Another World War with a Democrat President in Charge?

[SJJRSJJS]

Now we may have a Military showdown with Russia over the Ukraine invasion? History shows US that Major Wars have started because Democrat Presidents have weakened US Militarily and Foreign aggressors want to "try US out". No sooner had President Obama declared major cuts in our Military, that Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, made his aggressive military move into the Ukraine to "save his Russian speaking peoples", just like Hitler did in WW2 with the Sudetenland and Austria. WW1 was started because of a weak Military cutting Democrat President Wilson. WW2 was started because we had a weak military created by Democrat President Roosevelt, hardly any Army manpower strength at the start of WW2. The Korean War and the Vietnam War came about during the terms of two Democrat jackasses named Truman and Johnson, who also cut our Military strength. 911 and Iraq came about after President Cliton weakened US to the point that Saddam Hussein was not afraid of US. We win Wars with Republican Presidents because they strengthen our Military, read your history books. Republican President Reagan made Russia give up because Reagan strengthened our Military especially with Laser weapons technology. The very first 5 minutes after President Reagan was inaugurated, Iran turned loose all those Embassy hostages that they kept imprisoned for two years while the weak Democrat spineless President Carter was in Office, look it up. The question is who will be known as weaker, and Militarily inept, President Carter or President Obama, both military cutting specialists who kowtow to potential enemies..................

....."President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."........

 

[SJJRSJJS]

Now we may have a Military showdown with Russia over the Ukraine invasion? History shows US that Major Wars have started because Democrat Presidents have weakened US Militarily and Foreign aggressors want to "try US out". No sooner had President Obama declared major cuts in our Military, that Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, made his aggressive military move into the Ukraine to "save his Russian speaking peoples", just like Hitler did in WW2 with the Sudetenland and Austria. WW1 was started because of a weak Military cutting Democrat President Wilson. WW2 was started because we had a weak military created by Democrat President Roosevelt, hardly any Army manpower strength at the start of WW2. The Korean War and the Vietnam War came about during the terms of two Democrat jackasses named Truman and Johnson, who also cut our Military strength. 911 and Iraq came about after President Cliton weakened US to the point that Saddam Hussein was not afraid of US. We win Wars with Republican Presidents because they strengthen our Military, read your history books. Republican President Reagan made Russia give up because Reagan strengthened our Military especially with Laser weapons technology. The very first 5 minutes after President Reagan was inaugurated, Iran turned loose all those Embassy hostages that they kept imprisoned for two years while the weak Democrat spineless President Carter was in Office, look it up. The question is who will be known as weaker, and Militarily inept, President Carter or President Obama, both military cutting specialists who kowtow to potential enemies..................

....."President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."........

 

[Airstrip One]

FDR actually was beefing the military up, in anticipation of war. We gutted it in the 20s when there was a nationwide antiwar sentiment in full-swing. I've never heard of Wilson shrinking the military, either. The only Dem who was ever particularly noted for gutting the military was Clinton, because he thought it could be done post Cold War.

 

[Taft2016]

WW1 was started because of a weak Military cutting Democrat President Wilson.

While I agree with the general theme of your post, the United States wasn't even a consideration in the events leading up to World War I. I just read "The Guns of August," which describes the lead up to the war quite well.

Likewise with WW II. Pearl Harbor was simply a delaying action to allow the Japanese to solidify their fortifications around the Pacific rim. Our military strength, or weakness, on our continent only represented a time difference of 3 or 4 months.

That said, the idea of "Peace Through Strength" is a perfectly valid one that has worked. It should also be noted that all of the military strength in the world will not offset a war if there is not a strong foreign policy connected to it. A President issuing "red lines" that are quickly violated, ignored, laughed at, and not acted upon, negates the preventative power of a strong military.

 

[christiefan915]

Now we may have a Military showdown with Russia over the Ukraine invasion? History shows US that Major Wars have started because Democrat Presidents have weakened US Militarily and Foreign aggressors want to "try US out". No sooner had President Obama declared major cuts in our Military, that Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, made his aggressive military move into the Ukraine to "save his Russian speaking peoples", just like Hitler did in WW2 with the Sudetenland and Austria. WW1 was started because of a weak Military cutting Democrat President Wilson. WW2 was started because we had a weak military created by Democrat President Roosevelt, hardly any Army manpower strength at the start of WW2. The Korean War and the Vietnam War came about during the terms of two Democrat jackasses named Truman and Johnson, who also cut our Military strength. 911 and Iraq came about after President Cliton weakened US to the point that Saddam Hussein was not afraid of US. We win Wars with Republican Presidents because they strengthen our Military, read your history books. Republican President Reagan made Russia give up because Reagan strengthened our Military especially with Laser weapons technology. The very first 5 minutes after President Reagan was inaugurated, Iran turned loose all those Embassy hostages that they kept imprisoned for two years while the weak Democrat spineless President Carter was in Office, look it up. The question is who will be known as weaker, and Militarily inept, President Carter or President Obama, both military cutting specialists who kowtow to potential enemies..................

....."President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."........

Not to worry, none of the Republican doves in Congress would sign on to another world war. </sarcasm>

Section 8: Powers of Congress

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

 

[christiefan915]

 

[cancel2 2022]

While I agree with the general theme of your post, the United States wasn't even a consideration in the events leading up to World War I. I just read "The Guns of August," which describes the lead up to the war quite well.

Likewise with WW II. Pearl Harbor was simply a delaying action to allow the Japanese to solidify their fortifications around the Pacific rim. Our military strength, or weakness, on our continent only represented a time difference of 3 or 4 months.

That said, the idea of "Peace Through Strength" is a perfectly valid one that has worked. It should also be noted that all of the military strength in the world will not offset a war if there is not a strong foreign policy connected to it. A President issuing "red lines" that are quickly violated, ignored, laughed at, and not acted upon, negates the preventative power of a strong military.

What exactly did Bush do when Russia invaded Georgia? I must have missed his decisive actions then.

 

[Taft2016]

What exactly did Bush do when Russia invaded Georgia? I must have missed his decisive actions then.

I will explain, and demonstrate, why thinking gentlemen should never, ever, try to piggyback on a position framed by liberals. Almost universally, they are framed upon a false premise.

As is the case here. The question is not what President Bush did afterwards, it's what he did NOT do beforehand.

President Bush did not run around the planet drawing red-lines and then decline to act upon them. He did not issue empty threats and ultimatums. The world knew that when President Bush said he would do something, he would act. Which is why I said:

It should also be noted that all of the military strength in the world will not offset a war if there is not a strong foreign policy connected to it.

The world has no idea of what Oboober will do when he flaps his gums. He may do something. He may not. This just creates an enormous temptation for regimes to see how far they can push the envelope with this administration, which exudes weakness and indecisiveness. Which ultimately makes war more likely.

 

[Airstrip One]

The US only became recognized as a world power in 1898 with victory over Spain and our acquisitions. In 1939, we were ranked 16th between like Norway and Denmark.

 

[jet57]

Now we may have a Military showdown with Russia over the Ukraine invasion? History shows US that Major Wars have started because Democrat Presidents have weakened US Militarily and Foreign aggressors want to "try US out". No sooner had President Obama declared major cuts in our Military, that Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, made his aggressive military move into the Ukraine to "save his Russian speaking peoples", just like Hitler did in WW2 with the Sudetenland and Austria. WW1 was started because of a weak Military cutting Democrat President Wilson. WW2 was started because we had a weak military created by Democrat President Roosevelt, hardly any Army manpower strength at the start of WW2. The Korean War and the Vietnam War came about during the terms of two Democrat jackasses named Truman and Johnson, who also cut our Military strength. 911 and Iraq came about after President Cliton weakened US to the point that Saddam Hussein was not afraid of US. We win Wars with Republican Presidents because they strengthen our Military, read your history books. Republican President Reagan made Russia give up because Reagan strengthened our Military especially with Laser weapons technology. The very first 5 minutes after President Reagan was inaugurated, Iran turned loose all those Embassy hostages that they kept imprisoned for two years while the weak Democrat spineless President Carter was in Office, look it up. The question is who will be known as weaker, and Militarily inept, President Carter or President Obama, both military cutting specialists who kowtow to potential enemies..................

....."President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."........

You haven't the slightest idea of what you're talking about. Democrats have been drawn into wars, just like now. Dems were cutting military spending becasue our posture; up until Grenada, was one of defense.

Putin is not going to "invade": he's gambling, he's macho, he's going to see what he can get away with and what agreements he can get in private. The Crimea is Putin;s version of Iraq and he's doing it just right . . . The other card he's playing is that the terrioty is close to home so he can build up for a lot cheaper.

Your comments are strictly prejudicial and defy reality.

 

[SJJRSJJS]

You haven't the slightest idea of what you're talking about. Democrats have been drawn into wars, just like now. Dems were cutting military spending becasue our posture; up until Grenada, was one of defense.

Putin is not going to "invade": he's gambling, he's macho, he's going to see what he can get away with and what agreements he can get in private. The Crimea is Putin;s version of Iraq and he's doing it just right . . . The other card he's playing is that the terrioty is close to home so he can build up for a lot cheaper.

Your comments are strictly prejudicial and defy reality.

Democrats are weak minded, militarily speaking, and every Tom, Dick and Harry knows it, expect obviously you. Democrats come across as casper milktoast whimpy types to foreigners, President Obama even bowed to a Saudi Prince/King. I used to call Democrat men..girlymen, because their women tell them what to do, say, etc, and maybe that is why Bubba Cliton messed around with Monica, to get away from The Hillary's nagging. Sure, when Democrats are forced into a corner, they will fight, but so will any dog. I believe that Monday is a kind of D-Day with Putin and US, let's see if Russia's Vladimer Put-in-Ass is bluffing, of course President Obama will go the same way as Pre WW2 British Prime Minister Chamberlain and kowtow(Bow) to Putin................
..........."Arthur Neville Chamberlain was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from May 1937 to May 1940. Chamberlain is best known for his appeasement foreign policy, and in particular for his signing of the Munich Agreement in 1938, conceding the German-populated Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia to Germany. However when Adolf Hitler continued his aggression by invading Poland, Britain declared war on Germany on 3 September 1939, and Chamberlain led Britain through the first eight months of World War II"...........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain

 

[cancel2 2022]

I will explain, and demonstrate, why thinking gentlemen should never, ever, try to piggyback on a position framed by liberals. Almost universally, they are framed upon a false premise.

As is the case here. The question is not what President Bush did afterwards, it's what he did NOT do beforehand.

President Bush did not run around the planet drawing red-lines and then decline to act upon them. He did not issue empty threats and ultimatums. The world knew that when President Bush said he would do something, he would act. Which is why I said:



The world has no idea of what Oboober will do when he flaps his gums. He may do something. He may not. This just creates an enormous temptation for regimes to see how far they can push the envelope with this administration, which exudes weakness and indecisiveness. Which ultimately makes war more likely.

Bush did nothing is the correct answer and South Ossetia is STILL under Russian control.

 

[evince]

so Bush LIES us into a war and you fucks thought that was great.

Now you don't have to guts to stand up to KGB man and just want him to be able to walk into countries and fucking subjugate entire countrys at whim?



Bush let him take Georgia because he fucked our military by wasting it in protracted middle east meddling that completely destablized and entire region of the world.



But you want Obama to just hand the Urikrain to Putin?

 

[Teflon Don]

<squawk> BUSH <squawk>

 

[christiefan915]

Bush did nothing is the correct answer and South Ossetia is STILL under Russian control.

If bush had just backed away from that red line over Iraq, America would have been a better place. And every other country too, including the coalition of the bribed and Iraq itself.

 

[Taft2016]

Bush did nothing is the correct answer and South Ossetia is STILL under Russian control.

Well, if you really want to push the issue.... No, that is not true.

In the years prior to the invasion, President Bush provided military assistance to Georgia.

After the invasion (which happened near the end of his presidency) President Bush had our military deliver humanitarian aid and placed sanctions on Russia. In December of 2008, the Russians began large-scale troop withdrawls.

Obama then took office and lifted the sanctions, a gesture for which he was rewarded with an invasion of the Crimea.

Anything else you care to know?

 

[cancel2 2022]

Well, if you really want to push the issue.... No, that is not true.

In the years prior to the invasion, President Bush provided military assistance to Georgia.

After the invasion (which happened near the end of his presidency) President Bush had our military deliver humanitarian aid and placed sanctions on Russia. In December of 2008, the Russians began large-scale troop withdrawls.

Obama then took office and lifted the sanctions, a gesture for which he was rewarded with an invasion of the Crimea.

Anything else you care to know?

I know that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are under Russian military control, apparently you choose not to believe that fact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia

http://wikitravel.org/en/South_Ossetia

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18269210

 

[Taft2016]

I know that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are under Russian military control, apparently you choose not to believe that fact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia

http://wikitravel.org/en/South_Ossetia

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18269210

I wasn't arguing that point.

You said President Bush did nothing. I disproved that.

Obama negated what President Bush did in the last weeks of his presidency by lifting the sanctions.

I understand it makes folks like you feel good to blame Bush, who had weeks to deal with the issue, as opposed to Obama, who has had years.

Much like President Bush had 8 months to address the Bin Laden problem, whereas Clinton had 8 years. However, the feel-good spin does not stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

 

[jet57]

Democrats are weak minded, militarily speaking, and every Tom, Dick and Harry knows it, expect obviously you. Democrats come across as casper milktoast whimpy types to foreigners, President Obama even bowed to a Saudi Prince/King. I used to call Democrat men..girlymen, because their women tell them what to do, say, etc, and maybe that is why Bubba Cliton messed around with Monica, to get away from The Hillary's nagging. Sure, when Democrats are forced into a corner, they will fight, but so will any dog. I believe that Monday is a kind of D-Day with Putin and US, let's see if Russia's Vladimer Put-in-Ass is bluffing, of course President Obama will go the same way as Pre WW2 British Prime Minister Chamberlain and kowtow(Bow) to Putin................
..........."Arthur Neville Chamberlain was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from May 1937 to May 1940. Chamberlain is best known for his appeasement foreign policy, and in particular for his signing of the Munich Agreement in 1938, conceding the German-populated Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia to Germany. However when Adolf Hitler continued his aggression by invading Poland, Britain declared war on Germany on 3 September 1939, and Chamberlain led Britain through the first eight months of World War II"...........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain

You make such misinformed comments.

Chamberlin: The British way ha always been diplomacy first, military action second: that's how they gre to an empire: $$$ The German Hanrovian government was married into the English throne, so diplomacy served two purposes: it lured Hilter into a promise and created the spring board for Chamberlin to later declare war on Germany. That's how a country goes to war; nice and clean. No doubts.

As Dems and war:i]any dog will fight[/i]? You keep forgetting tht the American people don't want to go to war, or had you forgotten Viet Nam and Iraq? But Democratic presidents won two world wars didn't they.

Your hero Ronald Reagan cut and run from Lebanon, and his "lovely little war" in Grenada was an outright unprovoked invasion of the smallest island in the western hemousphere with only 1,000 militai men. If Reagan really had war balls, he would have invaded Cuba right? But why didn;t he? Was it bacause Cuba; like Syria is a client state of Russia? Lebanon was up for grabs in 1982, why didn't the great no bullshit president thumb his nose at opponents and invade Lebanon? Perhaps to not step on the toes of Israel?

Yeah, sorry, but your knowledge of real history and today's foreign policy realities are completely overshadowed by a silly predjudice that has no foundation.

 

[Taft2016]

Chamberlin: The British way ha always been diplomacy first, military action second: that's how they gre to an empire: $$$ The German Hanrovian government was married into the English throne, so diplomacy served two purposes: it lured Hilter into a promise and created the spring board for Chamberlin to later declare war on Germany. That's how a country goes to war; nice and clean. No doubts.

Hahahaha, that's a good one. You reminded me of that scene in the movie where Pee Wee Herman falls off his bicycle in a dramatically clumsy manner, and gets right back up and says "I meant to do that."

Hahaha. But seriously, this is a good topic. Try not to troll it.