Skip to comments.NATO responsibilities equate to "attacking Russia" to Democrats?!?
Posted on 09/14/2008 9:53:38 AM PDT by CraigPichach
Anyone watch CNN Late Edition today (September 14, 2008) - the Democratic governor on the panel equated Palins comments that that if a NATO member was attacked the US would fulfill their responsibilities to defend was condemned as advocating a military attack on Russia!!! Is Obama advocating that the US no longer be in the business of defending freedom and democracy anymore?? Is NATO truely just a piece of paper to them to discard? So much for the free world standing together after 50 years of the NATO treaty. I hope McCain attacks this sentiment big time; how can any nation, especially emerging democracies, be expected to stand with the United States if even the NATO treaty which won the cold war is in question.
In a word, "Yes!"
Exactly what did the Governor say?
Another prefect example of how Obama just doesn’t get it. This guy would run scared if any mention of conflict came up.
If this was the same program I watched, it was Senator Diane Feinstein from California who said that Palin “advocated attacking Russia.” To Wolf Blitzer’s credit, he corrected her, showed the actual clip of Sarah talking about how we are obligated to defend NATO countries, and then asked Feinstein “isn’t that a factual statement?” Feinstein then proceeded to hem and haw so much that I laughed out loud...she blethered on about how our military is stretched too thin, but the funniest exchange was when Wolf asked Feinstein if she supported allowing Georgia into NATO. Feinstein sat there like a deer caught in headlights and then stammered our “I don’t know, I haven’t studied the issue.” LOL!
Sarah Palin continues to show she knows more about world politics than the old guard democrat leadership does.
In insurance, there’s the concept of a “known risk.” I don’t think that we should be encouraging NATO to expand to include every minor state which has ongoing problems with Russia, since we are the main guarantor (insurer) of NATO’s security. It’s different for Poland, and maybe the Ukraine, because they can contribute to NATO as well as benefit from it, and their independence from Russia has been well established over the past 20 years.
To some extents, strong alliances discourage wars, but remeber that careless ones were a trigger for WWI.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Obama, the wise one, believes the best way to handle Russia is in the UN Security Council.
Obama doctine on Georgia/NATO
Obama doctrine on Georgia/NATO
“nato responsibilites equate to “attacking russia” to democrats?!?!?!?”
that’s because the democrats are a bunch of psychotic, adolescent scu&bags.
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.