LaidBackNinja
Pony Slaystation
+343|6701|Charlie One Alpha

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Wow, You need to show me how to build your future vision time travel goggles.  I wish I could tell you whats going to happen within the next few years.
Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.

dayarath wrote:

Cuba, was a WHOLE different case not even remotely comparable to this.

Why do people bring it up
We're not talking about how it was back then. We're talking about RIGHT NOW. If Russia built a missile shield on Cube RIGHT NOW that would shoot down any nuke the U.S. fired, they'd be pretty fucking pissed too. It seems people just want to be able to nuke each other.

Last edited by LaidBackNinja (2008-02-08 16:03:47)

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine SecuROM slapping your face with its dick -- forever." -George Orwell
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6635

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Wow, You need to show me how to build your future vision time travel goggles.  I wish I could tell you whats going to happen within the next few years.
Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.
Id rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it.
LaidBackNinja
Pony Slaystation
+343|6701|Charlie One Alpha

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Wow, You need to show me how to build your future vision time travel goggles.  I wish I could tell you whats going to happen within the next few years.
Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.
Id rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it.
Right now it seems more trouble than it's worth.
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine SecuROM slapping your face with its dick -- forever." -George Orwell
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|5991|...

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Wow, You need to show me how to build your future vision time travel goggles.  I wish I could tell you whats going to happen within the next few years.
Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.

dayarath wrote:

Cuba, was a WHOLE different case not even remotely comparable to this.

Why do people bring it up
W're not talking how it was back then. We're talking about RIGHT NOW. If Russia built a missile shield on Cube RIGHT NOW that would shoot down any nuke the U.S. fired, they'd be pretty fucking pissed too. It seems people just want to be able to nuke each other.
but this is as you pointed out a minor flimsy missile defense system probably not capable of shooting down advanced equipment used to transport nukes. Even if, russians could just go around it if they wanted to do something bad. So why make a fuss about it in the first place? Yes cuba would be odd.
inane little opines
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6635

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:


Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.
Id rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it.
Right now it seems more trouble than it's worth.
Blame Poland, they are the ones that want it.
LaidBackNinja
Pony Slaystation
+343|6701|Charlie One Alpha

dayarath wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Wow, You need to show me how to build your future vision time travel goggles.  I wish I could tell you whats going to happen within the next few years.
Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.

dayarath wrote:

Cuba, was a WHOLE different case not even remotely comparable to this.

Why do people bring it up
W're not talking how it was back then. We're talking about RIGHT NOW. If Russia built a missile shield on Cube RIGHT NOW that would shoot down any nuke the U.S. fired, they'd be pretty fucking pissed too. It seems people just want to be able to nuke each other.
but this is as you pointed out a minor flimsy missile defense system probably not capable of shooting down advanced equipment used to transport nukes. Even if, russians could just go around it if they wanted to do something bad. So why make a fuss about it in the first place? Yes cuba would be odd.
Maybe because Russia's nukes is all it's got left. They don't know how advanced the missile defense system is going to be, but it's just too big a risk to take. It would render Russia pretty much harmless. It's probably going to be flimsy, but what if it actually works?

Question:

Would the U.S. accept it if Russia built a missile defense system right outside the American border that would shoot down American ICBM's?

I don't think so.

GS:

Yeah, I don't know where the hell Poland is going with this. They've got nothing to fear from Iran (yeah right, as if that was the reason in the first place) and I just can't think of any possible valid reason they could have for wanting the damned thing.

Last edited by LaidBackNinja (2008-02-08 16:09:09)

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine SecuROM slapping your face with its dick -- forever." -George Orwell
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6635

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Blame Poland, they are the ones that want it.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6635

LaidBackNinja wrote:

dayarath wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.


W're not talking how it was back then. We're talking about RIGHT NOW. If Russia built a missile shield on Cube RIGHT NOW that would shoot down any nuke the U.S. fired, they'd be pretty fucking pissed too. It seems people just want to be able to nuke each other.
but this is as you pointed out a minor flimsy missile defense system probably not capable of shooting down advanced equipment used to transport nukes. Even if, russians could just go around it if they wanted to do something bad. So why make a fuss about it in the first place? Yes cuba would be odd.
Maybe because Russia's nukes is all it's got left. They don't know how advanced the missile defense system is going to be, but it's just too big a risk to take. It would render Russia pretty much harmless. It's probably going to be flimsy, but what if it actually works?

Question:

Would the U.S. accept it if Russia built a missile defense system right outside the American border that would shoot down American ICBM's?

I don't think so.
we border russia
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|5991|...

LaidBackNinja wrote:

dayarath wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:


Oh I agree that the coming few years will be very unpredictable, but no matter what happens, I don't think a flimsy "missile defense system" is going to help.


W're not talking how it was back then. We're talking about RIGHT NOW. If Russia built a missile shield on Cube RIGHT NOW that would shoot down any nuke the U.S. fired, they'd be pretty fucking pissed too. It seems people just want to be able to nuke each other.
but this is as you pointed out a minor flimsy missile defense system probably not capable of shooting down advanced equipment used to transport nukes. Even if, russians could just go around it if they wanted to do something bad. So why make a fuss about it in the first place? Yes cuba would be odd.
Maybe because Russia's nukes is all it's got left. They don't know how advanced the missile defense system is going to be, but it's just too big a risk to take. It would render Russia pretty much harmless. It's probably going to be flimsy, but what if it actually works?

Question:

Would the U.S. accept it if Russia built a missile defense system right outside the American border that would shoot down American ICBM's?

I don't think so.
Are you kidding me? Those new sukhoi and mig planes rolling out are pretty badass. Get one of those and bypass the defense system in no time. Russians may suck but their military designers sometimes come up with good shit. It's idiotic to assume that defense system would pose any considerable threat to russia.

A defense system out of nowhere in Cuba would make some commotion indeed yes.

Last edited by dayarath (2008-02-08 16:10:05)

inane little opines
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6402|'Murka

LaidBackNinja wrote:

Question:

Would the U.S. accept it if Russia built a missile defense system right outside the American border that would shoot down American ICBM's?

I don't think so.
Your comparison is only valid if the US is lobbing ICBMs at Cuba or elsewhere in Central/South America. It would have zero ability to intercept US ICBMs heading to Russia. These systems simply don't work that way.

To answer the question: Probably couldn't give a squirt of piss if they installed a purely defensive system in Cuba.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
SineNomine
Panzerblitz
+37|6714|SPARTA
these russians are so fucking stupid. they still think in black and white and that all the outside world is against them, especially the US, which is soooooo off the truth. and putin uses this old fear to rearm and fuel his agenda of russian domination over europe, either by economic or military means.
and who can oppose this threat now. the US is weakend by a dumbass president who does not think about the future of his glorious country, betrayed and abandoned by all old allies. and them, europe, what will they do,  as they face reality that not every madman is stopped by negotiation?
the only thing sure about the future is that we all, even the haters of america, will need a strong america, because the alternative of that is, how to say "most displeasing".
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6623|949

Another "Cold War" with Russia isn't happening any time soon.  The only real threat of a Bipolar Superpower standoff would be with some type of regional faction - like NATO or OPEC or something like that - against the U.S. Military Sphere of Influence.  Even that seems somewhat far-fetched to due to increased global partnerships between many of the largest industrial economies.  However, there could be aggression by the U.S. as a result of these increasingly common regional partnerships that look to limit U.S. economic and military influence.  These regional partnerships are already viewed tentatively by the U.S. - imagine the rejection felt when we were soundly rejected to the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization).  Look at early analysis and political grumblings after Chavez and other South American leaders created the Bank of The South.  It is these types of regional factions that the U.S. government is wary about.

Russia wants so badly to be relevant like it was in the Cold War.  The main problem with them getting to that point is that the downfall of their self-inflated empire was fairly transparent and gave insight into why a country controlled and maintained the way the USSR was (and how Putin is trying to re-consolidate it) was impractical and detrimental to the nation's health in the long run.  It was perceived power, based on false perceptions that the USSR tried to perpetuate.

Plus, as long as the U.S. spends more than the rest of the world combined (and other countries are complacent in lending us money to do so) on Military, a lone nation (regardless of size) will not be an immediate cold war-type threat.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-02-11 13:58:18)

..teddy..jimmy
Member
+1,393|6641

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:


Id rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it.
Right now it seems more trouble than it's worth.
Blame Poland, they are the ones that want it.
Blame Canada tbh.



I have a dream, and in this dream we gather all Ruski political leaders together, lead them to the kremlin and proceed to bombing the shit out of it.
fadedsteve
GOP Sympathizer
+266|6482|Menlo Park, CA

IRONCHEF wrote:

Good for him.  It's not like we ever stopped.
I just dont get comments like this. . . . Dont you support your government trying to protect you??

Its not like Putin is looking out for the best interests of American citizens!! He sells/sold his countries technology/weapons to the VERY people who are trying to kill us i.e. Iran, Syria, formerly Iraq, North Korea the Taliban. . . .  probably more!!  These weapons END UP IN TERRORISTS HANDS! Do you know how much shit this prick has sold to Iran?? The various anti air weapons, guns, ammo etc. ALL in the hands of Islamic terrorists. . .

So what if we build a missle defense system to help European countries?? They are our "friends" and if they cant defend themselves and ask for our help etc. whats the problem?? This system is being put in Poland if I am not mistaken, a country Russia ABUSED throughly during the last few centuries so I am not surprised we jumped on the opportunity to "set up shop".

If anything you have it WRONG!! The NEXT COLD WAR as far as the USA is concerned is with CHINA! Thats a fact. . . .

Last edited by fadedsteve (2008-02-11 14:39:47)

usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6753

Hmmmmm.........

" U.S. military official says that one Russian Tupolev 95 flew directly over the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz twice, at a low altitude of about 2,000 feet, while another bomber circled about 58 miles out."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080211/ap_ … an_bombers
PRLR
Member
+5|5990|Northern Sweden
Ofcourse they should setup their own missiledefence systems if the americans sets up their own at the russian border. Why even complain.
Little BaBy JESUS
m8
+394|6140|'straya
Ooh cant wait for another arms race then inevitably WWIII
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6402|'Murka

usmarine wrote:

Hmmmmm.........

" U.S. military official says that one Russian Tupolev 95 flew directly over the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz twice, at a low altitude of about 2,000 feet, while another bomber circled about 58 miles out."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080211/ap_ … an_bombers
Yeah...Putin's been flexing his muscle via long-range aviation sorties for a while now.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6613|London, England
lol... props...and no, a turboprop is still a prop
delta4bravo*nl*
Dutch Delight
+68|6744
I loved the cold war, all was nice and stable, people had tons of work making weapons and other related items.
face it the us needs a war, cold war would do them well.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6402|'Murka

delta4bravo*nl* wrote:

I loved the cold war, all was nice and stable, people had tons of work making weapons and other related items.
face it the us needs a war, cold war would do them well.
The US neither needs nor wants a war.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6365|Kyiv, Ukraine

FEOS wrote:

delta4bravo*nl* wrote:

I loved the cold war, all was nice and stable, people had tons of work making weapons and other related items.
face it the us needs a war, cold war would do them well.
The US neither needs nor wants a war.
With close to 11% of our GDP dependant on arms sales, government hand-outs (Military Keynesianism), or military contracts, foreign and domestic.  We are currently highly dependant on war of any kind or our economy will tank worse than it already is.

As far as Russia objecting to a missile defense system, it seems strange if you look at it through a pin-hole, but in the big picture of strategic weapons their concerns are very valid.

They've worked very hard to reduce the nukes they've stocked during the Cold War, as they are expensive to maintain and utterly overkill.  We've actually let our strategic arsenal go about the same.  The two "superpowers" of old (USA and USSR) were held in check by a concept called "MAD" (mutually assured destruction).  Which means if anyone pushes the button, everyone dies.  A "missile shield", unless deployed equally by both sides, destroys this conept.

Post-USSR Russia, has figured out that nuclear arms are nothing but a big money sink, and would rather invest their tax dollars on other strategic assets, like state-monopolies on oil.  A missile shield for the USA though means the following:

Big cash windfall (like they need it) to the corporations developing and deploying it.  Taxpayers get stuck with the bill.

Forces Russia to up the ante, either by deploying more nukes or developing their own shield...wasting their tax dollars.

Either way, America needs to balance with even more nukes.  Another big cash windfall at taxpayer expense.

Putin is slick and possibly evil, but he's not stupid.  Bush's cronies are self-serving and greedy, but not stupid.  Basically, a lot of idealogues advising Bush want things back the way they were, beating Russia by seeing who can max out their countries' credit cards the fastest.  USA barely won the last round and we're in no position to do it again without some kind of slave labor.

Basic idea - Missile shield bad for USA, bad for the world, mmmkay?
SineNomine
Panzerblitz
+37|6714|SPARTA

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

FEOS wrote:

delta4bravo*nl* wrote:

I loved the cold war, all was nice and stable, people had tons of work making weapons and other related items.
face it the us needs a war, cold war would do them well.
The US neither needs nor wants a war.
With close to 11% of our GDP dependant on arms sales, government hand-outs (Military Keynesianism), or military contracts, foreign and domestic.  We are currently highly dependant on war of any kind or our economy will tank worse than it already is.

As far as Russia objecting to a missile defense system, it seems strange if you look at it through a pin-hole, but in the big picture of strategic weapons their concerns are very valid.

They've worked very hard to reduce the nukes they've stocked during the Cold War, as they are expensive to maintain and utterly overkill.  We've actually let our strategic arsenal go about the same.  The two "superpowers" of old (USA and USSR) were held in check by a concept called "MAD" (mutually assured destruction).  Which means if anyone pushes the button, everyone dies.  A "missile shield", unless deployed equally by both sides, destroys this conept.

Post-USSR Russia, has figured out that nuclear arms are nothing but a big money sink, and would rather invest their tax dollars on other strategic assets, like state-monopolies on oil.  A missile shield for the USA though means the following:

Big cash windfall (like they need it) to the corporations developing and deploying it.  Taxpayers get stuck with the bill.

Forces Russia to up the ante, either by deploying more nukes or developing their own shield...wasting their tax dollars.

Either way, America needs to balance with even more nukes.  Another big cash windfall at taxpayer expense.

Putin is slick and possibly evil, but he's not stupid.  Bush's cronies are self-serving and greedy, but not stupid.  Basically, a lot of idealogues advising Bush want things back the way they were, beating Russia by seeing who can max out their countries' credit cards the fastest.  USA barely won the last round and we're in no position to do it again without some kind of slave labor.

Basic idea - Missile shield bad for USA, bad for the world, mmmkay?
by what i learned from mans history: i'm not sure about the 'stupid' .......
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6402|'Murka

For GorillaTicTacs:

Where do you get your defense industry as a percentage of GDP information? Does it provide any of that info for countries other than the US?

The missile shield in question here is not for the US...it's for Europe. mmmkay?

Having a large defense industry does not equate to needing or wanting war. It equates to having a large defense industry. Like other countries in the world do (France, China, Russia, Israel, etc.)

Last edited by FEOS (2008-02-12 05:24:33)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Jepeto87
Member
+38|6677|Dublin

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

FEOS wrote:

delta4bravo*nl* wrote:

I loved the cold war, all was nice and stable, people had tons of work making weapons and other related items.
face it the us needs a war, cold war would do them well.
The US neither needs nor wants a war.
With close to 11% of our GDP dependant on arms sales, government hand-outs (Military Keynesianism), or military contracts, foreign and domestic.  We are currently highly dependant on war of any kind or our economy will tank worse than it already is.

As far as Russia objecting to a missile defense system, it seems strange if you look at it through a pin-hole, but in the big picture of strategic weapons their concerns are very valid.

They've worked very hard to reduce the nukes they've stocked during the Cold War, as they are expensive to maintain and utterly overkill.  We've actually let our strategic arsenal go about the same.  The two "superpowers" of old (USA and USSR) were held in check by a concept called "MAD" (mutually assured destruction).  Which means if anyone pushes the button, everyone dies.  A "missile shield", unless deployed equally by both sides, destroys this conept.

Post-USSR Russia, has figured out that nuclear arms are nothing but a big money sink, and would rather invest their tax dollars on other strategic assets, like state-monopolies on oil.  A missile shield for the USA though means the following:

Big cash windfall (like they need it) to the corporations developing and deploying it.  Taxpayers get stuck with the bill.

Forces Russia to up the ante, either by deploying more nukes or developing their own shield...wasting their tax dollars.

Either way, America needs to balance with even more nukes.  Another big cash windfall at taxpayer expense.

Putin is slick and possibly evil, but he's not stupid.  Bush's cronies are self-serving and greedy, but not stupid.  Basically, a lot of idealogues advising Bush want things back the way they were, beating Russia by seeing who can max out their countries' credit cards the fastest.  USA barely won the last round and we're in no position to do it again without some kind of slave labor.

Basic idea - Missile shield bad for USA, bad for the world, mmmkay?
Exactly America is un-setting a balance which has actually kept the peace.

And Gunslinger id look into Poland wanting it, the village residents certainly dont and there new government has
stalled approving the plans pending a full review.

Last edited by Jepeto87 (2008-02-12 05:29:22)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard