Russia nuclear bombers in Cuba

2008-07-22 16:53:56

#1

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6949|Global Command

So, we place a missile shield in Europe and this is not meant to be a threat to Russia, so Russia wants to send heavy bombers to Cuba, and this " crosses a red line. "

It brings to the forefront again the stupid spending our government does. We should let Europe defend Europe. Building a missile shield for them while our borders are open makes as much sense as standing on our head and packing rocks in our asses.

"We seek strategic cooperation with the Russians. We want to work with them on preventing missiles from rogue nations like Iran from threatening our friends and allies," said Perino.

But Medvedev has warned that the missile defense project worsens regional security and will force Moscow to consider counter-measures.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id … _article=1

2008-07-22 17:02:26

#2

TrollmeaT: Aspiring Objectivist; +492|7093|Colorado

I seriously don't know what russias hard on is all about, were allies now & send them loads of cash. WTF else do they want?

2008-07-22 17:06:45

#3

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,072|7192|PNW

TrollmeaT wrote:
I seriously don't know what russias hard on is all about, were allies now & send them loads of cash. WTF else do they want?

http://www.dawnofgaming.com/Pics/Red%20 … t-0001.jpg

2008-07-22 17:16:23

#4

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6831|'Murka

I don't disagree with ATG.

The Russians are stupid for finding the missile shield threatening (they really don't, it just gives them an excuse to flex their muscle again), but if europe wants it, europe should pay for it. If they don't want it, we shouldn't build it for them.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-07-22 17:40:51

#5

usmarine2: Banned; +233|6211|Dublin, Ohio

so when kennedy did it........we make movies?

2008-07-22 17:45:11

#6

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6949|Global Command

TrollmeaT wrote:
I seriously don't know what russias hard on is all about, were allies now & send them loads of cash. WTF else do they want?

They want Boobies. Nothing more --------ATG

2008-07-22 17:54:45

#7

imortal: Member; +240|7085|Austin, TX

FEOS wrote:
I don't disagree with ATG.

The Russians are stupid for finding the missile shield threatening (they really don't, it just gives them an excuse to flex their muscle again), but if europe wants it, europe should pay for it. If they don't want it, we shouldn't build it for them.

During the Cold War, the Soviets hated the idea of a ballistic missile shield because they knew they could not replicate it, and that skewed the balance of power. MAD was a viable foreign policy, because neither nation wanted to kill the other so badly they were willing to be destroyed themselves in turn. Star Wars changed all of that. With a shield against ballistic missiles, the Soviets perceived the US as trying to get an advantage with which they could strike first without fear of a retalitory strike. That was one of the reasons the USSR was being so aggressive during the SDI era.

I do not know if something similar is happening now. Are we stumbling into another Cold War?

2008-07-22 17:58:49

#8

SgtHeihn: Should have ducked; +394|6907|Ham Lake, MN (Fucking Cold)

imortal wrote:
FEOS wrote:
I don't disagree with ATG.

The Russians are stupid for finding the missile shield threatening (they really don't, it just gives them an excuse to flex their muscle again), but if europe wants it, europe should pay for it. If they don't want it, we shouldn't build it for them.
During the Cold War, the Soviets hated the idea of a ballistic missile shield because they knew they could not replicate it, and that skewed the balance of power. MAD was a viable foreign policy, because neither nation wanted to kill the other so badly they were willing to be destroyed themselves in turn. Star Wars changed all of that. With a shield against ballistic missiles, the Soviets perceived the US as trying to get an advantage with which they could strike first without fear of a retalitory strike. That was one of the reasons the USSR was being so aggressive during the SDI era.

I do not know if something similar is happening now. Are we stumbling into another Cold War?

Yes we are, the Russians want to get back their former glory of the USSR.

2008-07-22 18:03:06

#9

icecold2510: Member; +31|6714

Their former glory of failing.

2008-07-22 18:14:12

#10

NeXuS: Shock it till ya know it; +375|6762|Atlanta, Georgia

The US nor Russia would be stupid enough to go to war with each other. The stakes are just too high.

2008-07-22 18:23:50

#11

SgtHeihn: Should have ducked; +394|6907|Ham Lake, MN (Fucking Cold)

NeXuS4909 wrote:
The US nor Russia would be stupid enough to go to war with each other. The stakes are just too high.

The Russians are banking on the US not to say shit because we have most of our military tied up in a 2 front conflict. brings up the old saying, "When the cats away, the mice will play".

They are looking to stir up trouble, just like this, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,388821,00.html.

They took over supplying weapons to them. Also, Russia and China vetoed a UN resolution condemning Mugabe.

2008-07-23 13:10:41

#12

motherdear: Member; +25|7072|Denmark/Minnesota (depends)

ffs russia was offered to be a part of the shield and now they are just being retarded.

2008-07-23 15:24:44

#13

Ghandi767: Member; +17|7043|Hanging in the Balance

They'll prolly get taken down enroute by a Hurricane

2008-07-23 15:31:38

#14

usmarine2: Banned; +233|6211|Dublin, Ohio

usmarine2 wrote:
so when kennedy did it........we make movies?

2008-07-23 15:38:45

#15

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6764|tropical regions of london

the missile defense in the czech republic is part of a larger grander strategy of economic and military cooperation with europe. doing this expands our influence and improves economic ties with the region.

how is a defensive missile system a threat to russias security?

its the era of globalization. any nation that favors isolationism (like Iran, like N Korea) is going down the drain. Iran has a strong economy but only because of oil. which is not stable. 85% of Iranian government income is from oil revenues.

The United States cant afford to be isolationist. especially if we want to hand the torch of global hyperpower status to China. China is going to be number one, we cant help that. But, what we can do is make it so that China's transition from communist police, state to an open liberal democratic nation will see as little shock to their social and economic systems as possible. In order to do this we must strengthen our ties to present allies, whether it be by military alliance or economic agreement.

Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-07-23 15:39:32)

2008-07-23 15:52:00

#16

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6764|tropical regions of london

the bullet proof vest that a cop wears is a threat to the security of the public.

2008-07-23 15:52:22

#17

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6976

You crank up the tension you gotta expect countermeasures. Contrary to everyone's beliefs the world is not globalising - it is dividing into several massive competing superblocks that will act exclusively in their own interests and their own interests only. Human society would collapse as a consequence of our own avarice in a monopolar world. National boundaries will remain important and nations will fight for scarce resources, etc., in these superblocks (because like it or not there IS NOT enough to go round for all 6 billion + of us). There isn't going to be some magical utopian society where resources get shared out equitably. Russia recognises this and does not want the military balance shifted in a manner that could be detrimental to them in the long term. As such, they'll take appropriate measures to 'keep up' or curb economic opponents military manoeuvres. I can't blame them. From an energy perspective the EU would be far better falling in with the Russkies than relying on the US or the middle east. Russia turns the taps and half of Europe is burning telephone directories to keep warm at wintertime. At least the Russkies share a European heritage. Most Europeans I think you'll find are not in favour of the US planting fancy new military installations on their soil. The Czechs certainly aren't. The US has fallen out of favour because they seem to attract more trouble than they're worth.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-07-23 16:07:02)

2008-07-23 16:07:25

#18

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6764|tropical regions of london

russia also has a terrible political culture that is not compatable with liberal democracy, europe's favored style of government

I have to disagree with you on globalization.

borders are just lines drawn on a map. mutually beneficial cooperation is the very heart of globalisation. I agree, it is a very multilateral world where power blocks are each after their own self interest. within our lifetime, newly emerging powerhouse econmies will only further strengthen the ties between nations and the business elite.

USA right now serves as the only real superpower correct?

China is on its way to taking that place. Not far from china is India. Not far from India or China are a number of nations that may potentially reach economic and military super power status. Look at China. Look at the EU (although, I dont see it lasting) look at brazil shit, even argentina might be where the United States is today sometime in the future.

Even parts of africa are seeing economic upturns.

China and India have been developing their economies (africa) since the early part of this decade.

Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-07-23 16:09:15)

2008-07-23 16:18:14

#19

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|7092|UK

i hope 1 lands in Ohio.

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2008-07-23 16:29:40

#20

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6825|North Carolina

I'd have to agree with Cam's assessment here. No matter how much we push free trade and comparative advantage, it all comes back to human nature -- vexing and oppressing. There's no better way to show this than observing military policies throughout time.

2008-07-23 16:39:14

#21

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6764|tropical regions of london

vexing and opressing? what do you think free trade does to those nations that dont have manufacturing capabilities.

2008-07-23 16:43:31

#22

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6825|North Carolina

God Save the Queen wrote:
vexing and opressing? what do you think free trade does to those nations that dont have manufacturing capabilities.

There's plenty of that in trade as well, but it's still better than invading them or manipulating their governments.

2008-07-23 16:44:09

#23

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6764|tropical regions of london

whats are you arguing turq?
free trade is what makes globalization possible. its why we get call centers in new delhi when we live in montana.

military intervention and economic policy go hand in hand.

Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-07-23 16:45:44)

2008-07-23 16:46:28

#24

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6825|North Carolina

God Save the Queen wrote:
whats are you arguing turq?
free trade is what makes globalization possible. its why we get call centers in new delhi when we live in montana.

military intervention and economic policy go hand in hand.

Not always. With the U.S., Russia, and sometimes even China, yes. With smaller countries, not so much.

2008-07-23 16:47:27

#25

God Save the Queen: Banned; +628|6764|tropical regions of london

smaller countries that make up the periphery arent even a factor. All they do is offer resources and labor. Economic incentives with national governments will always keep that flow running.

BF2S Forums Russia nuclear bombers in Cuba

TrollmeaT wrote:

TrollmeaT wrote:

FEOS wrote:

imortal wrote:

FEOS wrote:

NeXuS4909 wrote:

usmarine2 wrote:

God Save the Queen wrote:

God Save the Queen wrote:

Board footer