| Forum Index > Closed |
There is a new policy in effect in this thread. Anyone not complying will be moderated. New policy, please read before posting: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=21393711 | ||
|
Liman
Serbia681 Posts
I wonder what would US do if Mexico or Canada joined military-economic alliance with Russia? Would they take the rest of California from Mexico or bomb them to the ground? There are some people here,mostly from west,who dont realize that their countries and alliances which they are in behave exactly same as Russia. Is this off topic? I dont know anymore this thread.... | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:13 mcc wrote: Of course Putin has boundaries. The ones that real world puts on him. He is not stupid and definitely does not want to lose his power and life, which is exactly what using nukes would mean. You are completely off if you think he is more likely to use nukes than US. Read up on russian military doctrine or google "rogozin". | ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:04 Feartheguru wrote: Quoting this just to laugh in your face when it becomes clear how wrong you are at the end of this. So much wrong I can't even decide where to start. 1) The West promotes national self-determination through referendums all over the world, just not when it isn't convenient for them. 2) When an American friendly state in it's backyard faces a revolt (Guatemala, Panama, Chile is even more blatant than this,Cuba etc etc etc... list is too long why bother), army goes in high 5 bros job well done. When Russia faces the same situation in it's backyard, they can't even go into just the region with their ethical majority, imperialist commies! Hypocrisy at its finest. 3) UN cannot do anything when Russia is one of the permanent members of it's security council, even a verbal condemnation will be vetoed (This point alone shows how little you know) What is the difference between a thug and a policeman (real one, not some corrupt or dumb one)? | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:14 Liman wrote: Rename thread to Ukraine crisis. I wonder what would US do if Mexico or Canada joined military-economic alliance with Russia? Not care. Except for all the economic refugees who would flood into America since both these countries would go from trading with the richest market in the world to an economy the size of italy Would they take the rest of California from Mexico or bomb them to the ground? No, this isnt the Balkans. I am sorry that your former president-dictator broke up Yugoslavia and because you were viewed as the most aggressive country you faced the most hardships. But this situation is not similar. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
There are some people here,mostly from west,who dont realize that their countries and alliances which they are in behave exactly same as Russia. Most people do. Some people here will voice their opinion against western idiocracy as well, but they mostly have their own threads. | ||
|
Kamille
Monaco1035 Posts
On March 01 2014 10:43 LaNague wrote: noone is nuking anything, russia even removed ammo from most of those "covert" army guys just to not have any risk of them firing in a heated situation. and they certainly wont start a war with EU, war against germany, france AND UK is gg air superiority. Therein lies the problem. The EU needs to act as a single entity to stop Russia. While former Soviet bloc countries may have immediate reasons to support Ukraine for their own sovereignty, France, Germany, and the UK don't share those concerns. Since Russia exports natural gas to Western Europe, opposing Russia might not be politically salient for Merkel or Hollande and their voters at home. | ||
|
zeonmx
United States111 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:24 Kamille wrote: Therein lies the problem. The EU needs to act as a single entity to stop Russia. While former Soviet bloc countries may have immediate reasons to support Ukraine for their own sovereignty, France, Germany, and the UK don't share those concerns. Since Russia exports natural gas to Western Europe, opposing Russia might not be politically salient for Merkel or Hollande and their voters at home. You are hoping for something that is not possible. EU has 28 members who cant agree on anything... they never did intervene together and were always slow to act... it is not hard to remember Bosnia. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:19 Cheerio wrote: What is the difference between a thug and a policeman (real one, not some corrupt or dumb one)? One has a mandate, the other does not. So both Russia and US are thugs. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:18 m4ini wrote: Read up on russian military doctrine or google "rogozin". Yes, and ? You are naive if you think that Putin does not think about his and his friends best interests. Even Iran would not use nukes if it had some, that Russia would use them just on a whim is even more stupid scenario. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:41 mcc wrote: Yes, and ? You are naive if you think that Putin does not think about his and his friends best interests. Even Iran would not use nukes if it had some, that Russia would use them just on a whim is even more stupid scenario. I don't give a hoot, frankly, what you think that he does. You asked/complained about the fact that as soon as russia is mentioned, the discussion at some point reaches nukes. I told you why. If he uses them or not, doesn't even matter. They threaten to use it, other than for example china. At least out of the top of my head i can't come up with an example of a chinese politician who did, especially that frequently. There you have your reason. PS: to assure you, the closest to a worldwide nuclear threat in my mind is not russia, nor china or the us. Just to get that out of the way. | ||
|
sgtnoobkilla
Australia249 Posts
How exactly do you guys come up with the conclusion that that this could somehow escalate to a shooting war with nukes between the US and Russia? Just...how? | ||
|
zeonmx
United States111 Posts
On March 01 2014 12:54 sgtnoobkilla wrote: Nuclear weapons again. How exactly do you guys come up with the conclusion that that this could somehow escalate to a shooting war with nukes between the US and Russia? Just...how? Apparently because Russia = evil and putin = evil. That's their logic behind nuclear war scenario. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:20 Sub40APM wrote: Not care. Except for all the economic refugees who would flood into America since both these countries would go from trading with the richest market in the world to an economy the size of italy No, this isnt the Balkans. I am sorry that your former president-dictator broke up Yugoslavia and because you were viewed as the most aggressive country you faced the most hardships. But this situation is not similar. I get the feeling that most pro-Russian posters in this thread don't have the slightest clue why making these comparisons is so ludicrous. Just because everything is so shitty in the wreckage of the old USSR doesn't mean it's that way everywhere else. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5080 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:14 Liman wrote: Rename thread to Ukraine crisis. I wonder what would US do if Mexico or Canada joined military-economic alliance with Russia? Would they take the rest of California from Mexico or bomb them to the ground? There are some people here,mostly from west,who dont realize that their countries and alliances which they are in behave exactly same as Russia. Is this off topic? I dont know anymore this thread.... Both Canada and Mexico trade with Russia, the US government doesn't mind. If they joined a military alliance with Russia we'd think they went out of their minds since Russia brings far far less to the table in a military alliance than the US does. It's not exactly a great secret or a great scandal - except in fringe circles like say the internet - that nations behave pretty much the same way in international relations when shooting is not involved. The difference is that the US doesn't turn entire cities into burned-out rubble anymore and in the aftermath of war we have consistently poured wealth into the countries we fought those wars in, not sucked it out the way Russia did to Eastern Europe after WW2. | ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
On March 01 2014 13:51 DeepElemBlues wrote: The difference is that the US doesn't turn entire cities into burned-out rubble anymore and in the aftermath of war we have consistently poured wealth into the countries we fought those wars in, not sucked it out the way Russia did to Eastern Europe after WW2. I don't think they sucked much, in many cases they were actively donating. The problem is that the political and economical system they exported wasn't good for anything besides defending itself from change. | ||
|
MyrMindservant
695 Posts
On March 01 2014 03:30 mcc wrote: ... As for persecution of minorities, the regional languages were banned in official acts nearly immediately after new government took power. ... Sigh, here we go again. I wish people would refrain from making statements about thing they don't understand. I'll have to repeat myself: "Ukrainian is the only official language in Ukraine. This is written in our constitution and was present there since we adopted it in 1996. And everything was fine, people still used Russian in all parts of Ukraine without a problem. They just had to use Ukrainian in some formal situations. In 2012, previous government decided to pass a law that would give Russian language a status of regional. Basically it would allow some regions to use Russian as official even though this contradicts our constitution. Practically, that law had very little impact because Russian was already used everywhere in those regions. Less than a week ago, parliament had a vote and that law was properly canceled as unconstitutional. Now, many forces are exaggerating this fact and making various scary stories even though we were living fine without that law for more than 16 years." Even though Russian doesn't have the status of official language, it has never stopped people from using it in official situations, like government and courts. It is one of the many norms in Ukraine that aren't enforced or enforced very loosely. That law was only pushed through by the previous government to increase its ratings among the pro-russian crowd. And in practice its cancellation hardly changes anything, just like when it was adopted. All these debates about the language issue are full of speculation, some parties are simply using it as an another instrument of propaganda. | ||
|
Saihv
Finland54 Posts
On March 01 2014 11:20 Sub40APM wrote: Not care. Except for all the economic refugees who would flood into America since both these countries would go from trading with the richest market in the world to an economy the size of italy No, this isnt the Balkans. I am sorry that your former president-dictator broke up Yugoslavia and because you were viewed as the most aggressive country you faced the most hardships. But this situation is not similar. Europe is the richest tradezone atm. If USA and europe come to terms with the freetrade negotions US-Euro zone would be it. At least that's my understanding. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
zeonmx
United States111 Posts
On March 01 2014 17:04 Ghanburighan wrote: https://twitter.com/carlbildt/status/439667563157786624 Puppet state? More like annexation. Russian parliament already introduced the bill to annex Crimea. | ||
| ||
|
|
GSL
Epic.LAN
Big Brain Bouts
OSC
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
Epic.LAN
IPSL
eOnzErG vs McRibbed
LancerX vs StRyKeR
AI Arena Tournament
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
