Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (96819)	4/29/2003 6:11:30 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Kyrosi, You wrote this tongue in cheek, no? Mike@notsure.com

To: KyrosL who wrote (96819)	4/29/2003 6:16:53 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The rate of increase in the US defense budget is larger than any of the four's entire military budget. You need to buy a copy of the '02 July/August Foreign Affairs Magazine and read Wohlforth's and Brooks' article. It opened my eyes as to the nature and extent of our power. Before reading it, I had no idea as to its extent. It really is mind-boggling to the point of becoming surreal. I'm not arguing that we use our power wisely, that we're not an empire, and the usual bugaboos. Simply would like to see you incorporate into your thinking how absolutely, incredibly overpowering it is. Actually, Fault Line has posted it here: Message 18407694 and here: Message 18407695 It opens up the debate as to the proper use of that power, etc., but also does a good job of quantifiying it.

To: KyrosL who wrote (96819)	4/29/2003 6:50:34 PM
From: Dennis O'Bell	Respond to of 281500

Luxemburg has one of the main ingredients for today's new army: money. You're seriously suggesting that the gnomes with their hands on all that money in the Luxembourg, Belgium, or Swiss banks are going to allow any of it to be spent on military development ? I just don't think so.

To: KyrosL who wrote (96819)	4/29/2003 8:39:47 PM
From: maceng2	Respond to of 281500

European teenagers are not much different than American teenagers, and can be enticed into a technology-based, professional, very low casualty army, just as American teenagers are -- especially given European teenage unemployment rates. The British armed forces are doing lots of TV recruiting adverts now. It's my belief (don't know much about marketing) that a well placed advert can get a lot of fence sitters to take the plunge and make a decision. The adverts have all the usual adventure, see foreign places etc, but finish with a nice touch.. A guy pulls out his mobile, and says "you already have a communications device, just make the call". Yep, I can see that one working. Recent news helps too I guess.

To: KyrosL who wrote (96819)	4/29/2003 9:01:32 PM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

>>These moves are the first steps toward creating a European Union defense force< Yup!Was wondering what it would take for them to get the message that they would not have control of their destiny as long as they did not have control of their military.It took GWB and his PNAC team to wake them up to their reality. Well done boys. In ten years they will be saying : " You are either with us or against us ",and MAY have the means of supporting that assertion. >>essentially obsoleting NATO<< I doubt it Kyrosl.They will not pretend to compete with NATO for a long long time,if ever.They will however in a relatively short time have the means of conducting adventures in places THEY may consider a threat to THEIR security,and embark on strategic initiatives such as wars on nations considered hostile to THEM. Those who underestimate the importance of these alignments need to step back and consider how easy it is for highly technical cultures to bring formidable forces to bare, given the necessity or perception of one. I have stated here a number of times the blowback from the current administration's propensity to regard any nation that does not see eye to eye with them as " irrelevant ". They will be relevant. I have stated here a number of times the likelihood that a new arms race would unfold in the aftermath of this latest adventure,where these and other nations KNEW they were being lied to and the " coal-ition " was acting on the premise that they could do what they damn well pleased. This will be just one of the sparks that lights the eventual fire of nations from America's past umbrella protection venturing outward with their own capabilities and determination. The window has been thrown open. Enjoy the view.<GGG> KC@NewWorldDisorder.CON

To: KyrosL who wrote (96819)	4/29/2003 10:01:40 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<<The new army that the US demonstrated in Afghanistan and Iraq can be built by any power that is sufficiently rich and determined to spend the money.>>> The arms race was over when the invisible f-117.s flew over Baghdad 12 years ago. We won. No amount of money can buy our capabilities which were built step by step from the time of the Industrial Revolution.The Russians were the last serious challengers but folded. But that still leaves the threats of WMD's and a new type of war to fight. Sig