sherpa Posted May 5 Posted May 5 7 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Saudi can defend itself and its interests, I mean, at least in theory, right? I'm not sure where you are trying to go with this, but it isn't a significant variable in a discussion of Iran's expressed intent to eliminate Israel, but ya, against Iran, they could probably do OK. Really hard to say though. I'm not sure exactly where they are now, but they have good equipment at least. Still, I fought against their F-15's back in the 80's, and they were useless. A total waste of time. Rich, entitled Muslim men who drank heavily every night and were useless in the air. Started with six of us and four airplanes on Monday, supposed to do two things per day until Friday. Got to be such a waste of time we cut it to three airplanes and four pilots by Wed.
The Frankish Reich Posted May 5 Posted May 5 3 minutes ago, sherpa said: I'm not sure where you are trying to go with this, but it isn't a significant variable in a discussion of Iran's expressed intent to eliminate Israel, but ya, against Iran, they could probably do OK. Really hard to say though. I'm not sure exactly where they are now, but they have good equipment at least. Still, I fought against their F-15's back in the 80's, and they were useless. A total waste of time. Rich, entitled Muslim men who drank heavily every night and were useless in the air. Started with six of us and four airplanes on Monday, supposed to do two things per day until Friday. Got to be such a waste of time we cut it to three airplanes and four pilots by Wed. My experience in a quite different context with the Saudis. What I'm saying here is "let them fight their own fight" should apply equally to them as to Ukrainians? As to the Baltics, who fear that they are next in Putin's reconquista? We have legitimate U.S. interests in conflicts and conflict avoidance all over the world, and I think this fight - even a proxy battle we're involved in vs. the Houthis - shows that an isolationist America First/no involvement in foreign conflicts is simply naive and dangerous, and that everyone except JD Vance understands that.
sherpa Posted May 5 Posted May 5 5 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: What I'm saying here is "let them fight their own fight" should apply equally to them as to Ukrainians? As to the Baltics, who fear that they are next in Putin's reconquista? We have legitimate U.S. interests in conflicts and conflict avoidance all over the world, and I think this fight - even a proxy battle we're involved in vs. the Houthis - shows that an isolationist America First/no involvement in foreign conflicts is simply naive and dangerous, and that everyone except JD Vance understands that. Again, I'm not sure where you are going with this. The Saudis have become an ally, but aren't really a major variable in the Iran/Israel thing. Protecting shipping in international waters has always been a primary interest of the US. A strategy of simply absorbing weapons, which was the Last admin's thing was insane on about five different levels. I mentioned three above, but I would add corrosive to Navy morale and a definite negative in the retention issue, which is extremely important. Regarding Vance, of the four running for pres/VP, I would regard him as the brightest and most trustworthy. I think the Dems ran the goofiest couple in my lifetime. 1
Homelander Posted Sunday at 08:22 PM Posted Sunday at 08:22 PM On 5/5/2025 at 10:55 AM, B-Man said: NOTHING SAYS IMPARTIALITY AND NEUTRALITY LIKE UNRWA’S LONG COLLABORATION WITH HAMAS:
Recommended Posts