Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cuomo's going to war remark

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cuomo's going to war remark

    NY Gov Cuomo said, "you go to war with what you have, not what you need."

    Do you agree?

  • #2
    No. If the US went into WW2 with what we had, instead of building what we need, we would have lost.
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Nikki View Post
      NY Gov Cuomo said, "you go to war with what you have, not what you need."

      Do you agree?
      It's always been that way.

      Comment


      • #4
        if you're the aggressor, no.
        If the defender, yes.
        Conservatives in the U.S. won't be happy until Jim Crow returns and "White Heterosexual Only" signs are legalized.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Nikki View Post
          NY Gov Cuomo said, "you go to war with what you have, not what you need."

          Do you agree?
          I have little fondness or respect for Cuomo, and IIRC "someone else" said this long before him. That aside, would seem most of history bares this out, especially in the past century or so.

          It's the rare war where both sides take time to build up and prepare as much as they'd like, or need. And only slightly less rare that one side has built what/all they "need" (or want) when starting a war. Also, the actions that often start a war tend to be based on a perceived weakness of one side by the other that is acting as an aggressor.

          Perhaps a classic and recent example is World War Two. Hindsight and we find history often claims it "started" on September 1,1939; when Nazi Germany attacked and invaded Poland. From one perspective, it could be said that Germany was feeling prepared for a war with Poland; thought they had "what they need". But Hitler/Germany weren't expecting England(UK) and France to honor their treaty of mutual defense with Poland so when both declared war on Germany it came as a surprise.

          Hitler and Germany were expecting, planning on France and UK to appease and acquiesce to German intimidation and aggression as they had already with regard to Austria, Czechoslovakia, and other "expansions". With that expected "non-response" from the "Allies", the Hitler/Germany plan for "starting" the larger war was geared towards a build-up where they would be ready, "have what they need" about 1944. They were expecting to gain their part of Poland with no significant consequence, and continue on with plans as normal.

          What is interesting is that when USSR/Russia invaded the Eastern part of Poland a few weeks later it did not also gain a declaration of war from the "Allies" (France and UK).

          In essence, WWII is a case where both sides found a "War" suddenly upon them at a time which neither had planned on. Germany geared to not start such until about 1944 and France and UK having no clear idea if/when they would be responding to Germany, either than the hope it was years into the future.

          Could almost make a similar claim for events in the Pacific since it was unexpected increase of resource bans and boycotts against Japan which forced them to show their hand and engage sooner than they had planned or hoped to.

          IIRC, it's rare when both sides have held off until each felt "ready" to do war with the other. Usually one feels it has an edge and will start actions/aggression against the other that it perceives to be weak and vulnerable, especially if that one thinks it has the advantage for victory. But few wars have been planned to happen by both sides like a football or other gaming match. Usually they happen, are stumbled into, and neither side is "kitted out" as they would like to have been.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Nikki View Post
            NY Gov Cuomo said, "you go to war with what you have, not what you need."

            Do you agree?
            No. you plan ahead for what you predict you will need. In the event of a medical situation such as this one, the needs are well known far in advance. They are essentially the same for every infectious, contagious disease.
            Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
              No. If the US went into WW2 with what we had, instead of building what we need, we would have lost.
              USA didn't plan for the events of December 7,1941 to happen when and how they did. WW2 came to us(USA) and forced us to respond with what we had on hand. Fortunately we had distance and resources to play defensive and build up to our offensive.

              Comment


              • #8
                I mean obviously I agree. You go to war with what you have...that's common sense. It's also a fighting attitude.

                But I liked him better when he thanked Trump for the presiden'ts support. There's something about cooperation that is much more heroic that political bickering.


                "It is a fine fox chase, my boys"

                "It is well that war is so terrible-we would grow too fond of it"

                Comment


                • #9
                  This might cast come light on Cuomo's problem:

                  Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by American87 View Post
                    I mean obviously I agree. You go to war with what you have...that's common sense. It's also a fighting attitude.

                    But I liked him better when he thanked Trump for the presiden'ts support. There's something about cooperation that is much more heroic that political bickering.

                    My reservations and concern/dislike is based on his NYC first and above the rest of the Nation comments I came across/heard.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Anthrax View Post
                      if you're the aggressor, no.
                      If the defender, yes.
                      This. We are the defender right now. We fight with what we have. Given a 6 month warning we’d have a different set of things to go to war with, but we don’t right now so we make do as best we can
                      Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

                      That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Nikki View Post
                        NY Gov Cuomo said, "you go to war with what you have, not what you need."

                        Do you agree?
                        Nah.Catfight it out, KardASHIAN STYLE.
                        oUR RESPONSE, COMPARED TO THE HANDLING OF THE 1950-53 POLIO OUTBREAK, has been rather mediocre.- given the advances in medicine and knowledge.
                        by now, our mothers and fathers would have had testing trailers in every neighbourhood.


                        The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by marktwain View Post

                          Nah.Catfight it out, KardASHIAN STYLE.
                          oUR RESPONSE, COMPARED TO THE HANDLING OF THE 1950-53 POLIO OUTBREAK, has been rather mediocre.- given the advances in medicine and knowledge.
                          by now, our mothers and fathers would have had testing trailers in every neighbourhood.

                          A closer comparison would be the case of Swine Flu about 10-11 years ago which is much closer in disease type, timelines and treatments/results than polio which has been around for thousands of years and saw decades involved in detection, definition, and effective treatments. Then, as one of our WOGs/wags have pointed out Swine flu versus latest version of coronavirus is "apples to oranges". Which would make polio to COVID-19 apples to corncobs I'd guess ...

                          Some refreshers in context, EXCERPTS:
                          ...
                          Poliovirus is usually spread from person to person through infected fecal matter entering the mouth.[1] It may also be spread by food or water containing human feces and less commonly from infected saliva.[1][3] Those who are infected may spread the disease for up to six weeks even if no symptoms are present.[1] The disease may be diagnosed by finding the virus in the feces or detecting antibodies against it in the blood.[1] The disease occurs naturally only in humans
                          ...
                          Poliomyelitis has existed for thousands of years, with depictions of the disease in ancient art.[1] The disease was first recognized as a distinct condition by the English physician Michael Underwood in 1789[1] and the virus that causes it was first identified in 1908 by the Austrian immunologist Karl Landsteiner.[7] Major outbreaks started to occur in the late 19th century in Europe and the United States.[1] In the 20th century it became one of the most worrying childhood diseases in these areas.[8] The first polio vaccine was developed in the 1950s by Jonas Salk.[9] In 2013, the World Health Organization had hoped that vaccination efforts and early detection of cases would result in global eradication of the disease by 2018.
                          ...
                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio

                          So not sure how a medical condition(polio) that was decades in knowing and defining, and then years in finding an effective treatment/cure is comparable to one that's only been around for a few months, and rather sudden in it's appearance.

                          But then, everyone seems to have their own and widely varied ideas and metaphors, etc. about how to look at, define, and deal with the situation~crisis.

                          To recap:

                          Hindsight now suggests first case was in early December (@6th, 2019) and since the wife of that "first" case got it also, hint there it may be human-to-human transmissible. Though there are hints it may have been seen a couple weeks earlier, @Nov. 17.

                          Initially it is defined as a unique case of pneumonia and China officially claims it is not human-to-human transmissible, "whatever it is".

                          By first of January(@1-2), about 4+ weeks in, finally isolate the genome = now know how to define this new disease/virus, hence can now develop effective and accurate tests to detect and also, hopefully, effective treatment and/or cures.

                          However, China sits on this discovery for another week(@ Jan.8th), depriving the world of that knowledge and lead time, plus, insult to injury, still clings to it not being possible for human-to-human transmission.

                          About a week+ later (@ Jan.15) China starts to change tune that maybe there is evidence of it transmitting human-to-human. Meanwhile WHO presents mixed announcements going either way regards transmission and the world is barely becoming aware and also confused by the limited and mixed data coming out of China.

                          Takes another week or two for the world to realize that there MIGHT be a pandemic potential here and MAYBE should limit or ban travel in and out of China. By now about 6+ weeks to two+ months in spread of this disease around China and to the rest of the world, the "pandemic" is well out of the bag.

                          As we go into February, the world is scrambling to develop and produce effective and accurate testing methods, quarantine or not, how to treat and basically what to do.

                          Also, by this time "It's all Trumps and/or the USA's fault."; and we are back to the usual partisan and political game plays and denials we've seen in so many past events.

                          China is off the hook of responsibility for poor handling because it's a "People's Republic" and they can do no wrong and as usual it is all the fault of the USA and Trump that this has spread around the world. Same Trump just out of Impeachment distractions as this was breaking and being pilloried months earlier for adjusting tariff and trade relations with "perfect" China.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                            No. you plan ahead for what you predict you will need. In the event of a medical situation such as this one, the needs are well known far in advance. They are essentially the same for every infectious, contagious disease.
                            Except you have to know details like a genome to be able to make effective and accurate tests for such - which wasn't know until 6-10 weeks after it first appeared;

                            Plus you have to know it's something new which wasn't the case until at least a few weeks after it appeared;

                            Plus you need to be honest and truthful and not suppress information and data about it, which China did for the first 6-10 weeks into the event;

                            Plus you need an accurate crystal ball to tell you how quickly it might spread, how dangerous it might be, and how lethal, among other factors you won't know until it happens, and you have a start of some form of data base.

                            Not all contagious diseases are the same or can be handled/treated the same ...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                              No. If the US went into WW2 with what we had, instead of building what we need, we would have lost.
                              The U.S. did indeed go into World War II with the military it had. Fortunately the U.S. had started expanding its military before the war.

                              Many of the weapons that would be used in the war were already in production, but production levels would quickly be ramped up.

                              Many other of the critical weapons to the U.S. were already on the drawing boards.
                              "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" Beatrice Evelyn Hall
                              Updated for the 21st century... except if you are criticizing islam, that scares the $hii+e out of me!

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X