The Judgment day

Citat:
Israel Shamir (Russian: Исраэль Шамир; born 1947),[1] also known by the names Jöran Jermas[2][3] and Adam Ermash, is a Russian-born Swedish writer and journalist.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik AndY1 pravi:
Ampak res, tale Putin je pa vsemogocen.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik Demz pravi:

nikoli ne bi povezal.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik Demz pravi:
Nisem te še dal, ker sem po naravi firbčen človek in sem še malce počakal. Sem ti pravkar odgovoril pri sosedih.

Nič bati, si že bil v pm, pa greš znova. Ko te bom blagovoljil nazaj, bi bilo pa lepo, če bi poročal kako je tam.

)

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
How Trump’s victory is causing Europe to rethink its security

The surprise triumph of Donald Trump is raising fears of a historic recalibration between the United States and its allies in Europe, threatening to upend the allegiances that became the cornerstone of post-World War II peace.

...

“Europe will have to be prepared to take better precautions itself,” German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen told public television.

...

Yet a provocative Trump presidency could prove a tipping point for change, including accelerated talks to create a European army anchored by Germany and France.

In a sense, that new era of European security is already unfolding. Berlin is sending 650 soldiers to Mali next month in an experimental operation to relieve French forces fighting militants affiliated with the Islamic State. Next year, German troops will also stage a deeply symbolic deployment to Lithuania — a nation once brutally occupied by the Nazis — as part of NATO’s mission to counter an increasingly belligerent Russia.

“If Russia reaches a great power understanding with Trump, Germany would need to reconsider its defense,” said Christian Mölling, senior transatlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund in Berlin. “But defending against whom? Also the U.S.? You open a Pandora’s box.”

...

In fact, some see Merkel — particularly if she runs and wins reelection next year — as potentially filling the gap on the world stage left by Obama’s exit. In a full-circle transition for Germany, she could emerge as the leading champion, and defender, of liberal Western values.

...

Although German defense spending has recently grown, it is still only 1.2 percent of gross domestic product, compared with NATO’s benchmark of 2 percent.

Conventional wisdom holds that Germany’s neighbors, particularly France, would fear a stronger military here. But new calculations with Trump as the leader of the “free world” may change that, experts say.

Germans “avoid military conflict, whereas we rather tend to seek it,” said François Heisbourg, a former member of a French presidential commission on defense. “When the Germans display greater willingness to act like a normal power, that actually makes the French quite happy, because they’re acting like a normal country.”

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Inside General Flynn’s brain

We live in a dangerous world marked by rapid technological change.

...

There are many sincere people in our government who, frankly, are paralyzed by this complexity and so actively choose or passively accept a defensive posture — reasoning that passivity is less likely to provoke our enemies and that specific threats can simply be anticipated, discovered, countered, or recovered from.

...

In truth, the only way to operate effectively within an infinitely complex environment is by orienting all decision making to a core set of principles — or a more apparent logic of action that enables realistic assessments of our enemies, our objectives, our means and of our methods of engagement.

President Ronald Reagan understood this. He was clear about the Soviet threat and their political ideology of communism and he led the country to deal with that adversary with the right balance of engagement and soft power.

...

I’ll touch on each of these truths in order.

First. There is no substitute for American power. Human nature is imperfect and prone to violence and conflict. Because of this reality, leaders and nations can reduce — but not eliminate — the danger of war.

This truth is not very popular in some circles. There are people who believe that history is irrevocably progressing towards an ever-improving future.

...

I don’t subscribe to this idea. While I am a firm believer in the application of all elements of national power and never telegraphing which ones you may or may not use, the reality is that just since 1960, there have been over 30 insurgencies, conflicts, and wars and, in two thirds of these cases, the bad guys won.

...

Coalitions are valuable and should be cultivated whenever possible, and new ones must be formed.

But, we are fundamentally responsible for securing the future of our people and we can pursue this goal boldly in the knowledge that doing so has the derivative effect of improving the lives of people around the globe.

Second. A strong defense is the best deterrent.

...

Retreat, retrenchment, and disarmament are historically a recipe for disaster.

For that reason, we must always be ready to deploy what Winston Churchill called “overwhelming power.” This posture will deter most aggressors most of the time and, when even the best deterrent sometimes fails, it will still defeat them at the lowest possible cost and risk.

Third. Regime types matter. A prudent foreign policy is attentive to the types of regimes and their ideologies when discerning friends, foes, opportunities, and perils. Again, Reagan distinguished sharply between stable and liberal, democratic regimes on one hand, and totalitarian regimes — often animated by a wicked ideology — on the other. He rightly considered the former to be more reliable allies.

That said, we need to be clear about who we fight.

...

Relatedly, and my fourth point: We must think — and act — geopolitically.

A prudent foreign policy considers threats, interests, and opportunities based on the imperatives of world politics rather than vague notions of cosmic justice or “international morality.”

While those ideas are fine for the ivory tower, they are not rooted in the real world that we all live in today.

...

We should assail isolationism, any form of American withdrawal, and the fallacy of moral equivalence. But we should also not believe for a second that exporting democracy the world over will work either. However, we should also never be ashamed of our American values.

...

Five. We need to embrace American exceptionalism. Threats abroad are not addressed solely by military action. Instead, we need to understand that a successful foreign policy depends on a long-term strategy that combines economic prosperity at home, robust American military power, and the vitality of the American way of life.

...

Today and tomorrow’s environment dictates innovative force structure, interoperable technology, clear and simple policy and doctrine beyond the current construct.

And NOW is the time to get rid of the wasteful programs and choose only those that actually work.

...

The people of the United States deserve nothing less than our best effort and what they want is the unvarnished truth about what we are facing.

They also want to know that there are those willing to make the tough decisions on their behalf.

Because what they do know is that there are men and women serving in our armed forces, many in this room tonight, as Abraham Lincoln stated, who are willing to give the last true measure of devotion in service to our nation.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik AndY1 pravi:
Hudica, se ena tema, ki nam jo bo PacMan zasmetil s svojim dolgimi copy-paste-i

Klikni za razširitev