What is America's best MNNA?

Posted by: Jifpop09

A MNNA recieves US training, weapons, and organized structure provided by the US. We also maintain their ships, send them supplies, and occasional financing.

Vote
8 Total Votes
1

South Korea

3 votes
1 comment
2

Japan

2 votes
1 comment
3

Afghanistan

1 vote
1 comment
4

Australia

1 vote
0 comments
5

Israel

1 vote
0 comments
6

Argentina

0 votes
0 comments
7

Thailand

0 votes
0 comments
8

Jordan

0 votes
0 comments
9

Philipines

0 votes
0 comments
10

Pakistan

0 votes
0 comments
11

Egypt

0 votes
0 comments
12

Kuwait

0 votes
0 comments
13

Morroco

0 votes
0 comments
14

Bahrain

0 votes
0 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Jifpop09 says2014-05-01T13:56:25.8866479-05:00
We need to drop MNNA status for Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, and Kuwait. I don't like how their militaries are funded by the US. Bush handed out MNNA status like candy.
Jifpop09 says2014-05-01T13:57:32.8574479-05:00
I think are most beneficial MNNA's are Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Morroco, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Philipines.
Jifpop09 says2014-05-01T14:00:19.2158479-05:00
If it were up to me, I would drop MNNA status for those earlier four countries, and extend it to Ukraine. Russia said they don't want NATO influence, so there you go.
Jifpop09 says2014-05-01T14:12:25.8342731-05:00
I agree with your choice Joephr, but you don't think Afghanistan and Pakistan are not relevant in current conflicts?
joepbr says2014-05-01T14:26:04.6610479-05:00
Afghanistan and Pakistan are relevant, but the conflicts there are much more different, since they aren't conflicts between states, but between the states and internal groups. A very strong alliance with those countries could be detrimental to some extent if you consider that there is a higher chance that the technologies and strategies shared with their governments can be seized by those groups easier than they could be by by an outside country, like North Korea.
Jifpop09 says2014-05-01T14:29:01.7713962-05:00
This is a legitimate concern, but long term stability within the region is more important. Afghanistan can only afford to pay 1/3 of its expenses, and the bilateral security agreement is a good way to get us out of the current conflict. If that involves supplying them weapons, then I would say it outweighs the possibility of insurgents gaining weapons.
1313socialist says2014-05-01T19:03:23.8402123-05:00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOEIruwzf54

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.