Originally Posted by
AxlF16
The withdrawal would've been a CENTCOM plan - in Tampa, not DC. More than likely it was led by ARCENT/3rd Army. I've worked as a planner in both organizations and IMO you're making a lot of bad assumptions and judgements. I worked NEO & ISIL planning with ARCENT G(J)3-5 and have a WAY better understanding of that culture than you can imagine.
You may have a better understanding of the culture. But the withdrawal plan that they had was not executed. It was 'revised' by higher ups in the chain of command. Not in Tampa.
Do you not know how that whole chain of command thingy works?
Originally Posted by
AxlF16
Sounds like your making a lot of excuses and justifications for Russian aggression and invasions of sovereign nations. You've articulated Putin's POV very well, now can you do the same for the US, NATO, and Russian 'buffer zone' nations?
Axl, I posted that for people who are spoon fed ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox/MSNBC which only has a US POV. Does this thread really need any more posts from a myopic point of view?
Perhaps you should read a bit about the Yalta Conference and Stalin's concerns for a buffer zone. FDR and Churchill agreed to the eastern European buffer zone. The west took that buffer zone away from Russia after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
I would have thought you knew more about the history here; Santayana was talking to people like you.
Originally Posted by
AxlF16
Against ICBMs and hypersonic cruise missles?
OMG. Hyperbole much? I can see I overestimated your understanding of world history.
Originally Posted by
AxlF16
Can you explain this logic? Why would NATO be at the table...muchless offering concessions? if anything, NATO should be expanded at a far quicker pace.
Is this a joke? NATO is the US. Without the US, NATO is nothing.