Print

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

Petro Poroshenko

5 (29.4%)

Yulia Tymoshenko

2 (11.8%)

Oleg Lyashko

2 (11.8%)

Anatoly Hrytsenko

2 (11.8%)

Serhiy Tihipko

0 (0%)

Mykhailo Dobkin

0 (0%)

Other

6 (35.3%)

Total Members Voted: 17

[mainiac]

I find it enjoyable that you think that people are obliged to be convinced by just one argument of yours. I acknowledged it. I didn't find it convincing, mostly because your entire argument boiled down to "Ukrainian war is just evil and pathetic Russia trying to annex some lands of Ukraine, which is self-evident, period."

Ah yes, that was obviously the context of my comparison of GDP.

Well seeing as you are obviously hostile towards me and will stop at nothing to strawman me, I have no choice but to imply that you suck and self righteously declare myself better then you.

God, Knit Tie, why must you be so hostile towards polite conversation?

[Knit tie]

Ah yes, that was obviously the context of my comparison of GDP.

GDP is only tangentially related to the actual social and cultural developmental level of a country (India: 10th biggest economy in the world, half the population's never seen a toilet. China: monster GDP, appaling living standards for mainland rust belt). And besides, Russia has a larger GDP than Canada, how's it third world then, if GDP is the only measure of "worldness"?

A country's level of development is best illustrated by other criteria, such as GDP per capita (Russia's in the middle) and HDI (Russia's "high", brought down from "very high" by rampant alcoholism-powered low male life expectancy).

But anyway, even if Russia's third world, how the hell does that prevent the USA from fighting it politically due to conflicting interests? No, seriously, let's assume that you are right and Russia is indeed "a third world shitshow bullying it's neighbors because a temporary tick in commodity prices gave it money to burn." How does that discredit my opinion that the USA and Russia are trying to push each other politically right now?

[mainiac]

What it discredits is the notion that it's a Cold War.  You can't have a Cold War when there is a massive disparity between the sides.

[Sergarr]

What it discredits is the notion that it's a Cold War.  You can't have a Cold War when there is a massive disparity between the sides.

We have enough nuclear missiles to remove half of US cities from the map if we wanted to.

[Owlbread]

Dick waving aside, I have never heard a definition of "Cold War" that has the qualification "both countries need to be as powerful as the other". Most of Russia is third world, yes. Russia is nowhere near being a superpower, yes. Nukes have nothing to do with that - ask the DPRK. None of that should stop the US and Russia being in a prolonged state of conflict with no open warfare and instead proxy wars e.g. Syria, espionage and so on.

I believe,  for example,  that we have been in a Cold War with Iran for years. The Israelis even more so

[Sergarr]

The very name of Cold War implies that it's almost a war. Almost - because an actual war would inflict unacceptable casualties on both sides. The current Russia-NATO vs is not yet at that level, but it's getting there.

[Owlbread]

The very name of Cold War implies that it's almost a war. Almost - because an actual war would inflict unacceptable casualties on both sides. The current Russia-NATO vs is not yet at that level, but it's getting there.

I don't think it's even about casualties. Let's not kid ourselves - this isn't Japan 1945. It's about damage to the economy of USA, Russia and the world and instability and all the rest of it.

[Sergarr]

The very name of Cold War implies that it's almost a war. Almost - because an actual war would inflict unacceptable casualties on both sides. The current Russia-NATO vs is not yet at that level, but it's getting there.

I don't think it's even about casualties. Let's not kid ourselves - this isn't Japan 1945. It's about damage to the economy of USA, Russia and the world and instability and all the rest of it.

By "unacceptable casualties" I mean "hundreds of millions dead from nuclear explosions".

Let's not kid ourselves - the only reason why NATO troops are not marching to Moscow right now is nuclear weapons.

[Helgoland]

Also that we don't have any reason to march on Moscow. What do you think we want from you guys? Polar bears? Vodka?

All that would happen would be a somewhat limited war until Russia capitulates. Nobody wants to occupy Russia - even disregarding the horrible partisan movement that would pop up, the Western powers simply don't have the manpower required.

[Sergarr]

Also that we don't have any reason to march on Moscow. What do you think we want from you guys? Polar bears? Vodka?

All that would happen would be a somewhat limited war until Russia capitulates. Nobody wants to occupy Russia - even disregarding the horrible partisan movement that would pop up, the Western powers simply don't have the manpower required.

The lack of any rational reason to invade didn't stop USA and Bush from invading and occupying Iraq.

The fact that they used a fake casus belli to do this is also telling.

[Guardian G.I.]

Also that we don't have any reason to march on Moscow. What do you think we want from you guys? Polar bears? Vodka?

All that would happen would be a somewhat limited war until Russia capitulates. Nobody wants to occupy Russia - even disregarding the horrible partisan movement that would pop up, the Western powers simply don't have the manpower required.

Abundant natural resources!

* Guardian G.I. hides in the trench

EDIT:

* Guardian G.I. pops out of the trench

Spoiler: Unrelated picture, an example of American Cold War propaganda (click to show/hide)

"Preview of the War We Do Not Want" - sure as hell you didn't!
Also, for some really odd reason, the evil Soviet propaganda didn't make such things during the Cold War. The last propaganda films about how the Soviet Union defeated the evil potential adversaries were released in... late 1930s. Americans, on the other hand...

[Helgoland]

The lack of any rational reason to invade didn't stop USA and Bush from invading and occupying Iraq.

Iraq was assumed to be a rather small war, [aabr=Home by Christmas - does this remind you of anything? ...]over in a couple of weeks[/abbr]. Nobody would claim such a thing about fighting Russia.

And GI, we can simply buy these - that's much cheaper than waging war, as Iraq has demonstrated magnificently. Claiming the West would invade Russia because of resources is about as nuts as claiming the NATO intervention in Libya was a way to get at their oil.

[Sergarr]

There are plenty of people believing that Russia's army without nukes is absolutely worthless (with the exception of few elite units) and will be effortlessly crushed in a matter of weeks.

Just look at what UR has said. That's what he thinks. That's what a lot of people think. The threat of war against us is real and will continue to be real while there are people who assume the Russian army to be weak, and there are plenty of people who think it even now, after the blitzkrieg of Georgia and the way the Ukrainian army got facebusted in August.

These kind of people will just assume it was a random fluke and that a real army would crush Russia in a matter of weeks effortlessly.

[Owlbread]

By "unacceptable casualties" I mean "hundreds of millions dead from nuclear explosions".

Let's not kid ourselves - the only reason why NATO troops are not marching to Moscow right now is nuclear weapons.

It's this kind of silliness that Putin exploits and gets votes out of people. Even if Russia had no nukes like normal countries don't there is no way NATO troops would ever march into Moscow - for the simple reasons that at least a fifth of the country is first world and also white majority and Christian (doesn't look good invading white people with computers and internet and stuff), it would totally cripple the European economy and the economy of the world, not the least the USA and it would be totally pointless because there is no reason for the big, bad West to invade Moscow. The Ukrainian situation isn't good and it needs to be stabilised, but actually having some kind of invasion is as ludicrous as the Germans deciding to invade Poland again. It would only happen in the fevered minds of paranoid idiots who have their heads stuck in a 1945 time warp.

The West may have bombed the Serbs but there's a difference between Serbia then and Russia now. If the USA was attacking Russians with drones or something I could go on Bay 12 and talk to you about it and hear just how terrible it is. Do you know how bad PR that is? Can you imagine what it would be like if people in Afghanistan were using English-language internet as much as Russians?

[Sheb]

Yeah, contrarily to popular belief, most of the nukeless countries are NOT being invaded by NATO as we speak.