WAR
- Thread starter Evmur
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
R
Ruby123
Guest
What?! People don't like it when you invade a sovereign country? That is bad, that is real bad!
1) we invaded North Korea (at the request of South Korea), 2–4) we invaded Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos 4–5) we invaded Iraq twice, 6) Afghanistan, and oh, yeah, 7) in 1983 we invaded Granada, 8) we invaded Cuba. And then there all the African countries that we ‘semi-invaded’ — under the guise of training and equipping: Algeria, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal and Tunisia – not to mention operations in Libya, Somalia, Uganda, Kenya, Djibouti — that’s a total of 23.
However, we bomb more than invade. With drone strike capability and the U.S. President having ‘Authorized Use of Military Force’* without Congressional approval. Libya, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as examples.
Why didn't anyone tell us these countries don't like this!?
Russian missiles cross into NATO member Poland, kill 2: senior US intelligence official
https://www.foxnews.com/world/russi...poland-kill-2-senior-us-intelligence-official
https://www.foxnews.com/world/russi...poland-kill-2-senior-us-intelligence-official
It is certainly relevant to the topic of this becoming WWIII and the rest of the world rising up to attack the US.
Biden renewed these commitments again in September when he addressed Russian President Vladimir Putin from the White House and said, "We’re fully prepared to defend…our NATO allies. To defend every single inch of NATO territory — every single inch.
"So, Mr. Putin, don’t misunderstand what I’m saying: every inch,"
We'll soon know whether or not he was bluffing.
My bet is that he'll show himself to have been bluffing.
I think the script says "Biden exits stage left"? Big Bad orange man steps up to the microphone in the spotlight at center stage.
Defending "every inch" of territory hardly requires a war over what seems like a mistake rather than purposeful targeting. I would predict that unless it can be proven that these missiles were intentionally fired by Russia with the intention to hit Poland, the most that we will see is some additional support for Ukraine and perhaps discussion about improving Poland's defenses. Furthermore, I would argue that this is perfectly in line with "defending every inch".
Just hypothetically, if the Mexican army had a firefight with some criminals, terrorists or an invading (non-US) force near the US-Mexican border and one stray bullet fired by a Mexican soldier reached the US side and hit a US border guard, would the US be failing to defend every inch of US territory if they didn't launch an attack in response to that?
Not to be argumentative here, but biden did use the words, "Every inch" multiple times as if he meant it as ironclad. It seem far more so than just before the Russia/Ukraine invasion when he seemed to excuse a "minor incursion" of Ukraine, after which Russia began with just that.
As for the US/Mexico border, I doubt there would be any response at all if bullets errantly flew over the border. We already have military-aged males coming over the border by the millions, and Kamala Harris just laughs about it and claims the border is secure, even though she won't even go there.