[ocrenter]

the French heard on a certain U.S. based housing blog a guy from Fallbrook was calling them pussies and they felt they had to prove something.

[ocrenter]

the French heard on a certain U.S. based housing blog a guy from Fallbrook was calling them pussies and they felt they had to prove something.

[ocrenter]

[quote=gandalf]Great discussion, enjoyed reading. One of the best FP threads in a long while.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with allowing the Europeans to “own” this, is that they won’t. And we all know it. Why? Because they’re bigger pussies than Obama.
[/quote]

That made me laugh.[/quote]

I will say here that I actually do not disagree with Allan with his assessment of the European pussiness. I will also say this type of pussiness is not limited to the Europeans, but throughout most of the American client states around the world, including Asian countries such as S.Korea and Japan.

So why are all of our “friends” pussies? The answer is by allowing them to rely so much on American military might, we made them so. This reality must change. Much like if any of us have a son rather on the soft side, our objective is to toughen him up so he can fend for himself in the future, and not fight his fight for him even when he is fully grown.

[ocrenter]

[quote=gandalf]Great discussion, enjoyed reading. One of the best FP threads in a long while.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with allowing the Europeans to “own” this, is that they won’t. And we all know it. Why? Because they’re bigger pussies than Obama.
[/quote]

That made me laugh.[/quote]

I will say here that I actually do not disagree with Allan with his assessment of the European pussiness. I will also say this type of pussiness is not limited to the Europeans, but throughout most of the American client states around the world, including Asian countries such as S.Korea and Japan.

So why are all of our “friends” pussies? The answer is by allowing them to rely so much on American military might, we made them so. This reality must change. Much like if any of us have a son rather on the soft side, our objective is to toughen him up so he can fend for himself in the future, and not fight his fight for him even when he is fully grown.

[ocrenter]

[quote=gandalf]Great discussion, enjoyed reading. One of the best FP threads in a long while.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with allowing the Europeans to “own” this, is that they won’t. And we all know it. Why? Because they’re bigger pussies than Obama.
[/quote]

That made me laugh.[/quote]

I will say here that I actually do not disagree with Allan with his assessment of the European pussiness. I will also say this type of pussiness is not limited to the Europeans, but throughout most of the American client states around the world, including Asian countries such as S.Korea and Japan.

So why are all of our “friends” pussies? The answer is by allowing them to rely so much on American military might, we made them so. This reality must change. Much like if any of us have a son rather on the soft side, our objective is to toughen him up so he can fend for himself in the future, and not fight his fight for him even when he is fully grown.

[ocrenter]

[quote=gandalf]Great discussion, enjoyed reading. One of the best FP threads in a long while.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with allowing the Europeans to “own” this, is that they won’t. And we all know it. Why? Because they’re bigger pussies than Obama.
[/quote]

That made me laugh.[/quote]

I will say here that I actually do not disagree with Allan with his assessment of the European pussiness. I will also say this type of pussiness is not limited to the Europeans, but throughout most of the American client states around the world, including Asian countries such as S.Korea and Japan.

So why are all of our “friends” pussies? The answer is by allowing them to rely so much on American military might, we made them so. This reality must change. Much like if any of us have a son rather on the soft side, our objective is to toughen him up so he can fend for himself in the future, and not fight his fight for him even when he is fully grown.

[ocrenter]

[quote=gandalf]Great discussion, enjoyed reading. One of the best FP threads in a long while.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]The problem with allowing the Europeans to “own” this, is that they won’t. And we all know it. Why? Because they’re bigger pussies than Obama.
[/quote]

That made me laugh.[/quote]

I will say here that I actually do not disagree with Allan with his assessment of the European pussiness. I will also say this type of pussiness is not limited to the Europeans, but throughout most of the American client states around the world, including Asian countries such as S.Korea and Japan.

So why are all of our “friends” pussies? The answer is by allowing them to rely so much on American military might, we made them so. This reality must change. Much like if any of us have a son rather on the soft side, our objective is to toughen him up so he can fend for himself in the future, and not fight his fight for him even when he is fully grown.

[ocrenter]

The question here is how do we wish to shape future world policing policy? So far the US is the lone ranger. This strategy does have its benefits. You do not have to consult with other states, you have the ability to act fast. Militarily this is the better way to go.

But the negatives are simply too much to list. We live it, we are way overstretched, and it is costing us big.

We desperately need to move away from the lone ranger route. So when do we do it?

Every time a crisis arise, everyone will turn to the lone ranger because that’s what they are used to. Plus, what is better than 1st rate military protection? FREE 1st rate military protection!

The only one that can get the world off its lone ranger dependency is the lone ranger himself. And this Libyan crisis is the best opportunity.

We have now set precedence with UN backing and Arab League backing. We are no longer the lone ranger. I say well done!

[ocrenter]

The question here is how do we wish to shape future world policing policy? So far the US is the lone ranger. This strategy does have its benefits. You do not have to consult with other states, you have the ability to act fast. Militarily this is the better way to go.

But the negatives are simply too much to list. We live it, we are way overstretched, and it is costing us big.

We desperately need to move away from the lone ranger route. So when do we do it?

Every time a crisis arise, everyone will turn to the lone ranger because that’s what they are used to. Plus, what is better than 1st rate military protection? FREE 1st rate military protection!

The only one that can get the world off its lone ranger dependency is the lone ranger himself. And this Libyan crisis is the best opportunity.

We have now set precedence with UN backing and Arab League backing. We are no longer the lone ranger. I say well done!

[ocrenter]

The question here is how do we wish to shape future world policing policy? So far the US is the lone ranger. This strategy does have its benefits. You do not have to consult with other states, you have the ability to act fast. Militarily this is the better way to go.

But the negatives are simply too much to list. We live it, we are way overstretched, and it is costing us big.

We desperately need to move away from the lone ranger route. So when do we do it?

Every time a crisis arise, everyone will turn to the lone ranger because that’s what they are used to. Plus, what is better than 1st rate military protection? FREE 1st rate military protection!

The only one that can get the world off its lone ranger dependency is the lone ranger himself. And this Libyan crisis is the best opportunity.

We have now set precedence with UN backing and Arab League backing. We are no longer the lone ranger. I say well done!

[ocrenter]

The question here is how do we wish to shape future world policing policy? So far the US is the lone ranger. This strategy does have its benefits. You do not have to consult with other states, you have the ability to act fast. Militarily this is the better way to go.

But the negatives are simply too much to list. We live it, we are way overstretched, and it is costing us big.

We desperately need to move away from the lone ranger route. So when do we do it?

Every time a crisis arise, everyone will turn to the lone ranger because that’s what they are used to. Plus, what is better than 1st rate military protection? FREE 1st rate military protection!

The only one that can get the world off its lone ranger dependency is the lone ranger himself. And this Libyan crisis is the best opportunity.

We have now set precedence with UN backing and Arab League backing. We are no longer the lone ranger. I say well done!

[ocrenter]

The question here is how do we wish to shape future world policing policy? So far the US is the lone ranger. This strategy does have its benefits. You do not have to consult with other states, you have the ability to act fast. Militarily this is the better way to go.

But the negatives are simply too much to list. We live it, we are way overstretched, and it is costing us big.

We desperately need to move away from the lone ranger route. So when do we do it?

Every time a crisis arise, everyone will turn to the lone ranger because that’s what they are used to. Plus, what is better than 1st rate military protection? FREE 1st rate military protection!

The only one that can get the world off its lone ranger dependency is the lone ranger himself. And this Libyan crisis is the best opportunity.

We have now set precedence with UN backing and Arab League backing. We are no longer the lone ranger. I say well done!

[ocrenter]

I understand, essentially a partial no-fly. but the question remains, we do it unilaterally or we do it with buy-in and ownership from those that will benefit the most from our action (ie the Euros).

[ocrenter]

I understand, essentially a partial no-fly. but the question remains, we do it unilaterally or we do it with buy-in and ownership from those that will benefit the most from our action (ie the Euros).

[ocrenter]

I understand, essentially a partial no-fly. but the question remains, we do it unilaterally or we do it with buy-in and ownership from those that will benefit the most from our action (ie the Euros).

[Author]

Posts