Shahter wrote:
There are more former Soviet vassals than Georgia, Shahter. All but about two are trying like hell to embrace the West...
no, it's the west-supported governments who do. the people in those places feel quite different. a lot of them, like myself, have actually seen what it was like before and after ussr' collapse. they are right here, come over, i'll introduce you, and you'll see for yourself how eager they are to "embrace the west". or you can keep chewing on the line o'crap you are being fed by your media.
Again with the media conspiracy theories. From the guy who lives in a place where all media is controlled by the government. Rich.
I get my foreign affairs inputs from articles written by those who live in the countries involved, thank you. You know, like those who you are referencing. I guess they must be controlled by the massive, world-wide anti-Russia media conspiracy...unlike the pristine media environment in Russia, eh?
Shahter wrote:
and it's pissing Putin off to no end. God forbid he see that as an opportunity to improve Russia's relations with the rest of the world, rather than making things worse. There's more than one way to rise back up, you know...
usa & co made it perfectly clear that nobody is going to be allowed to simply "rise up" peacefully. you did allow china to do that, got scared shitless by what they accomplished and went bombing anyone who tried to run themselves the way they wanted with "democracy and freedom". there's no improving anything. in the modern world everybody is for themselves.
"Nobody is going to be allowed to simply 'rise up' peacefully"? Really? Economies haven't grown peacefully over the past twenty-odd years globally, particularly in free market regions? India, Southeast Asia (to include Communist Vietnam--dammit, shoots your argument in the ass), various dictatorships with market economies, as well as democracies. Economics =/= politics. They are linked, but they are not the same.
We started bombing people because "China grew too much"? Have you started filtering brake fluid through toast or something?
Shahter wrote:
Shahter wrote:
And by "deal with it," I don't mean "pitch a fit and threaten them with nukes."
the free and the brave - and their "little kids" as well - deal with their problems the way they see fit. i see no reason why russia should listen to anything you say re "pitching fits and threatening" after what you've been doing over the past coupla decades.
As if calling the West "the free and the brave" repeatedly is going to hurt someone's feelings? Try a new trolling tactic.
i'm not trolling you, man. i'm getting back with the same bullshit i'm being continuously bombed with on these forums. you think that's "trolling"? you are an admin, how about you start doing something about it. you are welcome start with me.
I'm not an admin. I'm a moderator. Two different sets of permissions on the site.
You're only getting return fire for what you spew out, with little to nothing to back it up, Shahter. In the words of one of our posters: "deal with it."
And yes, constantly trying to make "the free and the brave" seem like a dig is trolling. Poor trolling, but trolling nonetheless.
Shahter wrote:
How has the West been threatening people with nukes for not doing exactly what we say after we've been invited to participate in the process and then refused? Don't say Iraq, because that's not the way that went down. Don't say Afghanistan, because that's not how that went down, either.
Face it: it's all about Russia posturing to try to regain prominence that was lost after the fall of the USSR. And it's a remarkably shitty way to go about it in today's climate.
what's with the nukes again? threatening is threatening, nukes are just one of many things you can use in the process. russia, unfortunately, haven't got much to threaten others with anymore.
Why was there a need to threaten at all? There wasn't. That was the point.
Shahter wrote:
Shahter wrote:
I'm sure Russia has tons of experience regarding ASATs from their own failed attempts.
i though the missile defense in poland wasn't supposed to be able to shot down any sattelites. something changed while i wasn't looking?
Because I obviously didn't mistype ASAT for ABM. FFS...pedantry...
"obviously"? hmm. k.
but then in abm systems russia certainly have some experience. really, they do
You're right. Failure is experience. Everyone can learn.
Shahter wrote:
Shahter wrote:
So the negotiating tactic is: "Put the system where we say--whether it is the best place for it or not--or we put nukes on the border"? And everyone involved is supposed to just roll over and take that?
something like that, yes. israel's been doing that shit ever since they'd been allowed to create a state - and you've been behind them all that time. it's called diplomacy, apparently. fascinating shit isn't it?
Pretty sure Israel's never done anything of the sort, nor would the US or any other ally of theirs "be behind them" if they did. Because it's jackassery.
wat? so israely continuously drive palestinian people from their land, while once in a while throwing a proposition like "we'll give some of that back if you agree to admit that the rest is legitimately ours. what, you won't? k, we will continue pushing you away then, come back when you reconsider." they did it all while you were continuously blocking any and all attempts at resolving this crap by un. if that's no extortion - i don't know what is.
Nice derail attempt.
We're talking about Russia and their response to missile systems in former USSR client states.
Israel-Palestine thread is that way ---->
Shahter wrote:
Shahter wrote:
what gets around comes around.
The proper phrase is "What goes around comes around". And I can only guess that you are implying that somehow, the US's bone-headed Middle East policy somehow justifies Russia taking an equally bone-headed policy toward its former client states, even though the two situations are nothing at all alike.
no. the situations aren't. the methods used are. disregard for other's opinions on the matter is - the "bone-headed"-ness as you called it. but you are not in any position to be pointing a finger - and you know it.
Actually, people who have made mistakes--and learned from them--are the
exact people to be calling out others for making similar mistakes. Why on earth would you think it's a good idea to take the same--admittedly--stupid policy approach that ostracized the US with so many globally?
Shahter wrote:
As stated earlier, you're comparing apples and armchairs. Does Russia have a dozen years of violations of UN resolutions and the concurrence of multiple countries' intel organizations that the West has nefarious aims regarding this missile system? Did either the West or Poland or the Czech Republic recently attack or harbor those who attacked Russia and killed 3,000-odd of her citizens? No?
See? Apples and armchairs. Come back when you have a rational, valid geopolitical comparison, please.
see above. after you clean your own lawn maybe i'll accept something like this from you. until then - enjoy what may very well develop into another cold war.
Again, see above. Here in the US, our mothers ask our children this question when the kids say, "but the other kids are doing it": "If the other kids jumped off a bridge, would you?" Point being, just because someone else does something that's not a great idea, it doesn't mean you have to, as well. Unilateralism has its place: usually when there is an existential threat involved. This ain't it. Never was. Russia knows it, as does everyone else. Which is what makes Russia's behavior all the more boorish, considering.
