Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 09/20/2016 View Mon 09/19/2016 View Sun 09/18/2016 View Sat 09/17/2016 View Fri 09/16/2016 View Thu 09/15/2016 View Wed 09/14/2016
1
2016-09-20 Europe
Five Reasons The U.S. Army Will Lose Its Next War In Europe -- Maybe In 2017
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Besoeker 2016-09-20 00:00|| || Front Page|| [5 views ]  Top

#1 Elections have consequences.
Posted by Nguard 2016-09-20 00:38||   2016-09-20 00:38|| Front Page Top

#2 And yet losing is what the U.S. Army is currently postured to do.

And yet where has the (alleged) "opposition" party stood up and *demanded* that our military be adequately funded?
Posted by Crusader 2016-09-20 00:40||   2016-09-20 00:40|| Front Page Top

#3 #1 Elections have consequences. Posted by Nguard Yep, and the poor old infantryman and tanker will pay the price.
Posted by Tennessee 2016-09-20 00:42||   2016-09-20 00:42|| Front Page Top

#4 I guess Putin had to wait until after Obama was re-elected.
Posted by no mo uro 2016-09-20 05:44||   2016-09-20 05:44|| Front Page Top

#5 The U.S. Army would likely do most of the ground combat for NATO, because America contributes over two-thirds of the alliance's resources.

There is your answer.

Somewhere around the early 80s, Western Europe reach GDP and population parity. We've funded 30 years of military welfare. Why are we even there. If they don't have the will to defend themselves, why should Americans once again be called upon to die? Can't lose a war if you are not there.
Posted by Procopius2k 2016-09-20 07:56||   2016-09-20 07:56|| Front Page Top

#6 Kuwait was a ground war.
Europe won't be.
Posted by Skidmark 2016-09-20 10:34||   2016-09-20 10:34|| Front Page Top

#7 I suspect they'll have a civil war with their Muslim populations before Russia gets involved. In fact Russia may be welcomed by that point for all we know.

Either way NATO should have been reevaluated long ago.
Posted by rjschwarz 2016-09-20 14:42||   2016-09-20 14:42|| Front Page Top

#8 #3 #1 Elections have consequences. Posted by Nguard Yep, and the poor old infantryman and tanker will pay the price.
Posted by: Tennessee


prolly would've voted for the evil Rep party anyway
Posted by Frank G 2016-09-20 21:41||   2016-09-20 21:41|| Front Page Top

23:58 Crusader
23:56 Crusader
23:52 Crusader
23:45 Crusader
23:08 rjschwarz
23:04 rjschwarz
22:14 Percy Crusogum9777
21:41 Frank G
21:34 Frank G
21:21 Frank G
20:54 SteveS
20:37 Frank G
20:30 phil_b
20:12 Pappy
19:58 Pappy
19:49 Iblis
19:41 BrerRabbit
19:41 BrerRabbit
19:08 Deacon Blues
18:36 Charles
18:07 Crusader
18:06 Procopius2k
18:01 Crusader
18:00 Crusader









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com