes.

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:44 PM
I did. Georgia is not part of NATO or wasn't the last time I checked.

The question

Please notice the "if" there, Mr. VP.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:44 PM
When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

'IF' is two letters, but it's a big word.

LMAO

just like what the definition of is right? :)

J Diddy
09-11-2008, 03:45 PM
Read the question she was responding to, again.

And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:45 PM
LMAO

just like what the definition of is right? :)

Seems like Palin understood the question, even if you didn't.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:45 PM
If they become a full NATO member? Yes.

So in this war, would nukes be on the table?

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 03:46 PM
LMAO

just like what the definition of is right? :)


No. Nothing like that.

It's a hypothetical question. Come on. You're better than this.

A hypothetical question is one asked out of interest, as the answer will have no effect on the situation.

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 03:46 PM
At least you recognize what the problem is.
McCain voice on/ CHANGE IS COMING yuk yuk.

The dude is a joker, that shit ass grin he had when he said that had me splitting with laughter. Almost like the lipstick on the pig thing.

Wow, damn we are good at getting to the heart of what is important in a President.

What I would like to ask, is why it took 2 years to get to the bottom of all of this shit??? Anyone.

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:46 PM
Maybe, just maybe, there is a reason for it.

Gee, I wonder what it is?


You think?

clemensol
09-11-2008, 03:47 PM
More from the interview:

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war?

PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words. But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side. That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."

PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.

GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?

PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:47 PM
And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

We would probably assist Georgia, yes. Just like other NATO members have helped us in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:47 PM
McCain voice on/ CHANGE IS COMING yuk yuk.

The dude is a joker, that shit ass grin he had when he said that had me splitting with laughter. Almost like the lipstick on the pig thing.

Wow, damn we are good at getting to the heart of what is important in a President.

What I would like to ask, is why it took 2 years to get to the bottom of all of this shit??? Anyone.

LMAO

You have got to be one of the most sensitive neocons evah! :D

Carlota69
09-11-2008, 03:47 PM
Maybe I should be VP I am smarter than her

I'd vote for you:)

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:48 PM
So in this war, would nukes be on the table?

I have no idea.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:48 PM
We would probably assist Georgia, yes. Just like other NATO members have helped us in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That isn't what she said. She said we would "go to war" with Russia.

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 03:48 PM
So in this war, would nukes be on the table?Nukes should always be on the table.

And in the subs, ad the B2 bombers, and the A/C carriers, and the frigates, and the destroyers etc.

Oh, I forgot the silos.

"Touch georgia and I will answer the critics of Global warming, FAST."

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:48 PM
I have no idea.

I would have to assume Nukes would be on the table for Russia, so they would have to be on the table for us as well.

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:48 PM
More from the interview:

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war?

PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words. But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side. That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."

PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.

GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?

PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.

Great.

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:49 PM
That isn't what she said. She said we would "go to war" with Russia.

No, she didn't. This is what she said: ""Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help."

She's correct.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:49 PM
Nukes should always be on the table.

And in the subs, ad the B2 bombers, and the A/C carriers, and the frigates, and the destroyers etc.

Oh, I forgot the silos.

"Touch georgia and I will answer the critics of Global warming, FAST."

So you think Georgia is worth global thermo nuclear war?

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:49 PM
More from the interview:

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war?

PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words. But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side. That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."

PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.

GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?

PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.

Wow, she got owned in this segment. So much for being a soft interview. Talk about wiggling around trying not to be pinned down by past words. Invoking Lincoln?

ROFL

Also, gotta love the last tidbit. Change from "I don't know if the task is from God" (after I said it was in the past) to "my son made a decision and I'm proud of it."

EDIT 2: I wonder why it took until Locke in the 16-1700s to come up with rights that are "god given".

Cave Johnson
09-11-2008, 03:50 PM
No. Nothing like that.

It's a hypothetical question. Come on. You're better than this.

A hypothetical question is one asked out of interest, as the answer will have no effect on the situation.

This is going to be big and illustrates why politicians shouldn't answer hypothetical questions.

Bowser
09-11-2008, 03:50 PM
So you think Georgia is worth global thermo nuclear war?

Long Beach is worth that to bunny. :)

Logical
09-11-2008, 03:50 PM
She is out of her depth and scary, be sure to watch her dance about the God's will statements, it is friggen hilarious.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:50 PM
No. Nothing like that.

It's a hypothetical question. Come on. You're better than this.

A hypothetical question is one asked out of interest, as the answer will have no effect on the situation.

The question is if Russia invades georgia do we go to war? She said yes.

If Russia invades Georgia tomorrow do we go to war because Georgia is not part of NATO?

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:51 PM
No, she didn't. This is what she said: ""Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help."

She's correct.

Gibson asks if, under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would need to go to war with Russia if it again invades Georgia.
Palin: “Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.”

Logical
09-11-2008, 03:52 PM
Wow, she got owned in this segment. So much for being a soft interview. Talk about wiggling around trying not to be pinned down by past words. Invoking Lincoln?

ROFL

Also, gotta love the last tidbit. Change from "I don't know if the task is from God" (after I said it was in the past) to "my son made a decision and I'm proud of it."Indeed

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:52 PM
The question is if Russia invades georgia do we go to war? She said yes.

If Russia invades Georgia tomorrow do we go to war because Georgia is not part of NATO?

Uhhh, Russia did invade and we did NOT go to war.

clemensol
09-11-2008, 03:53 PM
I would have to assume Nukes would be on the table for Russia, so they would have to be on the table for us as well.

Why would you assume such a thing???

Think about it from a Russian perspective. Nuclear war with the US would almost certainly mean the complete destruction of Russia as we know it. Why one earth would Russia risk such an option in order to control a small eastern european country?

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:53 PM
Uhhh, Russia did invade and we did NOT go to war.

I know we didn't and we shouldn't. That is why she comes off like an imbecile.

clemensol
09-11-2008, 03:53 PM
GIBSON: Would you favor putting Georgia and Ukraine in NATO?

PALIN: Ukraine, definitely, yes. Yes, and Georgia.

Wow, insane

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 03:54 PM
Why would you assume such a thing???

Think about it from a Russian perspective. Nuclear war with the US would almost certainly mean the complete destruction of Russia as we know it. Why one earth would Russia risk such an option in order to control a small eastern european country?

I am talking about Russia retaliating against us if we intervene in full force to help Georgia.

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:54 PM
Gibson asks if, under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would need to go to war with Russia if it again invades Georgia.
Palin: “Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.”

You she would. She said "perhaps so."

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 03:54 PM
The question is if Russia invades georgia do we go to war? She said yes.

If Russia invades Georgia tomorrow do we go to war because Georgia is not part of NATO?


Under the qualifier IF Georgia was NATO member

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:55 PM
GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.

PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to be cognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.

And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.

It doesn’t have to lead to war and it doesn’t have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries.

His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that’s a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we were to allow that to happen.

Yay! More Team America World Police!

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 03:56 PM
Uhhh, Russia did invade and we did NOT go to war.

Exactly. The question is if Russia invades Georgia do we go to war. She said yes.

Now I would fully understand if Georgia or Ukraine are part of NATO but they are not and there is no idea when or ever if they will be.

So as it stands right now if Russia goes back next week and does a full invasion of Georgia she would go to war with Russia. Do you agree?

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:56 PM
I know we didn't and we shouldn't. That is why she comes off like an imbecile.

Actually, she's completely correct. If Georgia becomes a full NATO member (which was the question), under Article V, we and every other NATO member would be called upon to provide assistance.

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 03:56 PM
LMAO

You have got to be one of the most sensitive neocons evah! :DI am not a neocon. I am a conservative, cut out of Ronald Reagans cloth.

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:56 PM
Under the qualifier IF Georgia was NATO member

In the transcript Jake provided, I didn't see the question phrased as Donger quoted.

Did I miss it?

clemensol
09-11-2008, 03:57 PM
I am talking about Russia retaliating against us if we intervene in full force to help Georgia.

Again, why would Russia use nuclear weapons to retaliate against us when it would almost certainly lead to their destruction?

plbrdude
09-11-2008, 03:57 PM
And people say I have nothing to hold up as evidence for my scared shitlessness.

what do you have to be afraid of?

clemensol
09-11-2008, 03:57 PM
I am not a neocon. I am a conservative, cut out of Ronald Reagans cloth.

Reagan was a neo-con. One of the first in fact.

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 03:57 PM
So you think Georgia is worth global thermo nuclear war?
Well, maybe not Georgia, but Delaware, damn it, we would have to nuke them over that.

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:57 PM
what do you have to be afraid of?

Going to more wars on behalf of other countries like she says. Going to war in general.

It's unacceptable.

Donger
09-11-2008, 03:58 PM
Exactly. The question is if Russia invades Georgia do we go to war. She said yes.

Now I would fully understand if Georgia or Ukraine are part of NATO but they are not and there is no idea when or ever if they will be.

So as it stands right now if Russia goes back next week and does a full invasion of Georgia she would go to war with Russia. Do you agree?

No, she said perhaps so. The question posed was presuming Georgia is granted full membership.

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 03:58 PM
In the transcript Jake provided, I didn't see the question phrased as Donger quoted.

Did I miss it?


Exact Quote:

"When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help."

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 03:59 PM
Reagan was a neo-con. One of the first in fact.Who coined this phrase? I despise it, and reject it.

Kind of like when the African Americans rejected previous terms that were used to describe them.

I am offended, I will have to send you to sensitivity training if you keep calling me that.

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 03:59 PM
Exact Quote:

"When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help."


And per the transcript provided by Jake it actually reads:

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?


PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.

But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to — especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.

We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.

Chief Henry
09-11-2008, 03:59 PM
Actually, she's completely correct. If Georgia becomes a full NATO member (which was the question), under Article V, we and every other NATO member would be called upon to provide assistance.





thread over

Amnorix
09-11-2008, 04:00 PM
If they become a full NATO member? Yes.


errr...the question doesn't say that. Her answer is correct if Georgia is currently a NATO member, but incorrect if it is not.

Georgia is not currently a NATO member.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 04:01 PM
Actually, she's completely correct. If Georgia becomes a full NATO member (which was the question), under Article V, we and every other NATO member would be called upon to provide assistance.


Ok, so you and Palin do think Georgia is worth a possible nuclear war. Just checking. :shake:

Amnorix
09-11-2008, 04:01 PM
Exact Quote:

"When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help."


Well, Georgia is NOT part of NATO, so the answer is NO. Why is this hard.

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:01 PM
No, she said perhaps so. The question posed was presuming Georgia is granted full membership.Personally I don't care if we pull them into NATO, unless the entire NATO alliance or at least 90% of it is will to send equal troops in I am not willing to risk nuclear war with Russia.

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 04:01 PM
TEAM AMERICA WORLD POLICE! AMERICA F*CK YEAH!

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 04:01 PM
And per the transcript provided by Jake it actually reads:


Again, even in that context NATO membership is a qualifier

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 04:01 PM
No, she said perhaps so. The question posed was presuming Georgia is granted full membership.

I agree. After reading the full context of the quote I misspoke and as Jake as pointed out I am dumb shit.

Close thread

Amnorix
09-11-2008, 04:01 PM
thread over


Well, it would be if Georgia was a member of NATO, but since it isn't...

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 04:02 PM
thread over

Are you going to sign up to defend Georgia?

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 04:02 PM
Personally I don't care if we pull them into NATO, unless the entire NATO alliance or at least 90% of it is will to send equal troops in I am not willing to risk nuclear war with Russia.

NATO is retarded anyway.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 04:02 PM
Seems like Palin understood the question, even if you didn't.

It seems that you can't use common sense and logic here. Those against the republican party will take anything and everything out of context. It seems they jump on the repubs whenever they feel obama has been slighted.

Facts be not here.

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 04:02 PM
Well, Georgia is NOT part of NATO, so the answer is NO. Why is this hard.


It's a hypothetical question. Aren't you an attorney

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 04:03 PM
Again, even in that context NATO membership is a qualifier

Not arguing that. But the quote Donger posted makes it a bit more clear cut than it was. It's not as simple as Donger's quote.


But regardless, the interview should bomb due to the God's task part and the moral of this Russia biz: TEAM AMERICA WORLD POLICE!!!

Chief Henry
09-11-2008, 04:03 PM
Are you going to sign up to defend Georgia?

Will you ?

Donger
09-11-2008, 04:05 PM
errr...the question doesn't say that. Her answer is correct if Georgia is currently a NATO member, but incorrect if it is not.

Georgia is not currently a NATO member.

"When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help."

I realize that. So does Palin. She was basically being asked if she would support mutual defense IF Georgia was/is granted NATO membership.

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 04:05 PM
Not arguing that. But the quote Donger posted makes it a bit more clear cut than it was. It's not as simple as Donger's quote.


But regardless, the interview should bomb due to the God's task part and the moral of this Russia biz: TEAM AMERICA WORLD POLICE!!!


Obama wants to police Africa. It's on his website. Maybe we should maybe we shouldn't, but he wants to police the world as well. I think the transcript about her faith demostrates that all these interpretions going around are unfounded.

clemensol
09-11-2008, 04:05 PM
Who coined this phrase? I despise it, and reject it.

Kind of like when the African Americans rejected previous terms that were used to describe them.

I am offended, I will have to send you to sensitivity training if you keep calling me that.

I think it was coined by Irving Kristol though I could be wrong.

Anyway, as much as you may dislike the term, I think it is important to differentiate between modern conservatives such as Reagan, BushI, BushII and McCain and traditional small government conservatives in the Hoover, Coolidge mold.

plbrdude
09-11-2008, 04:05 PM
Going to more wars on behalf of other countries like she says. Going to war in general.

It's unacceptable.

well that i can see. for some reason i thought you were putting a different angle on it like it was a concern that we would be invaded.

another terrorist hit is likely in the future i'm sure, i just hope it will be a dud though.

Carlota69
09-11-2008, 04:05 PM
It seems that you can't use common sense and logic here. Those against the republican party will take anything and everything out of context. It seems they jump on the repubs whenever they feel obama has been slighted.

Facts be not here.

Lets be fair--both sides do it, equally. Thats is politics. maybe it shouldnt be, but it is.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 04:06 PM
Thank God there are people like you in this place.

I was just quoting what was on the ABC NEWS website.

EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5778018&page=1)

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 04:06 PM
Even if we wanted to go to war with Russia (one of the more ****in stupidly insane ideas I've heard in a very long time), we couldn't. The vast majority of our troops are located in Iraq and Afganistan.

We would have to have a draft, we would have to borrow more money from China. We would have to take equipment that is already stretched to max. in Iraq and Afganistan to send to Russia. It would be the most unpoplar war in the history of the U.S. before it even started given the current situation we are in.

clemensol
09-11-2008, 04:06 PM
Obama wants to police Africa. It's on his website. Maybe we should maybe we shouldn't, but he wants to police the world as well. I think the transcript about her faith demostrates that all these interpretions going around are unfounded.

what exactly does he say about policing africa?

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 04:07 PM
Obama wants to police Africa. It's on his website. Maybe we should maybe we shouldn't, but he wants to police the world as well. I think the transcript about her faith demostrates that all these interpretions going around are unfounded.

You didn't notice her retarded wiggling? The backing out of previous statements? The switching from topic to an empathy topic (her son's decision to fight)?

You noticed none of that?

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 04:07 PM
Will you ?

Come on warmonger. Answer the ****in question. You are so willing to send others off to die. Are you going sign up to defend Georgia?

Chief Henry
09-11-2008, 04:07 PM
"When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help."

I realize that. So does Palin. She was basically being asked if she would support mutual defense IF Georgia was/is granted NATO membership.

Donger,

You answered correctly. Its just they want to get her in a "GOTCHA" moment. End of story.

Donger
09-11-2008, 04:09 PM
I agree. After reading the full context of the quote I misspoke and as Jake as pointed out I am dumb shit.

Close thread

Can I still write your name in for VPOTUS?

Garcia Bronco
09-11-2008, 04:09 PM
You didn't notice her retarded wiggling? The backing out of previous statements? The switching from topic to an empathy topic (her son's decision to fight)?

You noticed none of that?


Geeze, she's proud of her son and his decision.

Chief Henry
09-11-2008, 04:09 PM
NATO is retarded anyway.

Now that I can agree with.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 04:09 PM
Can I still write your name in for VPOTUS?

Yes because I am just as bad of a ****up as the rest of them :)

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 04:10 PM
Geeze, she's proud of her son and his decision.

Which she is more than welcome to do but she switched topics to back out of where she was caught.

Donger
09-11-2008, 04:10 PM
Yes because I am just as bad of a ****up as the rest of them :)

:)

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 04:12 PM
Personally I blame ABC NEWS they are the ones with the hyped up title and are the ones that did the interview

That is my story and I am sticking to it :harumph:

BIG_DADDY
09-11-2008, 04:13 PM
And people say I have nothing to hold up as evidence for my scared shitlessness.

You were born scared shitless and nothing has ever changed.

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:13 PM
Which she is more than welcome to do but she switched topics to back out of where she was caught.Yes and it is obvious even to the blind.

Donger
09-11-2008, 04:14 PM
I hope that the left keeps attacking her faith. I really do.

BucEyedPea
09-11-2008, 04:15 PM
I really can't believe she said this.

I can. If she was willing to accept being half of a NC ( warmonger ) ticket then she'd have to toe the party line. Like I said, she is being used. Too bad.

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:15 PM
Personally I blame ABC NEWS they are the ones with the hyped up title and are the ones that did the interview

That is my story and I am sticking to it :harumph:I think the title is correct. Anyone who is willing to take on Russia whether that nation is in NATO or not is ****ing insane unless 90% of the entire alliance is willing to commit equal troops and equipment to the effort. This lady is fuggin nutz.

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 04:16 PM
I hope that the left keeps attacking her faith. I really do.

I hope people can see through her bullshit.

But that's not very realistic.

Chief Henry
09-11-2008, 04:17 PM
You were born scared shitless and nothing has ever changed.

+1 ROFL

irishjayhawk
09-11-2008, 04:17 PM
You were born scared shitless and nothing has ever changed.

:spock:

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:17 PM
I hope that the left keeps attacking her faith. I really do.Why would they have to, she keeps saying things that are absolutely insane and that have no defense. I like this interview so far, it is far better than we could have hoped for, hopefully it only gets better.

kcvet
09-11-2008, 04:17 PM
I assume was referring to NATO?

that was my impression

Gibson asks if, under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would need to go to war with Russia if it again invades Georgia.

Palin: “Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.”

Adds: “For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable.”



she said nothing about this in the vid?????

Cave Johnson
09-11-2008, 04:17 PM
You would think you conservatives would have learned after the Obama-lipstick brouhaha.... it doesn't have to make complete sense to be a controversy.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 04:18 PM
I think the title is correct. Anyone who is willing to take on Russia whether that nation is in NATO or not is ****ing insane unless 90% of the entire alliance is willing to commit equal troops and equipment to the effort. This lady is fuggin nutz.

If she was smart, she would have hedged her bets and said something along the line of: needing to consult with other members of NATO, working out diplomatic solutions etc...

you know, like what would happen in real ****in life.

kcvet
09-11-2008, 04:19 PM
Putin told the world we're back. deal with it

Chief Henry
09-11-2008, 04:19 PM
Why would they have to, she keeps saying things that are absolutely insane and that have no defense. I like this interview so far, it is far better than we could have hoped for, hopefully it only gets better.

There only insane to the TinkyWinky liberals .

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:21 PM
If she was smart, she would have hedged her bets and said something along the line of: needing to consult with other members of NATO, working out diplomatic solutions etc...

you know, like what would happen in real ****in life.
You mean what should happen, this knucklehead does not even understand the basics.

BIG_DADDY
09-11-2008, 04:22 PM
I think the title is correct. Anyone who is willing to take on Russia whether that nation is in NATO or not is ****ing insane unless 90% of the entire alliance is willing to commit equal troops and equipment to the effort. This lady is fuggin nutz.

IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER, IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER.

Say what you will. It just doesn't matter. She is going in the white house. I can hardly wait until I post the thread Obama loses HA, ha, ha ,ha, ha I told you so.

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:23 PM
There only insane to the TinkyWinky liberals .I have no idea what the smilie means. It was put on this BB for back when Jamie was posting all the time I think to represent the silly Big Buy ad creature.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 04:24 PM
If she was smart, she would have hedged her bets and said something along the line of: needing to consult with other members of NATO, working out diplomatic solutions etc...

you know, like what would happen in real ****in life.

You mean that you want her to sound like Obama?

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:24 PM
IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER, IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER.

Say what you will. It just doesn't matter. She is going in the white house. I can hardly wait until I post the thread Obama loses HA, ha, ha ,ha, ha I told you so.Like you told us he could not win the Primary. Troy it is best you stick with football. I think you may just be a slightly older recxjake.

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:25 PM
You mean that you want her to sound like Obama?You mean knowledgeable. Well that would be good if I cared if she was screwing her ticket.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 04:27 PM
You mean that you want her to sound like Obama?

You mean like a rational leader that has half a brain? Yes, something like that.

BIG_DADDY
09-11-2008, 04:29 PM
Like you told us he could not win the Primary. Troy it is best you stick with football. I think you may just be a slightly older recxjake.

Out of all my political predictions that was the only one I missed and only by a hair on my ass. It's all you guys remember. When did you become Zach?

BIG_DADDY
09-11-2008, 04:31 PM
Bottom line Cronus is Obama is going down like 16 year old on prom night. The fact that you don't want to acknowledge that is humorous.

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 04:36 PM
Donger,

You answered correctly. Its just they want to get her in a "GOTCHA" moment. End of story.Kind of like Horshack, from Welcome Back Kotter.

Calcountry
09-11-2008, 04:38 PM
Bottom line Cronus is Obama is going down like 16 year old on prom night. The fact that you don't want to acknowledge that is humorous.
He threatened us that he would change his vote the other day.

RINGLEADER
09-11-2008, 04:41 PM
When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

Loaded question -- but the right answer.

Obviously intended to illicit headlines like the one at the top of this thread.

Adept Havelock
09-11-2008, 04:43 PM
What is Gov. Palin's stance on admitting Georgia to NATO? :hmmm:

RINGLEADER
09-11-2008, 04:49 PM
Ok now I can

ABC: Palin Warns of War With Russia If It Invades Another Country (http://thepage.time.com/2008/09/11/abc-palin-warns-of-war-with-russia-if-it-invades-another-country/) http://markhalperin.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/gibsonpalin2.jpg?w=360&h=235
ABC News
The network releases the first headline from Charlie Gibson’s interview with the vice presidential candidate.
Clips to be aired on Thursday’s “World News” and “Nightline,” as well as Friday’s “Good Morning America” and a “20/20″ special.

Funny that ABC News' website frames the question a little differently. From the first paragraph of their story:

"On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, Gov. Sarah Palin took a hard-line approach on national security and said that war with Russia may be necessary if Georgia were to join NATO and be invaded by Russia."

kcvet
09-11-2008, 04:50 PM
You mean that you want her to sound like Obama?

nice avatar. that's what i used to sport......................and still have it in my stable:D

RINGLEADER
09-11-2008, 04:50 PM
What is Gov. Palin's stance on admitting Georgia to NATO? :hmmm:

From the ABCNEWS story that it appears you didn't read:

The governor advocated for the admittance of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 04:52 PM
You mean like a rational leader that has half a brain? Yes, something like that.

If she were to answer the question as you stated it she would be mimicking Obama, you know like when he said he wanted to negotiate with our enemies?

I don't where they stand on the IQ levels, but I'd say that she is at least as smart as Obama if not smarter.

She is at the least able to handle an interview without going over the edge with ignorant rambling.

Adept Havelock
09-11-2008, 04:52 PM
From the ABCNEWS story that it appears you didn't read:

Thanks, I overlooked that.

So, she is in favor of admitting Georgia to NATO, and going to war with Russia if it invades Georgia. :shrug:

Personally, I think admitting Georgia, Ukraine, etc. to NATO isn't a very good idea.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 04:52 PM
The title of this thread is misleading, even given the abc screenshot posted above. The NATO qualifier is rather critical. If Georgia were in NATO, we would be required to assist if they were invaded. No one asked her what we should do if they are invaded again as things are today.

Logical
09-11-2008, 04:59 PM
Thanks, I overlooked that.

So, she is in favor of admitting Georgia to NATO, and going to war with Russia if it invades Georgia. :shrug:

Personally, I think admitting Georgia, Ukraine, etc. to NATO isn't a very good idea.
Amen, hell if they invaded Poland we better have most of the alliance (90%) supporting with substantial troop and equipment to the effort. We best not be going it alone unless we are ready to commit the nukes. Adding more former Soviet Republics to Nato just is not a good idea.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 05:03 PM
Funny that ABC News' website frames the question a little differently. From the first paragraph of their story:

"On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, Gov. Sarah Palin took a hard-line approach on national security and said that war with Russia may be necessary if Georgia were to join NATO and be invaded by Russia."

This what I pulled from ABC's own website when I started the thread

EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5778018&page=1)

I have learned my lesson and I will not post any breaking stories until the full facts are out.

Logical
09-11-2008, 05:03 PM
Out of all my political predictions that was the only one I missed and only by a hair on my ass. It's all you guys remember. When did you become Zach?What do you mean I brought up the thread where you did that not Zach. I have hated your apparently racist position (though I know you are not a racist) since you started posting it.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 05:04 PM
Amen, hell if they invaded Poland we better have most of the alliance (90%) supporting with substantial troop and equipment to the effort. We best not be going it alone unless we are ready to commit the nukes. Adding more former Soviet Republics to Nato just is not a good idea.

So you are saying they do not appreciate being free of the grip of communism? How does your view fit in with that of your favorite son Obama? After all, he does want to sit across a table from the leader of our enemies. Would Georgia fit into his category of an enemy?

I suppose your belief is once a communist always a communist?

Logical
09-11-2008, 05:05 PM
Bottom line Cronus is Obama is going down like 16 year old on prom night. The fact that you don't want to acknowledge that is humorous.I think he has at least a 50/50 shot of winning. When you made your prediction the only thing you had to base it on is you believe the country is racist so he has no chance. I give this country more credit than you do.

Logical
09-11-2008, 05:08 PM
So you are saying they do not appreciate being free of the grip of communism? How does your view fit in with that of your favorite son Obama? After all, he does want to sit across a table from the leader of our enemies. Would Georgia fit into his category of an enemy?

I suppose your belief is once a communist always a communist?I believe strongly that the Russians view most of the breakaway provinces as their property and that supporting those militarily better have full Nato support unless we want to have our asses handed to us.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 05:11 PM
See I wasn't imagining things


http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/

This isn't the headline the McCain camp wanted out of Palin's interview: Possible war with Russia.
That's the tease on ABC News' website (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/) right now, though: "EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY."

Programmer
09-11-2008, 05:19 PM
I believe strongly that the Russians view most of the breakaway provinces as their property and that supporting those militarily better have full Nato support unless we want to have our asses handed to us.

I'm not sure we would have our asses handed to us, but I am sure that if Obama is elected that would be more of a reality than I'm willing to accept.

Obama is all about reducing our military and he also wants to unilaterally disarm the U.S. of it's nuclear weapons.

As it stands Russia would not be able to ramp their military back up to cold war levels for some time.

IMO, McCain as president our military is still viable as a defense force. With Obama as president we are in deep shit.

Cave Johnson
09-11-2008, 05:19 PM
I don't where they stand on the IQ levels, but I'd say that she is at least as smart as Obama if not smarter.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/305vRNoofr8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/305vRNoofr8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Cave Johnson
09-11-2008, 05:20 PM
Obama is all about reducing our military and he also wants to unilaterally disarm the U.S. of it's nuclear weapons.

Link?

Donger
09-11-2008, 05:23 PM
See I wasn't imagining things

No, you weren't imagining things. I saw the "Breaking News" item that said exactly what you wrote.

They were wrong, that's all. It's also gone from their website.

Adept Havelock
09-11-2008, 05:24 PM
Amen, hell if they invaded Poland we better have most of the alliance (90%) supporting with substantial troop and equipment to the effort. We best not be going it alone unless we are ready to commit the nukes. Adding more former Soviet Republics to Nato just is not a good idea.

I'm inclined to agree. Also, I'm not sure we have the heavy forces to deploy the Desert Storm style "heavy" multicorps extravaganza that would be needed. At least, considering our commitments in the WOT/Iraqi Occupation.

Sure, the Russian military is a shadow of what it was, but it's still based on the same Armor/Motor-Rifle model it was during the cold war.

As for the nuclear guarantee that has historically been implicit with admission to NATO, I remain unconvinced it is in the interest of the United States to put LA, NYC, DC, etc. on the line to defend Tiblisi. I can see our interest in defending Western Europe from the Red Army, but Georgia from Russia? Nope.

Logical
09-11-2008, 05:28 PM
I'm not sure we would have our asses handed to us, but I am sure that if Obama is elected that would be more of a reality than I'm willing to accept.

Obama is all about reducing our military and he also wants to unilaterally disarm the U.S. of it's nuclear weapons.

....I see you are just talking out your ass with no proof, again.

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 05:32 PM
No, you weren't imagining things. I saw the "Breaking News" item that said exactly what you wrote.

They were wrong, that's all. It's also gone from their website.

Thank you. I won't make this mistake again though.

Also in one of the articles from Politico someone posted this comment which I thought was pretty funny

I'm pretty sure that the American people are not prepared to go to war with Russia over any country that doesn't have space at Epcot. Yes, that means you Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. LMAO

jAZ
09-11-2008, 05:33 PM
Funny that ABC News' website frames the question a little differently. From the first paragraph of their story:

"On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, Gov. Sarah Palin took a hard-line approach on national security and said that war with Russia may be necessary if Georgia were to join NATO and be invaded by Russia."

Here's the question:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=5782924&page=2

GIBSON: Would you favor putting Georgia and Ukraine in NATO?
PALIN: Ukraine, definitely, yes. Yes, and Georgia.

GIBSON: Because Putin has said he would not tolerate NATO incursion into the Caucasus.

PALIN: Well, you know, the Rose Revolution, the Orange Revolution, those actions have showed us that those democratic nations, I believe, deserve to be in NATO.

Putin thinks otherwise. Obviously, he thinks otherwise, but...

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to -- especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.

My question is why is it merely "perhaps" in her mind?

She can't seem to keep reality straight.

If you advocate for them to join NATO and they join it, and then Russia tests our resolve and invades Georgia... then there is no room for "perhaps". Our obligation by law is to invade.

jAZ
09-11-2008, 05:35 PM
The great thing about this (from a purely politcal position) is this is exactly what McCain thinks, so Obama can ignore the Palin aspect of this and hammer this issue home on McCain, and rightly so.

It's crazy.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 05:35 PM
I see you are just talking out your ass with no proof, again.

Have you never listened to Obama speak? He said that live on TV.

Hiding your head in the sand seems to be your mode of operation. Stick with it, but find a breathing tube.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 05:35 PM
I won't make this mistake again though.

You have nothing to apologize for in this case. ABC blew it and quickly corrected the error. They are supposed to be more reliable than Matt Drudge. When a major network posts a headline, they presumably have enough credibility for anyone to safely re-post it. No one should expect you to fact-check ABC.

Donger
09-11-2008, 05:37 PM
If you advocate for them to join NATO and they join it, and then Russia tests our resolve and invades Georgia... then there is no room for "perhaps". Our obligation by law is to invade.

Wrong.

kcvet
09-11-2008, 05:38 PM
Link?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7o84PE871BE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7o84PE871BE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

dirk digler
09-11-2008, 05:38 PM
You have nothing to apologize for in this case. ABC blew it and quickly corrected the error. They are supposed to be more reliable than Matt Drudge. When a major network posts a headline, they presumably have enough credibility for anyone to safely re-post it. No one should expect you to fact-check ABC.

I appreciate that. The funny thing though is ABC is the one who did the interview.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 05:38 PM
Wrong.

On what? If you think "invade" is wrong, I agree, our obligation would be to defend Georgia, not invade Russia.

Donger
09-11-2008, 05:40 PM
On what? If you think "invade" is wrong, I agree, our obligation would be to defend Georgia, not invade Russia.

Article V does not guarantee the use of military force to assist another NATO nation.

Quite simply, Palin was correct when she said, "perhaps."

alnorth
09-11-2008, 05:42 PM
Article V does not guarantee the use of military force to assist another NATO nation.

Quite simply, Palin was correct when she said, "perhaps."

Hmmm... I'll defer on that issue then. I admit I thought NATO was more clear-cut than that, I honestly didnt know that the ability to give less than military support was an option if the attacked country asked for it.

Donger
09-11-2008, 05:44 PM
Hmmm... I'll defer on that issue then. I admit I thought NATO was more clear-cut than that, I honestly didnt know that the ability to give less than military support was an option if the attacked country asked for it.

It's pretty straight-forward:

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .

Logical
09-11-2008, 05:53 PM
It's pretty straight-forward:

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .I am pretty sure Georgia and the Ukraine are not in Europe or North America.

By the way Donger did you miss article 1
Article 1

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/), to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 05:54 PM
It's pretty straight-forward:

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .

I see. Well, technically you are correct, but realistically in the extreme case that the alliance was formed to protect against, if a NATO ally faces imminent loss of sovereignty without direct military support, then it would stretch credulity that armed assistence would not be "deemed necessary".

Donger
09-11-2008, 05:55 PM
I am pretty sure Georgia and the Ukraine are not in Europe or North America.

By the way Donger did you miss article 1
Article 1

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/), to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

No, I didn't miss it.

Donger
09-11-2008, 05:56 PM
I see. Well, technically you are correct, but realistically in the extreme case that the alliance was formed to protect against, if a NATO ally faces imminent loss of sovereignty without direct military support, then it would stretch credulity that armed assistence would not be "deemed necessary".

Right. That's why she said "perhaps."

alnorth
09-11-2008, 05:57 PM
I am pretty sure Georgia and the Ukraine are not in Europe or North America.

By the way Donger did you miss article 1
Article 1

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/), to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

An armed invasion of a NATO ally would probably preclude article 1, or NATO itself is useless.

I read that as "just because you have an agreement to assist one another if invaded does not mean you should use NATO as an excuse to ignore the UN in less extreme situations"

FAX
09-11-2008, 06:05 PM
This is nothing new. We've been threatening to go to war with Russia on and off for almost a century, now. She's just a Reagan girl at heart.

Besides, it's important that we keep the Ruskies on their toes and investing in armaments. When the Chinese decide to take over the world, we'll need them.

FAX

Adept Havelock
09-11-2008, 06:38 PM
This is nothing new. We've been threatening to go to war with Russia on and off for almost a century, now. She's just a Reagan girl at heart.

Besides, it's important that we keep the Ruskies on their toes and investing in armaments. When the Chinese decide to take over the world, we'll need them.

FAX

I think we should get India lined up to help as well.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 07:13 PM
+1 ROFL

Hey dipshit, can you please stop typing "+1"? I mean I know you're ****in stupid and can't come up with a thought on your own. But this really points that out. If all you can come up with is +1, maybe you shouldn't post at all.

****in moron.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-11-2008, 07:14 PM
Hey dipshit, can you please stop typing "+1"? I mean I know you're ****in stupid and can't come up with a thought on your own. But this really points that out. If all you can come up with is +1, maybe you shouldn't post at all.

****in moron.

ROFL


+1

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 07:24 PM
ROFL


+1

lol, I appreciate your +1 to my post, I think that deserves a +1 to your post that gives my previous post a +1.

+1 baby!

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 07:40 PM
Bottom line Cronus is Obama is going down like 16 year old on prom night. The fact that you don't want to acknowledge that is humorous.

Your typical bluster and predictions have always failed. You may or may not be correct now. But pardon me if we don't buy into your stupid bullsh!t now. If history is any guide as it relates to your judgement, Obama will be the next President of the United States... and of course then you'll have to move to Australia because you won't be able to live in a nation where a darkie can hold the highest office in the land.ROFL

patteeu
09-11-2008, 07:41 PM
The headline should be: Obama supporters don't understand NATO. Palin's explanation creates irrational tizzy among them.

J Diddy
09-11-2008, 07:43 PM
The headline should be: Obama supporters don't understand NATO. Palin's explanation creates irrational tizzy among them.


How does her quote equate that obama supporters don't understand NATO

Donger
09-11-2008, 07:43 PM
How does her quote equate that obama supporters don't understand NATO

Have you read this thread?

Programmer
09-11-2008, 07:45 PM
How does her quote equate that obama supporters don't understand NATO


Read the replies here. Interpretation is their biggest problem.

patteeu
09-11-2008, 07:48 PM
errr...the question doesn't say that. Her answer is correct if Georgia is currently a NATO member, but incorrect if it is not.

Georgia is not currently a NATO member.

You need to either re-read the transcript, or better yet, watch the interview. It was obvious in the interview that she was talking about a situation where Georgia and Ukraine had become NATO members.

Donger
09-11-2008, 07:50 PM
Read the replies here. Interpretation is their biggest problem.

It seems that this thread displays two flaws in the "thinking" of the leftists here:

1) Believing ABC's headline.

2) Complete ignorance of NATO's Article V.

Ironically, considering some of the comments herein, Palin (the idiot who knows nothing about foreign affairs) was absolutely correct.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 07:54 PM
I can't believe all the Right Wing dish!ts that are seriously defending this Twaaaats position that could literally lead to global thermal nuclear war. Remember asswipes, the Russian still have the 2nd most nukes on the entire planet.

I can't believe the bitch didn't stop herself before saying it.

Donger
09-11-2008, 07:55 PM
I can't believe all the Right Wing dish!ts that are seriously defending this Twaaaats position that could literally lead to global thermal nuclear war. Remember asswipes, the Russian still have the 2nd most nukes on the entire planet.

I can't believe the bitch didn't stop herself before saying it.

I hate to tell you this, but Barack Hussein also supports Georgia's introduction into NATO.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 07:56 PM
It seems that this thread displays two flaws in the "thinking" of the leftists here:

1) Believing ABC's headline.

2) Complete ignorance of NATO's Article V.

Ironically, considering some of the comments herein, Palin (the idiot who knows nothing about foreign affairs) was absolutely correct.

I can't claim to be knowledgeable about all of the articles, but it sure seems like Palin knows more about it than the average correspondent.

patteeu
09-11-2008, 07:57 PM
Thanks, I overlooked that.

So, she is in favor of admitting Georgia to NATO, and going to war with Russia if it invades Georgia. :shrug:

Personally, I think admitting Georgia, Ukraine, etc. to NATO isn't a very good idea.

I question the wisdom of that idea, myself. Unless NATO is willing to live up to it's security obligations in the event of a Russian invasion, we shouldn't expand. The alliance is worthless if it can't be counted upon for it's primary purpose. Every time we admit a new country, the entire alliance ought to be committed to that new country's defense.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 07:59 PM
I hate to tell you this, but Barack Hussein also supports Georgia's introduction into NATO.

Show me where Barac "Hussein" said we should go to war with them.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 07:59 PM
I can't believe all the Right Wing dish!ts that are seriously defending this Twaaaats position that could literally lead to global thermal nuclear war. Remember asswipes, the Russian still have the 2nd most nukes on the entire planet.

I can't believe the bitch didn't stop herself before saying it.

I also expect your outrage to be directed equally at Obama, who essentially has the same position.

Logical
09-11-2008, 07:59 PM
An armed invasion of a NATO ally would probably preclude article 1, or NATO itself is useless.

I read that as "just because you have an agreement to assist one another if invaded does not mean you should use NATO as an excuse to ignore the UN in less extreme situations"That is not at all the way I read it, I read it as you need something approaching unanimous agreement among the NATO members to over Article 1 and on to Article 5

patteeu
09-11-2008, 07:59 PM
How does her quote equate that obama supporters don't understand NATO

Over the course of the first 100 or so posts in this thread, it appeared that most Obama supporters didn't appreciate the mutual defense nature of the NATO alliance. I was happy to see that dirk finally figured out that the central idea of the thread was bogus. I haven't seen too many others admit their error.

Logical
09-11-2008, 08:00 PM
I also expect your outrage to be directed equally at Obama, who essentially has the same position.Link?

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:00 PM
Show me where Barac "Hussein" said we should go to war with them.

If Georgia is a member of NATO and is attacked by Russia, then there is no decision to be made. If Georgia is attacked, we are basically required by the treaty to defend them.

It would be the same as if Russia suddenly decided to bomb Portugal.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:01 PM
I also expect your outrage to be directed equally at Obama, who essentially has the same position.

Provide the quote where Obama said we would go to war with Russia.

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:01 PM
Show me where Barac "Hussein" said we should go to war with them.

I'm not following you. Barack Hussein supports Georgian entry into NATO. So does McCain/Palin.

Does Barack Hussein intend to modify NATO Article V?

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:02 PM
If Georgia is a member of NATO and is attacked by Russia, then there is no decision to be made. If Georgia is attacked, we are basically required by the treaty to defend them.

It would be the same as if Russia suddenly decided to bomb Portugal.

Also, explain how we would do it with nearly our entire military tied up in Afganistan and Iraq.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:03 PM
I'm not following you. Barack Hussein supports Georgian entry into NATO. So does McCain/Palin.

Does Barack Hussein intend to modify NATO Article V?

Provide the quote wher Barack "Hussein" said he would go to war with Russia if they invaded a Nato member Georgia.

Logical
09-11-2008, 08:03 PM
Over the course of the first 100 or so posts in this thread, it appeared that most Obama supporters didn't appreciate the mutual defense nature of the NATO alliance. I was happy to see that dirk finally figured out that the central idea of the thread was bogus. I haven't seen too many others admit their error.Probably because most of us don't believe it means going it alone without complete or nearly complete agreement and participation of all the NATO members. To risk Nuclear war otherwise would be suicide for any of the member nations.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:05 PM
Provide the quote where Obama said we would go to war with Russia.

Obama supports letting Georgia into NATO. That basically means he would sign a treaty promising to defend them if they are attacked.

The only way out would be for the USA to say "we were lying" and break the treaty, which isnt going to happen. If you dont want to defend Georgia, then you dont sign a mutual defense agreement with them.

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:05 PM
Provide the quote wher Barack "Hussein" said he would go to war with Russia if they invaded a Nato member Georgia.

I can't. You can't provide one for Palin, either.

They both support Georgia's introduction into NATO. Therefore, it seems reasonable that they both support the defense of a fellow NATO member as laid out by Article V.

NewChief
09-11-2008, 08:07 PM
Her interpretation of NATO is correct. She also, from what I understand, went on to explain that it doesn't necessarily mandate war, but could also involve economic sanctions and other steps prior to outright war. But since the Right evidently doesn't give a **** about context, why should I? Let's just face it, SHE WANTS TO GO TO WAR WITH RUSSIA!!! SHE SAID IT!!! OMGOMGOMG>>>SARAH PALIN IS A PSYCHO WARMONGER!!!! SHE WANTS WWIII SO ALASKA WILL BECOME THE HOLYLAND WHERE WE ALL WEATHER ARMAGEDDON!

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:07 PM
Provide the quote wher Barack "Hussein" said he would go to war with Russia if they invaded a Nato member Georgia.

So are you then saying that Obama is a lier? That he would willingly support and sign a mutual defense treaty with no intention of ever following through?

What other promises should I assume that he is lying about?

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:08 PM
Her interpretation of NATO is correct. She also, from what I understand, went on to explain that it doesn't necessarily mandate war, but could also involve economic sanctions and other steps prior to outright war. But since the Right evidently doesn't give a **** about context, why should I? Let's just face it, SHE WANTS TO GO TO WAR WITH RUSSIA!!! SHE SAID IT!!! OMGOMGOMG>>>SARAH PALIN IS A PSYCHO WARMONGER!!!!

ROFL

Props to you and Dirk.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:08 PM
Obama supports letting Georgia into NATO. That basically means he would sign a treaty promising to defend them if they are attacked.

The only way out would be for the USA to say "we were lying" and break the treaty, which isnt going to happen. If you dont want to defend Georgia, then you dont sign a mutual defense agreement with them.

No, no, lets not try to muddy the waters here. Provide the quote where Barack "Hussien" said that if Russia invades Georgia, we will go to war with Russia. Provide any quote, NATO or no NATO in which Obama said we should engage Russia.

NewChief
09-11-2008, 08:09 PM
ROFL

Props to you and Dirk.

Damnit, you quoted me before I edited in the really good stuff.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 08:10 PM
http://www.nato.int/home.htm

For those that really want to know what it's all about.

Do a google and go to the NATO website.

The preamble is there as well as all of the articles.

Ari Chi3fs
09-11-2008, 08:11 PM
This country is ****ed... and as a result, the world is ****ed.

in another 100 years, we will be in another dark age.

patteeu
09-11-2008, 08:12 PM
Probably because most of us don't believe it means going it alone without complete or nearly complete agreement and participation of all the NATO members. To risk Nuclear war otherwise would be suicide for any of the member nations.

I don't think that fully explains the dumbassery demonstrated by Obama folks in this thread.

NewChief
09-11-2008, 08:14 PM
I don't think that fully explains the dumbassery demonstrated by Obama folks in this thread.

The Dumbasses from the McCain side are starting to rub off on them? Or is that just putting lipstick on a pig?

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:15 PM
I can't. You can't provide one for Palin, either.

They both support Georgia's introduction into NATO. Therefore, it seems reasonable that they both support the defense of a fellow NATO member as laid out by Article V.

I didn't think so because Obama doesn't go off half cocked like that when it comes to huge issues.

I do think it is quite telling of Palin that she would automatically advocate war with all of our troops tied up in two other wars and Russia having the 2nd most nukes on the planet. I have a feeling the Rooskies probably wouldn't take her very seriously.

J Diddy
09-11-2008, 08:16 PM
The Dumbasses from the McCain side are starting to rub off on them? Or is that just putting lipstick on a pig?

you're gonna get a cease and desist order from the McCain campaign for that one

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:17 PM
No, no, lets not try to muddy the waters here. Provide the quote where Barack "Hussien" said that if Russia invades Georgia, we will go to war with Russia. Provide any quote, NATO or no NATO in which Obama said we should engage Russia.

There is no such quote, but his stance on this issue is still the same as McCain/Palin. Thats not really a surprise, because this is generally a bipartisan issue that wont be fought over.

Barack Obama supports allowing Georgia into NATO. Once that happens, we are obligated to fight Russia if they invade. If Obama wants to never fight Russia over Georgia under any circumstances, then HE CAN NOT support Georgia's inclusion into NATO. NATO has only one purpose: if a member is attacked, the others will help. Its less certain what that means when sovereignty is not threatened (such as 9/11), but if a member is going down, the other members are basically required to fight off the aggresser.

L.A. Chieffan
09-11-2008, 08:18 PM
Who gives a shit about Georgia?

Programmer
09-11-2008, 08:19 PM
I didn't think so because Obama doesn't go off half cocked like that when it comes to huge issues.

I do think it is quite telling of Palin that she would automatically advocate war with all of our troops tied up in two other wars and Russia having the 2nd most nukes on the planet. I have a feeling the Rooskies probably wouldn't take her very seriously.

She didn't automatically advocate war. It seems like you didn't read the thread. Why does that not surprise me?

NewChief
09-11-2008, 08:19 PM
Who gives a shit about Georgia?

Clearly not Obama. He pulled his staff out of there according to jake. [rimshot for crossthread humor]

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:20 PM
Damnit, you quoted me before I edited in the really good stuff.

Sorry, premature quotalation.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:23 PM
There is no such quote,

I know, because he's not a ****in warmongering idiot.

Barack Obama supports allowing Georgia into NATO. Once that happens, we are obligated to fight Russia if they invade. If Obama wants to never fight Russia over Georgia under any circumstances, then HE CAN NOT support Georgia's inclusion into NATO. NATO has only one purpose: if a member is attacked, the others will help. Its less certain what that means when sovereignty is not threatened (such as 9/11), but if a member is going down, the other members are basically required to fight off the aggresser.

None of that other bullshit you are spouting means a damn thing. We are not obligated to do shit NATO or no NATO. Who is going to force us to defend Georgia? You people are naive. The most that will happen is we would condemn Russia publicly and it would be the same even if Georgia was a member of Nato. We couldn't defend Georgia if we wanted to, our military is currently involved in two other wars in case you haven't forgotten.

RJ
09-11-2008, 08:24 PM
Why would you assume such a thing???

Think about it from a Russian perspective. Nuclear war with the US would almost certainly mean the complete destruction of Russia as we know it. Why one earth would Russia risk such an option in order to control a small eastern european country?



Maybe it would happen if their leaders are nuts?

Just like we might risk nuclear war if our leaders were nuts.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:26 PM
None of that other bullshit you are spouting means a damn thing. We are not obligated to do shit NATO or no NATO. Who is going to force us to defend Georgia? You people are naive. The most that will happen is we would condemn Russia publicly and it would be the same even if Georgia was a member of Nato. We couldn't defend Georgia if we wanted to, our military is currently involved in two other wars in case you haven't forgotten.

Then I'll return to my earlier question. You apparently believe Obama is a shameless lier, who will sign a treaty he never intends to honor.

What other promises should I presume that Obama has lied about?

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:27 PM
None of that other bullshit you are spouting means a damn thing. We are not obligated to do shit NATO or no NATO. Who is going to force us to defend Georgia? You people are naive. The most that will happen is we would condemn Russia publicly and it would be the same even if Georgia was a member of Nato. We couldn't defend Georgia if we wanted to, our military is currently involved in two other wars in case you haven't forgotten.

I'll tell that the crew of the USS Mount Whitney. I'll have to speak loudly, however, since they are in Georgian waters.

J Diddy
09-11-2008, 08:29 PM
I'll tell that the crew of the USS Mount Whitney. I'll have to speak loudly, however, since they are in Georgian waters.

Damn, you can talk loud.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:29 PM
I'll tell that the crew of the USS Mount Whitney. I'll have to speak loudly, however, since they are in Georgian waters.

So you think would have have a full scale conventional war with Russia while also fighting two wars in Iraq and Afganistan?

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:31 PM
So you think would have have a full scale conventional war with Russia while also fighting two wars in Iraq and Afganistan?

(We'll leave nukes out of the discussion for now just to humor the Dong.)

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:32 PM
So you think would have have a full scale conventional war with Russia while also fighting two wars in Iraq and Afganistan?

Over and in Georgia? Yes, certainly.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:32 PM
So you think would have have a full scale conventional war with Russia while also fighting two wars in Iraq and Afganistan?

Why do you think Russia cares so much about whether Georgia is in NATO? Why do they seem to be in such a hurry to take them out before they can be brought into the organization?

For now we have no obligation to protect them, so we can act in our own self-interest, possibly threatening Russia while hoping they dont call the bluff.

Once Georgia is in NATO, we are legally obligated to follow it or leave. If we have to pull everything out of Iraq and Afghanistan to help our other allies fulfill our treaty obligations together, so be it.

Logical
09-11-2008, 08:36 PM
Maybe it would happen if their leaders are nuts?

Just like we might risk nuclear war if our leaders were nuts.
Hell our leader is nuts enough to have risked our security to topple Iraq, and to what actual purpose other than wasting a trillion dollars and losing 1000s of American lives and 10s of 1000s of lost Iraqi lives most of them innocent in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:37 PM
Why do you think Russia cares so much about whether Georgia is in NATO? Why do they seem to be in such a hurry to take them out before they can be brought into the organization?

For now we have no obligation to protect them, so we can act in our own self-interest, possibly threatening Russia while hoping they dont call the bluff.

Once Georgia is in NATO, we are legally obligated to follow it or leave. If we have to pull everything out of Iraq and Afghanistan to help our other allies fulfill our treaty obligations together, so be it.

Answer the question: could we have a full scale conventional war (we're leaving out nukes just for the hell of it), with Russia while our military is almost 100% engaged in Iraq and Afganistan?

banyon
09-11-2008, 08:41 PM
Over and in Georgia? Yes, certainly.

Answering by denying the premise of the question. Nice.

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:42 PM
Answering by denying the premise of the question. Nice.

Read Article V. It is a defense article.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:44 PM
Answer the question: could we have a full scale conventional war (we're leaving out nukes just for the hell of it), with Russia while our military is almost 100% engaged in Iraq and Afganistan?

You assume they would remain engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. We dont have a signed treaty forcing us to be in those two places. However, even that probably wouldnt be necessary. Our navy, air force, and the troops in Korea, Germany, Japan, etc would probably be enough. We would presumably be attacking russia along with the combined might of TWENTY-FIVE other nations. This is NATO, remember? We wouldnt need our whole army.

Simply put, this is a game of chicken that Russia cant win. They can not fight off the US and all of Europe. If Georgia is in NATO, they probably dont attack, and then we begin peaceful negotiations over the provinces that want to break away.

NewChief
09-11-2008, 08:44 PM
Answer the question: could we have a full scale conventional war (we're leaving out nukes just for the hell of it), with Russia while our military is almost 100% engaged in Iraq and Afganistan?

You can find your answer below:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sWS-FoXbjVI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sWS-FoXbjVI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Donger
09-11-2008, 08:46 PM
It really is somewhat amusing. Barack Hussein AGREES with Palin's position.

Do you followers not understand that?

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:47 PM
You can find your answer below:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sWS-FoXbjVI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sWS-FoXbjVI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

While I am sure that the Dong just spontaneously ejaculated in his trousers (yes, I am sure that f()ckin limey wears trousers) while watching that vid., it doesn't answer my question ROFL

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:50 PM
You assume they would remain engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. We dont have a signed treaty forcing us to be in those two places. However, even that probably wouldnt be necessary. Our navy, air force, and the troops in Korea, Germany, Japan, etc would probably be enough. We would presumably be attacking russia along with the combined might of TWENTY-FIVE other nations. This is NATO, remember? We wouldnt need our whole army.

Simply put, this is a game of chicken that Russia cant win. They can not fight off the US and all of Europe. If Georgia is in NATO, they probably dont attack, and then we begin peaceful negotiations over the provinces that want to break away.

They are literally 10000 times in a better position than us regarding war. Are you insane? They don't have their entire military stretched thin in two wars thousands of miles from their homeland.

Logical
09-11-2008, 08:52 PM
You can find your answer below:
<object height="344" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sWS-FoXbjVI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></object>
I admit I am entertained by that video (great music) I am also alarmed knowing that so many Americans have this simplified view of what war is especially because of Iraq. Most wars cannot be fought from the air and are not fought by countries with the capability to strike back directly upon our country. We would be ****ing insane to honor the NATO treat going it alone.

NewChief
09-11-2008, 08:52 PM
They are literally 10000 times in a better position than us regarding war. Are you insane? They don't have their entire military stretched thin in two wars thousands of miles from their homeland.

What part of "lick my butt and suck on my balls" do you not understand?

You obviously need to watch the video again.

banyon
09-11-2008, 08:52 PM
Read Article V. It is a defense article.

That's not the part of the premise you denied.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:53 PM
What part of "lick my butt and suck on my balls" do you not understand?

You obviously need to watch the video again.

Haha, nice job Mr. Sarcastic.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:53 PM
They are literally 10000 times in a better position than us regarding war. Are you insane? They don't have their entire military stretched thin in two wars thousands of miles from their homeland.

OK, so Russia is capable of conquering Europe and the US with their older outdated equipment. Cool.

Were you also screaming about how Reagan was going to destroy the world? How did that war against Russia turn out? What, there was no war? Imagine that!

If this issue is that important to you, then I suggest you find someone else to vote for, because Obama does not agree with your position. Maybe Ron Paul, I thought I read that he didnt like NATO?

alnorth
09-11-2008, 08:55 PM
We would be ****ing insane to honor the NATO treat going it alone.

That sentence is hilarious.

We wouldnt go it alone, because the moment we realized everyone in the alliance was going to break the treaty, then we dissolve NATO and stay home.

BucEyedPea
09-11-2008, 08:56 PM
It really is somewhat amusing. Barack Hussein AGREES with Palin's position.

Do you followers not understand that?

I do. Gravel has said the Democratic party is the party of war.
This is why I say the right has shifted left. It's falling for the same progressive crap.
Barack's initial reaction was correct, then he changed it, and quickly.
It was like someone got to him or coached him.
Our FP is basically the same administration to administration with just a few differences.
The candidates are empty suits for the corporatist Establishment.

People need to wake up and observe the obvious.

Logical
09-11-2008, 08:58 PM
OK, so Russia is capable of conquering Europe and the US with their older outdated equipment. Cool.

Were you also screaming about how Reagan was going to destroy the world? How did that war against Russia turn out? What, there was no war? Imagine that!

If this issue is that important to you, then I suggest you find someone else to vote for, because Obama does not agree with your position. Maybe Ron Paul, I thought I read that he didnt like NATO?

Jesus AI I thought you would be wise enough to know that NATO is basically a neutered entity. Pretty much none of the NATO allies will honor the commitment, Maybe Britain and Portugaul, with over fly rights from Spain.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 08:58 PM
OK, so Russia is capable of conquering Europe and the US with their older outdated equipment. Cool.

Were you also screaming about how Reagan was going to destroy the world? How did that war against Russia turn out? What, there was no war? Imagine that!

If this issue is that important to you, then I suggest you find someone else to vote for, because Obama does not agree with your position. Maybe Ron Paul, I thought I read that he didnt like NATO?

Holy sh!t dude, this post = EPIC FAIL. Just give me someone with some restraint and intelligence that can use power when necessary and I'm fine. So far, Obama seems to be that person. McCain/Palin are not that person and I'm not even going into her f()cked up religious views of all of this.

Logical
09-11-2008, 08:59 PM
That sentence is hilarious.

We wouldnt go it alone, because the moment we realized everyone in the alliance was going to break the treaty, then we dissolve NATO and stay home.Then admitting additional Nations is just a completely empty gesture.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 09:00 PM
Jesus AI I thought you would be wise enough to know that NATO is basically a neutered entity. Pretty much none of the NATO allies will honor the commitment, Maybe Britain and Portugaul, with over fly rights from Spain.

Can we hire you to fly over and tell that to Russia, the countries that are trying to join us, and the NATO allies who are reluctant to admit Georgia? Either that, or fly to Brussels and tell them that they need to pack it up and dissolve the treaty.

alnorth
09-11-2008, 09:02 PM
Then admitting additional Nations is just a completely empty gesture.

but again, Obama's position is the same as McCain/Palin.

Thats the basic point, there will be no political fallout here, because NATO is very much a bipartisan issue with little disagreement.

Programmer
09-11-2008, 09:02 PM
Answer the question: could we have a full scale conventional war (we're leaving out nukes just for the hell of it), with Russia while our military is almost 100% engaged in Iraq and Afganistan?


Our military is not "almost 100%" engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You should use actual numbers and percentages rather than making wild accusations

http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/MILITARY/history/hst0803.pdf

alnorth
09-11-2008, 09:03 PM
Holy sh!t dude, this post = EPIC FAIL. Just give me someone with some restraint and intelligence that can use power when necessary and I'm fine. So far, Obama seems to be that person. McCain/Palin are not that person and I'm not even going into her f()cked up religious views of all of this.

Your posts are no longer worth the effort to reply.

Cannibal
09-11-2008, 09:06 PM
Your posts are no longer worth the effort to reply.

Because you can't post any factual information. You seem to think the US could conquer Russia while tied up in Iraq and Afganistan. That's about all we need to know regarding your thoughts on this topic.

AMERIKA **** YEAH ROFL

Uncle_Ted
09-11-2008, 09:07 PM
Haven't you guys figured it out yet? Sarah Palin is Dick Cheney with lipstick ...

Logical
09-11-2008, 09:16 PM
Can we hire you to fly over and tell that to Russia, the countries that are trying to join us, and the NATO allies who are reluctant to admit Georgia? Either that, or fly to Brussels and tell them that they need to pack it up and dissolve the treaty.Definitely dissolve the worthless treaty.