- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:41 pm to Darth_Vader
They thought they would have us protecting them forever.
Back in the day they were really good. I trained with the SAS in the 70s, was hospitalized over there ... it's where I met my first wife.
Liberalism destroys militaries intended to defend the country and builds militaries intended to control the citizenry on behalf of the internal power brokers.
We should send a strong signal to NATO that we're not carrying their asses anylonger because Italy, Belgium, France, Spain ... they are all pitiful shells of what they used to be militarily.
Back in the day they were really good. I trained with the SAS in the 70s, was hospitalized over there ... it's where I met my first wife.
Liberalism destroys militaries intended to defend the country and builds militaries intended to control the citizenry on behalf of the internal power brokers.
We should send a strong signal to NATO that we're not carrying their asses anylonger because Italy, Belgium, France, Spain ... they are all pitiful shells of what they used to be militarily.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:41 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
Do expand
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:41 pm to rmnldr
quote:
And the Brits have always been better at both
There comes a point where, to sort of quote Stalin, the quality of numbers take over all other factors.
In other words, if you take a look at how many infantrymen the Russians have compared to the British, you'll see why the British Army itself is saying the Russians would destroy the only British division left in only one afternoon. I know the reputation the Bits have had for centuries. But what part of "THEY'VE ONLY GOT ONE FREAKING DIVISION LEFT IN THE ENTIRE BRITISH ARMY" is not sinking in with you????
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:43 pm to rmnldr
I mean they're meh. They don't suck like the Iraqis but they're not world class either. Also they're kinda fat. Their Marines are top notch though. But there's only a few thousand of them.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:43 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Which means it's our problem as well all due to one simple reason. Here's a hint in case you don't know why it's our problem....
I can see NATO pussing out when it comes to Russia chipping away at the Baltic states.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:43 pm to scrooster
quote:
Italy, Belgium, France, Spain ... they are all pitiful shells of what they used to be militarily.
Add Germany to that list as well. They don't have enough of a fighting force left to even hold a mid-sized city.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:44 pm to rmnldr
quote:
British infantry would royally wreck Russian infantry
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:44 pm to Darth_Vader
Exactly. At some point superior numbers overtake superior fighters. The Civil War is a perfect example. The South had soldiers with more skill but the North had the manpower to overcome.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:45 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Add Germany to that list as well. They don't have enough of a fighting force left to even hold a mid-sized city.
And they beat us at the NATO tanker challenge
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:46 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
And they beat us at the NATO tanker challenge
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:46 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I can see NATO pussing out when it comes to Russia chipping away at the Baltic states
That's one of the main reasons I've always thought it was a terrible idea to expand NATO by adding old Warsaw Pact countries. Seriously, adding them did nothing to strengthen NATO and instead only gave NATO (and us) more to defend.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:46 pm to Darth_Vader
Yes because they won't mobilize anyone in the case of an imminent war. 
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:48 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
And they beat us at the NATO tanker challenge
Well, our best tank crews are not even in the regular army, they're in the National Guard....
Army Guard tank crew wins Sullivan Cup
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:49 pm to PaperPaintball92
... and you're forgetting just how buddy buddy the Russians and ChiComs are becoming again - although the Red ChiComs would be fools to link arms with Russia against us or our allies.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:52 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
That's one of the main reasons I've always thought it was a terrible idea to expand NATO by adding old Warsaw Pact countries. Seriously, adding them did nothing to strengthen NATO and instead only gave NATO (and us) more to defend.
Well, the problem is that they all have about 25% ethnic Russians within their borders who could likely be sympathetic to an invasion/annexation. It's a big liability and those countries really have to focus on placating and including those ethnic populations in the political process or there will be a Ukrainian situation.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:54 pm to rmnldr
quote:
Yes because they won't mobilize anyone in the case of an imminent war
Mobilize? Bwahahahahahaha
1. How long do you think it would take Britain to mobilize a force large enough to have any effect on a major modern European battlefield? I'll give you a hint, think in terms of months, not weeks.
2. How long do you think a European War would last if Russia invaded the Baltic countries or Poland tomorrow? I'll give you a hint, think in terms of hours or at best days.
In other words, by the time Britain scratched together a reserve force, the war would have been over for weeks.
"Mobilize". Give me a break.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:55 pm to upgrayedd
Moldova is the next one to fall.
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:56 pm to Darth_Vader
Hours or days? Lol
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:56 pm to Darth_Vader
NATO needs the US a hell of a lot more than the US needs NATO. We spend 2x as much on defense as the other 27 NATO members combined and the majority of NATO doesn't spend the recommended 2% of GDP for their defense budgets. Only 4 NATO countries besides US spend at least 2% of GDP on military.
Hopefully Trump and Mattis tell NATO that the US won't continue to carry 27 other members on our back and that if they don't step up their military spending and stop relying so heavily on US to do everything, that we may need to reconsider the US' NATO membership
Hopefully Trump and Mattis tell NATO that the US won't continue to carry 27 other members on our back and that if they don't step up their military spending and stop relying so heavily on US to do everything, that we may need to reconsider the US' NATO membership
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News