• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Is Vladimir Putin a Democrat or Republican?

Ecomike said:
It was Bush Jr's refusal to take a first strike option off the table that concerned me too.
Click to expand...

No one's gonna nuke anyone. I prefer that our enemies be scared of us. Maybe even think we are bunch a "crazy MF'rs".

I remember back when I was in high school. My buddy and I would drag around in his POS 71 Chevy Nova. There was one time when some guys in another car started harassing us...looking for a fight. They followed us for an hour or so. Finally we stopped in a well lit parking lot. I looked at my buddy and said:

When you get out, act like the meanest, craziest out of control white guy you have ever seen. Bang the roof of your car and and start walking really fast towards them...before they even get out. Shout C'mon, bring it. Iv'e been waitin for this. Yell some crap like that. I'll do the same.

Needless to say those two dudes turned the wheel of their car and high tailed it right out of there.

Our bark was worse than our bite, believe me we would have gotten our butts kicked.

I prefer our enemies, or anyone who wants to side with our enemies, think about it long and hard before they try something. Thinking that we might strike first might just deter...or maybe even open there mind enough to understand our point of view.

Have you even been caught in a violent situation...maybe a fight in grade school. Where you avoided a situation with reason or humor? Ironically in most of those situations the bully ends up being your friend in the end. Communication lines are open after such an incident. However it took that bully showing you his strength to make you understand his point, and how better to get along with him.
 
Putin Is a commi/socialist and there will not be a nuke attack on any front because of what it would mean. Every crountry in the word is terrified of what would happen if some one was stupid enough to actaully launch a nuecular assult. The Mass Assured Distruction, and it would be assured, would be devistating because it wouldn't just be a simple counter attack it would be the compelte distruction of what ever nation initated it.

Russia like us is trying to protect their current and future interest. However UNLIKE Russia the US does not just invade another country and suck the life out of it like a leach. Dont try using the Iraq argument saying that we are plundering the country for oil, I have been there and seen it with my own eyes. What is going on there is not the same as what Russia is doing in Georgia.

While I dont neci-sillyly agree with everything out goverment says I still believe that we are doing whats right.

Hopefully peacfull communication will prevail before hostial communication is needed.

So like JohnJohn said we can just bark for now but still reserve the right to bite. (I know thats not exactly how you ment it JohnJohn but it had a certain poetic ring to it I couldn't leave out)

 
fosforito_one said:
Putin Is a commi/socialist and there will not be a nuke attack on any front because of what it would mean. Every crountry in the word is terrified of what would happen if some one was stupid enough to actaully launch a nuecular assult. The Mass Assured Distruction, and it would be assured, would be devistating because it wouldn't just be a simple counter attack it would be the compelte distruction of what ever nation initated it.
Click to expand...

Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). And you're right, a nuclear war would be bad.

fosforito_one said:

Russia like us is trying to protect their current and future interest. However UNLIKE Russia the US does not just invade another country and suck the life out of it like a leach. Dont try using the Iraq argument saying that we are plundering the country for oil, I have been there and seen it with my own eyes. What is going on there is not the same as what Russia is doing in Georgia.
Click to expand...

You're right about them protecting their interests. However, we DO unilaterally invade other countries in wars of aggression. Our credibility took a real hit when we invaded Iraq and us talking down to Russia sounds hypocritical. We have no moral leverage left on that issue now. Great job Bush. And are you so sure we're not going to get a lot of oil out of Iraq for dirt cheap as 'repayment' for our reconstruction efforts? Are you aware the only Iraqi ministry building we bothered to secure at the onset of the invasion was the Ministry of Oil? Bush is a zealot, but not stupid. He's just buying time till later to start getting the oil.

fosforito_one said:

While I dont neci-sillyly agree with everything out goverment says I still believe that we are doing whats right.

Hopefully peacfull communication will prevail before hostial communication is needed.

So like JohnJohn said we can just bark for now but still reserve the right to bite. (I know thats not exactly how you ment it JohnJohn but it had a certain poetic ring to it I couldn't leave out)

Click to expand...

I sure hope that we don't have to 'bite.' We're bogged down in two intense occupations and despite the drawdown in Iraq, we're not equipped to fight a manuever fight anymore. And everyone knows it. But that's besides the point, we'll never go toe to toe with Russia. Too much to lose on both sides.

Putin is simply trying to rebuild the old USSR, just w/o the distraction of the philosophical differences between democracy and communism. He's targeted Georgia in an attempt to "punish" them. To remind them that though they made the US an ally Russia can still smack them...hard. And then there is the oil. Though Georgia has no natural reserves to write home about, they are in a key location for oil and natural gas coming out of Azerbaijan (sp?). BP actually shut down their pipeline running through Georgia because of this conflict. And the interesting thing about this oil is the fact that it's not Russian or OPEC oil that is running through it. It's independant. If Russia controls the pipeline, they can control the flow.

Bush has handled Russia with the finesse of a bull. He's ignored multiple international treaties and laws, aggressively pursued policies that piss Russia off, and ignored any input they might have outright. But now Russia has manuevered themselves as the main supplier of oil to the EU. They've used to proceeds to rebuild their military in the hopes of expanding their energy output. They know that the only country that had the moral and international standing to stop their expansion was the US, but looky looky, we're doing the same thing, at least in the eyes of the international community, whether truthful or not. Awesome.
 
Oh, and considering Putin's affinity for Black Gold, I'd say he a Republican, oh, and a facist...still Republican IMO. Damn, I feel fiesty today. :geek:
 
buschwhaked said:
Bush has handled Russia with the finesse of a bull. He's ignored multiple international treaties and laws, aggressively pursued policies that piss Russia off, and ignored any input they might have outright.
Click to expand...
What's funny here is that the main one (in the news, at least) is the missile defense shield in Czechoslovakia and Poland. Russia has no basis to be mad over this unless they plan on launching some missiles at people. A missile defense shield isn't an offensive weapon, and we got a lot of people in that side of the world worth keeping an eye on.
 
Darky said:
What's funny here is that the main one (in the news, at least) is the missile defense shield in Czechoslovakia and Poland. Russia has no basis to be mad over this unless they plan on launching some missiles at people. A missile defense shield isn't an offensive weapon, and we got a lot of people in that side of the world worth keeping an eye on.
Click to expand...

True, but Bush handled it really poorly. Instead of working with the Russians to renegotiate the treaty or even give a heads up, he just walked out of the White House and announced it. No "hey heads up you rooskies" or "oh yeah, BTW..." just screw you, we do what we want when we want. From their POV they just lost their first strike capability and we still have ours. No more MAD. Dictatorships are naturally paranoid, so losing their ability to strike first much less retaliate tends to set some things out of balance.

Also, instead of working towards further nuclear disarmament and countering nuclear proliferation, Bush just invested more and more money into the military industrial complex. Now, we have a pissed off Russia unilateraly invading our ally nations with more inadequatly secured nukes all over the place and even more motivation to do whatever they can to counter efforts of western nations. Bush should be worried about his legacy.
 
JohnJohn said:
I disagree with the relation your trying to make. Hugo Chavez is hot for Black Gold too. I wouldn't call him a Republican. Socialist Dictator < Republican
Click to expand...

Chavez hasn't unilaterally invaded another country in pursuit of the control of energy.
 
buschwhaked said:
True, but Bush handled it really poorly. Instead of working with the Russians to renegotiate the treaty or even give a heads up, he just walked out of the White House and announced it. No "hey heads up you rooskies" or "oh yeah, BTW..." just screw you, we do what we want when we want. From their POV they just lost their first strike capability and we still have ours. No more MAD. Dictatorships are naturally paranoid, so losing their ability to strike first much less retaliate tends to set some things out of balance.

Also, instead of working towards further nuclear disarmament and countering nuclear proliferation, Bush just invested more and more money into the military industrial complex. Now, we have a pissed off Russia unilateraly invading our ally nations with more inadequatly secured nukes all over the place and even more motivation to do whatever they can to counter efforts of western nations. Bush should be worried about his legacy.
Click to expand...
I could care less if a dictator is mad because he no longer has first strike capabilities against us. Wanna know why? Because I like not being bombed. There's no need to ask, "Oh, hey, would you mind if we put up some missile defenses in case you or Iran, or even North Korea decide to lob a nuke or bio/chem missile at us? Oh you would mind, I'm sorry, we'll keep our defenses down then."

No that's stupid and I think if Russia is seriously that mad that we would put up defenses near them, maybe we oughtta reconsider how much attn we pay to their wants. Again, the only to fear a well-defended nation is if that nation is an enemy.

Bush's legacy will look a lot better if the turds hit the fan and the missile defense system he so foolishly erected stops us from getting nuked...
 
Bush handled it in a dismal way. Good idea or bad idea, I don't know, but it's done so what can we do? Nevertheless, he should have used the tools of diplomacy instead of just shooting from the hip. There were much better ways to get a missile defense system up than the way he did it. Now the result is we have a half completed system and a reinvigorated (sp?) Russia.
 
Last edited:
The arguement about what is different between Iraq and Georgia is that Iraq was a dictatorship where Georgia is an elected government. I'm not saying its right or wrong, just that that is the arguement.

As for the missile shield we've been trying for awhile now to get Poland to let us put it in, and while they did want to do it, they had been putting it off because they didn't want to pissoff Russia.

But then on the 8th Russia up and rolled into Georgia, getting all of those former Soviet Satellite nervous. And in 1 week, 15 Aug, Poland was signing the agreement to install this missile shield. IMO Poland was probably begging us to put it in once Russia rolled into Georgia.

As for the nukes I don't think that Russia or the US would every be the first to use one, Iran on the other hand would IMO be more than happy to launch one as soon as they get one.

Bush and his cabinet my not be the best at diplomicy but it was Russias action that lead Poland to do what they did.
 
fscrig75 said:
The arguement about what is different between Iraq and Georgia is that Iraq was a dictatorship where Georgia is an elected government.
Click to expand...

Its the manner of the occupation and the motives behind it. Russia's movement against Georgia was not provoked beyond reasons to display that they could. Yes, yes, I know the occupation of Iraq and Afganistan. No matter what way you try and dicect it they are still not the same.

BushWhacked I will never disagree with anyone when they say that we are there for the oil. I believe that is part of it and that is what I ment when I said "like we look out for our current and future interest." What I dissagree with is when people try and make it seem that we (the US Goverment) are trying to take the oil by force. "We" have dumped billions of dollars into the "reconstructoin" of Iraq (how they have used it is another issue) and are still paying a premium price for their oil, who knows if they will ever sell it to us for cheap or not.

This thread was started to create a debate instead of a solution. Who cares what party Putin would belong to if he were part of our democratic system, him being a rep or dem is not important. The important issues are the ones that have come out throughout this converstation such as energy for the future (short and long term), Global politics / diplomacy (perhaps the most important because it would insure energy and ecconomic stability) and of course all these tie into US involvement in Iraq (personally I think its time we start to get out).

But that's just my .02
 
fosforito_one said:
What I dissagree with is when people try and make it seem that we (the US Goverment) are trying to take the oil by force. "We" have dumped billions of dollars into the "reconstructoin" of Iraq (how they have used it is another issue) and are still paying a premium price for their oil, who knows if they will ever sell it to us for cheap or not.
Click to expand...


Well we took Iraq by force and the oil is in Iraq, but I have no idea where people got the idea we took the oil by force.:looney:

Regarding the billions we spent rebuilding IRaq, I keep hearing of missing billions and little or no visible reconstruction after all these years. Curious but I do believe that we are the ones that flattened their entire infrastructure.
 
fscrig75 said:
The arguement about what is different between Iraq and Georgia is that Iraq was a dictatorship where Georgia is an elected government. I'm not saying its right or wrong, just that that is the arguement.

As for the missile shield we've been trying for awhile now to get Poland to let us put it in, and while they did want to do it, they had been putting it off because they didn't want to pissoff Russia.

But then on the 8th Russia up and rolled into Georgia, getting all of those former Soviet Satellite nervous. And in 1 week, 15 Aug, Poland was signing the agreement to install this missile shield. IMO Poland was probably begging us to put it in once Russia rolled into Georgia.

As for the nukes I don't think that Russia or the US would every be the first to use one, Iran on the other hand would IMO be more than happy to launch one as soon as they get one.

Bush and his cabinet my not be the best at diplomicy but it was Russias action that lead Poland to do what they did.
Click to expand...

So its OK to attack a country with a 25 year old dictatorship like Iraq, but not one with a 2 year elected president? I wonder why we never attacked Stallin in Russia, hell Stallin made S. Hussien and Hitler look like pansies.

Now you have me wondering if Bush proded Georgia into starting the skermish, knowing they would get their buts kicked just to scare Poland into accepting the missile defense system.

The problem some of you fail to see is that the Russians (Soviets) and the USA had a policy called MAD that kept a balance of power in place for about 50 years, that assured neither side would be the first to use nukes, but a missile defense system was viewed to disturb that balance by giving the side with a missile defense system an advantage that made it more likely that the side with a missile defense system would use nukes in a first strike in the hopes of wiping out the other sides nukes to the point of the missile defense system being able to stop the remaing nukes. Therefore, the side with out the missle defense system is forced to strike first, before the missile defense system is completed by the other side.

Basicaly what Russia said is stop building the missle defense system in Poland or we will take it out with nukes before it is completed.

By the way, the last WW started over the German invasion of Poland.
 
Mike, you're sounding like someone who is pressing an agenda even against logic. If you recall, Georgia didn't start the "skirmish". It was started when Russia rolled into their country. I still see no intelligence behind leaving yourself undefended in hopes that nothing bad will happen. Again, Cold War is over. The only reason Russia has to fear our defense system is if they have any thoughts of launching a nuke at us.

As far as oil, we're still paying for oil from them, where's the force?
 
!!!1


Didn't we already determine that he's a Republican because he's "deuchebag" just like Bush???
 
Darky said:
Mike, you're sounding like someone who is pressing an agenda even against logic. If you recall, Georgia didn't start the "skirmish". It was started when Russia rolled into their country. I still see no intelligence behind leaving yourself undefended in hopes that nothing bad will happen. Again, Cold War is over. The only reason Russia has to fear our defense system is if they have any thoughts of launching a nuke at us.

As far as oil, we're still paying for oil from them, where's the force?
Click to expand...

Not correct. Many sources have reported and admitted that Georgian troops fired on and killed many Russian peacekepers in South Osetia (sp?) before the Russians moved into Georgia proper.

The point is if the Russians mean business, and at the moment it seems they do, then we are risking WW III at this time if we install the missile defense system in Poland. The Russians have made it pretty plain that they will attack with nukes if we install the missile defense system in Poland. If it is a bluff, I don't it is worth the risk to call their bluff.

Israel has basically told Iran that it will attack Iran with deadly force if they continue building a nuke(s). I don't think the Israelies are bluffing either.

I might add that I don't see the US offering a missile defense system to Russia. There was a time IIRC when Ronald Reagan offered the Star Wars missile defense system (in the R & D stages at the time) to the Soviets to help put an end the MAD.

I don't see where we have offered the Poland system to the Russians.

All I am saying, is that Russia is still the largest potential military threat to the US that we have, and if we are not careful we could end up in a real war or another cold war with Russia, which no wants, and the world can not afford.

Why is that you think Poland needs a missile defense system all of a sudden, badly enough to risk WW III?
 
TRNDRVR said:
!!!1


Didn't we already determine that he's a Republican because he's "deuchebag" just like Bush???
Click to expand...

I knew I could count on you to pour some oil on the :flame:.

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TORX
Oregon Trophy Challenge 2017
Replies
0
Views
3K
TORX
TORX
Back
Top