Posted on 05/01/2014 2:51:59 AM PDT by Reaganite Republican
Since Obama is already well-along in his scheme to ideologically purge and fundamentally transform our nation's once-proud military, the only voices speaking out against America's dramatic military decline would be those no longer in office/active service... so he doesn't have to endure the kind of reality that Gen Patton presented to the (Democratic) US administration in 1945...
On May 7, 1945, just before the German capitulation, Patton had a conference in Austria with U.S. Secretary of War Robert Patterson.
Patton was gravely concerned over the Soviet failure to respect the demarcation lines separating the Soviet and American occupation zones. He was also alarmed by plans in Washington for the immediate partial demobilization of the U.S. Army.
Patton said to Patterson: "Let's keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to the Red Army. This is the only language they understand and respect."
Patterson replied, "Oh, George, you have been so close to this thing so long, you have lost sight of the big picture.
"I understand the situation. Their (the Soviet) supply system is inadequate to maintain them in a serious action such as I could put to them.
They have chickens in the coop and cattle on the hoof -- that's their supply system. They could probably maintain themselves in the type of fighting I could give them for five days.
After that it would make no difference how many million men they have, and if you wanted Moscow I could give it to you. They lived on the land coming down. There is insufficient left for them to maintain themselves going back. Let's not give them time to build up their supplies.
If we do, then . . . we have had a victory over the Germans and disarmed them, but we have failed in the liberation of Europe; we have lost the war!"Stand-up guy and American war hero Patton paid for this moral and strategic clarity (which could have prevented the 40+ years occupation of eastern Europe) with his life (as so many in the way of the Obama regime's foolhardy agenda have).
What you say is probably true. Americans were tired of war, but they carved up Europe and Iran and Iraq and then Israel. I mean, we’re paying the price now.
Reagan would be firmly opposed to Putin right now
“Reagan was anti-Communist, not anti-Russian. Reagan was not a racist. He was a U.S. patriot who opposed Communism”
_________________________________________________
What you say is technically correct but today’s Kremlin is the EXACT same KGB clique that enabled the USSR to exist!
Reagan wouldn’t have liked Putin expansionism any more than he did Soviet expansionism- they’re not longer a full fledged Evil Empire, but they’re working on it...
Nations and people sure change fast in your world.
Russians are no longer Russian and the Americans are no longer the Americans, and all it took for them to replace each other in your mind, was an election.
Perhaps the Japanese can suddenly become something totally different from what they have been for thousands of years, in one election the Japanese might suddenly take on the national character of Australia, or perhaps Ireland.
there you go.
the problem wasn't Russians... it was big govt commies and their ideology that drives them to capture more countries (assets, ie: other people's money).
Patton would have the exact same problem with 0bama and his ilk these days.
Patton would also see these Russian moves as obvious and from the same cloth...whether it be communist land grabs or ultra nationalist land grabs.
Makes me homesick. Like zer0 doesn’t play crony capitalist.
Get to your point
We have only been Ameican for a little over 200 years
You may not feel the republic is in danger because of one (or 2 ) election. I dont know. Time will tell. I do know we have an avowed Marxist in the white hut. We are on a precipice and I cannot worry about Russia unless they go after the Czechs or Poles or Germany. And even if they do I do not trust zer0 with our military. I’ll wait out the next 2.5 years before I feel comfortable with someone who controls the American military forces.
as a people, Russians don’t respect weakness. if you’re weak, you should be relieved of your responsibilities ... and property
That’s true but what is different about todays’ Russia? Are you saying there are positives established by Putin that are superior to the USSR?
He’s a KGB thug and anti American Russian nationalist... the only differences between the USSR and today’s Russian Federation is scope and style of flag... HELLO!
Putin’s regime is much like what Mussolini did... corporatist nationalism. as with Obama. And they are ALL scum.
It certainly appears to me, if you look at Russian history, that it is a critical weakness of Russians, to need strong despotic leaders.
Why are so many people in the US more concerned about the integrity of Ukraine’s border than they are with the integrity of our own borders? Many of the clowns huffing and puffing over Crimea are the same people who wholeheartedly approve of Mexico’s defacto invasion and cultural/political annexation of the American southwest.
Conservatives can multi-task.
It is not in the security interests of the US to allow an avowed enemy of the US, trample over weaker nations.
Appeasement begets more Russian land grabs. We can make them pay an economic price, Russia has already pushed all of Europe closer to the Western sphere.
It’s not about multi-tasking. The point I was making was that a lot of neoconservatives seem to care about the integrity of every border and the sovereignty of every nation except that of the US. The same people (John McCain, Bill Kristol) who are all up in arms about Crimea are the ones advocating policies that amount to an annexation of the US southwest by Mexico in everything but name.
Why conflate the two issues? They are separate.
The elites from both US Parties have decided they want open borders. We can disagree and fight them on the issue by electing others.
But this issue has nothing to do and is no reason to ignore the illegal annexation and incursion into Ukraine by Russia. And it is not in US security interests to allow an enemy to steam roll weaker nations without at least economic consequences.
Putin is clearly stirring things up Ukraine to distract the Russian population from his corrupt regime and their stagnant, tanking economy. And his tactic is working - his approval rating is skryrocketting in Russia.
Similarly, neoconservatives like to focus America's attention on imagined foreign threats (does anyone seriously believe Putin is going to attack US territory?) is a distraction from their own destructive policies. A case in point is someone like McCain - he makes himself sound all tough and patriotic by fussing over Crimea, while he hands over Arizona to illegals.
The Russians are letting Putin get away with using imagined foreign threats as a distraction from the havoc his policies have caused at home. Apparently many US politicians aren't above playing the same game.
“They aren’t separate issues.”
Factually, logically, and literally, they are indeed separate issues.
“Governments often use foreign wars and imagined foreign threats as a distraction from domestic problems.”
Putin’s naked aggression, certainly wasn’t coordinated with the US. This is a real event that needs to be responded to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.