The High Price of Friendship - do USA want to stop supporting allies?

Of course new york times. I have never seen so stupid people who comment world affairs (except Le Monde which is much more stupid, but NYT pretends to be "fine" paper, and Le Monde is just "red" one)

About 4 months ago they described Poland as "antisemitic" country because..one guy shouted at polish "first Rabbi" "Poland for Poles" (I won't mention that Israel is jewish state and nobody try to suggest that it's something wrong, not long ago you could have some legal problems if you want to buy a land and you wasn't a Jew) but never mind

So she stated that about 50 millions for Poland is....Too much...And we even have to do it for free...So we have to deploy soldiers, use our equipment, pay our money and stand against european countries like France "just like that". Maybe we should even pay USA for our help?

I always supported our mission in Iraq and polish partnership with USA. Also our war with terror.

But when I read so dumb professor I want only to ask "Where did you get such idiots"???


That war in Iraq cost USA above 150 bln $. And 50 millions is such big amount of money that NYT should write about that?? Maybe USA won't need allies? Maybe such idiots like this "professor" want such situation where whole world would have similiar attitiude to USA as France or Spain?

Jesus. What an idiocy

and last thing:

Should we even be in the position of paying countries to be our partners?)

no, but our service is not for free! We have to pay for out mission. Do we have to do it without any help? So we in this crazy woman point of view - we should to help for our money? Great!

I suppose that when she ask guests for her birthday party they come with gifts and they also get they own food, alcohol and drinks!

Because it should be something great for them just to "BE THERE"

www.nytimes.com...

By PATRICIA WEITSMAN
Published: August 31, 2006

Athens, Ohio

ACCORDING to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the United States has engaged in more multinational operations since the end of the cold war than it did in the preceding 90 years. Relying on one’s partners to fight wars makes sense. After all, it is better to fight with your friends at your side than alone, right?

Wrong.

When waged for the wrong reasons, coalition warfare is more costly and less effective than fighting alone. Coalition warfare requires a high degree of joint planning, consultation and cooperation. The presumption is that this loss of autonomy is more than compensated by having coalition partners provide additional troops on the ground and share the burden of fighting.

Are these in fact the reasons the United States has been using coalition warfare to prosecute wars in the contemporary era? Not exactly. Rather, the United States has used its partners to garner legitimacy for its foreign policy objectives.

[edit on 31-8-2006 by gattaca]

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 31/8/2006 by Mirthful Me]

Gallaca if you are going to get pissy and upset about everything journalists say then you will be one unhappy person. Just because one person wrote this does not mean the US feels this way. I am sure I can find loads and loads and loads and loads...did I mention loads? of anti-US propaganda sponsored in allied countries.

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
Gallaca if you are going to get pissy and upset about everything journalists say then you will be one unhappy person. Just because one person wrote this does not mean the US feels this way. I am sure I can find loads and loads and loads and loads...did I mention loads? of anti-US propaganda sponsored in allied countries.

in Poland we don't have anti-US propaganda. Our anti-US propaganda is shattered

ps-I'm just showing how stupid people could be. It's not against US, it's against some people and NYT, which should be named "New York al-Times"

of course, we have some small anti-US propaganda. But all main newspapers and tv channels are OK. You wont see antything like that in any leading press

[edit on 31-8-2006 by gattaca]

[edit on 31-8-2006 by gattaca]