It goes something like this:
“There’s no such thing as a fair fight.” But we’re supposed to be measured, because they’re the underdog?
Trump, has identified 51 targets. Are these from the group?
If so, why not just tell them, 6 down, and 45 to go.
But we’re supposed to be measured, because they’re the underdog?
*************
Good point.
An attack is an attack regardless of who it comes from. If we want to ‘discourage’ such actions we have to respond with whatever action is necessary to convince the attacker to NEVER do it again. Because we are a superpower there seems to be a supposition that we should be restrained in how we deal with lesser countries. But that is a fallacy that only invites further aggression.
Talking about things like red lines, measured responses, and proportionality only reinforces the notion that we are reluctant to protect our interests. In fact, talk is perceived as weakness and indecisiveness in many cultures. We need to show resolve or we will continually be on the receiving end of costly acts in terms of lives and our national credibility.
But we’re supposed to be measured, because they’re the underdog?
*************
Good point.
An attack is an attack regardless of who it comes from. If we want to ‘discourage’ such actions we have to respond with whatever action is necessary to convince the attacker to NEVER do it again. Because we are a superpower there seems to be a supposition that we should be restrained in how we deal with lesser countries. But that is a fallacy that only invites further aggression.
Talking about things like red lines, measured responses, and proportionality only reinforces the notion that we are reluctant to protect our interests. In fact, talk is perceived as weakness and indecisiveness in many cultures. We need to show resolve or we will continually be on the receiving end of costly acts in terms of lives and our national credibility.