A Complete Waste of Space

Well...I just listened to Obama's speech in Belgium today.
He's a sanctimonious "gas" bag. My economic advice to Europe?
Buy a lot of blankets fer next winter.

Here's a brief analogy of Obama's speech:

Obama is like the dude in the bar trying to pick up the "hot" chick...he's bought her a few drinks and he's planning on taking her home....soon. However, all of a sudden in comes a bunch of "hells angel" type bikers....Obama, looks at them, gulps his drink down and whispers in the "hot" chick's ear.."Looks like there will be a fight...excuse me, I'm gonna take a pee, first". Obama heads off to the "boys room", constantly looking over his shoulder....locks the door and climbs out the window....and runs away. Leaving the "hot" chick at the bar...with the tab...and to face the consequences....alone.

So, Nic?
How's it feel to be? A "Barbie Girl" in "Obama's World"?

callmeslick wrote:it is the business of every nation in NATO, as there is a treaty involved protecting the sovereignity of Ukraine.

That's total bullshit! Here learn something:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_37750.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2 ... _relations
http://nato.mfa.gov.ua/en/ukraine-nato/military
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/nato_countries.htm
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/off ... _17120.htm

thank you for the clarification, stating that it is merely an 'agreement' as opposed to a treaty, Darkhorse.
Still, do you think NATO should do nothing here? BTW, not implying you do, you merely didn't state either way.

Here is where treaties come in......not NATO as a whole, only the US and Britain:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... g-war.html

callmeslick wrote:Still, do you think NATO should do nothing here? BTW, not implying you do, you merely didn't state either way.

You asked, here is my 2 cents.

"But a closer look at the Budapest Memorandum shows the specifics might be more complex than some are assuming. Article one of the agreement states:
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine … to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
Reaffirming a “commitment” to Ukraine’s borders and being legally required to go to war are two very different ideas."

With that being said, no we should not get too involved in the Ukraine! Putin is not a dumb ass and has not jumped into this without weighting the options Obama is willing to do. He knows he can push the envelope and not suffer too much. With our military cut to the bone with more cuts coming, going toe to toe on a conventional battlefield is not a good idea.
I say let Russia grow to its former glory and that way when the right side of our political mess comes into power we can fire up the military industrial machine and return to our former glory!!

I'd say...right about now, Slick's head is pulling about 90 inches of mercury...

but, DH, there is that matter of the 1994 accord, which holds a higher level of response than the NATO accord.

Also, I might note that what you seem to be rooting for is the same crew that pissed away a couple of trillion dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to no effect,
at the price of a few hundred million people being subjugated by the Russians beforehand.
Even at the reduced levels, we spend more on our military than the rest of the planet put together. Suffice it to say, Obama has a LOT of weaponry to unload on Russia should he desire to. The question is whether the US public would support it. My gut tells me that this nation is VERY weary of playing tough-guy.

Hey Slick?
Does yer Bull Shit apply to Israel?

callmeslick wrote:but, DH, there is that matter of the 1994 accord, which holds a higher level of response than the NATO accord.

Also, I might note that what you seem to be rooting for is the same crew that pissed away a couple of trillion dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to no effect,
at the price of a few hundred million people being subjugated by the Russians beforehand.
Even at the reduced levels, we spend more on our military than the rest of the planet put together. Suffice it to say, Obama has a LOT of weaponry to unload on Russia should he desire to. The question is whether the US public would support it. My gut tells me that this nation is VERY weary of playing tough-guy.

I am going home now so will comment on this tomorrow as I will be home all day hangin with CPT Morgan.

Darkhorse wrote:

callmeslick wrote:but, DH, there is that matter of the 1994 accord, which holds a higher level of response than the NATO accord.

Also, I might note that what you seem to be rooting for is the same crew that pissed away a couple of trillion dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to no effect,
at the price of a few hundred million people being subjugated by the Russians beforehand.
Even at the reduced levels, we spend more on our military than the rest of the planet put together. Suffice it to say, Obama has a LOT of weaponry to unload on Russia should he desire to. The question is whether the US public would support it. My gut tells me that this nation is VERY weary of playing tough-guy.

I am going home now so will comment on this tomorrow as I will be home all day hangin with CPT Morgan.

thanks for the initial(civilized, what a breath of fresh air about these parts) response. Say hi to the good Captain. Thats a summer favorite of mine, of recent years!