Russia at it again

24

Comments

  • ThecureThecure Posts: 814
    what i love is that GWB once said that he looked into the soul of Putin and saw a partner. atleast McCain is not that dumb.
    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
    - Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

    If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
  • ThecureThecure Posts: 814
    spyguy wrote:
    I dont think anyone who notice ;)

    don't make us mad, we got beavers. :)
    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
    - Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

    If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    Thecure wrote:
    what i love is that GWB once said that he looked into the soul of Putin and saw a partner. atleast McCain is not that dumb.

    o come on. would you rather bush be sworn enemies with putin or extend an olive branch.
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Thecure wrote:
    what i love is that GWB once said that he looked into the soul of Putin and saw a partner. atleast McCain is not that dumb.

    Apparently Bush has some hilarious/cringeworthy nicknames for Putin ... Can't find the link right now.
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Here it is ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2000197.stm

    "Pootie-Poot" ... **shudder**
  • ThecureThecure Posts: 814
    spyguy wrote:
    o come on. would you rather bush be sworn enemies with putin or extend an olive branch.

    Ofcouse i woudl rather have BUSH give an Olive branch but to say that you looked into his soul does not really tell me that you are smart. you can say, i think we had a good start to this important relationship and hope to work with him in the future. just sound less how do i say it fucked up.
    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
    - Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

    If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    Thecure wrote:
    Ofcouse i woudl rather have BUSH give an Olive branch but to say that you looked into his soul does not really tell me that you are smart. you can say, i think we had a good start to this important relationship and hope to work with him in the future. just sound less how do i say it fucked up.

    yea I hear ya. but its beats being enemies.
  • JordyWordyJordyWordy Posts: 2,261
    I can understand the US have military presence in random parts of the world (left over bases from world wars etc), but why train the army of former Soviet countries? Is it solely to provoke a reaction?
  • brandon10brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    We would be pissed. We would also be pissed if Russia was training Latin American militaries, as we train Eastern European militaries.

    When we defeated the USSR, that was the time to let them have their space. When you rub the loser's nose in defeat, all you do is piss them off and foreshadow future aggression.

    How exactly did you defeat the U.S.S.R.? If you are talking about the cold war, I'm pretty sure the Russians defeated themselves.
  • Smellyman2Smellyman2 Posts: 689
    brandon10 wrote:
    How exactly did you defeat the U.S.S.R.? If you are talking about the cold war, I'm pretty sure the Russians defeated themselves.

    No. They were single handily defeated by the great Ronald Reagan. LOL


    as far as US Russia now is concerned, it appears US Hypocrisy knows no bounds.
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    how would the world react if we threatened people with nukes?


    anyway...

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/19/georgia.russia.war/index.html

    NATO: Russia not honoring cease-fire terms
  • fuckfuck Posts: 4,069
    I wonder how many threads we can make titled 'The U.S. at it again'...
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    _outlaw wrote:
    I wonder how many threads we can make titled 'The U.S. at it again'...

    stop trolling
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    I am not saying that the U.S. isn't causing major problems in the world today, but damn ...There is something about the Russians. Who in their right mind actually threatens nuclear strikes? People need to lay off the vodka or something.

    I've been saying it from the beginning. Smoke weed, people!

    :D






    I do love some good vodka.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • fuckfuck Posts: 4,069
    spyguy wrote:
    stop trolling
    I'll stop when I start, but thanks for the heads up.
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    _outlaw wrote:
    I'll stop when I start, but thanks for the heads up.

    great that makes alot of sense.
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    We would be pissed. We would also be pissed if Russia was training Latin American militaries, as we train Eastern European militaries.

    When we defeated the USSR, that was the time to let them have their space. When you rub the loser's nose in defeat, all you do is piss them off and foreshadow future aggression.


    When did we defeat the USSR? Who is we and how did we do this?
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    puremagic wrote:
    When did we defeat the USSR? Who is we and how did we do this?

    cold war. where have you been? last I checked the USSR doesnt exist
  • fuckfuck Posts: 4,069
    spyguy wrote:
    cold war. where have you been? last I checked the USSR doesnt exist
    I think he's referring to the part that explicitly says that the U.S. 'defeated' the USSR.
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    _outlaw wrote:
    I think he's referring to the part that explicitly says that the U.S. 'defeated' the USSR.

    uh huh. and?
  • fuckfuck Posts: 4,069
    spyguy wrote:
    uh huh. and?
    do you even know what defeat means? how did the U.S. 'defeat' the USSR?
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    _outlaw wrote:
    do you even know what defeat means? how did the U.S. 'defeat' the USSR?

    the US out spent them during the cold war leading to the collapse of the USSR
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    this isnt the time for a history lesson. in related news...

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080819/ts_nm/georgia_ossetia_nato_dc

    NATO freezes Russian ties over Georgia


    WTF are they thinking?
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    spyguy wrote:
    cold war. where have you been? last I checked the USSR doesnt exist


    You do know that the 'Cold War' was not an actual war, kinda like the war on terror, never ending.

    Do have an quip to the 'we' part?

    What about the 'How" part, any clues on that one?
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    spyguy wrote:
    the US out spent them during the cold war leading to the collapse of the USSR


    Ok, you not even trying.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    puremagic wrote:
    Ok, you not even trying.

    what am I missing?
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    spyguy wrote:
    this isnt the time for a history lesson. in related news...

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080819/ts_nm/georgia_ossetia_nato_dc

    NATO freezes Russian ties over Georgia


    WTF are they thinking?

    When these NATO countries start withdrawing their ambassadors and closing their embassies, then I'll believe they are willing to step up, until then, its a dog and pony show.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • spyguyspyguy Posts: 613
    puremagic wrote:
    When these NATO countries start withdrawing their ambassadors and closing their embassies, then I'll believe they are willing to step up, until then, its a dog and pony show.

    things like that dont happen overnight. this is the first step in that process
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    spyguy wrote:
    things like that dont happen overnight. this is the first step in that process


    Of course not, because Secretary Rice has been soooooo effective over the previous years as head of the State Department. Her biggest thought is that the Fall shopping season has begun and she'll be in Paris.

    On the other hand, this wait and see sh-t must be f--king with Sarkozy's feeling of god like powers as he reigns over his subjects in the EU.

    Like I said, a dog and pony show.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    puremagic wrote:
    Of course not, because Secretary Rice has been soooooo effective over the previous years as head of the State Department. Her biggest thought is that the Fall shopping season has begun and she'll be in Paris.

    On the other hand, this wait and see sh-t must be f--king with Sarkozy's feeling of god like powers as he reigns over his subjects in the EU.

    Like I said, a dog and pony show.


    Was Rice there to make sure nothing happened to the pipeline or to talk turkey?
    You've changed your place in this world!
Sign In or Register to comment.