Are We Allied to a Corpse?

Link

The Post story about Britain and France, the leading military powers of NATO Europe, depleting their smart-bomb supply in a one-month clash with an African nation of 6 million, and begging the Yanks to come back and win the war for them, raises a major question.

Is the most successful alliance in history, which kept the Red Army of Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev from smashing through the Fulda Gap and reaching the Channel, a hollow shell?

Is NATO, without America, a paper tiger?

This was a fantastic article by Pat Buchanan, political
commentator, one of many that I have found to be great.
Addressing the issue of France and Great Britain
already running out of the power to take Qaddafi on in
the air is quite shocking to me. Libya is a nation of
merely 6 million people in the Saharan Desert of North
Africa yet the supposedly mighty Western powers of
Britain and France can’t even manage to wage a
powerful air war against them for more than a month.
That is rather pathetic.

Come on Europeans, is that really the best you can
do? One month in the air over a Desert nation in Africa
has you drained? I really hate to say this because it
sounds so arrogantly pro-American but we are the only
ones apparently who have any serious fire power in NATO,
basically we are protecting all the other nations not all
nations working to protect each other. You spend
billions every year in welfare spending but you can’t
spend any to build a strong and resilient military that
can single-handedly defend your nation?

What happened to the Great Britain which fought off
Nazi Germany basically all alone for over 2 years?
What happened to the France… well forget it. Point is,
you lot used to be the masters of military and warfare,
where did all of that go?

Maybe it’s about time to declare NATO a failure and
bring all of our American troops, supplies, and
firepower back home and let European nations defend
themselves entirely. If they can manage that good for
them, I support it! But if they cannot, I will not be
surprised. If the US pulled out of NATO watch
European military spending skyrocket.

Oh the arrogance! How dare yankees speak like that to the greatest empires of human civilisation when thy itself as a nation are virtually still in pampers! Oh! I shall hoof and I shall woof! Come back to me in a thousand years...

Stop being such an idiot man, calling any group of people pathetic merely by judging their ability to afford bombs IS PATHETIC! Get off here.

reply to post by movetovanuatu


Good post, are you going to call me a doo-doo head
and throw your pacifier at me too? I presented my
argument and position on the matter, how about you
maturely present yours?

Well said man, couldn't agree with you more and I am British.
In the UK we are more concerned with giving money to benefit spongers than we are concerned with defense of the realm. The majority of us feel revulsion at the way our tax money is used to support these benefit sponging scum but the government is more concerned with pandering to them so as to secure their votes.
Americans should look and learn at what happens to a country when you let socialism in.

Originally posted by Misoir
Maybe it’s about time to declare NATO a failure and
bring all of our American troops, supplies, and
firepower back home and let European nations defend
themselves entirely. If they can manage that good for
them, I support it! But if they cannot, I will not be
surprised. If the US pulled out of NATO watch
European military spending skyrocket.

edit on 4/19/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)

I think that's a great idea. The US should protect itself on it's own territory instead of becoming more and more in debt because of all this fighting going on. Ofcourse this would change the army, since it would not be fighting but just doing what exactly? Hanging out at bases, clean all the warfare equipment over and over again, fly around aimlessly since there will be no nations that would try and mount an attack? Ofcourse the US could then choose to invest in their soldiers by giving them education, basically the army and universities would merge eventually and everyone in the nation would join the army just because of that. No risk of being sent to war, just wear a uniform, shoot a couple of rounds, do the chores and pass exams, get a civilian/army job. Imagine the R&D so many brains could do! And what a reassurance to know every able male and female would be properly trained as a soldier in case SHTF.

Meanwhile other countries would become more relaxed and would start to disarm and dismantle weapon production facilities since there isn't a army nextdoor following orders from people who believe the US is the only sane country in the world.

It's not that I'm ungrateful but I didn't ask for these wars. I'm actually glad my countries government recently decided to cut on the army, in brief:

- 12000 people laid off (out of 69.000)
- 19 F16's, one KDC10 plane, 4 antimine ships (6 remaining), 4 patrol ships, 1 supply ship (F16's will be used for spare parts to keep the remaining 68 F16's flying)
- all 17 cougar choppers
- all 80 leopard tanks (since the danger of communism is no longer a viable reason, which is why they were bought in the first place, almost never seen action)
- 6 houwitzers

Other EU countries are also cutting on armies, a trend which will last the next 30 years ultimately leading to a unified EU army which will replace the many splintered armed forces. Hopefully I can live to see a disarmed world, don't think it will ever happen though.

Point is, you lot used to be the masters of military and warfare, where did all of that go?

When was that exactly? Looking at my own countries' history there were some medieval wars but nothing outstanding, during WWI it remained neutral (because it didn't have much of an army) and during WW2 it took a few days to defeat the 'army' (there was a brave underground resistance though).

The EU have mostly been farmers and traders, not fighters, only a few outstanding soldiers. If you compare the EU to certain Asian countries, now those were warriors who made an art out of war having martial arts monasteries, bushido codes. In my country it's always been civilians joining the army for money, with little training, no warrior's culture, pisspoor tactics (just look at how generals used to let 2 armies armed with muskets march at eachother while shooting, at best trying a flanking tactic). Sure the Roman empire had it going on but they failed, not because of their military but because of internal conflicting ideoligies.

Your opinion is predicated on the idea that modern wars are being fought with the idea of what most us understand to be "winning" - (destroying the military opposition, taking out the political leaders = war over).
You will notice that the US is still "fighting" in Iraq and Afghanistan even though we achieved those objectives. So why are we still fighting? Wars are expensive and rack up huge debts very quickly. Whoever controls the debt controls everything. These aren't wars of national aggression but economic aggression where the supposed "winners" gain nothing but increased debt which is sinking the US faster than a boat made of swiss cheese. The banks are running the show my friend.
You will notice that everything the US does turns to failure, including wars. The only answer they ever have is to throw more money at the problem.

I think we all know that eventually there will be American troops in Libya. My bet is that this operation has been in the planning stages for at least a year and perhaps longer. And maybe even an continuation of the New Crusades started by the neocons just as Iraq and Afghanistan was. NATO is being used to add credibility to the coming invasion by the US.

All spelled out in the PNAC...

www.atlanticfreepress.com...


www.abovetopsecret.com...

War is Americas only growth industry.

Why is all this taking place NOW? Interesting reading....www.christianzionism.org...

and....

www.exminister.org...