Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Graknorke]

It's a sort of joke when someone says 'X or Y' and you reply 'yes', you basically (usually jokingly) mean both.

As a mathematician's answer it can also be a noncommital one. Or just being awkward.

[Antsan]

It's a sort of joke when someone says 'X or Y' and you reply 'yes', you basically (usually jokingly) mean both.

As a mathematician's answer it can also be a noncommital one. Or just being awkward.

I had answered that, too, but it doesn't sit right with the actual question, which starts with "With whom", which strongly implies that the "X or Y" is a listing of alternatives and not a question itself.

[martinuzz]

Holy crap batman.

The Russian ambassador to Danmark, Michail Vanin, wrote an article today in the Danish newspaper (Jylland Posten).
In this article he threatens that if Danmark continues to cooperate with the NATO anti missile shield, by providing ships, those ships "will become targets for Russian nuclear missiles", and it "will cause relations between Russia and Danmark to be less peaceful". He added that "Russia has nuclear missiles that can penetrate the shield".

What the fuck. Threatening a NATO partner with nuclear attacks and war?
I can only hope for the world that Putin dies soon of a heart attack, brain tumor, or polonium poisoning, ere his psychotic deluisions throw the world into nuclear holocaust.

[Sergarr]

I'm pretty sure that I've heard these words ("If you host anti-ballistic missile objects, you become targets for our nuclear missiles") somewhat long ago, during the whole "anti-missile systems in Europe" thing. This is not new and it's pretty logical - optimally these objects need to be targeted first before the others can fly through safely, and the surest way to disable them is by nuking the sites.

I'm curious why you consider that a threat, though. All NATO states are a part of potentially-hostile-to-Russia block and thus are potential targets for Russian nuclear missiles in case of nuclear war. Like, why are you so freaking out at that?

[Helgoland]

That bit is not that worrying, that's true - it's the other two quotes martinuzz provided that are the reason for such reactions.

[Antsan]

For real now? That sounds… I don't even know how that sounds. Why even Denmark?

[Sergarr]

That bit is not that worrying, that's true - it's the other two quotes martinuzz provided that are the reason for such reactions.

What, you mean the "worsening of relationships"? Why, this is to be expected - if you continue to support our potential enemy by being a part of a potential enemy alliance in the time where the word "potential" is slowly eroding away, the relationships will worsen, obviously.

Or the "missiles that can pierce the shield"? This part is to remind them that their anti-missiles defenses will not make them nuke-missile-proof. Just a friendly reminder.

Really, what else did you expect, in these times of worsening relationships with no end in sight?

[martinuzz]

All NATO states are a part of potentially-hostile-to-Russia block

If you were to replace "Russia" in that sentence with "nations that threaten European peace with war, annexations and nuclear missiles" I would fully agree with it.

I can't stop being baffled by people in Russia actually regarding Europe as an aggressor to Russia. For all I know, European leaders just basically think "this Putin dude is completely unreliable, maybe we should invest more into our defenses".
Which sadly gets twisted by your media as an example of European aggression.

But then again, I need not explain that to you. As far as I've read your posts, you do your utmost best to try and keep thinking for yourself.

Why did this shock me? I have not yet seen such a clear threat of war and use of nuclear weapons aimed directly at a NATO state until now. Also, as a neighbor state to Danmark, I am not very fond of the thought of nuclear fallout ruining my weed crops.

[Helgoland]

Well, he didn't talk about 'worsening' relationships, but of 'less peaceful' relationships - and if you say something like that and in the same breath remind everyone how effective your nukes are, you kinda sound like you want to start a war in the near future. Closing two eyes I could look at this simply as a lack of understatement, but I don't think Russian diplomats are quite that bad at their job...

[Sheb]

Out of curiosity, when was the last time a Western ambassador or head of state wrote an op-ed saying "We have nukes, and they can get you" in a Russian newspaper?

[scriver]

Yeah, the ironic thing is that if Denmark's ambassador had done the same in Russia (or rather, to keep sizes the same, if the US ambassador had done the same in Belarus) we'd have our Russian members crying their eyes out about how hostile "the West" is.

[Helgoland]

we'd have our Russian members crying their eyes out about how hostile "the West" is.

We don't right now?

[Guardian G.I.]

Yeah, the ironic thing is that if Denmark's ambassador had done the same in Russia (or rather, to keep sizes the same, if the US ambassador had done the same in Belarus) we'd have our Russian members crying their eyes out about how hostile "the West" is.

Compared to Russia, NATO's is less focused on talking and more focused on encroaching and bombing. 

[smjjames]

Yeah, the ironic thing is that if Denmark's ambassador had done the same in Russia (or rather, to keep sizes the same, if the US ambassador had done the same in Belarus) we'd have our Russian members crying their eyes out about how hostile "the West" is.

Compared to Russia, NATO's is less focused on talking and more focused on encroaching and bombing. 

The last time NATO bombed anything in Europe was during the Balkan conflicts.... Encroaching, okay, maybe, but bombing?

[Owlbread]

Russia and NATO are both encroaching forces. My sympathies lie with the people caught in between them.