Thread: National / World Security

Tonight, the GOP candidates for the US Presidency will debate national security issues.

Simple question: Given all the other issues pending, is national security important?

My position in two words: Hell yes!

In today's news cycle, media culture etc, we live in a totally "out of sight, out of mind" environment. When our politicians decide to pay attention, they pretend to play checkers while our international rivals play chess. Below is an example of a pending disaster that most of you are oblivious to. I haven't provided links, graphs or the like. Wake up and do your own bloody research...

(Disclaimer: Moderate difficulty level. Reader discretion advised)
Due to a dispute with the Iraqi government, President Obama has decided to remove all combat personnel from Iraq by the end of the year. The majority Shiite government has been positioning itself to keep squeezing the rival Sunnis out of it's remaining positions of power. After we leave, the pushing will become shoving, and it will be bloody.
The Iranian backed Shia will undoubtedly gain power, and open 'friendly' relations with Iran. Meanwhile, thousands of Sunni will flee to Saudi Arabia (a Sunni country, rival to Iran). These refugees will cause an ongoing tension, but they will be the lucky ones. Sunnis fleeing to Jordan or Syria will not have the welcome mat rolled out for them. Iran already has it's hooks in those countries.
Oh, this gets worse. Much worse. During this turmoil, Turkey will undoubtedly use the opportunity to settle scores with the Kurds in northern Iraq. Think, possible annexation of ten percent of northern Iraq. They'll call it a "buffer zone". The Turks have been building up their military, everything from cruise missiles to air assets and armour.
After a year or so of bloody civil war, I'm sure the UN will step in and broker a "peace". Iraq will be partitioned, with Iranian Shia controlling the largest chunk in the south, next to Saudi Arabia. Congats, VP Biden! You got what you wanted.

Wanna cherry on your sundae? By this time, Iran is sure to have a deployable nuclear weapon. Kuwait, along with many other gulf states will feel pressure to support Iran as a regional power. Saudi Arabia, not liking this, will speed up the development of it's own nuclear program. As a deterrent. There goes the neighborhood.


The sad thing is, for those that read through the entire preceding scenario, many are still shrugging a non-committal "SO?"
I haven't even touched on what's happening with The Spratly Islands, or Brazil's military build-up, Indo-Pakistan tensions...

All I can say at this time is, if you think that jar of mayonnaise is expensive now: Just wait.

Anyone who’s been paying attention since before we invaded Iraq knows what will happen when the U.S. pulls out. Whether it’s this year -- on Bush's and the Iraqis previously agreed upon timeline -- or five years from now, there will be a bloodbath -- and the potential for all kinds of nasty scenarios and unintended consequences. Of course. The idea that the invasion would somehow make the U.S. or the region safer is a joke -- and that was the pretense behind the whole massive boondoggle. It’s all been a waste of American and Iraqi lives and billions of dollars. The invasion of Iraq is the biggest, most costly blunder and moral failure in U.S. history -- that will become even more evident when we withdraw, regardless of when it happens. Staying put will just cost more American lives and will only postpone the inevitable. And somehow this Obama's fault? Why not mention Bush -- who got us into this mess in the first place?

And the neighborhood is going anyway -- with or without our help. The recent Arab unrest demonstrates that people will eventually take matters into their own hands, even if the outcomes aren't to our liking -- and there's very little we can do about it. Look at what's happening in Syria -- a few months ago, people were saying Assad's government would successfully crack down on any demonstrations or unrest -- but now it looks like his government will eventually fall. There's good reason to believe the same thing would have happened in Iraq -- all with the same result as the U.S. invasion and eventual withdraw -- a bloody civil war. So it was all for nothing -- and we'll come out of it with zero credibility and in no position to take any kind of moral high ground -- in the region or anywhere else. There's the cherry on your sundae. So I don't know what your ideas are on national security, but hopefully we've learned that invading sovereign nations and installing doomed, propped-up governments isn't the answer.

Nostradamus saw this coming. No matter what you think, the stage is set for the final blow. The species was flawed right from the beginning. The only advice for you is to have a frozen dinner ready to toss into your micro wave when the earth starts shaking. At least, you'll have one last meal to enjoy.

Welcome to Nostradamus101.com

Thanks for that post, garza. I appreciate the perspective.

If it weren't the U.S. engaging in aggression, it would have been another. Let's not forget the Egyptians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Huns, the Vikings, the Spanish, the English, the Japanese, the Germans, the Russians, etc., etc., etc.

The ultimate weapon, at this point, for achieving peace is through prayer. If enemies would pray to God for peace instead of for victory against each other, the outcome would be inevitable--world peace. The solution, a simple one too, faces one major hurdle in the form of man's own pride.

Today's world is not much different from the world at any other time in history--where lies human beings lies weapons, followed by invasions.

When enemies lay down their arms to pray for peace, the people on earth will awaken to a day never seen before--a beautiful day. There will be no further need to eliminate one another.

Thanks for those responses.

Pray for peace.

Originally Posted by Winston

I almost forgot that "it was all Bush's fault" as well. Because, we all know, to first solve a problem, one must arrogantly assign the blame and smugly say "I told you so". That always fixes things. Much better than postulating an undesirable scenario, then rationally discussing ways to keep it from happening.

The thing is, you didn’t propose a solution -- unless you think simply keeping a military presence in Iraq indefinitely is a “solution.” And it is -- for the short-term -- that’s obvious. Otherwise, all you did was list a bunch of things that could happen when we withdraw the troops – some of which could happen anyway. Or not. I’ve seen all of it in various articles and websites and from talking heads over the years. Some are about the application of a little common sense for anyone vaguely familiar with the history of the region. Lets’ see -- if sectarian violence erupts between the Sunnis and Shiites -- the minority Sunnis will try to get out of Iraq – presumably to neighboring countries who might not like it. Uh huh. And somehow, you failed to mention the wave of unrest in the Arab world -- the real wild card in all this that will bring about massive changes in the region. Quite an omission from someone who's chastising people about doing their own research.

Obama is following Bush’s agreed upon timeline. The “democratically” elected Iraqi government refused to negotiate terms that would allow us to keep a limited peacekeeping force -- so we’re pulling out. We really don’t have a choice at this point. Are the Iraqis ready? Probably not. But will they ever be ready? Probably not, considering the root of the problem -- religious differences that go back 1300 years -- differences Saddam was able to keep in check only under a brutal dictatorship. But I guess we should have thought of that before we invaded. Oops. Yeah -- we managed to kill Saddam, but otherwise we’ve accomplished about the opposite of what we set out to do. (Oh, am I allowed to say that -- or am I just saying "I told you so?" Ha ha)

And none of this is about me claiming moral superiority -- it’s about simply recognizing that the invasion was wrong and a colossal blunder. I’m not a politician who has to tread lightly -- so it’s weird for anyone to expect that I shouldn’t say exactly how I feel about it whenever the subject comes up. Sorry if it’s not to your liking. I don't know if you supported the invasion or not -- but your reaction is typical of people who did, and who aren't too crazy about hearing that they were duped and got it all wrong. Perhaps a long-term solution involves keeping this top of mind -- so it doesn’t ever happen again. If so, I'm happy to do my part.

On another note -- maybe you shouldn’t kick off your debates with some condescending little intro and “disclaimer,” assuming that people don’t know any better or that they might struggle to comprehend your relatively simple ideas. That’s your idea of a “civil and open manner?" Right. You’re the one who set the sarcastic, negative tone for all this -- and somehow you feel insulted when someone questions what you have to say about it all. Odd.

This is just a reminder to remain on topic and to discontinue comments of a personal nature.

Originally Posted by Winston

During this turmoil, Turkey will undoubtedly use the opportunity to settle scores with the Kurds in northern Iraq.

On the topic of settling scores with Turkey: happy Thanksgiving too all the American members!

Originally Posted by Capulet

On the topic of settling scores with Turkey: happy Thanksgiving too all the American members!

Thanks. Knowing you're Canadian, your selfless good tidings are accepted cheerfully!

Oh, and back on topic, how are all those F/A-18 Super Hornets we sold to ya working? Reminder: Your warranty expires at year's end.
You may consider upgrading to our new F-35. Contact your Northrup-Grumman dealer for Holiday specials and our "Loyal Customer Upgrade" program.

Oh, and circling back: Given all the other issues pending, is national security important?

Originally Posted by Winston

Oh, and back on topic, how are all those F/A-18 Super Hornets we sold to ya working? Reminder: Your warranty expires at year's end.
You may consider upgrading to our new F-35. Contact your Northrup-Grumman dealer for Holiday specials and our "Loyal Customer Upgrade" program.

I used to live on CFB Cold Lake, where many of the F-18s were stationed, and my father was stationed/working under AETE, that worked on them directly. Considering how long we've had them, and the many humanitarian/peace keeping initiatives we've supported using them, I think they've worked out quite well. I'm a firm supporter of a stable military capable of

You're lucky the Conservatives won a majority last election, because there's a chance Canada might still buy F-35s from the US, no matter how big a pile of crap it is. But, we'll buy something from the US, no matter how horrible it is, because if we ever bought something of that magnitude from the French, British, Russian, or Chinese the US would literaly dump it's bowels.

Originally Posted by Winston

Oh, and circling back: Given all the other issues pending, is national security important?

Why do you have to stipulate with other issues pending? I ask you in return: name me a time when national security isn't important? If you were asking if it was in jeopardy, there might be some room for debate, particularly on how to strengthen it if we thought it was lacking.

Originally Posted by Capulet

Why do you have to stipulate with other issues pending? I ask you in return: name me a time when national security isn't important? If you were asking if it was in jeopardy, there might be some room for debate, particularly on how to strengthen it if we thought it was lacking.

Oh, my slightly biased view of the 1990's saw the whole idea of a 'peace dividend' as a bad thing.

I think people take their "eyes off the ball", from time-to-time. After the '91 Gulf War, the US drew down a significant part of it's Cold War hardware. While all-in-all not a bad thing, some cuts were too deep.
Bush '43 has been roundly blasted for being too militaristic. This (IMHO) is because Clinton cut too much. We go through these cycles. I just don't want to see a weak America. Some think a "multi-polar" world would be safer. I don't.

The 90's brought us a resurgent Russia, assertive China and Al Qaida. Not seeing any of those as a positive by-product of a peace dividend.

Originally Posted by Winston

This (IMHO) is because Clinton cut too much. We go through these cycles. I just don't want to see a weak America. Some think a "multi-polar" world would be safer. I don't.

The 90's brought us a resurgent Russia, assertive China and Al Qaida. Not seeing any of those as a positive by-product of a peace dividend.

Well, the biggest threats to US national security comes in two areas:

1. The price of oil and its control by foreign interests
2. The loss of the US manufacturing base and their superpower status economically on the global stage

Neither of these problems will be solved by F-35s. I'm with McCain when he said the US should ramp up production and reduce the price of oil. Companion to that, the US should begin every initiative possible to find the viable replacement energy sources, and then patent and manufacture the snot out of them.

The money that's spent in the military industrial complex could be better spent elsewhere in the economy to diversify and expand US power, including getting out from under their crippling debt. It'd help foreign policy too, because they wouldn't have to continue inventing reasons to drop bombs to justify keeping the munitions factories open.

National security is at a great risk, but sending our troops overseas is not the solution. People need to stop thinking that the Al Qaeda attacked us because we are a free and prosperous nation. Since 1991 we have been bombing an entire country in an undeclared war. We popped up puppet dictator's, which all ended in disaster. And we built military bases on holy land. Yet, we still don't learn as we're still trying to do some of the same things in Libya. And we very recently made Russia angry with a missile shield near Europe, set up for Iran, soon to turn into the 3rd undeclared war, which would make it 3 times the constitution would been shat on by foreign policy. We need to bring them all back and just protect the borders. They'll hate us a lot less after we stop bombing and trying to control them. Then maybe we can talk things out. We shouldn't interfere with foreign affairs when we don't and can't help them with weapons, troops, and self-imposed democracies. We're installing a system that is failing right before us. Maybe if we concentrate on lowering our debt, and making ourselves prosperous again, we can show other countries how it's done. The majority of the people should be the one's to decide how the country is ran. But the least we can do is not militarily interfere and talk to them about it. We did it to the Vietnamese, Chinese, and Russians, with the latter being greatly threatened by our current foreign policy, which allows Obama to attack a country without congress's consent. WHY IS THE DEMOCRAT STARTING WARS ANYWAYS! The entire policy is broken, and we're only hurting them and ourselves. So Bring them home, just bring them home.

-RP2012