Dr3ams Posted September 21, 2016 Group: Members Followers: 2 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 60 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 36 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/19/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/23/1965 Share Posted September 21, 2016 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said: at least one candidate for president has said that he would not necessarily come to the aide of a NATO country. If that were to happen, then that would be a sad day indeed for America. Edited September 21, 2016 by Dr3ams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted September 21, 2016 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.69 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted September 21, 2016 Just now, Dr3ams said: If that were to happen, then that would be a sad day indeed for America. On that we agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayin jade Posted September 21, 2016 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 44 Topic Count: 6,178 Topics Per Day: 0.88 Content Count: 43,795 Content Per Day: 6.21 Reputation: 11,243 Days Won: 58 Joined: 01/03/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted September 21, 2016 Perhaps I am wrong, but it seemed like the gist of this article was the russia has the military readiness to take action against europe within a 48 hr time frame whereas nato is woefully unprepared to organize a defense within any reasonable time frame. I did not read in the article that russia was about to attack now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted September 21, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted September 21, 2016 And the plot thickens. We shall see. I have not seen this any where on the news. If it were a big deal it would seem like it would be all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger398 Posted September 21, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 562 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 2,074 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 648 Days Won: 2 Joined: 11/01/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1966 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I didn't hear nothing about it. Are you sure it's not a hoax article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted September 21, 2016 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 597 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,106 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,840 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted September 21, 2016 14 hours ago, Out of the Shadows said: I had not seen it yet, more political double talk. Nobody is trying to take our guns away, that is just a fear tactic. I do not live in a swing state so we do not get a lot of ads for the national race Hillary has been public that she wants the Supreme Court to change a decision about the second amendment referring to individual people or a state militia. After Scalia died her daughter made the comment on two occasions I heard on TV that now they might be able to get somewhere on gun control. Yes Hillary is trying to take our guns away.... Dianne Feinsteine has been very public about it also. With Hillary picking the Supreme Court Judges, it is quite possible she could accomplish that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AFlameOfFire Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 On 9/21/2016 at 8:15 AM, other one said: Hillary has been public that she wants the Supreme Court to change a decision about the second amendment referring to individual people or a state militia. After Scalia died her daughter made the comment on two occasions I heard on TV that now they might be able to get somewhere on gun control. Yes Hillary is trying to take our guns away.... Dianne Feinsteine has been very public about it also. With Hillary picking the Supreme Court Judges, it is quite possible she could accomplish that. I heard it out of her own mouth as well on one, I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marilyn C Posted September 25, 2016 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 30 Topic Count: 266 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 13,200 Content Per Day: 3.49 Reputation: 8,497 Days Won: 12 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/06/1947 Share Posted September 25, 2016 (edited) On 21/09/2016 at 10:20 AM, Dr3ams said: Because the U.S. is in NATO, they would have to respond with military force. We do have serious deterrents in Europe. Here in Germany we have nukes on loan from America. The nukes are on a joint base and would be delivered by German Tornados. There are also American nukes in Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey. There's also England's arsenal. Russia would also have to worry about China's constant eyeballing of Russian territory. If Russia were to attack NATO, it would be a good time for China to invade and capture land they have been lusting after for eons. Hu Dr3ams, Glad to see someone bringing reality to the conversation. Also we know from scripture that it is God Himself who will draw the Russian Federation (with Iran) down to Israel`s mountains & judge it there. 5/6ths of their army will be destroyed, thus leaving a huge, but huge power vacuum in the Middle east. Now I wonder who might like to fill that position? regards, Marilyn. Edited September 25, 2016 by Marilyn C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezra Posted September 25, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 134 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 8,142 Content Per Day: 2.35 Reputation: 6,612 Days Won: 20 Joined: 11/02/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted September 25, 2016 On 9/20/2016 at 2:36 PM, HAZARD said: Russia could invade Europe within 48 hours. Very true. One has to simply wonder why they have not do so already. The Europeans have had no leadership and no backbone for a long time. On 9/20/2016 at 3:27 PM, Out of the Shadows said: I wonder what the US response would be to such an action. "Go ahead and take control, since we would also love to surrender America". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walla299 Posted September 25, 2016 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 9 Topic Count: 92 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,164 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 1,727 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/19/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/10/1961 Share Posted September 25, 2016 On 9/20/2016 at 4:26 PM, Dr3ams said: This should be swallowed with a block of salt. Russia doesn't have the military might for a multi sided massive attack against NATO, nor do they have the resources for a prolonged conflict. If you need an example, look what happened in the Ukraine. If they threw the same arsenal and half witted invasion plans at NATO, they would have their extensions slapped into the dirt. You may be right up to a point, but there is one thing many forget. Russia controls several natural gas pipelines that feed into Europe. I saw one under construction when stationed in (then) West Germany in the mid '80s. Two pipelines at least 2 meters across side-by-side until they filled in the trench that ran alongside the village I lived in. All Russia would really need to do is shut down those pipelines in the middle of winter and they'd have quite the bargaining position - they wouldn't need to invade. They wouldn't come right out and threaten to shut down the lines, of course. There would probably be some kind of "technical failure" to slow the flow first and of course it would take time to fix it . . . while negotiations went on . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts