USA - США - SAD

Share
avatar

Posts : 7992
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Gargantua on Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:23 pm

No Country wrote:Долазили су и Норвежани, и то масовно, док је Норвешка била shithole. Пре ће бити да Трамп не разуме како миграције заиста функционишу, шта их покреће. Мени је ова изјава више у рангу оног искреног чуђења Марије Антоанете, што не једу колаче ако немају хлеба?

e to ti je fake news, never happened
avatar

Posts : 13297
Join date : 2012-02-12
Location : чекам камату на уштеђено време

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by паће on Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:32 pm

Gargantua wrote:
No Country wrote:Долазили су и Норвежани, и то масовно, док је Норвешка била shithole. Пре ће бити да Трамп не разуме како миграције заиста функционишу, шта их покреће. Мени је ова изјава више у рангу оног искреног чуђења Марије Антоанете, што не једу колаче ако немају хлеба?

e to ti je fake news, never happened

Лажно, али свеједно искрено.


_____
сви ће поцркамо
Just let me worst the weight, okay?
avatar

Posts : 5675
Join date : 2015-05-16

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by No Country on Sun Jan 14, 2018 9:08 pm

Gargantua wrote:
No Country wrote:Долазили су и Норвежани, и то масовно, док је Норвешка била shithole. Пре ће бити да Трамп не разуме како миграције заиста функционишу, шта их покреће. Мени је ова изјава више у рангу оног искреног чуђења Марије Антоанете, што не једу колаче ако немају хлеба?

e to ti je fake news, never happened
Well, that’s the very problem with fake news: news are fake, the message is real. 
avatar

Posts : 7992
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Gargantua on Mon Jan 15, 2018 10:22 pm



avatar

Posts : 3092
Join date : 2014-10-28

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Daï Djakman Faré on Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:17 am

pored toga sto je ovaj campaign ad totalna jebena bomba mislim da se mora reci da chelsea prilicno objasnjava ovaj gender transitioning 



_____
--to give the metals back their alchemical significance that has been neglected since the beginnings of the industrial revolution
--to alienate common apparati/mechanismi to create a perpetuum mobile called Motor Sehn-Sucht--
avatar

Posts : 12359
Join date : 2014-12-01

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Filipenko on Tue Jan 16, 2018 3:28 am

Lepo je docekan(a) u mejnstrim antinarodnoj propagandi.


avatar

Posts : 44819
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by William Murderface on Tue Jan 16, 2018 3:50 am

Morally compromised figure, jbt. Kad bi bar rekli, ko Amfilohije, "izdajnica!", to bi bilo bar iskrenije.


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije

Posts : 987
Join date : 2017-03-14

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by MNE on Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:53 am

aj ova(j) al što crna Asma
avatar

Posts : 13297
Join date : 2012-02-12
Location : чекам камату на уштеђено време

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by паће on Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:55 am

Ал то њихово "излагање живота ризику"... јбт, били су где не треба и радили против сопствених закона, дакле крив је ко каже "гле види њих". Није крив ко их је послао, а јок.

Ал' то понављање таквих мантри, то је ботовска машинерија коју виђам већ 15 година или јаче, по разним питањима, и то ми се све чини да ни сендвич не добију. Напросто утренирано да оде на фокс њуз по своје мишљење.


_____
сви ће поцркамо
Just let me worst the weight, okay?
avatar

Posts : 1576
Join date : 2016-01-07

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Djamolidine Abdoujaparov on Tue Jan 16, 2018 7:41 pm

dok #resistance diže frku oko shithole countries komentara, niko ne provaljuje šta su I'm with her demokrate došle da na tom sastanku ugovore.

“Both Tom Cotton and the Congressional Black Caucus will oppose our deal, so it is, by definition, bipartisan.” This is how a far-right policy becomes centrist, in less than a year. And this is how Democrats are negotiating with a historically unpopular president, in a midterm election year, on an issue on which they held an immense amount of leverage just a month ago.

Democrats like Durbin may be genuinely offended at Trump’s profane assessment of certain people who wish to become Americans, but they’ll still give him most of what he wants, in the name of compromise.
avatar

Posts : 7992
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Gargantua on Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:34 pm

avatar

Posts : 7992
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Gargantua on Sun Jan 21, 2018 6:23 pm

Mattis on defense. Gregory Copley, Defense & Foreign Affairs by The John Batchelor Show
https://player.fm/1nzydf #nowplaying

(Photo: Pentagon)

"Key take-aways from the new National Defense Strategy included: 1. The US Defense establishment would return, after almost two decades, to a recognizable military mission, and would rebuild its forces, its defense-related R&D, its doctrine, and its capabilities in line with the trajectory it had been on until the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the US, but taking into account the decline in its force structure caused by the 18-year diversion to the CT mission, and taking into account the totally transformed geopolitical and technological context; 2. To emphasize the geopolitical shift in the “competition” spectrum, the US had downgraded NATO to the second tier of its strategic alliance structures and raised to the first tier its existing and emerging alliances in the Indo-Pacific. This, by default, means the ANZUS Alliance (with Australia and New Zealand), its Japan and Republic of Korea alliances, and the emerging "Quadripartite" alliance structure linking the US with Japan, Australia, and India. Unspoken, but critical within this approach, would be — as Pres. Trump had already made clear — improved security relations with key ASEAN states and the Republic of China (ROC: Taiwan). The fact that the US has now moved to the “Indo-Pacific” contextual view, as opposed to the “Asia-Pacific” view was confirmed and important; it signals a shift in thinking1; 3. The Defense Dept. would substantially reorganize to improve flexibility, efficiency, and innovation, including improved relationship with private sector contractors. Indeed, private sector enthusiasm for working with Defense had essentially evaporated in recent years, with the exception of committed major contractors, because of the bias, difficulty, and bureaucratic morass which caused defense contracting to become something for most firms — particularly small-to-medium businesses — to avoid; 4. The document, apart from a few, non-substantive jingoistic comments, was low key and professional and, if anything, played down the fact that it represented a total transformation of the US defense capability. Sec. Mattis presumably did not want the document to inspire concern among “competitors”, or for allies to think that the new strategic posture was anything other than a return to historical continuity; 5. The Strategy highlighted that Defense would act more frequently within an inter-agency context — a “whole-of-government” framework — rather than as a purely military instrument. This was particularly evident in the one brief paragraph devoted to the Western Hemisphere. “Supporting the US interagency lead, the Department will deepen its relations with regional countries that contribute military capabilities to shared regional and global security challenges,” it said, leaving open and ambiguous how the US would deal with the substantial growth of PRC strategic (but non-military) projection into the Caribbean and much of South and Central America; 6. With regard to Africa, the message was subtle, but clear: the Defense Dept would work to counter, among other things, “trans-national criminal activity, and illegal arms trade with limited outside assistance; and limit the malign influence of non-African powers”. This phrasing clearly — but without naming names — emphasized the PRC’s “malign influence”, but also that of Turkey, which has emerged as a key driver of the illegal arms trade. But the Africa remarks indicated that the US would work with local partners and the European Union (EU), presumably including the United Kingdom; 7. The document did not seek to raise any undue expectations that the US would re-surge into the Middle East, but, rather, would build in its small bases and successes there to, among other things, “counterbalance” Iran, without mentioning the other competitive forces operating in the area: the PRC, Russia, and Turkey; 8. The Strategy was notably more gracious and accommodating about US alliances than earlier administrations had been. “Our allies and partners came to our aid after the terrorist attacks on 9/11, and have contributed to every major U.S.-led military engagement since. Every day, our allies and partners join us in defending freedom, deterring war, and maintaining the rules which underwrite a free and open international order.” This was an extensive section — given that the whole document was, in its unclassified extracts, only 11 pages — which emphasized collegiality, cooperation, collaborative planning, and the recognition that “each ally and partner is unique”. What was evident in the document was the decline in hubris, and the increase in awareness of context; 9. The new US strategic doctrine emphasizes agility and responsiveness, maneuver, and lethality. It makes it clear — without, again, setting off alarm bells — that cyber and space-based warfare was of paramount concern, without neglecting the modernization of nuclear forces (which would extend far beyond merely upgrading the land-based Minuteman III ICBMs, but would include the full spectrum of the triad of nuclear capabilities within a transformed context and technology mix).

It is probably true that the Defense leadership, under Secretary (and former Gen.) Mattis, pushed strongly for the Armed Forces to resume their classical mission structures in light of the declining strategic competitiveness of the US globally. But it is also probably true that Pres. Trump had no doubts that this was the appropriate move. The shift was completely in line with his campaign concerns that the US had lost its global strategic traction through the erosion of Armed Forces capabilities, not only with regard to budget. What is as significant as the new Strategy itself was the reality that it represented an interconnected approach, reducing the appearance of inter-service competition for resources, and stressing the jointness of all operational thinking, as well as the inter-agency collaboration. The document should be seen in the US Congress as a sign of a new spirit in Defense, ending the years of military mis-use under Pres. Bill Clinton and his commitment to intervention in the Balkans (creating problems which persist to this day), the distortion of mission under Pres. George W. Bush in the second Iraq War and the “war against global terror”, and mis-use and decline under Pres. Barack Obama. The new Strategy was a sign that maturity and professionalism — and with them a new improvement in morale and prestige — has returned to the US Defense establishment

. .. .. ..

National Defense Strategy a ‘Good Fit for Our Times,’ Mattis Says , by Jim Garamone / DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, Jan. 19, 2018 — The new National Defense Strategy is a good fit for the times, emphasizing the return of great power rivalry, yet still addressing other threats that abound in the world today, Defense Secretary James N. Mattis said today. The secretary unveiled the strategy at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies and stressed that the strategy is not merely a defense strategy, but an American strategy. The school is a division of the Johns Hopkins University based in Washington. The strategy -- the first new strategy in a decade -- is based on the National Security Strategy President Donald J. Trump announced in December. New Strategy Reclaims ‘An Era of Strategic Purpose’

“Today, America's military reclaims an era of strategic purpose and we're alert to the realities of a changing world and attentive to the need to protect our values and the countries that stand with us,” the secretary said. “America's military protects our way of life and I want to point out it also protects a realm of ideas. It's not just about protecting geography. This is a defense strategy that will guide our efforts in all realms.” Threats have changed since the last strategy. There is increasing global volatility and uncertainty with challenges from Russia and China coming to the fore. “Though we will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists that we are engaged in today, but great power competition, not terrorism, is now the primary focus of U.S. national security,” the secretary said. The strategy will provide the American people the military required “to protect our way of life, stand with our allies and live up to our responsibility to pass intact to the next generation those freedoms that all of us enjoy here today,” Mattis said. The strategy expands the U.S. military’s competitive space, prioritizes preparedness for war, provides clear direction for significant change at the speed of relevance and builds a more lethal force to compete strategically. Tough Choices In forming the strategy, officials had to make tough choices, “and we made them based upon a fundamental precept, namely that America can afford survival,” Mattis said. “We face growing threats from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia are from each other, nations that do seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models, pursuing veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic and security decisions,” he said. The threat from rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran persist. And even though ISIS’s physical caliphate is no more, the group -- and other extremist organizations -- continues to sow hatred. “In this time of change, our military is still strong, yet our competitive edge has eroded in every domain of warfare: air, land, sea, space and cyberspace, and it is continuing to erode,” the secretary said.

‘Our Military Will Win Should Diplomacy Fail’

Sixteen years of war, rapid technological change, defense spending caps, and seemingly continuous continuing resolutions “have created an overstretched and under-resourced military,” he said. “Our military's role is to keep the peace; to keep the peace for one more year, one more month, one more week, one more day; to ensure our diplomats who are working to solve problems do so from a position of strength and giving allies confidence in us. This confidence is underpinned by the assurance that our military will win should diplomacy fail.” Mattis said the supremacy of American military is not preordained. “It is incumbent upon us to field a more lethal force if our nation is to retain the ability to defend ourselves and what we stand for,” Mattis said. “The defense strategy's three primary lines of effort will restore our comparative military advantage.

” The strategy commits the department to build a more lethal joint force. It calls for strengthening old alliances and building new ones. “At the same time, we'll reform our department's business practices for performance and affordability,” the secretary said. An enemy will attack any perceived weakness, Mattis said. The American military, therefore, must be able to fight across the spectrum of conflict. “This means that the size and the composition of our force matters,” he said. “The nation must field sufficient capable forces to deter conflict. And if deterrence fails, we must win.” Mattis added, “To those who would threaten America's experiment in democracy, they must know: If you challenge us it will be your longest and your worst day. Work with our diplomats: You don't want to fight the Department of Defense.” Alliances are key to American success, the secretary said. “In my past, I fought many times and never did I fight in a solely American formation,” Mattis said. “It was always alongside foreign troops.” The American military must be designed, trained and ready to fight alongside allies, he added. “History proves that nations with allies thrive, an approach to security and prosperity that has served the United States well in keeping peace and winning war,” Mattis said. “Working by, with and through allies who carry their equitable share allows us to amass the greatest possible strength.

” Reforming DoD’s Business Practices The third line of effort, he said, will be the foundation for the U.S. competitive edge: reforming the business practices of the department. “We are going to have to be good stewards of the tax dollars allocated to us, and that means results and accountability matter,” the secretary said. “The department will transition to a culture of performance and affordability that operates at the speed of relevance. Success does not go to the country that develops a new technology first, but rather, to the one that better integrates it and more swiftly adapts its way of fighting.” Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick M. Shanahan is already leading this effort. He expects it to leverage the scale of operations, driving better deals for equipping troops and modernizing systems. This strategy means nothing if the resources are not in place, Mattis said. “No strategy can long survive without necessary funding and the stable, predictable budgets required to defend America in the modern age,” he said. “Failure to modernize our military risks leaving us with a force that could dominate the last war, but be irrelevant to tomorrow's security.”

Continuing Resolutions Harm Military Readiness

Mattis added, “Let me be clear. As hard as the last 16 years have been on our military, no enemy in the field has done more to harm the readiness of the U.S. military than the combined impact of the Budget Control Act's defense spending cuts, worsened … by us operating, nine of the last 10 years, under continuing resolutions, wasting copious amounts of precious taxpayer dollars.” The military continues to work tirelessly to accomplish the mission with now inadequate and misaligned resources, simply because the Congress cannot maintain regular order, Mattis said. “That we have performed well is a credit to our wonderful and loyal troops, but loyalty must be a two-way street,” he said. “We expect the magnificent men and women of our military to be faithful in their service, even when going in harm's way. We must remain faithful to those who voluntarily sign a blank check, payable to the American people with their lives.” Under the Constitution, it is Congress that has the authority to raise armies and navies, Mattis said. “Yet as I stand here this morning, watching the news, as we all are, from Capitol Hill, we're on the verge of a government shutdown or, at best, yet another debilitating continuing resolution,” he said. “We need Congress back in the driver's seat of budget decisions, not in the spectator seat of Budget Control Acts' indiscriminate and automatic cuts. We need a budget and we need budget predictability if we're to sustain our military's primacy.”...

avatar

Posts : 1125
Join date : 2017-02-24

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Miki on Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:04 pm

Daï Djakman Faré wrote:pored toga sto je ovaj campaign ad totalna jebena bomba mislim da se mora reci da chelsea prilicno objasnjava ovaj gender transitioning 

Dobra je riba Čelzi, jbg i dalje je to muška faca na svetlu i trezan, ali u tami paklene žuraje video bi samo one zelene oči
avatar

Posts : 12359
Join date : 2014-12-01

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Filipenko on Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:34 pm

Hej, Gargantua, mislio sam da ja ovde imam monopol na Dzona Bachelora 

Tko bi scao poslusati:

Mattis on defense. Gregory Copley, Defense & Foreign Affairs by The John Batchelor Show
avatar

Posts : 16878
Join date : 2012-02-10

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by xie saike on Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:36 pm

@existentialcoms

Scorching hot take from my Facebook page: Donald Trump happened because we have too much socialism.



_____
U Srbiji vlada bezvezništvo, u pravom smislu te reči.
Želimir Žilnik





-----------------------------------------------------
Фолу-Уп Гроуп Боард
avatar

Posts : 1728
Join date : 2017-11-16
Location : Nosgoth

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by KinderLad on Sun Jan 21, 2018 9:01 pm

Gargantua wrote:Mattis on defense. Gregory Copley, Defense & Foreign Affairs by The John Batchelor Show
https://player.fm/1nzydf #nowplaying



Pivot to Asia (samo još više tj šire ie Indo-Asia)

Pivoting away from MENA

Bonus: rekao bih da je Turska otpisana kao bilo kakav pouzdan saveznik
avatar

Posts : 13297
Join date : 2012-02-12
Location : чекам камату на уштеђено време

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by паће on Sun Jan 21, 2018 9:10 pm

Arkady Ivanovich wrote:
@existentialcoms

Scorching hot take from my Facebook page: Donald Trump happened because we have too much socialism.

За разлику од Клинтона, Бушева, Обаме, које су изабрали... радници.


_____
сви ће поцркамо
Just let me worst the weight, okay?
Guest

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Guest on Sun Jan 21, 2018 9:37 pm

Miki wrote:
Daï Djakman Faré wrote:pored toga sto je ovaj campaign ad totalna jebena bomba mislim da se mora reci da chelsea prilicno objasnjava ovaj gender transitioning 

Dobra je riba Čelzi, jbg i dalje je to muška faca na svetlu i trezan, ali u tami paklene žuraje video bi samo one zelene oči
+1
avatar

Posts : 3092
Join date : 2014-10-28

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Daï Djakman Faré on Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:56 pm

+2

u svakom slucaju, ne postoji ta paklena zuraja u kojoj bi dovatio sandu raskovic ivic


_____
--to give the metals back their alchemical significance that has been neglected since the beginnings of the industrial revolution
--to alienate common apparati/mechanismi to create a perpetuum mobile called Motor Sehn-Sucht--
avatar

Posts : 1576
Join date : 2016-01-07

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Djamolidine Abdoujaparov on Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:58 pm

dobar komentar
avatar

Posts : 7992
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Gargantua on Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:30 am

Daï Djakman Faré wrote:+2

u svakom slucaju, ne postoji ta paklena zuraja u kojoj bi dovatio sandu raskovic ivic

ti ne bi ali willliam bi! bounce
avatar

Posts : 12359
Join date : 2014-12-01

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Filipenko on Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:33 am

"Nebrn'te, mi brinemo o vama i vasoj bezbednosti..."


avatar

Posts : 19973
Join date : 2014-10-27

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by bruno sulak on Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:16 am

Gargantua wrote:Mattis on defense. Gregory Copley, Defense & Foreign Affairs by The John Batchelor Show
https://player.fm/1nzydf #nowplaying

(Photo: Pentagon)

"Key take-aways from the new National Defense Strategy included: 1. The US Defense establishment would return, after almost two decades, to a recognizable military mission, and would rebuild its forces, its defense-related R&D, its doctrine, and its capabilities in line with the trajectory it had been on until the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the US, but taking into account the decline in its force structure caused by the 18-year diversion to the CT mission, and taking into account the totally transformed geopolitical and technological context; 2. To emphasize the geopolitical shift in the “competition” spectrum, the US had downgraded NATO to the second tier of its strategic alliance structures and raised to the first tier its existing and emerging alliances in the Indo-Pacific. This, by default, means the ANZUS Alliance (with Australia and New Zealand), its Japan and Republic of Korea alliances, and the emerging "Quadripartite" alliance structure linking the US with Japan, Australia, and India. Unspoken, but critical within this approach, would be — as Pres. Trump had already made clear — improved security relations with key ASEAN states and the Republic of China (ROC: Taiwan). The fact that the US has now moved to the “Indo-Pacific” contextual view, as opposed to the “Asia-Pacific” view was confirmed and important; it signals a shift in thinking1; 3. The Defense Dept. would substantially reorganize to improve flexibility, efficiency, and innovation, including improved relationship with private sector contractors. Indeed, private sector enthusiasm for working with Defense had essentially evaporated in recent years, with the exception of committed major contractors, because of the bias, difficulty, and bureaucratic morass which caused defense contracting to become something for most firms — particularly small-to-medium businesses — to avoid; 4. The document, apart from a few, non-substantive jingoistic comments, was low key and professional and, if anything, played down the fact that it represented a total transformation of the US defense capability. Sec. Mattis presumably did not want the document to inspire concern among “competitors”, or for allies to think that the new strategic posture was anything other than a return to historical continuity; 5. The Strategy highlighted that Defense would act more frequently within an inter-agency context — a “whole-of-government” framework — rather than as a purely military instrument. This was particularly evident in the one brief paragraph devoted to the Western Hemisphere. “Supporting the US interagency lead, the Department will deepen its relations with regional countries that contribute military capabilities to shared regional and global security challenges,” it said, leaving open and ambiguous how the US would deal with the substantial growth of PRC strategic (but non-military) projection into the Caribbean and much of South and Central America; 6. With regard to Africa, the message was subtle, but clear: the Defense Dept would work to counter, among other things, “trans-national criminal activity, and illegal arms trade with limited outside assistance; and limit the malign influence of non-African powers”. This phrasing clearly — but without naming names — emphasized the PRC’s “malign influence”, but also that of Turkey, which has emerged as a key driver of the illegal arms trade. But the Africa remarks indicated that the US would work with local partners and the European Union (EU), presumably including the United Kingdom; 7. The document did not seek to raise any undue expectations that the US would re-surge into the Middle East, but, rather, would build in its small bases and successes there to, among other things, “counterbalance” Iran, without mentioning the other competitive forces operating in the area: the PRC, Russia, and Turkey; 8. The Strategy was notably more gracious and accommodating about US alliances than earlier administrations had been. “Our allies and partners came to our aid after the terrorist attacks on 9/11, and have contributed to every major U.S.-led military engagement since. Every day, our allies and partners join us in defending freedom, deterring war, and maintaining the rules which underwrite a free and open international order.” This was an extensive section — given that the whole document was, in its unclassified extracts, only 11 pages — which emphasized collegiality, cooperation, collaborative planning, and the recognition that “each ally and partner is unique”. What was evident in the document was the decline in hubris, and the increase in awareness of context; 9. The new US strategic doctrine emphasizes agility and responsiveness, maneuver, and lethality. It makes it clear — without, again, setting off alarm bells — that cyber and space-based warfare was of paramount concern, without neglecting the modernization of nuclear forces (which would extend far beyond merely upgrading the land-based Minuteman III ICBMs, but would include the full spectrum of the triad of nuclear capabilities within a transformed context and technology mix).

It is probably true that the Defense leadership, under Secretary (and former Gen.) Mattis, pushed strongly for the Armed Forces to resume their classical mission structures in light of the declining strategic competitiveness of the US globally. But it is also probably true that Pres. Trump had no doubts that this was the appropriate move. The shift was completely in line with his campaign concerns that the US had lost its global strategic traction through the erosion of Armed Forces capabilities, not only with regard to budget. What is as significant as the new Strategy itself was the reality that it represented an interconnected approach, reducing the appearance of inter-service competition for resources, and stressing the jointness of all operational thinking, as well as the inter-agency collaboration. The document should be seen in the US Congress as a sign of a new spirit in Defense, ending the years of military mis-use under Pres. Bill Clinton and his commitment to intervention in the Balkans (creating problems which persist to this day), the distortion of mission under Pres. George W. Bush in the second Iraq War and the “war against global terror”, and mis-use and decline under Pres. Barack Obama. The new Strategy was a sign that maturity and professionalism — and with them a new improvement in morale and prestige — has returned to the US Defense establishment

. .. .. ..

National Defense Strategy a ‘Good Fit for Our Times,’ Mattis Says , by Jim Garamone / DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, Jan. 19, 2018 — The new National Defense Strategy is a good fit for the times, emphasizing the return of great power rivalry, yet still addressing other threats that abound in the world today, Defense Secretary James N. Mattis said today. The secretary unveiled the strategy at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies and stressed that the strategy is not merely a defense strategy, but an American strategy. The school is a division of the Johns Hopkins University based in Washington. The strategy -- the first new strategy in a decade -- is based on the National Security Strategy President Donald J. Trump announced in December. New Strategy Reclaims ‘An Era of Strategic Purpose’

“Today, America's military reclaims an era of strategic purpose and we're alert to the realities of a changing world and attentive to the need to protect our values and the countries that stand with us,” the secretary said. “America's military protects our way of life and I want to point out it also protects a realm of ideas. It's not just about protecting geography. This is a defense strategy that will guide our efforts in all realms.” Threats have changed since the last strategy. There is increasing global volatility and uncertainty with challenges from Russia and China coming to the fore. “Though we will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists that we are engaged in today, but great power competition, not terrorism, is now the primary focus of U.S. national security,” the secretary said. The strategy will provide the American people the military required “to protect our way of life, stand with our allies and live up to our responsibility to pass intact to the next generation those freedoms that all of us enjoy here today,” Mattis said. The strategy expands the U.S. military’s competitive space, prioritizes preparedness for war, provides clear direction for significant change at the speed of relevance and builds a more lethal force to compete strategically. Tough Choices In forming the strategy, officials had to make tough choices, “and we made them based upon a fundamental precept, namely that America can afford survival,” Mattis said. “We face growing threats from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia are from each other, nations that do seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models, pursuing veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic and security decisions,” he said. The threat from rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran persist. And even though ISIS’s physical caliphate is no more, the group -- and other extremist organizations -- continues to sow hatred. “In this time of change, our military is still strong, yet our competitive edge has eroded in every domain of warfare: air, land, sea, space and cyberspace, and it is continuing to erode,” the secretary said.

‘Our Military Will Win Should Diplomacy Fail’

Sixteen years of war, rapid technological change, defense spending caps, and seemingly continuous continuing resolutions “have created an overstretched and under-resourced military,” he said. “Our military's role is to keep the peace; to keep the peace for one more year, one more month, one more week, one more day; to ensure our diplomats who are working to solve problems do so from a position of strength and giving allies confidence in us. This confidence is underpinned by the assurance that our military will win should diplomacy fail.” Mattis said the supremacy of American military is not preordained. “It is incumbent upon us to field a more lethal force if our nation is to retain the ability to defend ourselves and what we stand for,” Mattis said. “The defense strategy's three primary lines of effort will restore our comparative military advantage.

” The strategy commits the department to build a more lethal joint force. It calls for strengthening old alliances and building new ones. “At the same time, we'll reform our department's business practices for performance and affordability,” the secretary said. An enemy will attack any perceived weakness, Mattis said. The American military, therefore, must be able to fight across the spectrum of conflict. “This means that the size and the composition of our force matters,” he said. “The nation must field sufficient capable forces to deter conflict. And if deterrence fails, we must win.” Mattis added, “To those who would threaten America's experiment in democracy, they must know: If you challenge us it will be your longest and your worst day. Work with our diplomats: You don't want to fight the Department of Defense.” Alliances are key to American success, the secretary said. “In my past, I fought many times and never did I fight in a solely American formation,” Mattis said. “It was always alongside foreign troops.” The American military must be designed, trained and ready to fight alongside allies, he added. “History proves that nations with allies thrive, an approach to security and prosperity that has served the United States well in keeping peace and winning war,” Mattis said. “Working by, with and through allies who carry their equitable share allows us to amass the greatest possible strength.

” Reforming DoD’s Business Practices The third line of effort, he said, will be the foundation for the U.S. competitive edge: reforming the business practices of the department. “We are going to have to be good stewards of the tax dollars allocated to us, and that means results and accountability matter,” the secretary said. “The department will transition to a culture of performance and affordability that operates at the speed of relevance. Success does not go to the country that develops a new technology first, but rather, to the one that better integrates it and more swiftly adapts its way of fighting.” Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick M. Shanahan is already leading this effort. He expects it to leverage the scale of operations, driving better deals for equipping troops and modernizing systems. This strategy means nothing if the resources are not in place, Mattis said. “No strategy can long survive without necessary funding and the stable, predictable budgets required to defend America in the modern age,” he said. “Failure to modernize our military risks leaving us with a force that could dominate the last war, but be irrelevant to tomorrow's security.”

Continuing Resolutions Harm Military Readiness

Mattis added, “Let me be clear. As hard as the last 16 years have been on our military, no enemy in the field has done more to harm the readiness of the U.S. military than the combined impact of the Budget Control Act's defense spending cuts, worsened … by us operating, nine of the last 10 years, under continuing resolutions, wasting copious amounts of precious taxpayer dollars.” The military continues to work tirelessly to accomplish the mission with now inadequate and misaligned resources, simply because the Congress cannot maintain regular order, Mattis said. “That we have performed well is a credit to our wonderful and loyal troops, but loyalty must be a two-way street,” he said. “We expect the magnificent men and women of our military to be faithful in their service, even when going in harm's way. We must remain faithful to those who voluntarily sign a blank check, payable to the American people with their lives.” Under the Constitution, it is Congress that has the authority to raise armies and navies, Mattis said. “Yet as I stand here this morning, watching the news, as we all are, from Capitol Hill, we're on the verge of a government shutdown or, at best, yet another debilitating continuing resolution,” he said. “We need Congress back in the driver's seat of budget decisions, not in the spectator seat of Budget Control Acts' indiscriminate and automatic cuts. We need a budget and we need budget predictability if we're to sustain our military's primacy.”...


sta ovo znaci za balkan?


_____
The law provides us structure to guide us through paralyzing and trying times. But it requires us a vision to its procedures and higher purposes. Before we assume our respective roles in this enduring drama just let me say that when these frail shadows we inhabit now have quit the stage we'll meet and raise a glass again together in Valhalla.
avatar

Posts : 7992
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Gargantua on Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:21 am

ili ništa novo ili bar blago pojačano političko prisustvo, "završavanje posla" (iz američke perspektive).


edit: to u smisli direktne uloge, da li će prostor biti još i kusur u nekom drugom fajtu, videćemo.
avatar

Posts : 1728
Join date : 2017-11-16
Location : Nosgoth

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by KinderLad on Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:31 am

Glavna dilema među američkim geopolitičarima je (bila) da li će Amerika, okrečući se bezbednosno Aziji, zabataliti Evropu ili Middle East. Mislim da je ovde dilema razrešena u smislu da prioriteti idu: Azija (ali šiiiroko shvaćena, pa onda Evropa, Middle East. Rusija i Kina su svrstani u isti šator, što imho nije pametno, but there you go. Ključna država u ovom planu, skromno mislim, i mada se to ne vidi jasno, je Indija. A to je sasvim neizvestan enterprise. Mada ima logike.

Re: USA - США - SAD

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is Tue Apr 24, 2018 5:04 am