FourFans

Literally no one is doing that. In fact the answers to the realpolitik question are arguing against it. Did I miss something in the middle there? I am arguing in good faith. I bring up two different scenarios because of the way the people responded to them. It's not about Biden. It's about different yard sticks being used to measure the actions of different presidents while people declare they are being objective. Allow me to rephrase these two situations more circumspectly: - The US president, with no prior warning, unilaterally re-establishes US foreign policy concerning it's defense of a non-treaty nation against the US's biggest military rival on the planet in a moment when that rival is making political and physical threats that it will finally do what it's been claiming it would do since the 50's and retain Taiwan. All while China's president Xi is known to respond very poorly to threats that may make him appear to lose face. Moreover this is all happening at a moment when that nation is military very active and the USA has finally completely it's withdrawal from Afghanistan and is decidedly not ready for military action in that venue yet has military forces in and around the area and has for a very long time. - The US president makes brazen claims about wanting to have control over a semi-autonomous allied country/landmass that belongs to another allied country who has already set the precedent of selling the US land in the Atlantic/Caribbean. All while the US has no real reason to threaten this because Denmark has historically been very amiable and arguably one of the US's most steady allies, even going so far as to pay for infrastructure changes that the US requests. This blustery idiotic exchanges is set in a military environment where the neither country has much military footprint involved, and the US has neither the political, military, or legal justification or capacity to invade/occupy Greenland. Both are poor situations. I'm not addressing the follow-up on either situation. We do not need NATO. We have a vested interest in a peaceful Asia. Which is worse for the USA? My personal analysis is that people are putting the current exchange about Greenland on the top tier of existential problems while they simultaneously downplayed an event that literally could have led to a conventional exchange of arms over the Taiwan straits. To me, Taiwan was us poking a bully nation that was/is looking for any excuse to respond. Greenland in political theater the likes of which almost every president has conducted and amounts to siblings fighting with no real threat of actions. More to it, this is Trump's MO, and has been for his whole political life. I was in a NATO staff when he threatened to pull the US out if the allies didn't pay what they said they would. It was a bluff and everyone knew it. All the nations in that stuff literally laughed about it. Most countries didn't pay and the US is still in NATO. This is how Trump operates. I disagree with it. I think it's detrimental to his purposed. I think it's not how nations should interact, but I can't change it. I can just recognize what it is and what it isn't. We're not going to invade Greenland, so maybe people should stop acting like it's the end of the world that the USA is finally acting like a superpower again and demanding to be treated as such. (sidebar, i'll be curious to know what's happening in the background right now that no-one is paying attention to because of the Greenland noise...that's ALSO Trump's MO)

Yes. Were you as concerned when Biden openly said that yes, the USA would would defend Taiwan if China attacks it...even though it has literally been US policy for decades to specifically not say that? This space is messy. There is no room for double standards based on emotional responses to the assclowns in charge. Are you sure you're using the same yard stick with Trump that you did with other presidents?

Actually deploying troops to invade and occupy a nation without the approval of congress. Ordering our departure from NATO without the approval of the Senate. Unprovoked sanctioned assassination of one of our major enemy's heads of state. Everything else is just that: realpolitik. International relations are messy and gross, but necessary. Soft power is worthless unless it's backed by hard power.

God bless little European Texas

Read my post again, for comprehension this time. I'm trying to help some out there understand the higher math behind the political theater going on. We don't "just leave NATO" That's not happened once yet and I doubt we'll be the first. We're not going to invade Greenland (we don't even need to, Denmark is more than happy to pay for basing changing we ask for), and we're probably not going to leave NATO, even if other do. However, the wide receivers on the team needs to know they're not the O-Line, they're not the TE, and they sure as shit aren't the QB. To those who pay attention to the history of nations, what's happening right now is what that 'define the relationship' conversation looks like between allies. I fully expect some things will change out of this, but stop with the black-and-white good-and-evil right-and-wrong bullshit. Act like an adult who thinks with critical analysis in mind, not just so you can response with your party line. We've already got news anchors doing that, please don't join them. Turn off CNN and/or Fox news and start recognizing that you and I don't hear 1 percent of the high level conversations that occur around these events. More importantly, quit reading your own rhetoric into other peoples statements. You sound like a weepy melodramatic 5th grader trying to tell a sad story while blubbering. It's embarrassing.

I spent an extensive part of my past studying international relations. Rule 1: There is no such thing as international law. Rule 2: International relations is, by definition, countries screwing over other countries. No country has friends, just interests. That's a two way street and a lot Europe forgot that. Just because the USA has acted politely and almost philanthropically in past in no way means that should continue. Is it nice? Nope. "Nice" countries invariably end up as another's vassal. The Dutch guilder used to be the world's reserve currency before the British pound, now where is it? Dwell on that for a second. We've been looking after everyone else's interests for a very long time and have ignored our own back yard at the same time. Not anymore apparently. Regardless how much anyone likes it, the facts are true: No one else will look after our hemisphere with US interests in mind if we don't. From a broader perspective, the USA is finally starting to act like every other country on the planet, and arguable still more benevolently that any other country would if they were given the power that the USA currently wields. Jimmy Carr's comedy bit is rather insightful: - Everyone is a Communist in their own house (I'll selflessly give to my family what I have to what they need) - Socialist in their home community (we will collectively provide for those in our community that are in need) - Capitalist in the international environment (he didn't earn it so screw that guy) Several geopolitical analysts have been predicting the return of a neo-colonial world...and here we are. Don't have to like it to recognize what it is.

Agreed, though I'll call that a false equivalency. This is us pushing back against an organization of countries that have abused the good graces of the USA and acted as though access to our markets and access to use of our military force is their own personal birthright. During my time in NATO that attitude was common, and rather amusing to point out. Denmark really is too poor to buy blanks for it's military, so they point and say 'bang'. I'd guess the UK, some of the Nordic countries, and possibly now Poland are the only EU countries that could actually defend their own boarders...though Germany is on that path finally...(the history buff in me shutters at that). The US and the reputation of our military has kept the EU's Eastern flank secure for so long that the Europeans have forgotten that fact. Now the are being reminded and their calling foul on what should be called truth. Saying we're stealing our sidekick's lunch money is like saying a battered wife who finally defends herself is committed assault (I imagine something like Ronda Rousey being a battered wife for years and then finally realizing, wait, I can kill this guy...). On a technical level it might technically be true. On the truth level it's not. This is isn't bullying. This is the US finally standing up for itself.

Does anyone here actually believe that Trump is going to try and get the US to invade Greenland? If he does do you really think we'd actually do it? This is political theater. We reminded the world that the western hemisphere is ours. Now he's trying (poorly) to remind NATO that they really need us and we don't need them.

I'm in.

He's been in office long enough now for people to notice that he as qualities they don't like...aka he's human and now has a spotlight on him. Some guys apparently bite off on the trope of insider trading, or that he had some big-name somebody perform for free at a party, or that he's has a less than cordial relationship with Shawn Ryan, or something stupid like that. Personally I find it completely asinine when dudes get hugely emotional about their opinions about people whom they've never met, have had no interactions with, and are completely unaffected by. I don't have a problem with the dude, whom I've never met. I listen to his podcast, apply critical thinking, and learn stuff I didn't know before. But hey, adulting is hard. P.S. My guess on the trading is pretty much every congressman just applies to the Pelosi index and prospers. But it's not insider trading as literally every word they say is written down in public record and posted almost immediately on congress.gov. Convenient for me to follow? absolutely not, but illegal? No.

We've never actually overtly tried with Cuba. Bay of pigs was supposed to be hush-hush and deniable. This administration doesn't do anything hush-hush. Cuba would, however be an absolute mess in the aftermath...just like Venezuela is likely to be. Just imagine the post regime celebration that would turn almost immediately to immigration to the USA.

You said it wrong: In America how could personality NOT be the ENTIRE political question?

You're not wrong. I had that perception too. Similar experience, but I decided that the people who's opinions matter to me noticed important things in my life, all other's opinions don't matter.

Carnies. Small hands.

Why is Anderson Cooper shooting your gun? You can tell it's him by the hair.

This is freaking cool!

Addressing the OP: If you thought the USAF screwed you over, just wait until you experience an airline during contract negotiations. It sounds like outside influences have been crafted your outlook for you. It may be completely true that you were actively screwed by the system, but getting bitter only means you're letting the system win. The airlines will happily assume the role of screwing you over if you let them. I can show you a large collection of 30-year widebody captains making millions of dollars who are thoroughly convinced they've been screwed by the system. They are no fun to be around. It's all perspective. Pick your's with care. Choose gratitude instead of trying to pinpoint who's screwing you over. The answer to that question will always be "someone and/or everyone". Conversely, if you focus on what you're grateful for, you'll find a lot of good things in life. Pick one, you can't focus on both. I punched at 17 years and joined the reserves for 3 years. Now I'm at a major airline. In all three of those locations it is VERY easy to look around and wonder why the grass isn't as green as advertised. Reality is that the grass on the other side is just a different kind of grass. Once you get into a new organization, you'll see all the warts. You get to decide if it's good or bad, but if you let the system decide, it'll definitely suck. Truths: The system (usaf or corporate) doesn't owe you anything. Your hard work will be overlooked, but it will craft your reputation among your peers. Once you're gone, the system won't care. Maximize your personal gain without screwing others over, ignore the BS, do your work will, keep your integrity in tact, find a niche you can enjoy. Focus on good things, and your next career will be great. Focus on the hate, and you'll hate it. It's a DAILY choice.

Sounds like the commentary of a boomer who is almost completely tone-def to the future of air combat. Flying hours and airmanship are important...but not nearly as important as QUALITY of the training. If those hours are spent dogfighting and other "fun" things, they are largely wasted if the pilot will be expected to manage a fleet of drone wingmen. Fly hours is the wrong metric and has been for a long time. PROFICIENCY at required tasks is far more important. Hard to track, but not impossible. I agree our young pilots need more time in the air, but not just to get in the air. Chasing proficiency will have the side effect of building airmanship if the program is built properly. Thanks for the v-necks McPeak.

The best part is the expertly executed black-curtain deployment

Same. Was saddened to hear that Crenshaw is in that bucket from their perspective. I was hoping he'd be one of the good guys. Perhaps he is, but the comment Ryan mentions about Crenshaw's "boys down at 6" was disheartening.

precisely my point. I grew up 3 hours away from D-town, and it used to be a place you'd go just because you could...much like NYC. NO ONE goes there now unless they have a specific reason. NYC could easily go that way. It would take a couple decades, but I've lived in and visited major cities (well beyond seeing the airport and hotel) that suffered through the awesome-to-aweful transition as the result of socialist mismanagement. Bucharest, Sophia, Tbilisi, Beirut, San Francisco, and specific burbs of the LA basin all stand out as examples.

Detroit was technically too be to fail too. Been there recently? Given communist rule, ANY city is fully capable of collapsing and consuming itself.

I wouldn't expect them anytime soon. ID and NOK notification have to occur, and it appears the aircraft crashed into occupied buildings.

You remember those proclamations from Obama's term? That'd be 2008-2016...when you joined this forum in 2022? That's a significantly long lurk before registering to share your opinions which you seem really eager to share. Gaslight much?

This is heart breaking for the bros here at Brown. The MD crew force is packed with a great dudes.