No, no. Thor will save them.
Posted on 06/20/2006 9:32:11 AM PDT by Truth29
So, who's threatening Iceland right now? Since the USSR died 15 years ago, it's old navy is rusting away and no longer poses a threat and I doubt the islamofascists have a blue water navy to invade there, why shouldn't we pull out most of our military presence, keeping only the bare minimum skeleton staff to ensure we can deploy there quickly if the need arises.
I think they are more upset at the idea that there will no longer be a large contingent of free-spending American servicemen helping to prop up their economy. Maybe they can go back to fishing. I saw a box if "Icelandic" fish at Sam's Club the other day that had "Product of China" stamped in small print on the sides.
The Whiff was better and free drinks for all. :)
Yeah! Who would want to attack those beautiful blonde women who make up two-thirds of the island?
So...is it true what some have said about Icelandic women? That they are the world's most beautiful?
You are correct, I think, that the local economy benefited significantly from the American contingent. The population of Iceland is less than 300,000 and the Americans and dependents were in the neighborhood of 1500 - 2000, a sizable payroll for the island. However, the economy is strong with a high standard of living that will survive the closure.
Yes, it's true!
beside the point,but in case anyone is wondering.
Iceland Area
Whole country: 39,768.5 square miles (103,000 km²)
Vegetation: 9,191 square miles (23,805 km²)
Lakes: 1,065 square miles (2,757 km²)
Glaciers: 4,603 square miles (11,922 km²)
Wasteland: 24,918 square miles (64,538 km²)
Too many Zoomies!
Narwhals?
keeping in mind how few in numbers Icelanders are and the fact that they have through the course of the centuries not been used to bearing arms.",/p>
Oooookaaaay..........So what will the Icelanders do for national
Arm bears???? Do they have any bears???
/sarc
The story goes that the Vikings would plunder Europe of their most beautiful women and deposit them in Iceland. Today's Icelandic women are the descendents of that stacked gene pool.
I think if they look for the non blue-eyed non- blondes, they'll be able to spot the Al Quada guys before they do any damage.
No, no. Thor will save them.
In the 70s NYers would fly to Rekyavik for a long weekend. The fare was @ $149 RT (IIRC). In on Friday a.m. out Sunday night. It was like going to Europe without all the hassle.
I don't know man, I've been thinking about it.
Sack and pillage a town or two. Maybe make off with an iceland woman or two,
Thanks bigfootbob . . .
Puzzled the stuffing out of me?
Theoden, thanks for the ping and Truth for keeping this issue alive.
I am convinced that before the realisation that the US was not actively engaged in the talks about how the future of these matters should be that have been under way for years now, the support for a continued US-Icelandic mutual defence agreement was overwhelming, even among the leftists.
But everything changed when suddenly in the middle of what we thought were mutual talks on how the agreement should be implemented in the future the US decided (it was even as that command came from other branch of the government than the one we were having discussions with, without any comunication there between) unilaterally to witdraw all its forces.
Actually they seem to want to continue some listening stations here and equipment, and even for us to keep their equipment on standby if they should need it in the future, that is they seem to want everything in return of nothing, or at least that is what many Icelanders feel.
Even members of my party, the traditionally very pro-US party, the Independence Party, whose supporters surprisingly in large numbers (though much lower than the others) wanted to quit the agreement, something unthinkable only a year or so ago.
Many of us (I myself a little bit also) feel a little betreyed and abandoned, having defended the US and its foreigne policy and values and its presence here for decades. You should realise how much political damage it did to our party that we decided to help our democratic allies against the Red Storm with the little we could, that is access to our land and thus making us a target.
It fuelled the rise of a culturally nationalistic, pro Soviet party (or at least in name pacifist) and a movement that split the nation into two, wich got the support of many people who wanted us to be free of foreign influence and would have in large numbers traditionally voted for us I belive.
And it propably resulted in us loosing many of our distincting national traditions and the good old Icelandic morality, just like the nationalist that became leftists were afraid of. Not surprisingly when the numbers of the military personel here when they were in most numbers was similar to the number of males in the country, and in the womens eyes, the yankees were rich, handsome and in uniforms.
Many women went with the military men to the US whose children do not consider themselves Icelandic and have never been here or have no wish to live here. This could have led to the nations serius decline in numbers (we are so few), were it not for the fact that many of the military men were already married, without the icelandic women knowledge in the States, who then became the start of the horrificly high number of single moms and thus a crumble of the good old family values and morality.
Sorry, I am a little bitter here, but those were one of the sacrifices we made though we gained a lot to and for that you have my thanks. But it would have been better if that gaines would have been cemented to the future by instead of the US leaving us in the hands of the pacifists who will from now on control these matters.
If the US would have actively engaged in discussions which would have resulted in a gradual replacement of the US operations here by Icelandic security forces who would have learned from the US here would have been created a tradition of more responsibility of our own in our own defences. I am afraid that opportunity is beeing lost now.
It also is distressing that the US apparently is unaware of the damage it is causing domestically in Iceland. I wonder what the US reaction would be if Iceland turns eastward to establish a new defense relationship? I am not sure if we would even react.
Russian Forces Strike NATO Across Europe and Iceland January 10, 2010
As Europeans began celebrating the New Year, Russian forces shocked the world, carrying out coordinated attacks in Iceland, Norway and the United Kingdom.
Airfields Struck in the U.K.
Although both ground and air activity is being reported in Europe and Iceland, the UK has not escaped the opening shots of this war. ENN managed to contact airport staff at both the Lerwick and Kinloss military airfields who claimed a significant number of low flying missiles struck those bases. Lerwick apparently experienced extensive damage and fires are raging across the airbase and witnesses have described seeing at least two helicopters destroyed . Local firefighters are engaged in fighting those blazes now and no word has been released as to how long that complex may be out of action. At the Kinloss airbase, one witness - a veteran of the 1990s Gulf War - described the incoming missiles as appearing similar to U.S. cruise missiles. Although base officials would not go into detail, they did admit that the airfield took extensive damage to its infrastructure. Witness accounts indicate a runway may have been hit as were some hangers and perhaps sections of the base's radar array.
A military spokesperson reported the damage would not affect air operations and all available aircraft have already assumed a wartime footing. However civilian witnesses living to close to these airfields reported seeing numerous secondary explosions from some of the burning complexes, the source of which could be fuel or ammunition bunkers "cooking off" in the raging fires. Both bases are used by aircraft configured for anti-ship and anti-submarine missions, and any ammunition destroyed by these fires might include torpedoes and air launched missiles.
Russian Union Statement
On the political front, hastily arranged press conferences and statements by both Russia and NATO representatives clarified the situation somewhat, but events remains very fluid with new and conflicting information trickling in by the minute.
A Russian Union military officer presented seven points that justified the attack or was a condition for cessation of hostilities - with each being detailed over several minutes.
They first placed blame for the current situation squarely on the shoulders of NATO and the "Anglo Alliance" (AA), claiming evidence that demonstrated the alliances were planning a military takeover of Poland and attempting to separate the Western Ukraine from Russia proper.
The spokesman pointed to this alliance's recent policy in the Yugoslavian conflict and a build up of NATO forces along the German border with Poland - a situation not unlike when Hitler massed his forces on the Russian border in 1941 just prior to Operation Barbarossa. He added that a massive armed mutiny already existed against the "legally elected government" in Poland and implied that NATO and the AA were providing support to the insurgents there.
RUSSIAN UNION SEVEN POINTS>p> 1- Attack blamed on NATO & AA aggressive plans for Europe.
2 - Retaliation due to unprovoked submarine attack in GIUK area.
3 - Demands that NATO be dismantled.
4 - Norway will be occupied until it leaves AA and demilitarizes.
5 - Military traffic in Atlantic Ocean will be interdicted.
6 - No hostilities against Western Europe they renounce NATO and recognize sovereignty of other countries.
7 - No 1st use of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
The second justification dealt with a recent exchange of fire between submarines in the GUIK area north of the UK. This "unprovoked attack" led to an immediate and "justifiable retaliation" against military installations in the UK and in Iceland to protect Russia's freedom of shipping and airspace.
The third point dealt with general issues of concern to the Kremlin and suggested solutions to those matters. Specifically, it was demanded that NATO be dismantled as a political and military entity - claiming it is a tool being used to bend a democratic Europe to the will of the aggressive AA. They proposed that a non-aligned demilitarized zone be created in the whole of Eastern Europe to provide a “Curtain of Peace” that will separate Russia from Western Europe. To support this goal, the Russian Union stated its intent to assist the Polish government in destroying its internal enemies. It likewise insisted that Norway denounce its NATO and AA membership, close down all foreign military bases, and adopt a neutral status similar to Sweden and Finland.
Fourthly, Russia declared that to protect itself from an attack by the Anglo Alliance, it will occupy Norway until that government leaves the AA and agrees to demilitarize. This occupation is being carried out with an overwhelming military force and it was warned that resistance would bring “futile and pointless suffering and death” to both the Russian and Norwegian people.
The next demand directed that the entire Atlantic be closed to military traffic as an assurance that that Anglo Alliance would not be able to proceed with any intentions against Poland and Western Ukraine. They also reserved the right to interdict shipping suspected of contributing to such plans.
A solution for the end of hostilities was then offered to the Western European Union that includes Germany, France and others. The Russian Union claimed to have no ill will against those countries and declared they need not be involved in the current conflict if they denounced NATO and recognized the territorial integrity and sovereignty of other nations - specifically Russia and Poland. They went on to reiterate that the Anglo Alliance, primarily the U.S and U.K., were the real aggressors in the region.
Lastly, it was stressed that Russia would abide by its doctrine of no "first use" for weapons of mass destruction except in defense of Russia’s home soil against enemy intervention.
The press conference was concluded with examples of NATO’s “villainous” actions against a civilian aircraft, merchant ships, and urban areas where "doomed resistance" against Russian troops was needlessly endangering local civilians. NATO was likewise accused of sinking unarmed ships that were involved in a rescue operation in the mid Atlantic.
NATO Strikes Back The Joint Command North (JCNORTH) Public Affairs Office held a press conference of its own immediately after the Russian conference ended on the other side of the globe. It is quoted here verbatim:
“Minutes before midnight tonight, military units of the Russian Union initiated hostile aggressive action against NATO Forces in Norway, Iceland and Great Britain. This action is unprovoked and unprecedented, and brings to an end the many years of detente between the western allies and the Russian (formerly Soviet) Union.
While the action has been underway for only a few hours, it is apparent the NATO forces are under attack by a large, coordinated force, including naval, air, and ground combat units. The attacks were obviously timed to occur during the new years' celebration.
NATO forces are currently mobilizing in Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Damage assessments are not yet available, however preliminary reports indicate virtually all air force installations in northern Norway have been attacked, and Russian paratroopers have assaulted Iceland after a devastating bombardment that has resulted in the complete destruction of the Keflavik air base. In the United Kingdom, several airbases were also attacked, but damage there is said to be minor.
In response, the Joint Chiefs of Staff have ordered a large contingency force to the theatre which, when combined with the NATO forces already in the northern theatre, will provide ample strength to repel the hostile forces.
The size, timing, and effort utilized in this action by the Russian Union removes all suspicion of this being an attack carried out by rogue commanders, and can only result from the approval of the entire Russian leadership, thereby making themselves appropriate targets for NATO response planning.
Further information will be provided when available." After the NATO spokesman concluded, and just as reporters were leaving the conference room, a last minute Press Release was issued. It is shown here in it's entirety:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SUBJECT: LOSS OF HMS TRENCHANT
FROM: HEADQUARTERS, JOINT COMMAND NORTH (JCNORTH) PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE
JCNORTH REGRETS TO REPORT THE LOSS OF HMS TRENCHANT (S91), A TRAFALGAR CLASS NUCLEAR FAST ATTACK SUBMARINE. THE TRENCHANT WAS APPARENTLY ATTACKED BY ONE OR MORE RUSSIAN SUBMARINES THAT ALSO MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN ATTACKS ON ROYAL AIR FORCE INSTALLATIONS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE SHETLAND ISLANDS. A SEARCH AND RESCUE (SAR) MISSION HAS BEEN LAUNCHED, AND HOPES ARE HIGH THAT SURVIVORS WILL BE FOUND AND RETURNED SAFELY TO THE UK.
HMS TRENCHANT WAS PROBABLY STRUCK BY A TORPEDO LAUNCHED FROM WHAT IS SUSPECTED TO BE A RUSSIAN SUBMARINE JUST WEST OF THE SHETLAND ISLANDS, AT ABOUT MIDNIGHT LOCAL TIME. HMS TRENCHANT WAS ENGAGED IN RADIO COMMUNICATIONS AT THE TIME OF THE ATTACK. THE COMMUNICATIONS WERE LOST IN MID TRANSMISSION, AND ATTEMPTS TO CONTACT THE TRENCHANT SINCE THEN HAVE BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL. UNIDENTIFIED SOURCES IN THE AREA REPORTED "A GREAT DEAL OF NOISE" COMING FROM THE AREA HMS TRENCHANT WAS KNOWN TO BE OPERATING IN. NATO COMMANDERS AND, ESPECIALLY, THE BRITISH SEA LORD ARE OUTRAGED AT THE BRUTALITY OF THE ATTACK SO CLOSE TO THE SHORES OF GREAT BRITAIN.
HMS Trenchant HMS TRENCHANT, PICTURED TO THE RIGHT, HAS A SPLENDID HISTORY AND WAS DECORATED MANY TIMES FOR OUTSTANDING SERVICE. WITH HER CAPABLE CREW OF 130 MEN AND OFFICERS SHE PRESENTED A FEARSOME CAPABILITY WITH STATE OF THE ART WEAPONS AND LONG ENDURANCE. HER LOSS WILL NOT BE IN VAIN.
THIS IS THE FIRST LOSS OF A SUBMARINE DUE TO ENEMY ACTION BY THE BRITISH NAVY SINCE WORLD WAR II, AND ALSO THE FIRST LOSS OF A BRITISH NUCLEAR POWERED SHIP. THE POSSIBILITY OF CONTAMINATION OF THE SEA BY RADIOACTIVE LEAKAGE IS SLIGHT DUE TO THE DESIGN OF THE REACTOR VESSEL. HOWEVER, THE LOCATION OF HMS TRENCHANT IS KNOWN, AND PLANS TO MONITOR THE AREA ARE BEING FORMULATED BY THE ROYAL NAVY AND WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE CONDUCTED BY THE WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTE (WHOI) IN MASSACHUSSETS. WHOI IS KNOWN FOR ITS DEEP SEA SEARCH AND RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING OF THE USS SCORPION, AND MORE RECENTLY THE TWO SUBMARINES (USS DALLAS AND USS PHILADELPHIA) LOST IN THE BATTLE OF BRUNEI. IT IS POSSIBLE THIS MONITORING WILL NOT OCCUR FOR SOME TIME, DUE TO THE CURRENT RUSSIAN AGGRESSION.
JHQNORTH (J2)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2010 Electronic News Network. All Rights Reserved. ENN designed and maintained by Arcana Media
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.