Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Palin open to war with Russia if Russia attacks NATO allies « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 ... 12

cyberdude557

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11834
Offline
#15 : September 12, 2008, 12:29:25 AM

Someone needs to read the NATO charter: "An attack on one is an attack on all"

Palin is right. If Georgia and Ukraine are members of the NATO alliance and Putin decides to invade, then we have an obligation to help defend our allies.

Now if Obama is elected and Russia starts invading NATO allies and Obama does nothing....then NATO is dead. And we will have just stabbed our allies in Europe in the back. Those countries will never help us again on anything and our status around the world will surely be destroyed.

So this is a question I want the media to ask Obama. What would he do if Russia attacks a NATO ally?

Remember, NATO worked during the Cold War because we convinced the Russians that if they attack a NATO country, we launch our nukes. They didnt call our bluff on that one. If we have a weak president who refuses to lay down the threat....then Russia will call our bluff.

cyberdude557

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11834
Offline
#16 : September 12, 2008, 12:38:47 AM

They've both been promised NATO membership. So yes, it matters.

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28852
Offline
#17 : September 12, 2008, 12:47:16 AM

Who cares? Palin was coached for all of these answers. Do you doubt this?



Guest
#18 : September 12, 2008, 12:49:14 AM

Mccain likely wont survive his first term and this lady is gonna be president? Sorry im not buying that

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28852
Offline
#19 : September 12, 2008, 12:51:04 AM


She would have tons of people around her and they would be advising her. Same for Obama. It's not as if
she would be sitting in her office, wrapped in a bearskin, deciding on whether or not to invade Russia.

But SNL can have a field day with that! Have they done anything on her yet?


TheGladiator

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1582
Offline
#20 : September 12, 2008, 12:53:34 AM



This writeup below seems fair.  I caught a little of the second part which was on Nightline.  It was more on energy policy where you could tell she was in her element.  At one point he pushed a little prefacing a question with "call me a cynic, but.." and made a point about her position and maybe McCain's evolving on energy policy.   She let him finish and said, "you're a cynic" and this is why.....


http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=16089626

 Showing a confidence, in prepared answers
By Alessandra Stanley
Friday, September 12, 2008

"I got lost in a blizzard of words there," Charles Gibson of ABC said to Governor Sarah Palin, with a trace of irritation in his voice. "Is that a yes?"

Palin didn't look rattled or lose her cool in her first interview with Gibson, the network anchor, on Thursday night, but sailed through with general answers, sticking to talking points that flowed out quickly and spiritedly — but a little too much by rote to satisfy her interviewer that she was giving his questions serious consideration. When Palin seemed not to know exactly what the Bush Doctrine is, Gibson made a point of explaining exactly what it means — pre-emptive self-defense — and demanded that she tell him whether she agreed with it.

ABC News delivered the first glimpse of Palin without a script or a cheering audience, and it was a strained and illuminating conversation. Palin, who kept inserting Gibson's nickname, "Charlie," into her answers, as if to convey an old hand's conviviality, tried to project self-confidence, poise and even expertise: She let Gibson know that she had personally reassured the Georgian prime minister and correctly pronounced his last name, Saakashvili. At times, her voice hesitated, and she looked like a student trying to bend prepared answers to fit unexpected questions.

Gibson, who sat back in his chair and wriggled his foot impatiently, had the skeptical, annoyed tone of a university president who agrees to interview the daughter of a trustee, but doesn't believe she merits admission.

When he asked her, slowly and solemnly to "look the country in the eye" and say whether she truly felt qualified to be vice president and possibly commander in chief, Gibson seemed to expect Palin to express at least a moment of humility and self-doubt. Palin said she had no doubts whatsoever when asked to be Senator John McCain's running mate. ("I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink. You have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink.") Gibson suggested that her brash, unwavering confidence sounded like "hubris."

That first portion of ABC's three-part interview, broadcast on "World News," was meaty, touching on Israel, Iraq and Russia and aspects of her Christian faith, but it is unlikely to end the debate about her qualifications or the Republican complaints about news media bias and sexism. Mostly, it supplied all sides with lots of fresh material.

It was the first real test of Palin's ability to handle questions about foreign and domestic policy, but almost as much of a challenge for Gibson. He was chosen by the McCain campaign for the first interview partly because he is seen as courteous, mild-mannered and unlikely to play "gotcha" with such an important "get."

His was a tough road to navigate. If Gibson were too soft, Democrats would accuse him of being afraid of the Republican news-media-bashing machine, which has been scouring the press and Senator Barack Obama's speeches for any hint of sexism or elitism. If his questions were too tough, he would very likely stir up charges of sexism or elitism. His questions were tough but he was careful in the first part of the interview not to ask anything too frivolous (viewers of "World News" didn't hear questions about lipstick, pigs or juggling family and career). But his attitude was at times supercilious: He asked if a nuclear Iran posed an "existential threat" to Israel, as if it were the land of Sartre, not Sabras.

It was a tough first interview for Palin, but it was also a cautionary dress-rehearsal for Obama's running mate, Senator Joseph Biden Jr., in his debate with Palin next month: On television, tone matters as much as content.



cyberdude557

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11834
Offline
#21 : September 12, 2008, 01:04:31 AM

You are acting like it is not our business if an NATO ally is attacked. We have signed a treaty with these other NATO countries. To come out and say we are no longer going to honor that alliance, we will throw Europe under the bus.

The leadership in Russia is power hungry and wants their sphere of influence back. You are right that they want nothing to do with the United States. However, they want to reconstitute the Soviet Union's power base. And for them to accomplish that, they would have to take away NATO allies, other non-NATO allies, and democracies that are crying for help and protection from the west. And that's where the tension occurs with the US. And if we turn our backs on them, that will send a loud and clear message to the world and good luck ever getting help next time we're attacked by someone.

Lamond

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 6512
Offline
#22 : September 12, 2008, 05:22:39 AM

Georgia instigated that fight with Russia. Kinda like Mexico messing with New Mexico. What would we do? The exact same thing.

And Nato doesn't include either Georgia and Ukraine. No such thing as almost a member.

Russia only has power because we have squandered ours. But their backyard is their problem. Not ours.


cyberdude557

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11834
Offline
#23 : September 12, 2008, 05:38:41 AM

Have you seen their stock market since the Georgia invasion? It's taken a nose dive! Investors pulled out over $25 billion dollars. For Russia, that is a HELL of a lot of money they lost.

You need to remember that Moscow is not a communist town anymore. There is a lot of capitalism there now and if the government starts up another cold war, the economy is going to tank and will rely completely on oil. If oil prices then dive, the country will go into depression.

If you invest your money in Russia and that country starts screwing around with war and cold war rhetoric, you feel safe leaving your money there? Hell no. You are pulling it out. And that's exactly what happened.

Lamond

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 6512
Offline
#24 : September 12, 2008, 05:46:35 AM

I don't have any $$ invested in Russia. If their economy tanks, that's good for us. No cold war.

How about we take care of us and let them worry about them?


kmitchell

****
Starter

Posts : 964
Offline
#25 : September 12, 2008, 05:50:21 AM

I don't have any $$ invested in Russia. If their economy tanks, that's good for us. No cold war.

How about we take care of us and let them worry about them?

Exactly. A lot of americans think it is our responsibility to get in everyone elses' business.


cyberdude557

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11834
Offline
#26 : September 12, 2008, 05:51:37 AM

I don't have any $$ invested in Russia. If their economy tanks, that's good for us. No cold war.

How about we take care of us and let them worry about them?

Exactly. A lot of americans think it is our responsibility to get in everyone elses' business.

People said the same thing about Nazi Germany.

kmitchell

****
Starter

Posts : 964
Offline
#27 : September 12, 2008, 05:56:18 AM

We are Nazi Germany. What are you trying to say? Who conquers countries, installs puppet governments, tortures resistance fighters, and spies on their own people? Oh yeah, that us.


Lamond

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 6512
Offline
#28 : September 12, 2008, 06:04:35 AM

Well KM, I don't exactly think we're Nazi Germany but we are heading down that road, much to my chagrin.

IIRC, we tried to stay out of WWII. And before cyber comes back with some conspiricy theory about Pearl Harbor, I'll give you the fact that we needed to help the rest of the world stay out of Germany's grip. That, however is a totally different bailiwick than what we're dealing with now. Germany, Italy and Japan wanted to rule the whole world and had the wherewithall to pull it off.

There isn't anyone in the world trying that right now nor do they have the ability to do so. Except us. Time for a course correction.

We aren't the whole world or their parents, so we should mind our own business and let the rest of the world tend to theirs.


kmitchell

****
Starter

Posts : 964
Offline
#29 : September 12, 2008, 06:08:25 AM

We haven't carried out policies as far as Nazi Germany did, but we are still carrying out the same policies. They put Jews in camps without trial. We put suspected terrorists in camps without trial. Our civilian collateral damage is past 10% of what they did already.

I would vote Ron Paul for sure if he even had a marginal chance of winning an election. He wants to pull all US troops back to the US where they belong.

Page: 1 2 3 4 ... 12
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Palin open to war with Russia if Russia attacks NATO allies « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools