Russia: No CFE treaty for you! - Page 2

Az · February 10, 2004, 03:44

gosh, they let everyone into the party these days.

Hiya serb, long time no see.

Tak kuda Ribkina zapryatal?

Urban Ranger · February 10, 2004, 03:56

I think Bush's unilateral withdrawl from ABT has something to do with this.

At least he inspired Putin to do this.

Serb · February 10, 2004, 04:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel
gosh, they let everyone into the party these days.

No, only the one who have a Red flag.

Quote:

Tak kuda Ribkina zapryatal?

Do komu ona na hui nuzhna eta shlyha Berezovskogo?
Vchera po radio slyshal, chto vrode nashli ego v podmoskovie, buhal v chem-nibud pomest'e navernoe.

Az · February 10, 2004, 04:14

Saras · February 10, 2004, 04:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Lonestar
Yes. We mustn't forget The French (1813) and the Mongols!

The MONGOLS for God's sake!

Grand Duke Algirdas burned Moscow down 4 times in the 14th century

There's also a heroic painting of him knocking on their gates with his spear.

Of course, Russian returned the favor later on... with interest...

Quote:

Originally posted by Serb
In NATo's armed forces serve about 4,5 millions of troops. In Russian armed forces- 1,2 million. So sheer numbers is against us. You've surrounded our country with military alliance of 19 countries, it's growing constantly and step to our borders closer and closer. The leader of this alliance had started 3 wars within 4 years.

You have held new members of NATO under your oppressive yoke for over 50 years, so naturally everyone wants to join a strong defensive alliance. Your mistake is in escalating and upping the ante. Wake up, NATO is not going after you, at least not as long as you don't threaten member countries. And you have nukes. What a load of paranoids.

DaShi · February 10, 2004, 04:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I think Bush's unilateral withdrawl from ABT has something to do with this.

At least he inspired Putin to do this.

Serb · February 10, 2004, 04:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Saras
Grand Duke Algirdas burned Moscow down 4 times in the 14th century

There's also a heroic painting of him knocking on their gates with his spear.

Of course, Russian returned the favor later on... with interest...

Dolg platezhom krasen

Quote:

You have held new members of NATO under your oppressive yoke for over 50 years, so naturally everyone wants to join a strong defensive alliance. Your mistake is in escalating and upping the ante. Wake up, NATO is not going after you, at least not as long as you don't threaten member countries. And you have nukes. What a load of paranoids.

We have our reasons to be paranoid.

The Vagabond · February 10, 2004, 05:04

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Russia is a corrupt, burtal, kleptocracy teetering into dicatorship. To the devil with the Russian state.

I can forgive you the first part of the above quote, but I'll never forgive you the second.

Saras · February 10, 2004, 05:08

--"We have our reasons to be paranoid."

Constant hangover? Belyje myshi?

Az · February 10, 2004, 05:08

No reasons to be paranoid, of course, this is obviously a load of bull. The case is for the expansion of russian interests, or perhaps the ~~Soviet Union~~ Russian Federation itself. There is little doubt about it.

I mean, really, who's going to attack Russia? Noone, for the same reason the WP didn't attack NATO in the 50s and 60s: nukes.

The breaking of the treaty?

Noone gives a flying toss about treaties, Intl. law, etc. etc.

Serb · February 10, 2004, 05:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Saras
--"We have our reasons to be paranoid."

Constant hangover? Belyje myshi?

Exactly.

The Pinky, the Pinky and the Brain... B r a i n... B r a i n... B r a i n

Serb · February 10, 2004, 06:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel
No reasons to be paranoid, of course, this is obviously a load of bull. The case is for the expansion of russian interests, or perhaps the ~~Soviet Union~~ Russian Federation itself. There is little doubt about it.

I mean, really, who's going to attack Russia? Noone, for the same reason the WP didn't attack NATO in the 50s and 60s: nukes.

The breaking of the treaty?

Noone gives a flying toss about treaties, Intl. law, etc. etc.

Ukraine had about 1700 nukes. Now it has none.

Az · February 10, 2004, 06:07

are you advocating taking over the Ukraine by force? why do that if you can just take them over diplomatically ( like you can with Belarus, only that it seems that someone is being a hardass over there ).

Serb · February 10, 2004, 06:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel

are you advocating taking over the Ukraine by force? why do that if you can just take them over diplomatically ( like you can with Belarus, only that it seems that someone is being a hardass over there ).

No, I meant that West already know how to completely disarm a nuclear power without a threat for themself. Were is guaranty that the same will not happen with Russia, someday?

Az · February 10, 2004, 06:55

That's such a BS statement.

If Russia will want to disarm, you will. If you won't you want. Noone is forcing you, noone has forced the Ukraine, as well. I didn't think I'll have to explain this to you.

You make it sound like "the west" employed some voodoo magic on the Ukraine or something.

Serb · February 10, 2004, 06:59

They did.

It's magic of whip and candy.

Az · February 10, 2004, 07:01

well, if you're going to fall for that magic, no amount of conventional forces will help you.

Tripledoc · February 10, 2004, 07:18

Well as a Scandinavian I'm with Russia on this one.
Russia has never posed an aggressive threat to Europe, it has always been the other way round. And when Imperialist or Fascist Europe was aggresive it has always been as a reactionary way out in order to gather the strength to defeat Anglo-Saxon imperial encroachment.

Two local things have made me increasingly suspicious of Anglo Saxon intentions. The Americans are pressuring on to upgrade their radar bases on Greenland, to be compatible with the planned missile defense.

Secondly it has just been revealed in Danish media that, during the Cold War the government handed over the files of 400.000 citizens to American intelligence. This is not democratic behavior.

Thirdly it has been revealed that in the last thirty years no multinational corporation operating in Denmark has ever paid any taxes to the state. The reason stated was they had all run with a deficit for all those years. Then why continue to operate? The money could have been spent on healthcare and other services, instead they have vanished into thin air.

On the global level, it is clear that the Americans have been very agressive towards Russia. During the wars of Yugoslav Succesion, the Americans first supported the neofascist regime in Croatia and subsequently oversaw the ethic cleansing of 200.000 serbs from Krajina.

In the battle over Kosovo the American similarly supported the Albanian fascists and their dream of a greater Albania.

Furthermore under cover of the War on Terrorism the Americans have sprinkled bases to the South of Russia. If Americans are supporting Democracy why are they supporting Uzbekistan, a brutal dictatorship?

To my mind the recent election in Georgia was a coup. It was claimed that Sjevadnadse had commited election fraud. However the evidence for that was presented by an independent American observer group. The UN never made such a claim. I think the reason behind it all is that Sjevadnadse was halting the privatization of various services. Notably the electricity supply. After it was privatized to an American company the Georgians had to pay half their individual income just to cover the electricity bill. Futhermore there were frequent power outages. Under communism the citzens got their electricity for free, and there were no power outages.

Az · February 10, 2004, 07:26

Quote:

Russia has never posed an aggressive threat to Europe, it has always been the other way round.

Not quite true for the 19th century. It wasn't true even for WW1.

Tripledoc · February 10, 2004, 07:32

Well the Austrians attacked Serbia. And then it all went downhill from there. The Russians had to mobilize early because their mobilization procedures were painfully slow, due to the lack of railroad track. Had they waited, the Germans could have simply waded into France.

It was the almost suicidal Russian offensive into Eastern Prussia which forced the Germans to send divisions eastwards. Had the Germans had these divisons aganist France, she would certainly have fallen.

That would have meant a United Europe under feudal leadership.

DaShi · February 10, 2004, 07:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Well as a Scandinavian I'm with Russia on this one.
Russia has never posed an aggressive threat to Europe, it has always been the other way round. And when Imperialist or Fascist Europe was aggresive it has always been as a reactionary way out in order to gather the strength to defeat Anglo-Saxon imperial encroachment.

Two local things have made me increasingly suspicious of Anglo Saxon intentions. The Americans are pressuring on to upgrade their radar bases on Greenland, to be compatible with the planned missile defense.

Secondly it has just been revealed in Danish media that, during the Cold War the government handed over the files of 400.000 citizens to American intelligence. This is not democratic behavior.

Thirdly it has been revealed that in the last thirty years no multinational corporation operating in Denmark has ever paid any taxes to the state. The reason stated was they had all run with a deficit for all those years. Then why continue to operate? The money could have been spent on healthcare and other services, instead they have vanished into thin air.

On the global level, it is clear that the Americans have been very agressive towards Russia. During the wars of Yugoslav Succesion, the Americans first supported the neofascist regime in Croatia and subsequently oversaw the ethic cleansing of 200.000 serbs from Krajina.

In the battle over Kosovo the American similarly supported the Albanian fascists and their dream of a greater Albania.

Furthermore under cover of the War on Terrorism the Americans have sprinkled bases to the South of Russia. If Americans are supporting Democracy why are they supporting Uzbekistan, a brutal dictatorship?

To my mind the recent election in Georgia was a coup. It was claimed that Sjevadnadse had commited election fraud. However the evidence for that was presented by an independent American observer group. The UN never made such a claim. I think the reason behind it all is that Sjevadnadse was halting the privatization of various services. Notably the electricity supply. After it was privatized to an American company the Georgians had to pay half their individual income just to cover the electricity bill. Futhermore there were frequent power outages. Under communism the citzens got their electricity for free, and there were no power outages.

What evidence?

Chemical Ollie · February 10, 2004, 07:50

Let the Russkies have their troops wherever they want, as long as they are in Russia. Better to have them in European Russia than in Chechnya.

(sp?)

Az · February 10, 2004, 07:52

Chechniya is in Europe, too.

Serb · February 10, 2004, 07:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel
Not quite true for the 19th century.

Yeah, right. 1812 is true example of Russian aggression against innocent Europe.

Quote:

It wasn't true even for WW1.

Oh come on, Germans wanted the war, not Russians. Russia tried to solve the problem through diplomatic means.

Az · February 10, 2004, 07:58

Quote:

Yeah, right. 1812 is true example of Russian agression against inocent Europe

Napoleon only went after Russia when the Tzar started to penis-wave at him. If Napoleon would've won, Russia would be in a much better state today, together with all of europe. His victory would prevent the emergence of Germany ( the little states wanted to join the empire, and many of them were taken into Napoleon's army ), and would release the slaves in Russia a good couple of tens of years earlier, and if Napoleonic rule would emerge in Russia, it would clear out the stables that is Russian Tzarist Bureaucracy.It would also prevent WWI, and WWII.

The failure of Napoleon is a great tragedy to all of Europe.

Serb · February 10, 2004, 08:02

I hope you're not serious here.

Saras · February 10, 2004, 08:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Well as a Scandinavian I'm with Russia on this one.
Russia has never posed an aggressive threat to Europe,

And Finland, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania are in Antarctica?

Quote:

my mind recent election in Georgia was a coup. It was claimed that Sjevadnadse had commited election fraud. However the evidence for that was presented by an independent American observer group. The UN never made such a claim. I think the reason behind it all is that Sjevadnadse was halting the privatization of various services. Notably the electricity supply. After it was privatized to an American company the Georgians had to pay half their individual income just to cover the electricity bill. Futhermore there were frequent power outages. Under communism the citzens got their electricity for free, and there were no power outages.

Not a great display of brilliance, eh? AES sold out to RAO UES, moron.