Russia threatens to attack Poland... (1 Viewer)

[T Bell]

Alright, here is my theory.Putin arranges for Bush to receive false information showing Iraq to have WMDs, causing the US to go to war without fully thinking it through. He correctly diagnoses Bush as a gunslinger without too much in the way of brains, so his plan works perfectly. Once Putin consolidates power in Russia and trains up his military, he instigates a conflict with Georgia as a test to see how the rest of the world reacts. The US, still tied up militarily in Iraq, responds impotently. Everyone else basically says, 'bad Russia', and glances nervously at each other. Putin knows he has a lot of rope before anyone even thinks of a war with Russia, so he begin to flex his country's muscle.Putin most likely just wants Russia to be recognized again as a world power, which is sort of his job I suppose. If he allows the US to set up any kind of anti-missile defense in his own back yard, his nuclear threat is nullified and his country is neutered.

"Organized crime? Hah. Don't kid yourself. It's not that organized."

 

[falconeyed]

- The Soviet Union suffers worst wheat harvest in 55 years.

- Labor and food riots in Poland. Soviet Union invades.

- Cuba And Nicaragua reach troop strength goal of 500,000.

- El Salvador and Honduras fall.

- Green party gains control of West German Parliament and demands withdrawl of Nuclear Weapons from European soil.

- Mexico is plunged into revolution.

- NATO dissolves. The United States stands alone.

 

[roadkill1292]

Putin most likely just wants Russia to be recognized again as a world power, which is sort of his job I suppose. If he allows the US to set up any kind of anti-missile defense in his own back yard, his nuclear threat is nullified and his country is neutered.

I would instead call it part of a plan to secure the nation's borders. Russia has historically been surrounded by hostiles of one level or another and faces an enormous uphill climb to simply remain existent, for lack of a better word. They take strong action in neighboring states because they feel that they must for their own survival. We can only understand this intellectually, not empathically, for it is foreign to our own recent history.While their natural resources have been a recent boon, Russia still faces overwhelming problems, most notably a declining population base while being surrounded by distrustful ethnicities. I don't worry very much about Putin being able to expand very much beyond his immediate sphere of influence but it remains true that he can stir up a great deal of trouble for everyone right there in his own back yard.

 

[roadkill1292]

- The Soviet Union suffers worst wheat harvest in 55 years.

- Labor and food riots in Poland. Soviet Union invades.

- Cuba And Nicaragua reach troop strength goal of 500,000.

- El Salvador and Honduras fall.

- Green party gains control of West German Parliament and demands withdrawl of Nuclear Weapons from European soil.

- Mexico is plunged into revolution.

- NATO dissolves. The United States stands alone.

WOLVERINES!!!

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Brought this on themselves. It was their aggresion in Georgia that clinched this deal with the Poles.

Nail struck firmly on head.

 

[Christo]

If anyone is actually seriously debating if the US would go to war if a NATO country was attacked by Russia, doesn’t understand NATO or the US commitment to it.

There are few things the U.S. could do to destroy its international credibility more than to abandon NATO in the sort of crisis we're discussing. I'm not sure we'd do as much damage to our world standing by dropping a nuke on Tehran this evening as we would by abandoning NATO under such circumstances.

 

[cstu]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

 

[cstu]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

 

[cstu]

Rev.6[1] And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.[2] And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.[3] And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.[4] And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.[5] And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.[6] And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.[7] And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see.[8] And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.[9] And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:[10] And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?[11] And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.[12] And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;[13] And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.[14] And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.[15] And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;[16] And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:[17] For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Yeah, I've done shrooms too.

 

[T Bell]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

 

[BigA]

- The Soviet Union suffers worst wheat harvest in 55 years.

- Labor and food riots in Poland. Soviet Union invades.

- Cuba And Nicaragua reach troop strength goal of 500,000.

- El Salvador and Honduras fall.

- Green party gains control of West German Parliament and demands withdrawl of Nuclear Weapons from European soil.

- Mexico is plunged into revolution.

- NATO dissolves. The United States stands alone.

WOLVERINES!!!

 

[cstu]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Rev.6[1] And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.[2] And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.[3] And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.[4] And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.[5] And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.[6] And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.[7] And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see.[8] And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.[9] And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:[10] And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?[11] And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.[12] And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;[13] And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.[14] And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.[15] And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;[16] And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:[17] For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Yeah, I've done shrooms too.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

Are we talking about nuclear warhead missiles, or a missile defense system ?

 

[LHUCKS]

At what point does Ivan Drago become involved...that's when I'll start tuning in.

 

[T Bell]

- The Soviet Union suffers worst wheat harvest in 55 years.- Labor and food riots in Poland. Soviet Union invades.- Cuba And Nicaragua reach troop strength goal of 500,000.- El Salvador and Honduras fall.- Green party gains control of West German Parliament and demands withdrawl of Nuclear Weapons from European soil. - Mexico is plunged into revolution.- NATO dissolves. The United States stands alone.

When I read that I thought of Children of Men before I thought of Red Dawn:

ParisMoscowWashingtonKuala LumpurTokyoBrusselsHong KongBerlin, Jakarta, New York, Stockholm, Rome, Shanghai, Caracas, Copenhagen, Mexico City, Amsterdam, Atlanta, Geneva, Marseilles, Lisbon, Seoul, Singapore, San Diego, Naples, BostonAntwerpThe World Has Collapsed: Only Britain Soldiers On

 

[Christo]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

The flaw in your theory is, we do not have plans to invade Costa Rica, Russia does have plans to invade Poland.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

At what point does Ivan Drago become involved...that's when I'll start tuning in.

I don't know about Ivan, but **** is in the house.http://graphics.boston.com/images/bostondi...ograph_card.jpg

.

 

[cstu]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

Are we talking about nuclear warhead missiles, or a missile defense system ?

How is Russia to know what type of missiles are in the silos?

 

[Christo]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

Are we talking about nuclear warhead missiles, or a missile defense system ?

How is Russia to know what type of missiles are in the silos?

They don't use silos.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

The missile defense program is the worst mess we currently have in my eyes. Yes worse than Iraq. Because even though it will never work, Russia has to respond as if it will.

And you know this how, exactly? Are you speaking as someone who has worked on those programs? Just because there are some experts that are leery, does not mean something can't be done -- and just because something is done incrementally, does not mean it can't be done -- or would you have expected the Wright bros to have gone from their first plane to a P-51 mustang within a decade? Or, are you merely bringing this up because it's expensive?

Because other countries can shoot down our satellites.

 

[Chadstroma]

"Two toughest kids on the block, I guess. Sooner or later, they're gonna fight. "

WOLVERINES!

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

Are we talking about nuclear warhead missiles, or a missile defense system ?

It doesn't matter. What lets people sleep at night when thinking about nucs is mutually assured destruction. A working defense system would change this.

 

[Fennis]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

Are we talking about nuclear warhead missiles, or a missile defense system ?

How is Russia to know what type of missiles are in the silos?

They don't use silos.

The Russians can tell the difference between Patriot missiles and missiles designed to deliver a nuclear payload. They know exactly what they are.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

The missile defense program is the worst mess we currently have in my eyes. Yes worse than Iraq. Because even though it will never work, Russia has to respond as if it will.

Just like the Apollo missions. Men on the moon.

There wasn't somebody else working on rockets to shoot down the apollo missions.

 

[Fennis]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

Are we talking about nuclear warhead missiles, or a missile defense system ?

It doesn't matter. What lets people sleep at night when thinking about nucs is mutually assured destruction. A working defense system would change this.

Someone get Putin an Ambien prescription. Stat! Let’s hope he doesn’t sleep - push buttons

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

Why do you like Russia? Putin is scary.

 

[Chadstroma]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

Russia has been flexing it's strength recently. Now that it can actually pay it's military and put gas in their jets and tanks they have been testing the waters to see how far they will be allowed. Georgia made an error in trying to reclaim it's territory but it is interesting how quick the reaction of Russia was with decisiveness. There was no gearing up or mobilization, it was an immediate and powerful counter attack. It is fairly powerful circumstantial evidence that Russia was provoking this with it's "peacekeepers" in the breakaway territory. If you really think it is the Americans and NATO that are then why did Russia begin Soviet era probing of NATO airspace with it's bombers over a year ago? I will admit that the Bush Adminstration has made a mistake in not trying to bring Russia closer, for instance, it not reversing it's stance and backing Russia in it's fight against Chechen rebels who are very closely tied into the same Taliban and al-Qaeda networks we are fighting. Yet Russia has slid more and more back into an authoratative government that looks like it is willing to be aggresive in a way that reminds many of the Soviet's. Do not forget the goals of Soviet Russia in building satelite states around it as a physical buffer from suffering through the devastation that it lived through in WWII. It appears Russia is now actively probing to see how far the U.S. and it's allies are willing to let it go. We can not let them think that we will allow them to be aggresive and re-build it's past empire.

 

[SofaKings]

Putin would have to be a serious madman

We use this word a lot, but he doesn't need to be a "madman". All he needs to be is someone who is playing a high stakes power game with a major nation, who goes too far one time. Putin's a rational actor, but he's certainly capable of miscalculating the risks of his actions. For that reason, it's counterproductive to simply label him a "madman" as it gravely oversimplifies the problem and underestimates him as an opponent.

If anything we have a moron running this country who thinks he can push Russia around. I've yet to see Putin do anything that classifies him as a madman. He's power hungry but he hasn't made serious mistake yet, but it's seems like we are egging him on to make one that will cause a major war with Russia.

Poor, poor Vladimir. Just doing the best he can in this cruel world while that madman Bush pushes him around!

Neither side is innocent in this poker game. It's foolish to try to put missiles right next to Russia's border and think we can get away with it.s

Are we talking about nuclear warhead missiles, or a missile defense system ?

How is Russia to know what type of missiles are in the silos?

They are conventional defensive missiles not IRBM's like Russia had in Cuba. Or even the short range nuclear tipped missiles we installed in Europe in the 80's.

 

[RoarinSonoran]

Men's 200m Backstroke

Lochte - USA (WR)

Peirsol - USA

Vyatchanin - RUS

Go ahead, comrade Putin, make our day!

 

[T Bell]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

Why do you like Russia? Putin is scary.

I'm trying to figure out myself how one goes about wooing Russia without wooing Putin, who is its gatekeeper. What are the Russians going to do, overthrow Putin?

 

[Chadstroma]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

You think medium range nuke's widely regarded as a first strike weapon is the same as a defensive missile system? Really?

 

[Chadstroma]

It has always bothered me that Bush felt like he could "look into" Putin's eyes and see a "good man".

I think McCain said it the best way possible. You look into Putin's eyes and you should see "K.G.B".

 

[Hammered Finz]

Do the Russians even have a Navy anymore?

Of course.

I hear those submarines work GREAT!!

 

[T Bell]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

You think medium range nuke's widely regarded as a first strike weapon is the same as a defensive missile system? Really?

cstu is putting his intelligence on display here.

 

[cstu]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it. If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

You think medium range nuke's widely regarded as a first strike weapon is the same as a defensive missile system? Really?

cstu is putting his intelligence on display here.

 

[T Bell]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.

I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it.

If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

You think medium range nuke's widely regarded as a first strike weapon is the same as a defensive missile system? Really?

cstu is putting his intelligence on display here.

Exactly.

 

[cstu]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.

I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it.

If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

You think medium range nuke's widely regarded as a first strike weapon is the same as a defensive missile system? Really?

cstu is putting his intelligence on display here.

Exactly.

Well I guess America would be fine and dandy with Russia placing a few hundred "defensive missiles" in Cuba then.

 

[Paper Lions]

Tatum Bell is en fuego in this thread.

 

[T Bell]

I don't understand our politicians on this. McCain, Obama, Bush, all seem to be in favor of these agreements; they're all for offering NATO to the Ukraine, and a missle defense plan to Poland. And I don't get it.

I don't like Putin at all, but I do like Russia. Why are we trying to antagonize the Russians? What will this gain us? I don't see it. We have no plans to invade Costa Rica, but I have to believe that if China offered Costa Rica a missile defense plan or a military guarantee, we'd be pissed off about it.

If this was a partisan issue I'd probably find myself on the "liberal" side this time- except that Obama's for this stuff too. So maybe there's some logic here that I just don't understand...

It amazing that the U.S. thinks it can get away with this despite our history with missiles being installed too close to our borders. Absolute hypocrisy.

You think medium range nuke's widely regarded as a first strike weapon is the same as a defensive missile system? Really?

cstu is putting his intelligence on display here.

Exactly.

Well I guess America would be fine and dandy with Russia placing a few hundred "defensive missiles" in Cuba then.

When you've already bet and lost your mortgage, don't go double or nothing.

 

[timschochet]

First, lest I be associated with CSTU, what I said is that I didn't quite understand the policy of extending NATO to countries like Poland and the Baltic States, and I still don't. This has nothing to do with a moral standpoint; Putin is a bad bad man, though as I said, I like Russia, and would like to see us trade more with them. If it's a choice between buying oil from the Middle East and buying natural gas from Russia, I think the latter is preferable.

But even if (a) we had nothing to gain from trading with Russia and (b) Russia is really trying to gain back all of the territories of the USSR, I'm still not seeing the point of extending NATO. The point of NATO in the first place was a unified effort against Communism- basically us and Western Europe, meaning we can count on the military of England and France in the event of all out war with Russia. But every time you add some small country in Eastern Europe, all you're doing is committing US troops to its defense-what do we gain by this? It's one thing if that serves as a deterrent, then it makes sense. But if it serves as a reason to egg Russia on, then it's having the opposite effect of what we want, which is to contain Russia's territorial aims.

But I may not know what I'm talking about, because I don't have all the information. About three hours ago I posted the question for someone who knows military stuff: if Russia invades Poland do we and NATO have the means to stop them? Can we stop them long term without a military draft in this country? How would such a battle take place? Until we're all clear on the answers to these questions, it's useless to discuss this.

 

[Mr.Kitty]

Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?

 

[SofaKings]

First, lest I be associated with CSTU, what I said is that I didn't quite understand the policy of extending NATO to countries like Poland and the Baltic States, and I still don't. This has nothing to do with a moral standpoint; Putin is a bad bad man, though as I said, I like Russia, and would like to see us trade more with them. If it's a choice between buying oil from the Middle East and buying natural gas from Russia, I think the latter is preferable.

But even if (a) we had nothing to gain from trading with Russia and (b) Russia is really trying to gain back all of the territories of the USSR, I'm still not seeing the point of extending NATO. The point of NATO in the first place was a unified effort against Communism- basically us and Western Europe, meaning we can count on the military of England and France in the event of all out war with Russia. But every time you add some small country in Eastern Europe, all you're doing is committing US troops to its defense-what do we gain by this? It's one thing if that serves as a deterrent, then it makes sense. But if it serves as a reason to egg Russia on, then it's having the opposite effect of what we want, which is to contain Russia's territorial aims.

But I may not know what I'm talking about, because I don't have all the information. About three hours ago I posted the question for someone who knows military stuff: if Russia invades Poland do we and NATO have the means to stop them? Can we stop them long term without a military draft in this country? How would such a battle take place? Until we're all clear on the answers to these questions, it's useless to discuss this.

NATO serves as a buffer between Russia and the rest of Europe. As long as Russia keeps up what they are doing, NATO will stay in place, Germany and England will make sure of it. As for a military means of stopping Russia, we still have a few large airbases in Europe. Air power would be the first line of defence with troops being deployed as needed. Just as in Gulf War I.

 

[Fennis]

It has always bothered me that Bush felt like he could "look into" Putin's eyes and see a "good man". I think McCain said it the best way possible. You look into Putin's eyes and you should see "K.G.B".

Bush is an idiot and McCain can saber rattle with the best of 'em.

 

[Iupurbut]

 

[Iupurbut]

 

[Mr.Kitty]

The missile defense program is the worst mess we currently have in my eyes. Yes worse than Iraq. Because even though it will never work, Russia has to respond as if it will.

And you know this how, exactly? Are you speaking as someone who has worked on those programs? Just because there are some experts that are leery, does not mean something can't be done -- and just because something is done incrementally, does not mean it can't be done -- or would you have expected the Wright bros to have gone from their first plane to a P-51 mustang within a decade? Or, are you merely bringing this up because it's expensive?

Because other countries can shoot down our satellites.

Okay -- I've heard everything I need to know that you have nooooooo idea what you're talking about.You have no idea what you're talking about...period. 'Drunken Cowboy' has just about as much a clue as a bag full of hair. I will ask you to answer any one of the questions I asked above, as well as asking ....exactly how will these countries shoot down one of our satellites, and how would our satellite constellations of hundreds fail to rebound?

Let's hear it, 'Drunken Cowboy' -- I'd love to put you to bed once and for all. Can you answer any of my original questions? Or, are you a passing jack### that has no idea what they're talking about?

'Drunken Cowboy' -- what say you? Are you sticking around to talk....or may we not see you for a while :knockonwood:

Higgins, you're kind of a ####.

 

[T Bell]

The missile defense program is the worst mess we currently have in my eyes. Yes worse than Iraq. Because even though it will never work, Russia has to respond as if it will.

And you know this how, exactly? Are you speaking as someone who has worked on those programs? Just because there are some experts that are leery, does not mean something can't be done -- and just because something is done incrementally, does not mean it can't be done -- or would you have expected the Wright bros to have gone from their first plane to a P-51 mustang within a decade? Or, are you merely bringing this up because it's expensive?

Because other countries can shoot down our satellites.

Okay -- I've heard everything I need to know that you have nooooooo idea what you're talking about.You have no idea what you're talking about...period. 'Drunken Cowboy' has just about as much a clue as a bag full of hair. I will ask you to answer any one of the questions I asked above, as well as asking ....exactly how will these countries shoot down one of our satellites, and how would our satellite constellations of hundreds fail to rebound?

Let's hear it, 'Drunken Cowboy' -- I'd love to put you to bed once and for all. Can you answer any of my original questions? Or, are you a passing jack### that has no idea what they're talking about?

'Drunken Cowboy' -- what say you? Are you sticking around to talk....or may we not see you for a while :knockonwood:

Higgins, you're kind of a ####.

Now imagine he was wrong.

 

[timschochet]

Higgins, you seem to know a lot about this, so I would like to ask you, and this is a genuine question, without cynicism:

Will our missile defense shield really protect us from all ICBMs? Is it enough at the current time where this is no longer a threat, or in the future where this will no longer be a threat? And can we extend it to other countries to protect them as well? It seems to me that if 8 ICBMs are heading towards you, and 7 are destroyed en route, that's still not good enough, right? But can we get them all?

The other question is: if Russia or China has nuclear submarines, then even the missile shield can't protect us, because the subs could simply fire nukes at our coastline in the event of a war. Is this simplistic?

These questions have always been my own concerns about missle defense, SDI, etc. But maybe these things have been solved. Do you have any idea?

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

The missile defense program is the worst mess we currently have in my eyes. Yes worse than Iraq. Because even though it will never work, Russia has to respond as if it will.

And you know this how, exactly? Are you speaking as someone who has worked on those programs? Just because there are some experts that are leery, does not mean something can't be done -- and just because something is done incrementally, does not mean it can't be done -- or would you have expected the Wright bros to have gone from their first plane to a P-51 mustang within a decade? Or, are you merely bringing this up because it's expensive?

Because other countries can shoot down our satellites.

Okay -- I've heard everything I need to know that you have nooooooo idea what you're talking about.You have no idea what you're talking about...period. 'Drunken Cowboy' has just about as much a clue as a bag full of hair. I will ask you to answer any one of the questions I asked above, as well as asking ....exactly how will these countries shoot down one of our satellites, and how would our satellite constellations of hundreds fail to rebound?

Let's hear it, 'Drunken Cowboy' -- I'd love to put you to bed once and for all. Can you answer any of my original questions? Or, are you a passing jack### that has no idea what they're talking about?

'Drunken Cowboy' -- what say you? Are you sticking around to talk....or may we not see you for a while :knockonwood:

Higgins, you're kind of a ####.

He had a rough day at work apparently. Generally speaking though, it's a good idea to be up to speed on the last couple of decades of development of a system you are criticizing. There are plenty of real reasons why the Missile Defense is a marginal idea; then again, maybe all this cold war talk just had DC reminiscing back to the Star Wars days.