BF2S Forums Russia: the REAL Threat to the World

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

No no no, you got the wrong idea. I don't want to abandon relations in tense times (like now), I don't want to screw anyone over, I want to cordially break restricting alliances. Our goal should be to maintain good relations with everyone, but we should never have to feel someone else has the ability to force our hand.

For example, what if Great Britain was attacked tomorrow, 9/11 style, and the attack came from a terrorist group in Iran? It's really not that much of an out-there situation. We would have to help them, or make a complete ass of ourselves. At the same time, militarily that would be a very bad position we would have put ourselves in.

This is not to say that we should keep unrestricted trade with everyone, especially when it leads to weakness. China for example has diplomatic and therefore tactical advantages over us because of the trade deficit. Our economy is important, but strategy on the global stage should always take precedence.

Oh, you mean non-intervention, not isolationism. More of a Ron Paul stance.

(to which I agree)

Nein, I mean isolationism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolationism wrote:

Isolationism is a foreign policy which combines a non-interventionist military policy and a political policy of economic nationalism (protectionism). In other words, it asserts both of the following:

   1. Non-interventionism – Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial   self-defense.
   2. Protectionism – There should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.

Isolationism is not to be confused with the non-interventionist philosophy and foreign policy of the libertarian world view, which espouses unrestricted free trade and freedom of travel for individuals to all countries. This "libertarian isolationist" view is best defined as a policy of nonparticipation in foreign political relations, but free trade and affability to all people.

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Damn that line is blurry. What would you have called China 100 years ago?

Suckered out of a freakin clam shell into isolationism.

Major.League.Infidel wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

I think we can safely say at this point that Russia is far more of a threat to the world than Iraq, North Korea, and Iran ever could have been and ever will be

Could you remind us how many countries Russia has invaded in, say, the last 50 years?

Georgia, Afghanistan, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Pretty much all of Eastern Europe, Germany.  Not to mention all the aid to Asian countries and the like.

PureFodder wrote:

erm, the invasions of Germany and the most of Eastern Europe were due to the Nazis invading them first then attacking Russia from those countries. Plus the examples are obviously more than 50 years old with the exception of Afghanistan

iamangry wrote:

I would like to point out that we pushed russia into this position this time.  I'm sorry, but the missile shield is asking for it.  There's no way around that.  If we wanted to do this right, we should have included Russia in the plan.  If you look at the globe from a russia-centric point of view, you see that they are almost completely surrounded by BMD, to the north in the arctic and alaska, to the east in J-pan, and to the west in Poland.  I'd be a little worried if I were them too.  Not that I'm not all for making sure Russia stays suppressed, but it would have been nice to have done it in a more... elegant way.

Varegg wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

While Pakistan is plenty concerning in its own right, I think we can safely say at this point that Russia is far more of a threat to the world than Iraq, North Korea, and Iran ever could have been and ever will be.

With the way that the rest of the world either doesn't care or doesn't have the power to do much against Russia in its attacks on Georgia, I suppose we're back to the position we were in with the Cold War.

So, the question I have for this thread is...  With us being stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan, how best can we deal with Russia?  We obviously don't want WW3 to occur, but Russia is really pushing its luck lately.  How can we put them back in their place?

Well excuse me for pointing this out but you surely must mean that Russia is the biggest threat to the US and not the entire world!

And how come Russias actions in their back yard is a bigger threat to world stability than the actions of the US the last years ?

Chrisimo wrote:

Well, ask yourself if you'd rather be 'governed' by the US or by Russia.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-08-15 02:27:44)

CameronPoe wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Well, ask yourself if you'd rather be 'governed' by the US or by Russia.

Neither thanks. They aren't all that different really.

Last edited by Chrisimo (2008-08-15 02:35:27)

CameronPoe wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

While Pakistan is plenty concerning in its own right, I think we can safely say at this point that Russia is far more of a threat to the world than Iraq, North Korea, and Iran ever could have been and ever will be.

With the way that the rest of the world either doesn't care or doesn't have the power to do much against Russia in its attacks on Georgia, I suppose we're back to the position we were in with the Cold War.

So, the question I have for this thread is...  With us being stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan, how best can we deal with Russia?  We obviously don't want WW3 to occur, but Russia is really pushing its luck lately.  How can we put them back in their place?

Russia is not a threat to the 'world' as a whole. It's a threat to what it regards as its 'sphere of influence': Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Belarus and some non-EU slavic countries (e.g. Serbia).

It is acting the serious cunt by occupying the town of Gori longer than necessary (or at all for that reason) and turning a blind eye to Ossetian looters.

There will be no new Cold War. Like it or not Russia is important, Europe needs it and it's here to stay as a new(ish) power. That doesn't mean we have to like that but we do have to deal with that. What concern all of this is to the US I really don't know - you guys are safely thousands of miles from the region. It's really an EU issue if anything. Russia is just being as belligerent and unilateral as the US/UK has been with Iraq (although at least the Georgians provoked the Russians, unlike the Iraqis) and as Israel was in Lebanon. The Georgian president authorised an attack on South Ossetia - Russia inevitably responded. Russia now calls for said President to be deposed (a la US/UK 'regime change' in Iraq). Neither the US/UK interference in the politics of Iraq nor the Russian interference in the politics of Georgia were/are justifiable. How people who advocated war in Iraq or promote 'regime change' in distant perceived 'belligerent' countries or support Israel whole-heartedly can criticise Russian action here is beyond me. Russia were part of an international agreement to provide peacekeeping in South Ossetia and Abkhazia - Georgia broke that agreement. Saakashvili did this against the wishes of the west. THe only issue here is that Russia violated Georgia 'proper' which was way out of line - akin to typical Israeli retaliation.

Demanding things of Russia on this issue amidst all the hypocrisy is beyond the pale of understanding. Russia will do what it wants here, in its own time, because it knows Europe needs it and it knows there isn't a single sodding thing anyone in the world can do about it. They are powerful again. Talking of military action against Russia when the pot is calling the kettle black is just ludicrous. What will happen here is that South Ossetia and maybe Abkhazia (possible independence a la Kosovo?) will be inducted into Russia and Georgia will continue as it had done without these two regions. This conflict stands since 1991 - it had to come to a conclusion at some point and this is probably endgame. Ossetians and Abkhazians could never be expected to be part of Georgia now or to trust Georgians after what Georgia has done to them.

PS How would you like it if Russia DEMANDED that the US/UK withdrew from Iraq and Afghanistan? It's the exact same thing as what the west is demanding of them right now. In all cases the response would probably be 'the military operations have not yet been concluded satsifactorily' when the fact of the matter is all parties should have packed their fucking bags ages ago.

PPS Pushing Russia further into the cold will play into the hands of Iran ftr.

Chrisimo wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

Well, ask yourself if you'd rather be 'governed' by the US or by Russia.

Look at central America under US control (El salvador, Haiti, etc.) compare them to Easter Europe under the Soviets.

I choose Russia, political opression trumps death squads any day.

Could you please elaborate?

Braddock wrote:

Chrisimo wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Neither thanks. They aren't all that different really.

Yes, they are. I am born in and raised in West Germany while my best friend was born and raised in the GDR. It is a pretty good example of the difference between the US and the SU/Russia.

I have worked with loads of people who grew up in various parts of the former Soviet empire and the overall impression I have got from them is that  there are pros and cons to both the capitalist system and communist system. Plenty of weaknesses and plenty of strengths in both. A lot of people consider it a little taboo to say that Communism had some positive aspects, a famous German actress drew a lot of criticism recently for saying she was glad that Germany at least attempted a Communist style Government in her lifetime.

A Lithuanian friend of mine (whose Grandfather was sent to Siberia I must add) said that while he lived there during Communism he had free schooling and medical care for his kids, if they wanted to participate in sports there was a local academy who would take them and provide equipment, I think he even said local transport and telephone were free...or at least heavily subsided. But when capitalism came to town his hometown became swamped in corruption, he found himself with all these new bills that he never had to pay before, his little cafe went under and he had to move to Ireland to become a security guard. This guy is no champion of the Communist era (like I say his grandfather was sent to Siberia for dissent), he was just a realist who could see that neither system had all the answers.