Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 10424869)
Which involvement with Syria by the Russians are you referring to when you make the statement above?
The most recent one....or way back in time like almost Fifty Years? As you are so happy the Russians are backing Syria still today....you might read the following NYT Article and tell us which part of the relationship between Russia and Syria you are most impressed by. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/w...-and-deep.html Syria shown to be a US/UK/France led coup with cash provided by Saudi's and Qatar, going back then to countrys beholding to their energy suppliers who fund their government. Kill 3000 Americans on 9/11 and then become best buddies in Syria a decade or so later. |
From your same source, it would appear the German Military Minister agrees with the US Ambassador.
You appear to enjoy a quote that you agree with but seemed to have overlooked a differing German view of the same matter....by the fellow charged with overing the military affairs of the German government. I shall not "quote" the Military Commissioner but he does seem quite concerned about the failure of the German government to live up to its pledge of financial support to NATO. https://www.dw.com/en/german-militar...nts/a-47972229 |
Originally Posted by racedo
(Post 10425108)
First and formost you have made up something into a quote that I DID NOT POST.
As an aside Germany is looking after Germanys economic interests. |
An op/ed on the ambassador is your source document Racedo? Really?
Anyway, you seemed to have missed my question. Do you believe Putin wouldn't turn off the NG gas supply as a means to achieve political or military goals? |
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/r...-row-vhwhx8bq3 ‘Meddling’ Trump envoy Richard Grenell angers Germans in defence row SaveA senior German MP has called for the US ambassador to be expelled from Berlin for his “insubordinate behaviour” after an ill-tempered exchange over military spending. Richard Grenell, 52, who was appointed by President Trump last year, faced condemnation from across the political spectrum on Tuesday for his “thuggish” and “clumsy” criticism of Germany’s defence budget, which is forecast to decline in real terms in the early 2020s. In the latest episode of his running commentary on the perceived shortcomings of Angela Merkel’s government, the ambassador said that the cuts sent a “disturbing signal” to other Nato members. In response Wolfgang Kubicki, deputy speaker of the Bundestag, accused the US of acting like an “occupying power” and called for Mr Grenell to be declared persona non grata. Mr Kubicki, 67, who is also the deputy leader of the liberal Free Democrat party, said that while he had no desire to defend the armed forces budget, the ambassador should be sent back to Washington “for reasons of self-respect”. “Any American diplomat who behaves like the high commissioner of an occupying power has to learn that there are limits to our tolerance,” he said. “It is no longer tolerable for the American ambassador to repeatedly meddle in the politics of the sovereign German republic.”...... This week the ambassador renewed his criticism of Germany’s “unacceptably” low defence spending, which is due to rise from 1.3 per cent of GDP to 1.37 per cent next year before falling back to 1.25 per cent in 2023. This is significantly below the 2 per cent commitment expected from Nato members and is at odds with the chancellor’s promise to raise the level to 1.5 per cent by 2024. Mrs Merkel, 64, issued a tacit rebuke to Mr Grenell in a speech on Tuesday. “I would like to set something straight,” she said. “What is decisive is the actual expenditures, and they are always being revised upwards.” Carsten Schneider, an MP with the Social Democrats, Mrs Merkel’s centre-left coalition partners, said the ambassador was an “absolute diplomatic failure” whose treatment of a close ally “reminds one of the swaggering of a thug”....... |
Kill 3000 Americans on 9/11 and then become best buddies in Syria a decade or so later. Tell us what role the Saudi government played in the 9/11 attack will you? I thought one of the events that triggered Bin Liner's angst with Saudi Arabia was the presence of US Troops on Islamic Holy Ground (Saudi Arabia) which was well before 9/11. |
Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 10425939)
I thought one of the events that triggered Bin Liner's angst with Saudi Arabia was the presence of US Troops on Islamic Holy Ground (Saudi Arabia) which was well before 9/11. They were admittedly sanitized for the occasion by a short term conversion to Islam, so it avoided the desecration of the Muslim's most sacred place, but it does make it harder to wax indignant about a remote US presence. |
Originally Posted by West Coast
(Post 10425154)
An op/ed on the ambassador is your source document Racedo? Really?
Anyway, you seemed to have missed my question. Do you believe Putin wouldn't turn off the NG gas supply as a means to achieve political or military goals? The sanctions US pushed in 2014 have cost EU circa $50 billion but noticeable US has suffered little from this as its sold little agri goods there. After a while politicians start asking why are our countrys the ones bearing the brunt of sanctions and US is ok. Obama's strategy has made some European politicians to start to view US as Frenemy rather than a Friend. I though Obama strategy dumb at the time and has proven so. Russia not threatening anybody on Energy v statements from state dept to US Oil men. Dept of State dept policy is to destroy Russian economy by targeting Oil/Gas exports. If you look over last 5 yrs, as a result of sanctions Russia has sold off $160 billion is US treasuries, bought huge amounts of gold, reinvested huge amounts in starting up agri production, now outstrips US in Wheat exports and its growing. Additionally its trading heavily with China etc. Look at what China has also been doing. Biggest risk to US is not Russia or China but its $22 trillion debt. Countrys are not buying it and Interest repayments are as much as US defence spending, after a while it becomes unsustainable. |
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
(Post 10425131)
Actually, you posted a load of bollocks, so rather than repeat it in the quote, I summed it up in one word and italicized it. That load of bollocks was not relevant to my post, as a response. I should have been more clear that I had done so. I'll try to be more clear next time.
As an aside We are both in agreement on that, even though you forgot the apostrophe. :eek: (Remember when we used to have pages long threads about that in JB?) |
Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 10425939)
Are you confusing a Terrorist group for a National Government somehow?
Tell us what role the Saudi government played in the 9/11 attack will you? I thought one of the events that triggered Bin Liner's angst with Saudi Arabia was the presence of US Troops on Islamic Holy Ground (Saudi Arabia) which was well before 9/11. Afterall if we were to look at US Govt organisation like the CIA, Who its its biggest Enemy and Who is its biggest Opponent. If it does something is it officially sanctioned by the US Government or more like does US Govt even know. |
Answer is nope, not to Germany or EU because you only get to do it once and they stop buying. Germany bought $20 billion and NL bought $30 billion in Oil and Gas in 2017, assume that gets to $70 in a couple of years and thats 15-20 % of Russian exports. Germany and NL can buy elsewhere at increased cost and then not pay Russia for breach of agreement. Mutually agreed destruction of both economies |
Originally Posted by West Coast
(Post 10427118)
Well, at least you answered, that’s more than others do. Putin would be foolish not to weaponize NG. If he can achieve his goals by coercion rather than outright use of force and associated consequences, I have every reason to believe he would. |
Originally Posted by racedo
(Post 10427162)
Will US act in same way ?
|
You seem to have contradicted yourself with this one.....as you correctly identified the CIA as a US Government Organization the. you pose the following question.
If it does something is it officially sanctioned by the US Government or more like does US Govt even know. Is the second "it" defined as some hypothetical act/action/plot/scheme/operation perpetrated by the CIA? Then logically....the CIA by your first statement IS a US government organization....therefore you have answered your own question even as you ask it. Do you have any grasp of how the CIA gets its authorizations to conduct covert operations? |
West Coast,
Putin would be foolish not to weaponize NG. If he can achieve his goals by coercion rather than outright use of force and associated consequences, I have every reason to believe he would. |
|
Tells more about the "professor" than the germans.
|
ORAC.... that is one Man's view from the USA....voiced in a Blog...which under our system of government is protected Free Speech....well so far anyway until the Democrats have their way.
Others are quoting from sources that support one position or another and we consider what the sources have to say.....as we all should. Not all sources are credible or are able to withstand any kind of examination to determine bias. The question of "why" Germany is not ponying up as pledged and expected under existing agreements is probably a much more complex answer than far too many PPruners are capable of accepting based upon some of the posts we see here. The fact is the German's seem to be falling short of their commitments and that is the situation that must be acknowledged. The argument that they are looking out for German Interests is valid....but then when the US Government challenges that failure to live up to commitments made previously.....that is an American Interest that is being raised with the Germans by the American government. Isn't that how Diplomacy works....negotiation and debate? |
SASless, I do hope you stop talking sense!
|
The NATO Boss Fellah endorses President Trump's actions re NATO and Member Defense Spending demands, saying NATO is stronger for that initiative.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nat...ing-is-working NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in a historic address to Congress, declared Wednesday that President Trump’s push for NATO allies to increase their defense spending has “had an impact” and made the alliance stronger. “Allies must spend more on defense. This has been the clear message from President Trump,” he said. “And this message is having a real impact.” |
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:09. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.