Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 22 of 22
  1. #21
    Senior Member Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000


    I wonder if it was like this on December 6th, 1942

    December '42 was an interesting month. It was a bit quieter than other months, and during it all sides would have had to concede the outcome was "doubtful" for their side.

    Hindsight being 20/20, it was probably the high-water mark of the Axis powers -- the Allies had driven the Axis to a stop at Guadacanal, in North Africa, and in Russia. But Guadacanal would not be won until January, North Africa until May, and the Germans were just starting to realize they had been flanked in Russia not by the Army but by the weather, and they were now caught between the bitter Russian winter and Russian Army.

    I have a feeling we haven't quite reached that mark yet. At the risk of sounding rather hawkish, a nice large base of operations (oh, say 169,000 square miles with substantial oil reserves) from which we could knock together the heads of Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran to let them know this crap just won't be tolerated anymore would not be a bad option.

    We didn't want to be the world's policeman. It's a dirty job, but somebody's got to do it.

  2. #22
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Westchester Co., NY USA


    It doesn't change much for us either, and I have to agree with my good friend Silver as far as how it works. All it does is put it in the front of your mind again, instead of the middle. We have several "high risk" potential targets in my area and just outside.
    I also was rather conflicted with why they elevated the risk level anyway. Its the homeland security 'terror threat' system, but everyo other word out of the Mr. Ashcroft and Mr. Ridge's mouths, were overseas, overseas, overseas. Silver, you should be appointed the IACOJ's Administer of Homeland Defense. The only thing I do understand is why the military hasn't upped their level of threat. They do not want to give any indications that they are beefing up anything they are doing to mimic a possible attack on Iraq. It is a common tactic to 'not to do' something that other intelligence agencies will pick up on. The former soviet union saw it as a direct insult when the military threat level was increased when President Reagan was shot, and ever since then the Defense Secetaries and Joint Chiefs have been extremely careful in regards to changing DEFCON, and threat levels.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts