Poland. Look what youve brought on yourself...

#41
parapauk said:
If you think I'm going to give a high-level analysis of democracy to someone who explains a complex geostrategic situation by the use of crass racial and national stereotyping, you've obviously mistaken me for someone with time to waste.
As I thought, you talk at length about democracy yet can't define the term or explain why so different politico-social systems are identified by the same term.

I hope you don't mind expanding on "crass racial and national stereotyping" otherwise it reminds of a slogan.
 
#42
Well... we knew the Ruskies were going to pull the tarp off/shift some short range strategic "base busters" so all's square. Now America can shoot down ICBM's and long range missiles launched against Israel, and Russia can retaliate by mistake and destroy some bits of Poland.

On balance... it seems like Russia has done all it can to shoot itself in the foot should the nutters across the middle east get a free run at it in the next stretch.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#47
Well, the Russians want to play hard man again huh? Let's see if they can afford to keep it going again. After all, if they freeze out the west again, who'll buy their oil, their gas, and without that income, who'll pay for the silly armies, or to keep the Badgers and Bears flying?

Now, Obama is talking about MASSIVELY reducing the US carbon footprint, and giving huge tax breaks to companies that develop green technologies. Just how long will Europe and the US be ransomed by gas and oil producing cartels?

If Russia was a bloke, I'd say 'Listen mate, keep your money in your pocket, stop bigging yourself up, and stop being a d!ck'.
 
#49
KGB_resident said:
ghost_us said:
Russia is doing a great job of making NATO stronger and significant, that’s for certain.
Maybe but it doesn't matter. NATO is ineffective organisation anyway.
ghost_us said:
Russia is quickly putting NATO back up on the map and making it significant again.
That this will hopefully cause NATO to “wake up” can only be a “GOOD THING”. AS observed by Sergey, within Europe - its primary area of concern - NATO has been getting decidedly flabby and ineffectual over the last eighteen years.

Can we again, now look forward to nice big multinational deployment/reinforcement exercises every year ?!

whitecity said:
But consider this. Poland . . . have negotiated a battalion of Patriot too, but that's an add on.
QUESTION: Would the battalion of Patriot, be effective in neutralising the “Short-range Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad region (which themselves) would "neutralise" the planned US anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic . . .” ?!
 

RP578

LE
Book Reviewer
#50
Biped said:
If Russia was a bloke, I'd say 'Listen mate, keep your money in your pocket, stop bigging yourself up, and stop being a d!ck'.
If Russia was a bloke his Mrs would be tugging at his elbow screaming, "Leave him Sergey! He's not worth it!" :D
 
#51
Biped said:
After all, if they freeze out the west again, who'll buy their oil, their gas, and without that income, who'll pay for the silly armies, or to keep the Badgers and Bears flying?

.
:D

1. Russia never "froze out" the West, so the word "again" is misplaced. If you are referring to 2004-2005, -- thank Ukraine that was refusing to pay its debts and stealing European gas instead.

2. Your "who'll buy their oil, their gas, and without that income, who'll pay for the silly armies" sounds like "cut off ones nose to spite ones face": China will be the first to replace the West. Where the West is going to get its oil and gas from, "new technology"? Are you seriously suggesting US oil cartels are going to put themselves in a bin to "save the planet"?
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#52
RP578 said:
Biped said:
If Russia was a bloke, I'd say 'Listen mate, keep your money in your pocket, stop bigging yourself up, and stop being a d!ck'.
If Russia was a bloke his Mrs would be tugging at his elbow screaming, "Leave him Sergey! He's not worth it!" :D
'Yes mate, you ARE very hard, but you're also a bit tipsy from all that oil you've had - I think it's gone to your head. If I was you, I'd go home quietly with your missus, get your head down and maybe tomorrow, when you wake up, you may not regret the night before. I know this isn't sinking in right now, but please, please don't fcuking mess with me and my mates. There's more of us, we'e got more money, more tools, and we aren't drunk. :twisted:
 
#53
Domovoy said:
Poland. Look what you've brought on yourself... -- is pretty accurate: it is in Polish nature to seek immediate profit; Poles didn't ask themselves "Do we need this "shield?", they asked "How profitably can we sell ourselves?" hence lots of haggling with the US while ignoring repeated warnings from Russia about the consequences. Btw,
Bit like the Germans asking the question of profitability to the Juden wilst ignoring the Nazi Party.

They (Poland) are a democratic country that can vote for themselves. Whilst the USSR/NSDAP might not like it, it's tough sh1t, they voted for it and are now a NATO country.

Feel like restarting MAD?
 
#55
Aunty Stella said:
Domovoy said:
Poland. Look what you've brought on yourself... -- is pretty accurate: it is in Polish nature to seek immediate profit; Poles didn't ask themselves "Do we need this "shield?", they asked "How profitably can we sell ourselves?" hence lots of haggling with the US while ignoring repeated warnings from Russia about the consequences. Btw,

They (Poland) are a democratic country that can vote for themselves. Whilst the USSR/NSDAP might not like it, it's tough sh1t, they voted for it and are now a NATO country.
Welcome to 2008! I thought you said Poland destroyed the USSR? :?

Demagoguery about "democracy" aside, that was the point I was making: Poles brought it on themselves: the US will be defending itself over Polish territory.
 
#56
Domovoy said:
Aunty Stella said:
Domovoy said:
Poland. Look what you've brought on yourself... -- is pretty accurate: it is in Polish nature to seek immediate profit; Poles didn't ask themselves "Do we need this "shield?", they asked "How profitably can we sell ourselves?" hence lots of haggling with the US while ignoring repeated warnings from Russia about the consequences. Btw,

They (Poland) are a democratic country that can vote for themselves. Whilst the USSR/NSDAP might not like it, it's tough sh1t, they voted for it and are now a NATO country.
Welcome to 2008! I thought you said Poland destroyed the USSR? :?

Demagoguery about "democracy" aside, that was the point I was making: Poles brought it on themselves: the US will be defending itself over Polish territory.
He's laughing at you Mr Stella. 8O
 
#57
Biped said:
Well, the Russians want to play hard man again huh? Let's see if they can afford to keep it going again. After all, if they freeze out the west again, who'll buy their oil, their gas, and without that income, who'll pay for the silly armies, or to keep the Badgers and Bears flying?

Now, Obama is talking about MASSIVELY reducing the US carbon footprint, and giving huge tax breaks to companies that develop green technologies. Just how long will Europe and the US be ransomed by gas and oil producing cartels?

If Russia was a bloke, I'd say 'Listen mate, keep your money in your pocket, stop bigging yourself up, and stop being a d!ck'.
Who knew Wikipedia had such a keen insight into Russian foreign policy vis a vis the West:

Envy (also called invidiousness) may be defined as an emotion that "occurs when a person lacks another’s superior quality, achievement, or possession and either desires it or wishes that the other lacked it."

It can also derive from a sense of low self-esteem that results from an upward social comparison threatening a person's self image: another person has something that the envier considers to be important to have. If the other person is perceived to be similar to the envier, the aroused envy will be particularly intense, because it signals to the envier that it just as well could have been him or her who had the desired object.

Bertrand Russell said envy was one of the most potent causes of unhappiness. It is a universal and most unfortunate aspect of human nature because not only is the envious person rendered unhappy by his envy, but also wishes to inflict misfortune on others.


Just a thought.
 
#58
The_Snail said:
Domovoy said:
Aunty Stella said:
Domovoy said:
Poland. Look what you've brought on yourself... -- is pretty accurate: it is in Polish nature to seek immediate profit; Poles didn't ask themselves "Do we need this "shield?", they asked "How profitably can we sell ourselves?" hence lots of haggling with the US while ignoring repeated warnings from Russia about the consequences. Btw,

They (Poland) are a democratic country that can vote for themselves. Whilst the USSR/NSDAP might not like it, it's tough sh1t, they voted for it and are now a NATO country.
Welcome to 2008! I thought you said Poland destroyed the USSR? :?

Demagoguery about "democracy" aside, that was the point I was making: Poles brought it on themselves: the US will be defending itself over Polish territory.
He's laughing at you Mr Stella. 8O
P1ss off Dale. Although Domovoy is obviously wrong because he is disagreeing with me, he can also put a good argument together in proper English and doesn't fill me with the urge to shoot him in the head. None of which apply to you.

Now, back to Mr Wrong :)

Domovoy said:
[Demagoguery about "democracy" aside, that was the point I was making: Poles brought it on themselves: the US will be defending itself over Polish territory.
Hopefully not BUT, is that not what allies do? Poland freely entered into a pact with NATO and therefor warrants the same protection as any other NATO country.

Would Russia really invade and go to war over Poland? Didn't work out all that well for the last lot that tried.

I really can't see the problem anyway, you formed a new coalition called the CIS, one of the then members (Georgia) bordered a NATO country (Turkey). Funnily enough Georgia decided that sticking with the CIS maybe wasn't a good idea and we all know what happened after that.

Bullying countries never seems to work in the long run. Eventually they all get to their own equilibrium, whether that be being a bankrupt state with no friends (like most of the ex British Empire states were immediatley after independance, Canada, NZ and Aus excluded of course), or a state that almost immediatley becomes more prosperous thanks to Western intervention, like just about every state from the old USSR that has "crossed over"
 
#59
Aunty Stella said:
I really can't see the problem anyway, you formed a new coalition called the CIS, one of the then members (Georgia) bordered a NATO country (Turkey). Funnily enough Georgia decided that sticking with the CIS maybe wasn't a good idea and we all know what happened after that.
Leaving the CIS was not a problem. Launching grad rockets against a civilian population centre did for Georgia. How easy we forget the inconvenient truths.
 
#60
whitecity said:
Aunty Stella said:
I really can't see the problem anyway, you formed a new coalition called the CIS, one of the then members (Georgia) bordered a NATO country (Turkey). Funnily enough Georgia decided that sticking with the CIS maybe wasn't a good idea and we all know what happened after that.
Leaving the CIS was not a problem. Launching grad rockets against a civilian population centre did for Georgia. How easy we forget the inconvenient truths.
Tee-hee, Russia attacked Georgia because it was worried about the civilian casualties Georgia was causing. Thanks W.C., that will have me laughing all day!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top