Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Karlis

Palin: "military action against the Kremlin"?

Recommended Posts

Karlis

I wonder if this will help her run for the White House?

Karlis

Russian aggression could pull U.S. into war: Palin

Sheldon Alberts, Canwest News Service Published:

Friday, September 12, 2008

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Taking a hard line on national security, Sarah Palin said yesterday the U. S. could be forced into war against Russia to help defend future NATO allies from possible aggression by Moscow.

In her first interview since she was picked as John Mc-Cain's vice-presidential running mate, she told ABC News she supported Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO, and believed the United States would have to fight alongside the two nations if that decision provoked Russian military action.

"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," the Alaska Governor said.

Asked whether that meant the United States would have to take military action against the Kremlin, she replied, "Perhaps so."

Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/story.html?id=787005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
heinrich1858

Neither Russia or the US will ever attack each other . Their nukes are still pointed at each other . If they do then its the end for us all . (When the nukes get released)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis
Neither Russia or the US will ever attack each other . Their nukes are still pointed at each other . If they do then its the end for us all . (When the nukes get released)
I think Palin probably meant ground/air forces versus ground/air forces. MAD is not on the books at present, as I see it.

Edit: I'm thinking about Palin's grasp of diplomacy and Foreign Affairs. -- She does tend to be confrontational, does she not?

Regards,

Karlis

Edited by Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aztec Warrior

She answered correctly. That is the doctrine of the NATO alliance and if you or the Dem's don't like it, you're free to withdrawl from the alliance.

Edited by Aztec Warrior

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Silver Thong

Who attacked who though? I'v heard it was Georgia that was the aggressor.

I have to agree with Aztec here. If a member of nato is attacked it's up to the members to help that nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cleomenes

Yet another fake, manufactured gaffe. Good God, people must not even know what a military alliance is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guardsman Bass
She answered correctly. That is the doctrine of the NATO alliance and if you or the Dem's don't like it, you're free to withdrawl from the alliance.

Nice side-step there - her idiocy is in thinking that Georgia should even be in NATO, since (wait for it) we could be drawn into an open war when that idiot Saakashvili decides to get bold again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlindMessiah
She answered correctly. That is the doctrine of the NATO alliance and if you or the Dem's don't like it, you're free to withdrawl from the alliance.

Going to war with Russia for the sake of some "ally" is absurd. Another Cold War is all we need.

Who attacked who though? I'v heard it was Georgia that was the aggressor.

I have to agree with Aztec here. If a member of nato is attacked it's up to the members to help that nation.

Georgia attacked Russia and isn't even a member of NATO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aztec Warrior
Nice side-step there - her idiocy is in thinking that Georgia should even be in NATO, since (wait for it) we could be drawn into an open war when that idiot Saakashvili decides to get bold again.

Name a country, beside Russia, who thinks Georgia should not be allowed membership.

Going to war with Russia for the sake of some "ally" is absurd. Another Cold War is all we need.

Georgia attacked Russia and isn't even a member of NATO.

Georgia never attacked Russia...who ever told you that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guardsman Bass
Name a country, beside Russia, who thinks Georgia should not be allowed membership.

Germany . Remember the opposition they put up at the NATO meeting prior to the pocket war when the US started heavily pushing for both Ukraine and Georgia to be integrated into NATO?

. . . . As Mr. Bush did more often early in his presidency, he expressed his views candidly despite warnings from allies that he was complicating efforts to find diplomatic solutions.

Normally, summit meetings like this are prescripted, but Mr. Bush’s comments added some extra interest while annoying Germany and France, which had said they would block the invitation to Ukraine and Georgia.

At the dinner on Wednesday, the German and French position was supported by Italy, Hungary and the Benelux countries, a senior German official said. Mr. Bush was said to have accepted that his position was not going to prevail, and officials were asked to find some construction overnight that would encourage Ukraine and Georgia without asking them to enter a membership plan now. . . .

Georgia never attacked Russia...who ever told you that?

Didn't we just have this discussion two weeks ago? Georgia attacked South Ossetia and Russian peacekeepers that have been there as part of the Joint Force dating back to the 1994 Treaty that Georgia signed.

Edited by Guardsman Bass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aztec Warrior
Germany . Remember the opposition they put up at the NATO meeting prior to the pocket war when the US started heavily pushing for both Ukraine and Georgia to be integrated into NATO?

Didn't we just have this discussion two weeks ago? Georgia attacked South Ossetia and Russian peacekeepers that have been there as part of the Joint Force dating back to the 1994 Treaty that Georgia signed.

That's not what you said. You stated Georgia attacked Russsia, which was incorrect. You didn't state... Georgia attacked S. Ossetia where there were Russian peacekeepers.

As for Germany...read this and weep.

18/ 08/ 2008

TBILISI/BERLIN, August 18 (RIA Novosti) - German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that Georgia can still join NATO, despite a recent conflict with Russia over breakaway South Ossetia.

Merkel, who visited Tbilisi for talks with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili on Sunday, said support for Georgia's bid to join NATO was laid out in documents produced at the military alliance's summit in Bucharest in April.

"They contain, which is rather unusual, a very firm pledge that both Ukraine and Georgia will become NATO members," Merkel said. "The first review of the situation will take place in December."

link

Another link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guardsman Bass
That's not what you said. You stated Georgia attacked Russsia, which was incorrect. You didn't state... Georgia attacked S. Ossetia where there were Russian peacekeepers.

I didn't say anything - it was another poster who brought that up, and you immediately leaped on it to prove Russian aggression.

As for Germany...read this and weep.

link

Another link

The German government appears to have flip-flopped, considering that they opposed granting Ukraine and Georgia the action plans to become NATO members before the ****-storm in South Ossetia brewed over (which I pointed out in my article). We'll see how long this lasts; Merkel is sitting atop a fragile coalition, and for all of her now-support for this, she wasn't exactly a vocal force for a plan to include them at the Bucharest Summit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Aztec Warrior
I didn't say anything - it was another poster who brought that up, and you immediately leaped on it to prove Russian aggression.

I responded to BlindMessiah and you stepped in. Look back at the posts. I didn't say anything about Russian aggression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guardsman Bass
I responded to BlindMessiah and you stepped in. Look back at the posts. I didn't say anything about Russian aggression.

My mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aztec Warrior
My mistake.

No problem...that's why I like you. A clear thinker with intelligent responses, even though we frequently disagree on policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raptor
Nice side-step there - her idiocy is in thinking that Georgia should even be in NATO, since (wait for it) we could be drawn into an open war when that idiot Saakashvili decides to get bold again.

Unless I'm mistaken, Palin, McCain, Obama and Biden have all stated they'll back the decision to allow Georgia in to NATO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guardsman Bass
Unless I'm mistaken, Palin, McCain, Obama and Biden have all stated they'll back the decision to allow Georgia in to NATO.

I never said that that particular idiocy doesn't cross partisan lines. It very clearly does - witness Clinton's actions with NATO in the late 1990s. He took advantage of Russian weakness to pull the Eastern Europeans into NATO, which basically became fodder for Putin and associates to use as proof that the United States was trying to surround and contain Russia. He should have at least let the Europeans try to pull them into some kind of arrangement (the EU was picking up the pace at this time).

This is the main problem I have with the whole deal. We keep playing the Cold War game by trying to expand NATO, even though it has become, by and large, an organization without a clear mission anymore (since the main threat that it was created to defend against is gone), and even though it actually risks causing political instability by its expansion (Ukraine, in particular, is heavily divided on whether or not it wants to be in NATO; the eastern half of the Ukraine, which includes a lot of ethnic Russians, doesn't want anything to do with it). We should have urged the Western Europeans to pull them into the European Union first, which even the eastern Ukrainians support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mainpoint
I wonder if this will help her run for the White House?

Karlis

Russian aggression could pull U.S. into war: Palin

Sheldon Alberts, Canwest News Service Published:

Friday, September 12, 2008

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Taking a hard line on national security, Sarah Palin said yesterday the U. S. could be forced into war against Russia to help defend future NATO allies from possible aggression by Moscow.

In her first interview since she was picked as John Mc-Cain's vice-presidential running mate, she told ABC News she supported Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO, and believed the United States would have to fight alongside the two nations if that decision provoked Russian military action.

"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," the Alaska Governor said.

Asked whether that meant the United States would have to take military action against the Kremlin, she replied, "Perhaps so."

Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/story.html?id=787005

The end of world is near folks!

Russia vs US = THE END

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guardsman Bass

I doubt that would happen (although you can't be sure with McCain; he's been known to hold grudges and act erratically). What is more likely is that all of the Western Europeans and the US would find some way to weasel out of actually starting a war with Russia, and then NATO would more or less be a joke as a means of common defense in Central Asia. It's the fact that we could actually end up in such a possibly unpleasant situation like that which is bothering me.

Of course, that might actually be a good thing. They would then be forced to re-structure and re-design NATO to work in a post-Cold War period.

Edited by Guardsman Bass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caesar
She answered correctly. That is the doctrine of the NATO alliance and if you or the Dem's don't like it, you're free to withdrawl from the alliance.

Correct res 5 I think. an attack on one is an attack on all if Georga was a member of the U.N. and Russia invaded

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mainpoint
Correct res 5 I think. an attack on one is an attack on all if Georga was a member of the U.N. and Russia invaded

Rules are meant to be broken as recently it has been demonstrated in the end the top guy does what it wants to do

Articles Rules Resolutions PFFffffffffff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.