American Women

At the present time there is no conventional military force that can compete with the USA but there are many countries that have a nuclear detterant at the present time. Russia and China can both react to an American assault that would lead to nuclear war. In another 15 years, I expect China and Europe to build military forces that will surpass that of the US. Europe clearly has industrial might that surpasses the US and will use these conventional industries to build
an EU Army.

The Chinese have the American economy by the balls and that is all they really need to manipulate and blackmail the US Government at this point.

The coming European Superpower and the Chinese Russian Axis will spell the end of an American dominated globe.

[QUOTE=CBGBConnisur]In another 15 years, I expect China and Europe to build military forces that will surpass that of the US. Europe clearly has industrial might that surpasses the US and will use these conventional industries to build
an EU Army.[/QUOTE]

China is already working on it, most significantly developing a vast submarine fleet that is a real challenge to US naval superiority, the Russians are also starting things up in this direction not to mention working on advanced missile technology... their specialty. Still, they are both more than a decade away from challenging the US and will have to invest hundreds of billions to even catch up... potentially sabotaging their needed work on their countries' infrastructure which is necessary to sustain growth.

The EU army? You have got to be kidding. No chance on that, their internal politics and 3% defence spending will prohibit them from fielding more than a regiment or two. Even the UK has an astonishly small and weak army. Individual units, like Royal Marines, Paras or SAS/SBS are absolutely world class fighters.. but puny in size. Swedish submarines some of the world's stealthiest and the Germans still experts in building military equipment, especially tanks and small arms. But a military complex? It's still unstructured and small. The Typhoon project was a financial fiasco and the aircraft already second rate to the F-22, F-35, Su-30 and Su-35 before it has even been properly fielded. They can't even build a heavy transport plane of their own and instead buy them from the US and Russia.

Fyi, Israel is America's high tech backdoor. The Israelis are already selling off key US technologies to China and India. Recall the Israeli Lavi jet? Israel is also helping to modernize India's nuclear arsenal which will grow five fold by 2010.

The EU Army may sound remote now but its coming. Europe is engaging in currency warfare with the US and the Euro is going to dominate world finance, the dollar is on its way out and there will be no way for the US to finance a large military and foreign wars.

[QUOTE=CBGBConnisur]Fyi, Israel is America's high tech backdoor. The Israelis are already selling off key US technologies to China and India. [/QUOTE]

That's why we won't sell them the F22.

FYI...While the news media have finally started to grapple with the colossal amount of killing, a number of misunderstandings persist. Some are willful deceptions. Let's look at a few of them:

1. The U.S. is a buffer against more violence. This is perhaps the most resilient conjecture that has no basis in fact.

Iraqis themselves do not believe it. In a State Department poll published in September, huge majorities say the U.S. is directly responsible for the violence. The upsurge of bloodshed in Baghdad seems to confirm the Iraqis' view, at least by inference. The much-publicized U.S. effort to bring troops to Baghdad to quell sectarian killing has accompanied a period of increased mortality in the city.

2. The killers do it to influence U.S. politics. This was the mantra of right-wing bloggers and cable blowhards like Bill O'Reilly, who asserted time and again before November 7 that the violence was a "Tet offensive" designed to tarnish Bush and convince Americans to vote for Democrats. This is American solipsism, at which the right wing excels. If anything, the violence has grown since November 7.

English-language sources have more than 1,000 dead since the Bush rejection at the polls. Bill, are the Iraqi fighters now aiming at the Iowa caucuses in '08?

3. Syria and Iran are behind the violence. There is no compelling reason why the two neighbors would foment large-scale violence that could spill over to threaten their regimes. Iran is in the driver's seat -- as everyone not blinded by neo-con fantasies knew in advance -- with its Shia cousins in power; Syria has its own regime stability problems and does not need the large influx of refugees or potential jihadis. That both are happy to make life hard for the U.S. is not a secret (call it their Monroe Doctrine). But are they organizing the extreme and destabilizing violence we've seen this year? Doubtful. And, there's very little evidence to support this piece of blame-someone-else.

4. The "Go Big" strategy of the Pentagon could work. The Pentagon apparently is about to forward three options to Bush for a retreat: "Go Big," meaning more troops for a short time, "Go Long," a gradual withdrawal while training Iraqis, and "Go Home," acknowledging defeat and getting out. Go Big is what McCain and Zinni and others are proposing, as if adding 20,000 or 30,000 troops will do the trick. The argument about more troops, which speaks also to the "incompetence dodge" (i.e., that the war wasn't wrong, just badly managed), has one problem: no one can convincing prove that modest increments in troop strength will change the security situation in Iraq (see #1 above). One would need 300,000 or more troops to have a chance of pacifying Iraq, and that is neither politically feasible or logistically possible, and is therefore a nonstarter. So is "Go Big."

5. Foreign fighters, especially jihadis, are fueling the violence. This was largely discredited but is making a comeback as Washington's search for scapegoats intensifies. By most estimates, including the Pentagon's, foreign fighters make up a small fraction of violent actors in Iraq -- perhaps 10 percent overall. (This is based on identifying people arrested as fighters.) Some of the more spectacular attacks have been carried out by al Qaeda or its imitators, but overall the violence is due to three forces: U.S. military, Iraqi Sunni Arab insurgents, and Shia militia, with minor parts played by Kurdish peshmerga in Kirkuk and the foreign bad boys.

6. If we do not defeat the violent actors there, they will follow us here. This is now the sole remaining justification for U.S. involvement in the war. If the numbers about foreign fighters are correct, then it is plainly wrong. The main anatgonists are Iraqis, and they will remain there to fight it out for many years. That does not mean we have not created many "terrorists" who would do us harm, as U.S. intelligence agencies assert, but killing them in Iraq is not a plausible option. It's too difficult; aggressive counterinsurgency creates more fighters the longer we stay and harder we try; and they might not be there.

7. The violence is about Sunni-Shia mutual loathing; a pox on both their houses. This is the emerging "moral clarity" of the right wing, that we gave it our best, we handed the tools of freedom to Iraqis, and they'd rather kill each other. That there was longstanding antagonism, stemming from decades of Sunni Arab domination and repression, is well known. But the truly horrifying scale of violence we see now took many months to brew, and is built on the violence begun by the U.S. military and the lack of economic stability, political participation, etc., that the occupation wrought. Equally as important, sectarian killing found its political justification in the constitution fashioned by U.S. advisers that essentially split the country into three factions, giving them a very solid set of incentives to go to war with each other.

8. The war is an Iraqi affair, and the best we can do now is train them to enforce security. Despite three years of serious attempts, the U.S. training programs are bogged down by the sectarian violence itself, or by incompetence all round. No one who has looked at this carefully believes that training Iraqis is a near-term solution. It's a useful ruse as an exit strategy, blaming the victims for violence and failure.

9. Trust the same people who caused or endorsed the war to tell us what to do next. We know who they are: Bush, Cheney, McCain, and other cronies; the neo-cons now increasingly on the periphery of power but still bleating (Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Adelman, Lieberman), the liberal hawks, and the right-wing media (Krauthamer, Fox News, Glenn Beck, phalangist bloggers, et al). They say, "just finish the job." Just finish the job... at a human cost of how many more dead? How many lives ruined? How much more damage to U.S.-Arab relations? How much anti-Muslim racism fomented to justify the killing?

The distortions about the violence in Iraq persist even as the mayhem increases. Yesterday there was a report about 100 widows a day being created in Iraq. A Times of London report from last summer notes that gravediggers in one Baghdad cemetery are handling 200 bodies daily, compared with 60 before the war. The situation of the displaced is becoming a humanitarian crisis that will soon rival the worst African cases; the middle and upper classes have fled, leaving the poor to cope. So the poor from the U.S. go to beat up the poor in Iraq, or stand by helplessly as the Iraqi poor ravage each other.

That is the harsh reality of violence in Iraq. A half million dead. More than two million displaced. No end in sight.

[QUOTE=CBGBConnisur]Fyi, Israel is America's high tech backdoor. The Israelis are already selling off key US technologies to China and India. Recall the Israeli Lavi jet? Israel is also helping to modernize India's nuclear arsenal which will grow five fold by 2010.

The EU Army may sound remote now but its coming.[/QUOTE]And yet, Israel is getting tons of money from the US annually. Is it supposed to try make more money from being a "secret" lord of the war?

From reading this thread, I just feel like another world war is just around the corner. Wonder if human race can last for long.

[QUOTE=Doctor_Skank]That's why we won't sell them the F22.[/QUOTE]
In case you have not realized it, Israeli intelligence pretty much keeps tabs on everything the US government does. The Israelis have carte blanche to everything in the US. Being a New Yorker its an unspoken truth that Israel runs the USA not the other way around.

[QUOTE=Astor Bryan]FYI...While the news media have finally started to grapple with the colossal amount of killing, a number of misunderstandings persist. Some are willful deceptions. Let's look at a few of them....
...
No end in sight.[/QUOTE]

I absolutely agree with you.

But none of the above says the insurgents are bringing the US military to its knees. It just shows are strategy is flawed or its implementation too late. If there ever was a chance to succeed in Iraq, it was lost years ago.

[QUOTE=CBGBConnisur]In case you have not realized it, Israeli intelligence pretty much keeps tabs on everything the US government does. The Israelis have carte blanche to everything in the US. Being a New Yorker its an unspoken truth that Israel runs the USA not the other way around.[/QUOTE]

I didn't realize that... because its not true. Israel does have influence on US policy, but hardly "runs the show".

Being a New Yorker, perhaps you have a skewed view on things, like the Knicks winning a championship.

[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6997935.stm[/url]

This is a good case for why an EU Army might become a reality. Kouchner would never even mention the possibility of war with Iran if Europe did not have the capability.

Gentlemen: this board is about American Women, not politics or anti-Semitic neo-Nazi-ish rants about how "Jews run the US".

For what it's worth: the US government says no to Israel all the time and has expressed disapproval or admonishment of it many times.

Isn't there a politics/rantings/propaganda/opinions board you all can go to?

[QUOTE=Yogin]Gentlemen: this board is about American Women, not politics or anti-Semitic neo-Nazi-ish rants about how "Jews run the US".

For what it's worth: the US government says no to Israel all the time and has expressed disapproval or admonishment of it many times.

Isn't there a politics/rantings/propaganda/opinions board you all can go to?[/QUOTE]Piper 1,

You're NO fool. You're one American that has his eyes wise open.

Bernard Kouchner's remarks about war against Iran largely preempt that of George W Bush who up until now has been the primary hawk in the Mideast. Bush has been avoiding that question merely saying all options are on the table. Kouchner flat out said that war is a possibility, its a new direction for France. Germany's Merkel has also held a stronger stance against Tehran. Europe is destined to become a force to be reckoned with and will surpass the US in power, the Europeans will be counterbalanced by Russia and China.

What will eventually bring the US down a notch or two will be the insane military overspending that has been going on for decades now.

The same thing happened to "Great Britain" in the 20th century. In 1901, Britain was the world's number one military and economic power..... with the US a fast-rising, newly-industrialized, 2nd place. What happened? WWI aka The Great War.

The Brits fought this war and won, but at a staggering cost in terms of finances and loss of life. By WWII, they could barely hold off Nazi Germany on their own. Without outside help, they would likely have lost. Less than 5 years later, the Brits lost India.The Suez crisis was the event that drove the fact home for those few who didn't yet realize that the whole idea of being number one was over. WWII ended in 1945, but even if you use the Suez crisis as the official date the whole process of collapse took a little over 50 years.

I see something quite similar going on today. America has been largely hollowed out as an industrial power. The accumulated national debt is approaching 10 trillion dollars. People in general have become soft, lazy and selfish. New Orleans is still a mess, ground zero is still just a big hole in the ground.... and millions of illegals roam freely across the border every year. Is that what you call a superpower?

Personally, I don't see any other single political entity displacing America as the pre-eminent military/economic power..... not anytime soon anyways. I see a future with multiple competing powers. India and China will have their spheres of influence. You might see something like a unified Europe, but to me this is doubtful. The Russians will always be around in one form or another.

Whatever, and why even worry about such things? Better to make a good living and get laid, frequently, by a wide variety of attractive women!

Rock

Jesus Fucking Christ. What about pussy? Muslim pussy, not very good. Jewish pussy, can be good but not worth the hassle. I fucked a gal tonight, half Peruvian and half Argentinean. It was good. It wasn't great. 50 dollars for three hours and I provided dinner but she did the dishes.

Pussy, not politics. Or just beat off and don't bother posting.

[QUOTE=Dickhead]Jesus Fucking Christ. What about pussy? Muslim pussy, not very good. Jewish pussy, can be good but not worth the hassle. I fucked a gal tonight, half Peruvian and half Argentinean. It was good. It wasn't great. 50 dollars for three hours and I provided dinner but she did the dishes.

Pussy, not politics. Or just beat off and don't bother posting.[/QUOTE]

We may have the bigger, more powerful army... but Europe and Russia have the better women. I'll give them that... :)

OK, back on topic. Sorry.