Vance speaks like a LCpl that was smart enough to get into law school. We're doing nothing but making Canadians and Europeans hate us right now. Zero harsh rhetoric towards Putin. Infuriating TBH.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
The end of NATO?
- Thread starter Waveoff
- Start date
Vance speaks like a LCpl that was smart enough to get into law school. We're doing nothing but making Canadians and Europeans hate us right now. Zero harsh rhetoric towards Putin. Infuriating TBH.
Is there a chance his veteran status factored into his law school admission....? Because you know, that'd be w.E.I.r.D....
The head of our IC community is busy posting shit like this, while she's not sitting in on Signal chats. Kinzinger's response is funny.
Good, I’m glad we finally have people in charge that hold the same warranted disdain for euros as many Americans. Enough with their freeloading pompous smug attitudes. Sorry that makes you upset
Besides pissing locals off, it makes our own DOGE-related struggles even dumber when we can’t travel for work but he can fly to Greenland for 3 hours
How about we don't.
Want to talk about a specific requirement/rule that may have been violated and many of us are still held accountable for and have skin in the game about? Okay. Want to talk about greater politics and who is better/worse, smarter/dumer, red/blue, or fetishes donkeys/elephants? That's not what this site is about and only makes a tenuous communication medium more incendiary.
Policy discussions are fair game, politicking is not.
This isn't specifically directed to Faded Float Coat, but to everyone. Stop.
Maybe I misread what I wrote, but I'm pretty sure the post you quoted was aimed at the interaction of the US, Denmark, and Greenland as it relates to the title of this thread. To the extent that conversation can (or can't) happen because there are unserious people making decisions - well that seems germane.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
First time? Can't tell you how many times I couldn't get travel approval to send enlisted sailors to required schools that would also help them advance, but meanwhile the senior leader's travel that could have been a VTC is apparently mission critical.
Every time the DoD talks about tightening funding, our enlisted servicemembers are the ones who bear most of the burden.
From a policy standpoint, our last direction by the CNO was the Navplan to prepare for a potential fight with China NLT 2027. The current policy hasn’t changed that timeline nor the end state, but has added more potential conflict zones (Canada, Panama Canal, Greenland) of which, bringing back this thread’s topic, directly goes against 2 of the founding members of NATO.
JFC I thought this was about the Greenland mess….the goddamn Germans got nothing to do with it.
Are you implying there is a written policy change (Navplan) to include war scenarios with Canada and Denmark?
No, War Plan Red is 90 years in the past. You just implied that official policy has changed and the fleet must consider that. Is your comment based on what you hear someone saying, or actual policy changes?
in terms of policy:
When the Commander-in-chief says he wants to take over a Nation, I believe the services would follow suit.
Well, at least we know where the thought (not actual policy) comes from, your imagination. In case you failed civics, POTUS “wants” aren’t actionable while orders could be…if legal. For example, back in 2022 Biden talked very frankly about using nuclear weapons on Russia (the NYT called it Biden’s “Armageddon Moment”) but no missiles were launched. Why? Because political rhetoric doesn’t equal official orders.