Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size
Login

Military Photos



Current poll results


Should the U.S. be paying other countries to do their part in the war on terrorism?

Yes6 %6 %6 % 6.15 % (12)
No91 %91 %91 % 91.79 % (179)
I do not know0 %0 %0 % 0.51 % (1)
I have no opinion1 %1 %1 % 1.54 % (3)
Other, please list in comments0 %0 %0 % 0.00 % (0)

Total votes: 195
One vote is allowed per day

[ Voting booth | Other polls ]

Comments

Display Order
Re: Should the U.S. be paying other countries to do their pa
by Anonymous
on Mar 02, 2003
I can think of a few reasons why not: Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Noriega and every other leader or government or "resistance movement" our government has chosen to buy off with money or weapons who later conveniently disremembered from whom they got that crucial grub stake at one time long ago! On the other hand, our Congress members are paying one another off constantly for favors at voting time, so maybe it is simply an american tradition? Allies-of-convenience are informal alliances, and not to be trusted...too much is at stake this time, but the deed has already been done. Maybe the better question would be, "Now that the U.S. has paid off other countries to do their part in the war on terrorism, what are the double-crosses likely to be in the coming years?"
Bluehawk

Re: Should the U.S. be paying other countries to do their pa
by Anonymous
on Mar 03, 2003
What ever happened to 'G.W.'s' "you are for us, or against us" speach right after Sept.11 ??

Just wondering how much we have FORGOTTEN over the last several months.

If France isn't for us, they are against us. Same with Germany, Belgium, and any body else that doesn't want US on their side later on.

Terry

Re: Should the U.S. be paying other countries to do their pa
by Anonymous
on Mar 04, 2003

Throughout history, deals of convenience have been made by the United States. Some come back to bite us, true, but most are the only way to get things accomplished. If bribing a foreigh official, or government, can save American Lives, do it! The goal is too great to let misguided political purity stand in its' way. If Saddam provides a nuclear weapon to a terrorist for use on an American City, the devestation would hurt too much. Get this thing done!


Re: Should the U.S. be paying other countries to do their pa
by Anonymous
on Mar 09, 2003

A qualified yes. If another country can help, but does not have the money, then we should assist them. There must, however, be a quid pro quo and the US should monitor the use of the money.


Only logged in users are allowed to comment. register/log in
Military History
Forum Posts

Military Polls

Will Iraq enter into a civil war once U.S. forces are withdrawn?

[ Results | Polls ]

Votes: 173

This Day in History
1720: Spain signs the Treaty of the Hague with the Quadruple Alliance ending a war that was begun in 1718.

1804: A force led by Lt. Stephen Decatur recaptures the American ship Philadelphia which was being held in Tripoli harbor.

1864: The Confederate submarine Hunley sinks the USS Housatonic in Charleston Harbor, South Carolina.

1865: The soldiers from Union General William Tecumseh Shermans army ransack Columbia, South Carolina, and leave a charred city in their wake.

1870: Mississippi becomes the 9th state re-admitted to the U.S. after the Civil War.

1933: The League of Nations censures Japan in a worldwide broadcast.

1944: Operation Catchpole is launched as American troops devastate the Japanese defenders of Eniwetok and take control of the atoll in the northwestern part of the Marshall Islands.

1945: Gen. MacArthurs troops land on Corregidor in the Philippines.

1947: The U.S. Voice of America (VOA) begins its first radio broadcasts to the Soviet Union. The VOA effort was an important part of Americas propaganda campaign against the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

1951: B-26s flew the first night bombing mission using SHORAN, a short-range navigation system employing an airborne radar device and two ground beacon stations for precision bombing.