The Brink of War?

[Moses]

Do you have question why some regions rebel after "language law" and trying to run from Ukraine after nationalists got power in Ukraine?

1643705815(1).jpg

[goji]

No. It is totally different index: GDP PPP per capita shows not power of country's economy but workforce productivity. I.e. amount of goods and services what is manufactured by one citizen.

look at your URL: anybody here count #1 Lichtenstein the most powerful economy in world? and China is #100? Seriously?

Who wants to be sat at home in some crappy little appartment in Vladivostok thinking about how powerful my country is ?
Give me Liechtenstein GDP per capita any day of the week.

[Dodger]

I wonder which side he's on?

Would it matter?

[NitNoi]

Moses, your reference to Cuba is valid. Are we on a path to nuclear war again?
Ukraine in NATO destabilizes the "Mutual Assured Destruction" balance that has kept us safe for seventy years.
An alternative could be granting Cuba the same armament rights as Ukraine. Would that work?

[a447]

An alternative could be granting Cuba the same armament rights as Ukraine. Would that work?

Times have changed.

I'd be surprised if Cuba would accept Russian missiles on its soil these days.

But it would be interesting to see the US reaction should that suggestion be made. They would have a very difficult time criticising such a move.

[Moses]

Moses, your reference to Cuba is valid. Are we on a path to nuclear war again?
Ukraine in NATO destabilizes the "Mutual Assured Destruction" balance that has kept us safe for seventy years.
An alternative could be granting Cuba the same armament rights as Ukraine. Would that work?

I'm not Putin, you know...
But as per my opinion: if Ukraine wants to be within EU - great. This isn't Russia's business. But when Gorbachov had talks with EU there were said: Russia agrees with join of two Germanies in exchange of not moving warheads more close to Moscow. Do you remember? USSR/Russia had nuclear warheads in East Germany and had army's bases also. Warheads were removed by USSR, soviet army hasn't bases in East Germany anymore (while US still has), and Germanies are one country since that time.

But since that time NATO bases been moved more close to Moscow: Hungary, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia. Ballistic rockets are based in Poland now. What next? Should Russia wait till last "security belt" will fail? There is only Ukraine and Belorussia btw NATO and Russia now.

It is clearly visible, what "orange revolutions" were inspired in Ukraine (one failed, next successful) and Belorussia (twice failed) from outside. Look at Nulland and Biden photos from Ukraine'2014.

So NATO's bases right near Russian borders are unacceptable for Russia. My opinion - Ukraine should be in EU if it wants, but should keep neutral status like Finland does for decades and nobody cares: nor Finland, nor Russia - there are no tensions on that border at all, and Finish tourists are next to Chinese in quantity in Sankt-Petersburg. Finland is smart enough for not to wake up sleeping bear.

By the way: these talks about "Russia must to keep to pump gas via Ukrainian pipeline" are also unbelievable pushy. That pipeline has been laid at time when main Russian gas source was located at the south of Ural region near the border with Kazakhstan. And that pipeline been used for decades for to pump gas from Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan (both in Central Asia) and from the South Ural because Ukraine lays on direct line btw gas sources and gas customers.

Right now Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan sell gas to China. Gas sources on South Ural are almost empty. So Russia has nothing to pump via Ukrainian pipeline. But EU still insist what Russia should pump gas via this pipeline even when main gas sources are located on far North - Yamal and regions around. North stream is twice shorter. EU wants Russian gas to be pumped from North to South and only then to Europe. Are you sure what it is economically correct idea for Russia? I repeat: economically.

EU cries: "keep pumping !!!", because Ukraine will lose about US$ 3 bln yearly on gas transit if Russia will stop to sell gas via that pipeline. Why Russia should care? EU wants Ukraine to be with. Well. If you want Ukraine - feed them yourself then. Your satellite is your care now. Russian care is to sell gas and to have profit, and that includes to cut expenses on gas transit.

EU: you should cry on Norway then - they sell gas directly to Germany. Push them to transit gas via Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland at first and only then to Germany. Anyway you are sponsoring these countries - let Norway to do it instead, they are rich. Why I hear "No"?

[cdnmatt]

An alternative could be granting Cuba the same armament rights as Ukraine. Would that work?

No, those are two totally different things. The EU and NATO don't want Russia starting a massive war in their backyard, hence the defensive posture they've taken. Whereas Russia installing missiles in Ciba again would be an aggressive posture.

While we're on the topic of Cuba though, now there's an absolutely amazing story. Cuba has better life expectency, infant mortality, literacy rates among many others than the US. And they managed to do it all under crushing sanctions. Just imagine what they could do if those embagos were lifted.

The US just can't bare to see a socialist country thrive though, so we can't have that. I remember a while back some anti-governemnt protesters popped up in Cuba again, most likely backed by the US govt. Cubans know this game all too well though, so immediately there were absolutely massive protests to tell the anti-government protesters to fuck off.

Even the mainstream media was scrambling to try and make a story out of it. To try and show how large the anti-government protests were, Fox News even got caught using footage from a May Day parade a couple years before that, haha.

[Moses]

No, those are two totally different things. The EU and NATO don't want Russia starting a massive war in their backyard, hence the defensive posture they've taken. Whereas Russia installing missiles in Ciba again would be an aggressive posture.

Yes, yes. EU and NATO. They are peaceful and never attack other countries. Meanwhile Russia always do it!!!

I have proofs:
- Japan. Russians dropped 2 nuclear bombs to Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945! It was totally barbarian act. Over 500 000 died. Sorry, it was US.
- Vietnam. Russia started war there in 1956. What? US did that? OK
- Lebanon. 1958 Russian occupation of the port and international airport of Beirut. Not? Again US? Well, you are picky too much.
- Cuba 1961. Bay of Pigs Invasion by Russians. Nooooo! Not Americans! Russians!!! Oh. Ok, Americans.
- 1964 Congo. Simba Rebellions were suppressed by Russians and democratic movement has been defeated. Don't tell me what there again were Americans
- 1965-1973 Russia has been defeated in Vietnam war! Well... I don't know why everywhere on photos are American flags, don't ask.

(here I will omit short incidents in Korea, Thailand, Dominican Rep, where Russians for sure were involved)

- 1966-1967 Bolivia Russian oppressing of Che Guevara's guerrilla forces. Che Guevara captured and executed. Really? It again was Americans? Sorry

(here I will omit short incidents in Libya, Lebanon, Zaire, Grenada, Iran (1981) where Russians for sure were involved)

- 1989-1990 Russian invasion to Panama with regime changes. No-no-no-no! It was Russians!!! How you may say what Sun of Democracy - US - may be involved into invasion and to change regime??? For sure Russians had installed here own puppet.

Ok. Next
- 1991–2003 intervention to Iraq. United States, United Kingdom, France, Australia, Belgium, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Italy. Do you see? No one member of NATO is involved. Only Russian barbars.

- 1992–1995 first Russian intervention to Somali. Participants: United States, United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Greece, Germany, France, Canada, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand. Again no one NATO member!!! Only Russians

- 1992–1995 Yugoslav war. Russians against will of Security Council destroyed country and now there are peaceful snakes nest. No one NATO member has been involved. See? - no one: United States, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom

- 1994–1995 Haiti. Russian re-installment of regime. Only Russians: United States, Poland, Argentine

- 1998–1999 Kosovo war. Snakes nest has been divided to few more. Participant are only outside of NATO: United States, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Poland, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom

==== XXI century ====
- 20 years of Afghan war
- 2002 and still - Maghreb region
- 2002 and still now Enduring Freedom – Horn of Africa
- 2003–2011 Iraq war. Do you remember Russian general Powell in UN with pity claims about mass-destroying weapons in small glass tube?
- 2011 Russian military intervention in Libya. Participants: United States, United Kingdom, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark, France, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Spain, Turkey, Sweden. Result legal president has been killed. And now already 10 years there is going peaceful and colorful civil war.

I again will omit series of small and not so small conflicts

Syria. Now seriously: Russia is only state army that has been officially invited there by Syrian government. What "defensive postures" does there US and other half of NATO???

And let me remind you: there is one annexations in Europe now . It is Cyprus, by 2 members of NATO: Turkey and UK.

And few worlds to Americans: why you vote for idiots on the Hill? Listen them: "Russia does nothing yet, but it may do, so we need to apply preventive sanctions". Seriously? Right, lets do sanctions and hope Russia will not answer. Who elected such idiots???

Whole past decade, step by step, US and NATO pushing Russia to East. China is waiting for to hug Russia and smiles widely. Do you really need union of second and third strongest armies in World and 6th and 1st economies? EU! You are at the same continent. You will be unavoidable involved.

[cdnmatt]

I hate when people use that as their argument. "well, they did bad shit too, so it's totally fine if we do bad shit".

That's just really not a good argument.

[StevieWonders]

I hate when people use that as their argument. "well, they did bad shit too, so it's totally fine if we do bad shit".

That's just really not a good argument.

Politicians do it all the time without realising they’re saying “We are no better than our opponents” all the while claiming to be superior