Unless something happened in the last few months to this effect then Germany is still in the nuclear sharing program. Since military bases are for all intents and purposes the sovereign territory of their owners then that idea has no basis whatsoever. I'd like to see evidence for this, though even if it's the case I'm sure there were plenty of overly aggressive reduction policies that Russia itself didn't agree with, but knew the US wouldn't either and instead signed on to score political points.
In the few years after 9/11 Both the Russians and the Americans stopped cutting down on stockpiles. For the record Russia withdrew from START II following American withdraw from an ABM treaty. It wasn't solely a US thing. However, Obama on numerous occasions has expressed the desire for a nuclear free world, and if you look at any graphical representation of nuclear stockpiles were moving in the right direction.
Again it's on the German wikipedia page regarding the NPT... you can see it here, but I doubt it will help you unless you speak fluent german @ Pedro I acknowledged that the Russians are a part of this.... The direction maybe right, but regarding what is at stake its not moving nearly fast enough. Also, it doesnt end with weapons, there are power plants that need to be shut down too.....
oh... *facepalm* "At the Seventh Review Conference in May 2005, there were stark differences between the United States, which wanted the conference to focus on non-proliferation, especially on its allegations against Iran, and most other countries, who emphasized the lack of serious nuclear disarmament by the nuclear powers. The non-aligned countries reiterated their position emphasizing the need for nuclear disarmament" The german text adds that the 2005 conference ended without an end agreement due to blocking by the US in regards to those differences.... "Die Überprüfungskonferenz 2005 in New York scheiterte jedoch aufgrund der Blockadehaltung der USA und blieb ohne Ergebnis"
In this case I would have to say that's it's exactly as I described. Disarmament isn't a multilateral thing. It's a bilateral one. Which is why US-Russian talks are the ones that actually produce results. And in any case there are indeed a lot of good results coming from this front. There is no need to stop staying the course.
I am gunna take this back to the original topic. Obviously when it comes to conventional warfare with uniforms, battalion formations, tank blocks, front lines, and all that good stuff America would be unparalleled in comparison to any other nation. However if you are an enemy general, and have two brain cells to rub together you obviously don’t fight in a conventional war. It is this unconventional guerrilla warfare that American armies, and let’s be fair, every other army in history, have been much less capable in dealing with. See Vietnam or other recent wars.
Finally! someone with enough sense to bring things back to the true topic of this forum. One thing that I have never found out is why doesn't America depose the current North Korean government when it's is obviously evil, I mean America already went to the trouble of invading Iraq against the UN's wishes.
Because the North koreans have a capible army to fight back with. also to add in, If America were to fight a conventional war against another major power like china or russia, they would probaly win, but they would get there ass kicked all the way to victory. They would lose alot of men and equiptment esspecialy if they were on the offense so it wouldn't be worth it... war never is.
I know North Korea may have a large standing Army but against the full Military might of the United States it's not like their gonna last a month.
I agree the only thing we would have to worry about would be China backing them and that's not very likely
I know North Korea may have a large standing Army but against the full Military might of the United States it's not like their gonna last a month.[/quote] they would last longer then a month. maybe not a year but definatly longer then a month.
I would not underestimate China's ability to wage conventional warfare. But I doubt I'll ever see a conventional war in my lifetime anyway so this is all pointless talk regardless.
you never know, I personaly belive there will atleast be one conventional war in my life time. probaly North kore vs south korea, although it will only last until america comes to save the day as usal, sorry about horrible spelling
Getting involved in conflicts between nations that can defend themselves doesn't seem to be America's thing as of late. I doubt it would be a very popular decision with the public if they intevened in that kind of conflict.
It would only last a week or so given the fact that China would not support them. A couple months at best. THen we would leave the cleaning up and everything to South Korea
