(Lake Tuscaloosa Specific)
11 messages
Updated 11/6/2023 3:02:24 AM
Lakes Online Forum
83,649 messages
Updated 6/5/2024 6:00:14 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,195 messages
Updated 5/31/2024 4:36:53 AM
(Lake Tuscaloosa Specific)
6 messages
Updated 6/30/2008 7:08:16 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,169 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,976 messages
Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
Yankee06
|
|
Subject:
|
missiles and betrayals?
|
|
Date:
|
9/18/2009 11:52:58 PM
|
|
-all this is interesting, and complicated, stuff.
-we all agree that foreign policies should support US national intersts. Alliances usually agree on at least one common national interest. long alliances usually share many common national interests. long term alliances are not basically quid-pro-quo systems, they are shared goals/interests systems.. Quid-pro-quo relationships are more often found between or among antagonists that are trying to become friends or at least not mutually self distruct, like teh agreements between teh US and the old USSR.
-Bush's ABM changes: some outside of the foreign policy sphere may believe that there was no big international changes resulting from W's changes to teh status of teh ABM agreements. But even though they were done within teh paramweters of teh agreement, they have been folowed by the unravelling of teh Conventional Forces Europe (CFE), teh Intermediate nuclear missile agreement (INF), and a host of other agreements. Not that these agreements of teh cold war didn't need adjustments, but arbitrary actions often lead to unexpected, not-properly-prepared-for consequences. This was what happened as a result of W's ABM actions. in addition to Russia's pressuring these other agreements, many beleive it was W's ABM move that caused Russia to seriously reevaluate her weakening military capacities leading to a renewal of Russian bomber flights to US border areas, new Russian sub patrols off our Atlantic coastal areas, visiting Russian war ships to South American ports, etc. We must remember that W's action were with a former enemy, not abrogation of commitments to allies.
-Taiwan: Although along teh Asian sea lanes, Taiwan is a pawn of teh 1950s Cold War. It assumed the roll it did because China took Quemoy and matsu befoer we nkew what happened or could do anything about it. Taiwan became our new line in teh sand, or teh water so to speak. A US-protected Taiwan does make it easier to protect sea transportation in Asian-Pacific waters but not critically. Many national security and military strategists over the past decade do not even believe that the US would ...or could ...defend Taiwan if China decided to invade. Two factors, teh commercial interaction between teh US and China and teh end of teh cold war, have made this formerly solid US commitment very questionalbe.
-East Europe: The East Europeans have supported US positions on almost every political, economic, and military issue in Europe and Eurasia and in teh worldwide War on Terrorism for teh past two decades. East Europeans sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan in combat roles and suffered serious casualties and troops killed in action (KIA). Poland in particular believed it had solidified its alliance with teh US in blood. Apparantly Obama didn't think so.
|
|
Reply
Back
Search
Off-Topic Forum
»
Alabama Lakes
»
Lake Tuscaloosa
Login
|
Home
