Coincidentally, here’s a news story on the V-22 Osprey which appeared just today:
1 October 2012
US Osprey military aircraft begin Okinawa base move
Russia escalates things
-
@CWO:
We in Europe are in a constant risk of raising tensions with Russia just because one power from the other side of the world is playing it`s game here. We in Europe suck. EU sucks. We do not have a foreign policy of our own. In diplomatic questions we are more or less a satellite of Washington even in situations where we go against our own interests. That is sad
Someting I’m wondering: is there any element of nostalgia here for the good old days in which Europe controlled most of the world and the U.S. was in the international minor leagues? Back in the 19th century (let’s say prior to the Spanish-American War, which resulted in the U.S. picking up some significant overseas possessions from Spain), the U.S. wasn’t the kind of international player it became as a result of WWI and (especially) WWII. For most of the 19th century the major powers were all European countries, with their respective colonial empires (of various sizes) and with their own foreign policies. Despite all that, things still sucked in those days too. They sucked differently from today but they sucked nevertheless, since the European powers could do a perfectly satisfactory job on their own of creating problems for each other, without any need for the U.S. to prime the pump. The beginning of the 19th century was dominated by the Napoleonic Wars, in which (if I’m not mistaken) all the major powers were involved at one time or another. Napoleon’s defeat in 1915 ushered in a lengthy period of comparative peace (when measured against the Napoleonic Wars), but throughout this “long peace” just about every major power fought at least one other major power at some point (sometimes in combination with other powers) – three examples being the Austro-Italian War, the Crimean War and the Franco-Prussian War. So I imagine that the European powers were saying pretty much the same things about each other in the 19th century as are being said about the U.S. today.
1815
Ok, well Europe was never united, yes. There were some big powers which were behaving to small states like the world powers behave today.
But we saw so many wars and stuff and now we have a unified Europe. EU. And we just want to be one of the players in a multi-polar world. Not on the throne, but one of the few world super-powers.
And all tough we have 500+ million people, such a big territory, a good position and everything we are not able to form our own military alliance, foreign policy and reputation. We are just following what Washington says. We are risking tensions with Russia because Washington is pushing us to do so. Russia said it will place Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad if the shield project in Poland takes place. So we are risking getting some rockets in the ass all because of the imperialist desires of our great friends, the USA. It is time we get rid of this adiction to Washington in terms of foreign policy, but I am not so optimistic about it.
-
What is flip?
I believe he meant “flippant”. As in: cheeky, sarcastic, irreverent, retaliatory…
Why doesn`t USA criticize SA for human rights? No, they do not care for women in SA. They only care for human rights in China, Russia and Iran. How sweet.
You are correct. Many people here, certain groups in particular, thrive on exposing social injustices and pointing out those flaws here and abroad. It is primarily a political tool. Women’s rights in Saudi Arabia don’t fit the current agenda.
-
Re neo-nazi in Kiev
@rjpeters70:
Not a Nazi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serhiy_Arbuzov
Not a Nazi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arseniy_Yatsenyuk
Are there some Nazis in the streets? Maybe a handful. But that doesn’t make the movement a Nazi one.You missed a point. Yatsenyuk (Prime Minister) and 50% of his Government, including Minister of Defense, are either from Batkivshchyna (Fatherland) or Svoboda party. Both parties are in coalition since 2012. Svoboda is a Ukrainian nationalist political party. All of this is in Wikipedia you refer. Klichko who is planning to take the president chair is from UDAR (Punch) that in the coalition too btw.
Also, you forgot to mention Right Sector - a radical nationalist group. According to the same site , it is one of the main actors in the January 2014 riots in their later and more violent stages. The group leader Yarosh said that Right Sector and Svoboda “have a lot of common positions when it comes to ideological questions”. He was offered, but did not accept a minister case.
I can write more incl what and where they did already, but you see the picture. -
One more thing to everybody, not to just “patriots”. Please don’t watch only CNN and have your own opinion. The latter is a part of the real patriotizm from my view.
-
What is flip?
I believe he meant “flippant”. As in: cheeky, sarcastic, irreverent, retaliatory…
Why doesn`t USA criticize SA for human rights? No, they do not care for women in SA. They only care for human rights in China, Russia and Iran. How sweet.
You are correct. Many people here, certain groups in particular, thrive on exposing social injustices and pointing out those flaws here and abroad. It is primarily a political tool. Women’s rights in Saudi Arabia don’t fit the current agenda.
Thanks for explanation.
Saudi Arabia and North Korea are the two most totalitarian countries in the world. Hell on earth it is.
I am not anti-American. I just try to be fair and honest. Double standards are what bothers me.
-
@rjpeters70:
Wrong.� We have not built a new nuclear weapon since 1991.
Ok imperfection of the old ones. It is more or less the same.
@rjpeters70:
I honestly don’t know what you mean by this.
U say that USA did not build and is not building new nukes since 1991. But the missiles that carry it are getting better and better, and I think that the nukes itself are improved, all though they are not new models. It is logical for me that after 23 years, they have greater precision, destruction power and speed.
@rjpeters70:
Man there was hot line between Moscow and some other states because of this. USA was pushing it constantly. It was a defeat of USA foreign policy, since even Obama was when elected at the stand that the facilities in Poland and Czech Republic will be built. Not to mention the boy Bush.
I honestly don’t comprehend what you’re trying to say here.
I am trying to say that putting a shield in Poland is putting a finger in the eye to Russia and that Russia was planing to put Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad, stack EUropean borders with nukes, and nullify the treaties that reduce conventional army and weapons limit in Europe.
If that is not something (for EUrope) to be worried about, than I do not know what is.
USA did not withdrew the Poland shield project because of nothing, Russian pressure forced them to withdraw this bad idea.
. U have any right to counter my views and thoughts with Urs in a civilized way. I do not have problem with that. And i appreciate for all the information here U gave me.
We both agreed that the power which is able to have nukes with limited radius (and U say that many have it) and which would be able to build a anti balistic missile system that could destroy other powers offensive BM capacities, could indeed start a preemptive nuclear strike with limited wideness without worrying about getting a few nukes in the ass.
That how it is more or less irrelevant does USA has 1000 nukes or 3000. The same thing for Russia.
The thing is that if any power (in this case USA) develops technology that can take other powers BM-s down, then it is a strategic offensive advantage for that power either it has more or less then 500 or 1000 nukes.
So the withdrawal from the anti-BM treaty in 2002 is far severe then anything else, and that is my opinion and not just mine.
Building better nukes for USA means nothing, if Russia has so many powerful nukes which can strike. USA nukes can be 3 times better, but the thing is that Russian ones are so good that can destroy life on Earth without problems.
But if U develop a defensive system against enemy BM-s, then it is a totally different story. And that is what I am thinking that USA is doing. And as I said, not just me.
Well, Mossad is the best secret service in the world. CIA is the widest in range, it operates almost everywhere and CIA has so much exp in Iran, Asia, Latin America etc. CIA plans for years and decades in front. So does the Pentagon and the State Department. Just read Brzezinski for example.
USA is the world super power so dominant, that nobody since the time of the Roman Empire had such dominance.
U re n.1 in politics, economy, diplomatics, sport, U have the best universities, best hospitals, engineers, research and development centers, navy, air force, think thanks, lobbies, cinema, music.
U simply dominate. China will surpass USA in the economy field, but who knows when.
Russia is the only country, together with China that can compete U in military and sport.
And as for NGOs. Why do U think Putin has put them on strict check, to give information about money they receive, their donors, place of origin, connections with other states etc. Because they are often spies who seek their own agenda which is not in the interests of the country in which they act. USA spends billions of dollars funding various NGO-s all over the globe. So does Saudi Arabia and Turkey. This 2 countries are financing islamic radicals via this NGO-s.
We are in a time when wars are done by cyber ways, by media, by propaganda and not just by fists and swords like in good old days. Far from it that other countries do not have their NGO-s and their agenda which they are trying to spread globally. But USA, as the only world super power, is n.1 here without a competition.
-
I am not anti-American. I just try to be fair and honest. Double standards are what bothers me.
I can tell… and that is great. Then we agree on more than it seems.
Truth has no agenda.
-
-
@Nozdormu:
I am not anti-American. I just try to be fair and honest. Double standards are what bothers me.
I can tell… and that is great. Then we agree on more than it seems.
Truth has no agenda.
But politicians
almostalways doFixed that for you. That’s the entire point of politics.
-
@Nozdormu:
I am not anti-American. I just try to be fair and honest. Double standards are what bothers me.
I can tell… and that is great. Then we agree on more than it seems.
Truth has no agenda.
But politicians almost always do
Sure. But I don’t see what that has to do with my exchange with Amon-Sul.
-
vv
-
_Sorry guys bad news, NOTHING is going to happen!!
You still have to wait for the big bang, it is not time yet!_
-
@wittmann:
Things are hotting up in the Ukraine. Does not look good.
Nothing we cant fix with my m1
-
@wittmann:
Things are hotting� up in the Ukraine. Does not look good.
Nothing we cant fix with my m1
“Russia knows what it wants. World domination. And she is laying her plans accordingly. We, on the other hand, and England, and France to a lesser extent, don’t know what we want and get less than nothing as the result.”
- G. S. Patton, Jr
Incredibly relevant, even 70 years later.
-
Russia takes what belonged her for 250 years. And it’s completely different to, say, UK trying back India. What world domination you are talking about?
Do I agree with everything they do? No. Politicks is a durty business. There are good, bad, and so so people - not a scale in politicks. There are only big and small predators. -
Russia takes what belonged her for 250 years.
Be that as that may, there certainly is a better time and method of doing so. Thankfully it’s been relatively civil for what is possible.
-
-
Here is an interesting take on what Russia could do to crash the petrodollar and sink the economy. America has borrowed and corrupted itself into a very fragile situation.
-
Eisenhower should have listen to old George. :-D
-
The long and short of it is Putin is a leader and BO is a politician. I mean that in a very nonpartisan way.
Putin is evil, and you can even argue that he is stupid because he is trying to re-establish a form of government that fell apart quarter of a century ago because it was unsustainable. That being said, his evil/stupid antics makes him come across as a leader because he is decisive. I am not saying that is a good thing for the world at large, but when the shit hits the fan most people want to think the guy in charge knows what the hell he is doing.
When it comes to BO… I think his only interest in foreign policy is to distract from how bad Obamacare is going. His biggest concern is the next election, not the future of America. The man is a great speaker, nobody can take that away from him. However words only go so far.
We have had 2 presidents who knew how to deal with the Russians. Kennedy who told them “screw you, get out of Cuba NOW!” and Reagan whose foreign policy for the USSR was “we win, you lose”.
Ultimately I think all of America’s problems would be solved if we just harvested our own natural resources. The reason Russia has so much strength is because of oil and natural gas. If we dumped a ton of oil onto the world market the price of oil would drop like a rock. That would crash the economies of the people who hate us (not just Russia, lets give a shout out to Iran!)
Suggested Topics
