US GENERAL ELECTION MEGA-THREAD II: Clinton vs. Trump

[Freefall11111]

That's the reason NATO was created: Containment of Russia, specifically in Europe. That's still its main purpose, although its secondary purpose in fighting terrorism has grown significantly.

Let me rephrase. It's one of the reasons why NATO continues to exist.

The primary reason, yes. If Russia had successfully transitioned into a capitalist liberal democracy in the mid 90's, there's a good chance NATO would've ceased to exist (and a not insignificant chance it wouldn't, but still).

[Freefall11111]

Large segments of the American populace don't understand anything about geopolitics.

Doesn't really change the truth of my statement.

No, I just question the relevance of the public's opinions on foreign policy when they're not in charge and wrong.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

You know, it's pretty sad when civilians have more honor and integrity than your view of the US Army.

You never answered my question. How many American civilians is your platoon worth? More? Less?

Yeah, and it's pretty clear that those values imply exactly what the US is upholding currently as a defender of the freedom and independence of the Baltic countries with whom we have agreements with, who are our close allies, and who could not defend themselves against Russia.

Every american life is equal that to a one of my soldiers. Defenders of the american freedom not the foreign one.

The United States Armed Forces haven't been solely about protecting America since at least 1949, and there have been a number of instances before that, as well. I assume that you joined the military with the full knowledge that we were a NATO signatory, that this required us to come to the defense of our allies, and that you joined freely and of your own will, understanding what your duties would be as a result of this choice. As you now scorn these duties, and look down upon those who you are obligated to protect as a member of the military of a NATO signatory nation, I strongly suggest that when your term ends, you do whatever branch of the military you belong to a huge favor, and do not re-enlist. This was obviously an enormous mistake on your part, and everyone would likely be better off if you moved on to a field where you can fulfill your responsibilities without excessive resentment or feeling of resentment against those who you may have to protect one day.

Who the fuck are you to tell me when and when I cannot reenlist?

Re-read. I did not tell you what you can or cannot do. I'm merely suggesting that since you carry such resentment against the people you may one day be ordered to protect, and do not consider their lives to be worth the lives of anyone in your platoon, you may be in the wrong line of work.

[Eol Sha]

Let me rephrase. It's one of the reasons why NATO continues to exist.

The primary reason, yes. If Russia had successfully transitioned into a capitalist liberal democracy in the mid 90's, there's a good chance NATO would've ceased to exist (and a not insignificant chance it wouldn't, but still).

Maybe. Although, NATO might have been restructured and reorganized to go stare down some other world power. Namely China.

[Conserative Morality]

Every american life is equal that to a one of my soldiers. Defenders of the american freedom not the foreign one.

The fact that you can make that calculation is disturbing.

Who the fuck are you to tell me when and when I cannot reenlist?

There's a difference between 'cannot' and 'should not'. He's right - we have legal and moral obligations to other countries; to refuse them would damage our honor, integrity, violate our duty, show disrespect to others worldwide...

[Eol Sha]

Doesn't really change the truth of my statement.

No, I just question the relevance of the public's opinions on foreign policy when they're not in charge and wrong.

It becomes pretty relevant when one of the major party candidates has embraced the skeptic's view of the value of NATO.

[Freefall11111]

The primary reason, yes. If Russia had successfully transitioned into a capitalist liberal democracy in the mid 90's, there's a good chance NATO would've ceased to exist (and a not insignificant chance it wouldn't, but still).

Maybe. Although, NATO might have been restructured and reorganized to go stare down some other world power. Namely China.

Not likely. Few European powers have the ability to project power into the Pacific to actually be of any use to an anti-China NATO.

[Uxupox]

Every american life is equal that to a one of my soldiers. Defenders of the american freedom not the foreign one.



Who the fuck are you to tell me when and when I cannot reenlist?

Re-read. I did not tell you what you can or cannot do. I'm merely suggesting that since you carry such resentment against the people you may one day be ordered to protect, and do not consider their lives to be worth the lives of anyone in your platoon, you may be in the wrong line of work.

In that situation I will do what I always do and is what I consider the best course of option with the assignment given to me by my superiors to fulfill that mission according to the local METT-TC.

[Corrian]

Nationalism is a dangerous ideology it seems...

MEGA THREAD

Thanks for your add on to the discussion.

[Freefall11111]

No, I just question the relevance of the public's opinions on foreign policy when they're not in charge and wrong.

It becomes pretty relevant when one of the major party candidates has embraced the skeptic's view of the value of NATO.

I'm not worried given how every other day prompts more scandals. It's only a matter of time before one of them ends up being far too large to ignore.

[Eol Sha]

Maybe. Although, NATO might have been restructured and reorganized to go stare down some other world power. Namely China.

Not likely. Few European powers have the ability to project power into the Pacific to actually be of any use to an anti-China NATO.

It's the same with Russia for most NATO members, as well.

[Uxupox]

Every american life is equal that to a one of my soldiers. Defenders of the american freedom not the foreign one.

The fact that you can make that calculation is disturbing.

Who the fuck are you to tell me when and when I cannot reenlist?

There's a difference between 'cannot' and 'should not'. He's right - we have legal and moral obligations to other countries; to refuse them would damage our honor, integrity, violate our duty, show disrespect to others worldwide...

There is nothing in the constitution that says "Line Alpha of Sub-Paragraph B "You will give your life for another country". Disrespect to others? Just like that kid disrespected my soldier by throwing multiple rocks at him.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Re-read. I did not tell you what you can or cannot do. I'm merely suggesting that since you carry such resentment against the people you may one day be ordered to protect, and do not consider their lives to be worth the lives of anyone in your platoon, you may be in the wrong line of work.

In that situation I will do what I always do and is what I consider the best course of option with the assignment given to me by my superiors to fulfill that mission according to the local METT-TC.

But with the idea in your mind that the lives of the people you're protecting aren't worth the lives of anyone in your platoon. That's a recipe for disaster.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

The fact that you can make that calculation is disturbing.

There's a difference between 'cannot' and 'should not'. He's right - we have legal and moral obligations to other countries; to refuse them would damage our honor, integrity, violate our duty, show disrespect to others worldwide...

There is nothing in the constitution that says "Line Alpha of Sub-Paragraph B "You will give your life for another country". Disrespect to others? Just like that kid disrespected my soldier by throwing multiple rocks at him.

That kid is not required to show respect. You are.

[Eol Sha]

It becomes pretty relevant when one of the major party candidates has embraced the skeptic's view of the value of NATO.

I'm not worried given how every other day prompts more scandals. It's only a matter of time before one of them ends up being far too large to ignore.

Yeah, no. If you believe NATO to be an integral part of US foreign policy, I wouldn't be laid back while a man with a huge microphone maligns it and damages the trust of the public in the NATO mission.

[Uxupox]

In that situation I will do what I always do and is what I consider the best course of option with the assignment given to me by my superiors to fulfill that mission according to the local METT-TC.

But with the idea in your mind that the lives of the people you're protecting aren't worth the lives of anyone in your platoon. That's a recipe for disaster.

I did pretty well in a combat environment which didn't place in the United States with civilian observers, thank you.

There is nothing in the constitution that says "Line Alpha of Sub-Paragraph B "You will give your life for another country". Disrespect to others? Just like that kid disrespected my soldier by throwing multiple rocks at him.

That kid is not required to show respect. You are.

And I did. By giving him so well deserved candy.

[Freefall11111]

Not likely. Few European powers have the ability to project power into the Pacific to actually be of any use to an anti-China NATO.

It's the same with Russia for most NATO members, as well.

Err, no. We're comparing China, which is not connected by land to NATO and would require a navy capable of long-range assignments, to Russia, who is literally on the border of NATO. As a European power in NATO, all you need to do is hop in trucks and drive through a couple of other countries at most to reach the frontline. It's not even remotely the same.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I'm not worried given how every other day prompts more scandals. It's only a matter of time before one of them ends up being far too large to ignore.

Yeah, no. If you believe NATO to be an integral part of US foreign policy, I wouldn't be laid back while a man with a huge microphone maligns it and damages the trust of the public in the NATO mission.

Especially when you consider that his only backup plan seems to be "We can nuke them if we have to".

[Conserative Morality]

There is nothing in the constitution that says "Line Alpha of Sub-Paragraph B "You will give your life for another country".

No, it doesn't. But I thought you claimed to live by ideals of honor, integrity, and respect.

Disrespect to others? Just like that kid disrespected my soldier by throwing multiple rocks at him.

What do you expect from kids? I mean, goddamn. I'm not defending the kid, because kids are generally little shits, but I don't really see why being disrespected by an age bracket that does nothing but disrespect others is so notable.

[Eol Sha]

It's the same with Russia for most NATO members, as well.

Err, no. We're comparing China, which is not connected by land to NATO and would require a navy capable of long-range assignments, to Russia, who is literally on the border of NATO. As a European power in NATO, all you need to do is hop in trucks and drive through a couple of other countries at most to reach the frontline. It's not even remotely the same.

I suppose so.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

But with the idea in your mind that the lives of the people you're protecting aren't worth the lives of anyone in your platoon. That's a recipe for disaster.

I did pretty well in a combat environment which didn't place in the United States with civilian observers, thank you.

That kid is not required to show respect. You are.

And I did. By giving him so well deserved candy.

Your first reply I don't doubt. Your attitude remains a dangerous one, however.

Your second reply I have my doubts about, unless "candy" is a code for some sort of non-lethal reprisal.

[Freefall11111]

I'm not worried given how every other day prompts more scandals. It's only a matter of time before one of them ends up being far too large to ignore.

Yeah, no. If you believe NATO to be an integral part of US foreign policy, I wouldn't be laid back while a man with a huge microphone maligns it and damages the trust of the public in the NATO mission.

Not enough people care so strongly about NATO to risk an election flipping. Foreign policy rarely influences elections, with few exceptions (WW2, Vietnam, Iraq). The vast majority of voters just want jobs that pay them enough to live comfortably. They couldn't care less about NATO.

[Patridam]

That wasn't your point at all. My point was that while being a successful businessman gives you a certain skill set and makes you more capable of dealing with the economy and even negotiating trades (including political ones), it doesn't include telepathy into other peoples net worth.

On the subject of telepathy, it's interesting that you think you know what my point was better than I do.

It's less interesting because of how wrong you are.

I don't pretend to know what your point was better than you, but I know for a fact your point was not the same one as mine. You can't just say "Absolutely, exactly my point" and then proceed to make a completely different point and act as if folks are in agreement.

[Eol Sha]

Yeah, no. If you believe NATO to be an integral part of US foreign policy, I wouldn't be laid back while a man with a huge microphone maligns it and damages the trust of the public in the NATO mission.

Not enough people care so strongly about NATO to risk an election flipping. Foreign policy rarely influences elections, with few exceptions (WW2, Vietnam, Iraq). The vast majority of voters just want jobs that pay them enough to live comfortably. They couldn't care less about NATO.

Whether Trump loses or wins, the damage will be done and trust in NATO will be eroded. That's not good. Not in my opinion, anyway.

[Uxupox]

There is nothing in the constitution that says "Line Alpha of Sub-Paragraph B "You will give your life for another country".

No, it doesn't. But I thought you claimed to live by ideals of honor, integrity, and respect.

I do.

Disrespect to others? Just like that kid disrespected my soldier by throwing multiple rocks at him.

What do you expect from kids? I mean, goddamn. I'm not defending the kid, because kids are generally little shits, but I don't really see why being disrespected by an age bracket that does nothing but disrespect others is so notable.

If you think that little shit was bad then imagine how were their parents.