Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
CODE PROJECT For Those Who Code
  • Home
  • Articles
  • FAQ
Community
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. Washington Post: HOLMES: U.S. backtracks on missile shield

Washington Post: HOLMES: U.S. backtracks on missile shield

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
comhelpannouncementlounge
114 Posts 11 Posters 1 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Stan Shannon

    Which is an argument for returning to a true free market health care system.

    Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

    L Offline
    L Offline
    Lost User
    wrote on last edited by
    #61

    IMO if the system used in the United States was more equal it would be more just and might just have universal beneficial effects. As such, a true market healthcare system is as attainable as Perfect Capitalism (that's capitalism without those periodic financial crisis) and, in my view, that can't happen.

    S 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • O Oakman

      Richard A. Abbott wrote:

      Not as a "World Policeman" but as a means for mutual defence.

      With all due respect for the UK, exactly how much defending of the US can we count on?

      Richard A. Abbott wrote:

      those Russians have not yet reached IMO the status of trustworthy friend.

      They haven't yet reached the status of civilized nation, have they? The new Russia seems to be ruled by thugs from the NKVD who were smart enough to become crime lords before their friends did.

      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #62

      Oakman wrote:

      With all due respect for the UK, exactly how much defending of the US can we count on?

      If Britain wasn't fully committed to come when called, then Gulf War I and Gulf War II and post 9/11 into Afganistan would not have seen any kind of support from Britain. In fact, after 9/11, we came before you asked!

      Oakman wrote:

      status of civilized nation

      True, very true.

      C O 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • O Oakman

        Bob Emmett wrote:

        Presumably these are citizens of the USA? Everyone else seems to want either your money or your lives.

        Germany and the UK are paid around 3 billion a year as rent for the American bases in their country. The payrolls for the locals in those two countries alone are gi-normous and the amount of money the American GI spends locally has a major impact on the local economy. The primary purpose of those bases, or so I am told, is to protect the UK and Germany from those countries which might wish to do one or both of them, harm. Of course the love and undying gratitude of the average Brit or German and the total lack of any anti-American prejudice shown to our tourists more than makes up for our investment.

        Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

        C Offline
        C Offline
        Chris Austin
        wrote on last edited by
        #63

        Didn't congress recently (sometime during the 'W' years) overturn a pentagon directed closure of a base in Puerto Rico? Wasn't the reasoning basically that they needed the income from the base to support a portion of the local economy? It's insanely frustrating.

        Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?

        O 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          Mike Mullikin wrote:

          Does Australia require the control of satellites from the Northern hemisphere for proper defense?

          Probably

          Mike Mullikin wrote:

          If we aren't defending/policing the world our requirements are significantly reduced.

          Oh FFS

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #64

          Josh Gray wrote:

          Oh FFS

          Why FFS? If the US keeps its nose out of other nation's affairs and requires its military only to defend its own borders (like nearly every other nation) then we need less military (soldiers & weaponry) than we have today. No?

          L 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Lost User

            From what I can see that ship has already sailed.

            S Offline
            S Offline
            Stan Shannon
            wrote on last edited by
            #65

            Mike Mullikin wrote:

            From what I can see that ship has already sailed.

            I agree. But all the better - its an overcrowed, unsound vessel, so it will soon sink and take most with it. Good riddance to them all...

            Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L Lost User

              Oakman wrote:

              With all due respect for the UK, exactly how much defending of the US can we count on?

              If Britain wasn't fully committed to come when called, then Gulf War I and Gulf War II and post 9/11 into Afganistan would not have seen any kind of support from Britain. In fact, after 9/11, we came before you asked!

              Oakman wrote:

              status of civilized nation

              True, very true.

              C Offline
              C Offline
              Chris Austin
              wrote on last edited by
              #66

              Richard A. Abbott wrote:

              If Britain wasn't fully committed to come when called, then Gulf War I and Gulf War II and post 9/11 into Afganistan would not have seen any kind of support from Britain. In fact, after 9/11, we came before you asked!

              I absolutely agree with you. It seemed, before our civilian leadership decided that Iraq needed to be liberated, NATO was ready to bring hell to anybody who wanted a piece of it.

              Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?

              L 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • L Lost User

                Oakman wrote:

                Of course not, they expect us to do it for them and pay them for the privilege.

                Do we? Can you actually show some evidence of this or it is just an assumption? Seems to me there is a lot of mutual benefit in us sharing access to the Pine Ridge installation. A few highlights from the Wikipedia article Pine Gap was set aside for the United States Air Force's control station for Defense Support Program satellites that monitor heat emissions from missiles, giving first warning of ballistic missile launches. He described the CIA-run facility as the ground control and processing station for geosynchronous satellites engaged in signals intelligence collection, outlining four categories of signals collected: * telemetry from advanced weapons development, such as ballistic missiles, used for arms control verification; * signals from anti-missile and anti-aircraft radars; * transmissions intended for communications satellites; and * microwave emissions, such as long distance telephone calls. My personal favorite In 1999, with the Australian Government refusing to give details to an Australian Senate committee on treaties, Intelligence expert Professor Des Ball from the Australian National University was called to give an outline of Pine Gap Seems to me its important to someone. Trust me, not many people would want to live out there by choice. If you guys dont want it we could always give it back to the "Traditional Land Owners" :)

                O Offline
                O Offline
                Oakman
                wrote on last edited by
                #67

                Josh Gray wrote:

                Seems to me there is a lot of mutual benefit in us sharing access to the Pine Ridge installation

                Josh, you're defending Oz against an attack that never happened. I didn't say that the Spooks R Us branch of the US government were providing a service out of the goodness of their hearts. They obviously think its worthwhile to maintain Pine Ridge. However, if we stopped worrying about the South Pacific, we could go home. The Oz could either pay the full freight or, as you say, give it back to the indigenes. AFAIK, Australia does not maintain any similar looking-posts in the North Pacific - while the US does. AFAIK, Australia does not maintain any looking posts in the South Atlantic, but the US does. etc. Out of some idiotic belief that we are supposed to be the policeman of the world. X| OZ is much smarter. You guys cooperate with us in your neck of the woods, maintain a much smaller armed forces than you would if SEATO didn't guarantee that the US would react to any attack on Australia, and generally let us take point while you open the beer. The only point I was making was that if the US decided to pull back its forces and focus on North America in exactly the same manner that Australia minds its own business, then the US would be better off. The icing on the cake for you guys is that we would get caught up in idiocies in the middle east that we kept black mailing you into sending a battalion over to make it look like we weren't alone.

                Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                L 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • L Lost User

                  Josh Gray wrote:

                  Oh FFS

                  Why FFS? If the US keeps its nose out of other nation's affairs and requires its military only to defend its own borders (like nearly every other nation) then we need less military (soldiers & weaponry) than we have today. No?

                  L Offline
                  L Offline
                  Lost User
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #68

                  Mike Mullikin wrote:

                  Why FFS?

                  Because I dont imagine that our discussion will be worthwhile as you seem to have what I consider to be an overly simplistic view. Sorry if I appeared rude, it was not my intention. I find the attitude that many Americans have of yourselves being the World Police offensive.

                  Mike Mullikin wrote:

                  If the US keeps its nose out of other nation's affairs and requires its military only to defend its own borders (like nearly every other nation) then we need less military (soldiers & weaponry) than we have today. No?

                  In an ideal world perhaps. In the real world some presence in other countries is required for your own defense. The example of Pine Gap that I gave earlier is an example of this.

                  L 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    IMO if the system used in the United States was more equal it would be more just and might just have universal beneficial effects. As such, a true market healthcare system is as attainable as Perfect Capitalism (that's capitalism without those periodic financial crisis) and, in my view, that can't happen.

                    S Offline
                    S Offline
                    Stan Shannon
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #69

                    Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                    was more equal it would be more just and might just have universal beneficial effects.

                    Well, that is just fucking stupid, Richard. Its another shineing example of the utter, abysimally stupid principles of the left being forced upon us which I simply no longer have any tolerance for. You fools are destroying our civilization. Any thing that is guaranteed to be "equal" is guaranteed to be equally bad. It means no freedom of choice. It means no freedom period. I'm supposed to give up my freedom because other people cannot handle their own. Freedom, by definition, means inequality of results and outcomes. If you can't handle that, humble yourself to the mercy of my christian charity, or get the fuck out of America.

                    Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • O Oakman

                      Josh Gray wrote:

                      Seems to me there is a lot of mutual benefit in us sharing access to the Pine Ridge installation

                      Josh, you're defending Oz against an attack that never happened. I didn't say that the Spooks R Us branch of the US government were providing a service out of the goodness of their hearts. They obviously think its worthwhile to maintain Pine Ridge. However, if we stopped worrying about the South Pacific, we could go home. The Oz could either pay the full freight or, as you say, give it back to the indigenes. AFAIK, Australia does not maintain any similar looking-posts in the North Pacific - while the US does. AFAIK, Australia does not maintain any looking posts in the South Atlantic, but the US does. etc. Out of some idiotic belief that we are supposed to be the policeman of the world. X| OZ is much smarter. You guys cooperate with us in your neck of the woods, maintain a much smaller armed forces than you would if SEATO didn't guarantee that the US would react to any attack on Australia, and generally let us take point while you open the beer. The only point I was making was that if the US decided to pull back its forces and focus on North America in exactly the same manner that Australia minds its own business, then the US would be better off. The icing on the cake for you guys is that we would get caught up in idiocies in the middle east that we kept black mailing you into sending a battalion over to make it look like we weren't alone.

                      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                      L Offline
                      L Offline
                      Lost User
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #70

                      Oakman wrote:

                      kept black mailing you into sending a battalion over to make it look like we weren't alone

                      Thats because you know our beer is better and that we'll bring a case or two for you guys. On a more serious note I think you'll find the Australia SAS' contribution in Iraq and Afghanistan was quite significant

                      O 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • C Chris Austin

                        Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                        If Britain wasn't fully committed to come when called, then Gulf War I and Gulf War II and post 9/11 into Afganistan would not have seen any kind of support from Britain. In fact, after 9/11, we came before you asked!

                        I absolutely agree with you. It seemed, before our civilian leadership decided that Iraq needed to be liberated, NATO was ready to bring hell to anybody who wanted a piece of it.

                        Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Lost User
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #71

                        NATO is supposed to be a coalition of the willing for mutual defence. But, as shown by the willing for combat duties in Afghanistan, NATO may as well not exist. Only Canada, UK and USA seem to be holding up their membership card of NATO with any degree of honour.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • S Stan Shannon

                          Oakman wrote:

                          It's also because they are almost totally dependent on the US for defense against any serious threat.

                          Absolutely. It should be interesting to see what happens after the US social welfare state eliminates that protection for them. I suspect the "Original Nations" or whatever they call their Indians up there, will just kick their asses and take over again.

                          Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                          O Offline
                          O Offline
                          Oakman
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #72

                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                          It should be interesting to see what happens after the US social welfare state eliminates that protection for them

                          Oh don't be so harsh. After all they gave us Bill Shatner.

                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                          will just kick their asses and take over again

                          My impression is that the Canadians, one on one, are just as tough as the Americans. I was simply pointing out that they knew they didn't have to spend any money on their defense so they didn't. Why should they? If we stop, they will start.

                          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                          S 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • L Lost User

                            Oakman wrote:

                            With all due respect for the UK, exactly how much defending of the US can we count on?

                            If Britain wasn't fully committed to come when called, then Gulf War I and Gulf War II and post 9/11 into Afganistan would not have seen any kind of support from Britain. In fact, after 9/11, we came before you asked!

                            Oakman wrote:

                            status of civilized nation

                            True, very true.

                            O Offline
                            O Offline
                            Oakman
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #73

                            Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                            would not have seen any kind of support from Britain

                            But I wasn't asking about support. I was asking about defense of the US homeland to match the defense of the UK that our bases provide. It's not a matter of whether your heart is in the right place, but whether you have enough men and material to help protect us, if we are attacked.

                            Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                            L 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • L Lost User

                              Mike Mullikin wrote:

                              Why FFS?

                              Because I dont imagine that our discussion will be worthwhile as you seem to have what I consider to be an overly simplistic view. Sorry if I appeared rude, it was not my intention. I find the attitude that many Americans have of yourselves being the World Police offensive.

                              Mike Mullikin wrote:

                              If the US keeps its nose out of other nation's affairs and requires its military only to defend its own borders (like nearly every other nation) then we need less military (soldiers & weaponry) than we have today. No?

                              In an ideal world perhaps. In the real world some presence in other countries is required for your own defense. The example of Pine Gap that I gave earlier is an example of this.

                              L Offline
                              L Offline
                              Lost User
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #74

                              Josh Gray wrote:

                              I find the attitude that many Americans have of yourselves being the World Police offensive.

                              Errr... because you think we should not act like we're the world police? Neither do I. I want us to stop. Or because you think it's OK that we have military presence in 130+ countries?

                              Josh Gray wrote:

                              In the real world some presence in other countries is required for your own defense. The example of Pine Gap that I gave earlier is an example of this. Quote Selected Text

                              I could more easily handle joint intelligence & command/control installations like Pine Gap if there weren't so many other bad examples.

                              L 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • C Chris Austin

                                Didn't congress recently (sometime during the 'W' years) overturn a pentagon directed closure of a base in Puerto Rico? Wasn't the reasoning basically that they needed the income from the base to support a portion of the local economy? It's insanely frustrating.

                                Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --?

                                O Offline
                                O Offline
                                Oakman
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #75

                                Chris Austin wrote:

                                Wasn't the reasoning basically that they needed the income from the base to support a portion of the local economy

                                I remember something of that - and every closure of every base even within this country is bitterly fought by the congressional delegation of the State that is losing a cash cow. My guess is that if the U.S. pulled all of its forces out of NATO (an organization than no longer has a purpose) a number of countries in the EU would be effected very negatively. Germany would be in danger of doing an Iceland.

                                Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • L Lost User

                                  Oakman wrote:

                                  kept black mailing you into sending a battalion over to make it look like we weren't alone

                                  Thats because you know our beer is better and that we'll bring a case or two for you guys. On a more serious note I think you'll find the Australia SAS' contribution in Iraq and Afghanistan was quite significant

                                  O Offline
                                  O Offline
                                  Oakman
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #76

                                  Josh Gray wrote:

                                  SAS

                                  Those guys are scary. Like Delta Force only with backup. I wonder how many of them have gone into private security work?

                                  Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                                  L 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • O Oakman

                                    Josh Gray wrote:

                                    SAS

                                    Those guys are scary. Like Delta Force only with backup. I wonder how many of them have gone into private security work?

                                    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                                    L Offline
                                    L Offline
                                    Lost User
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #77

                                    Oakman wrote:

                                    I wonder how many of them have gone into private security work?

                                    No idea. They are pretty clandestine even within Oz. I've read a few times that they were among the first troops into Iraq months before war was declared.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • S Stan Shannon

                                      Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                      was more equal it would be more just and might just have universal beneficial effects.

                                      Well, that is just fucking stupid, Richard. Its another shineing example of the utter, abysimally stupid principles of the left being forced upon us which I simply no longer have any tolerance for. You fools are destroying our civilization. Any thing that is guaranteed to be "equal" is guaranteed to be equally bad. It means no freedom of choice. It means no freedom period. I'm supposed to give up my freedom because other people cannot handle their own. Freedom, by definition, means inequality of results and outcomes. If you can't handle that, humble yourself to the mercy of my christian charity, or get the fuck out of America.

                                      Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                      L Offline
                                      L Offline
                                      Lost User
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #78

                                      Personally, I wouldn't want to go cap-in-hand to any charity. It is demeaning. I am better than that. My family would deserve better than that. And if it means government taking a small amount of money out of my salary each week/month for the benefit of all citizens then I am quite happy for that to happen. Everybody without exception benefits. And these benefits I talk about are not supplied by "means testing" and the begging bowl never needs to see the light of day. As you say, freedom is the right to choose. And in Britain, I choose benefit of health care for all. Stan, I believe we both will never agree on what kind of health care is best. Thus, we must therefore agree to disagree.

                                      L S 2 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • L Lost User

                                        Josh Gray wrote:

                                        I find the attitude that many Americans have of yourselves being the World Police offensive.

                                        Errr... because you think we should not act like we're the world police? Neither do I. I want us to stop. Or because you think it's OK that we have military presence in 130+ countries?

                                        Josh Gray wrote:

                                        In the real world some presence in other countries is required for your own defense. The example of Pine Gap that I gave earlier is an example of this. Quote Selected Text

                                        I could more easily handle joint intelligence & command/control installations like Pine Gap if there weren't so many other bad examples.

                                        L Offline
                                        L Offline
                                        Lost User
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #79

                                        Mike Mullikin wrote:

                                        I find the attitude that many Americans have of yourselves being the World Police offensive. Errr... because you think we should not act like we're the world police? Neither do I. I want us to stop.

                                        Because you dont act like police in any sense. You look out primarily for your own interests as you should and as other countries do. Dont try and dress it up as some kind of charity that the rest of us should be grateful for. To do so is offensive.

                                        Mike Mullikin wrote:

                                        I could more easily handle joint intelligence & command/control istallations like Pine Gap if there weren't so many other bad examples.

                                        Which was my original point. Your comment that I responded to... "In fact, I'd take it even further and pull ALL U.S. military personnel, hardware and bases from all foreign countries - Japan, South Korea, Germany, UK, etc... All of it comes home and defends our ports and borders." ... is again overly simplistic, misleading and nationalistic because there are examples of US military presence overseas that is very important to your own security. Suggesting that they are here in OZ solely as a "farvour" to us, your poor cousins is again offensive. For me to suggest that you should be grateful to us for allowing them to be here would be similarly offensive because there is obviously a direct benefit to us as well. And your assumption that you paid for the hardware is also most likely wrong, probably unprovable and further evidence of your own poorly informed attitude.

                                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • O Oakman

                                          Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                                          would not have seen any kind of support from Britain

                                          But I wasn't asking about support. I was asking about defense of the US homeland to match the defense of the UK that our bases provide. It's not a matter of whether your heart is in the right place, but whether you have enough men and material to help protect us, if we are attacked.

                                          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                                          L Offline
                                          L Offline
                                          Lost User
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #80

                                          Britain has nowhere near the size of armed forces that the United States enjoys, and you know that as well as I do. Consequently, we don't have the same quantity of equipment available at our disposal as is evident given my first sentence. But whatever men and materials there exists would no doubt be made available as part of your defence. And if I were 25-30 years younger, I'll be rubbing shoulders alongside you. Size isn't everything, but we would do whatever we could possibly do.

                                          O 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups