First, let's consider the definition of "adversary":
adversary
one that contends with, opposes, or resists
Not strictly speaking just an enemy, but any nation that doesn't toe the American line. Resistance is now futile...to quote Dubya, "Yer either with us, or yer agin us".
Second, let's apply a little common sense. Take Europe, again. The EU includes several former enemies--Germany and several ex-Soviet satellites--and (I've lost track of this issue) Russia is either now a NATO member or is being considered for membership. How hard would a belligerent American regime have to try to portray a militarily-resurgent Europe as an adversary?
In general, how would an American regime feeling its power view any nation that shows signs of equalling our power? It seems to me that the latest policy essentially defines a nation that equals or surpasses our power as an adversary.
The message is clear: Stay in your place, subordinate to the US, or suffer our wrath.
--Robert
Current Events » in reply to Re: Inoperative chestnut
Re: Inoperative chestnut
The whole thread (80 posts)
- Canadians lose their minds.
- Why does Canada even have an army?
- Inoperative chestnut
- Re: Why buy aircraft?
- Canadian scizophrenia
- Reposting part of the article you posted so maybe everyone will read it this time
- Something to consider
- That's fine
- Cdn military
- Just saying no
- Re: As a Canadian what you say kinda pisses me off
- Then don't come begging to us for airlift capacity
- Re: Americans spend more on military than any country in the world
- Not even to fight Bushs' war?
- Then don't come begging to us for airlift capacity
