New Nato Missle Defense bas in Romainia to go live on thursday

[Deleted]

Nobody in their right mind should want the world's police go unchecked

Neither do I. But I also don`t expect US to give away the privileges it won last century without a fight. And whoever does, is a fool.

[Orly]

It`s called ''advancing your interests''.
If Russia can`t stand up to it - too bad. It`s silly to expect that there won`t be outraged when it does actually react to irritation. Anyone else would.

What treaty?

More colloquially called as simply being scum.

[Deleted]

Isn't Japan your ally?

They broke the treaty first according to you and you alone. Excuse me if i take that with a grain of salt, especially after you refused to stop the arms race.

You invaded a country because a few people who happened to be from a certain oil-rich country slammed 2 airplanes in two of your buildings. You don't get to decide what wars should be started over, hypocrite.

Look at this moralist. How cute! My local church could use a good preacher.

- - - Updated - - -

More colloquially called as simply being scum.

*yawn*
You`re booring.

[Orly]

Neither do I. But I also don`t expect US to give away the privileges it won last century without a fight. And whoever does, is a fool.

Scum. And paranoid to boot.

- - - Updated - - -

Look at this moralist. How cute! My local church could use a good preacher.

If morality is such a bad thing, then why are so many held against Russia lately? The hypocrisy is running really high around here.

Not entirely unexpected to be fair. USA has been a synonym for it for quite a while.

[Gorgodeus]

Isn't Japan your ally?

They broke the treaty first according to you and you alone. Excuse me if i take that with a grain of salt, especially after you refused to stop the arms race.

You invaded a country because a few people who happened to be from a certain oil-rich country slammed 2 airplanes in two of your buildings. You don't get to decide what wars should be started over, hypocrite.

I am pretty sure an attack that killed thousands on US soil is an act of war. Period.

That is not remotely similar to "cutting of trade or annoyances".

The US will never stop advancing when it comes to military might. It would be stupid to do so. The "oil-rich" bullshit hyperbole is meaningless. Last I recall, Iraq invaded Kuwait, and the US went to their aid. Apparently you don't know who the world's largest oil producer is now. It is the US. We don't need to rush to the Middle East for oil.

[Deleted]

If morality is such a bad thing, then why are so many held against Russia lately? The hypocrisy is running really high around here.

Not entirely unexpected to be fair. USA has been a synonym for it for quite a while.

I can`t speak for others. However I don`t see the current situation with Russia in terms of ''good'' or ''bad''. They have their interests. Those collide with interests of others. I don`t care why. I just know that`s the way it is and that certain events are bound to take place. That`s it.

[Ulmita]

Just got in:

Meet Satan's mommy, The RS-28 Sarmat

Just a reminder that Satan was the focus of start-2.

The Reagan and Bush administrations respected the SS-18 to such a degree that they made it the main focus of their arms control initiatives. The START II Treaty specifically banned land-based MIRV systems, in part, because of the threat the SS-18 posed to the balance of power. It was seen as a first-strike weapon and a very destabilizing presence in the bilateral relationship.

source

This bad boy can carry twice as much in greater speeds. We are talking about some 40-50 Megaton goodies flying at some unprecedented speeds.
And thus why the pentagon is rushing to modernize its nuclear arsenal. They are very very very very behind.

Video on the subject

https://youtu.be/QSjgk_bM8MA?t=1m

[Orly]

I am pretty sure an attack that killed thousands on US soil is an act of war. Period.

That is not remotely similar to "cutting of trade or annoyances".

The US will never stop advancing when it comes to military might. It would be stupid to do so. The "oil-rich" bullshit hyperbole is meaningless. Last I recall, Iraq invaded Kuwait, and the US went to their aid. Apparently you don't know who the world's largest oil producer is now. It is the US. We don't need to rush to the Middle East for oil.

Starvation kills thousands too. Is the death toll the only criteria that decides it? No, of course not. The act is more important. But that's where it gets tricky for you, i guess, because, as i said before, that implies getting both sides of the story.

Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 it seems. Why did it take 11 years and 2 planes to be benevolent about it?

Having the most of something doesn't necessarily mean you won't want more of it.

- - - Updated - - -

I can`t speak for others. However I don`t see the current situation with Russia in terms of ''good'' or ''bad''. They have their interests. Those collide with interests of others. I don`t care why. I just know that`s the way it is and that certain events are bound to take place. That`s it.

It just so appears that USA's interests of world domination collides with everyone else's interests of "we don't want a world war, ever again". That's it.

[zmp]

Russian has terrorists out there? Last time i checked it was USA who was talking with Al nursa - Al Qaeda, arming them, training them etc.

Nonono, you got it all wrong... Team-USA (ISIS) in Syria is fighting for... uhm.. liberation against.. uhm... tyrany.. and uhhh..

Unfortunately, their position is weakened (their oil too probably) and can't make up more $$$ to pay for stuff, because of the DAMN Russians..

[Deleted]

Oh look, it`s the ''I love NUKES!'' guy. Reminds me of myself when I was 11. Good times.

They are very very very very behind.

Nice assertion. Impressive amount of evidence!

Too bad the flawless record of Trident and it`s the most precise warhead in the world disagrees with you (GPS upgraded Trident II D5). Why precision is important? Well, go ahead and educate yourself.

As one scholar explains: “Making a weapon twice as accurate has the same effect on lethality as making the warhead eight times as powerful. Phrased another way, making the missile twice as precise would only require one-eighth the explosive power to maintain the same lethality.” Furthermore, radiological fallout operates according to Newton’s inverse square law.

In practical terms, all this means that the more accurate the bomb, the lower the yield that is needed to destroy any specific target. A lower-yield and more accurate bomb can therefore be used without having to fear the mass, indiscriminate killing of civilians through explosive force or radioactive fallout.

- - - Updated - - -

It just so appears that USA's interests of world domination collides with everyone else's interests of "we don't want a world war, ever again". That's it.

Implying that US wants a World War.

But even if your hysterical rant had anything to do with the reality, too bad for the rest of the world as it has very little in it`s arsenal it can do about US and it`s power.

[Orly]

Implying that US wants a World War.

But even if your hysterical rant had anything to do with the reality, too bad for the rest of the world as it has very little in it`s arsenal it can do about US and it`s power.

I like how you end up giving arguments FOR my point and not against it.

If it didn't want a WW it should not act like it. And the fact that it's "too bad for the rest of the world as it has very little in it`s arsenal it can do about US and it`s power" gives a good explanation as to why they wouldn't mind one at all if it gets them even more control than they currently have. Which is clearly what they want. "Interests", as you said a few times.

[zmp]

Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 it seems. Why did it take 11 years and 2 planes to be benevolent about it?

I believe it had something to do with a certain trade being planned to shift from dollars to another currency, but I suppose it was just a rumour (meaning lets forget little details and focus on another boogie man, Hussein).

[Deleted]

I like how you end up giving arguments FOR my point and not against it.

But I`m not arguing against you. I`m amused by your rants and moralism. Cute!

[Gorgodeus]

Starvation kills thousands too. Is the death toll the only criteria that decides it? No, of course not. The act is more important. But that's where it gets tricky for you, i guess, because, as i said before, that implies getting both sides of the story.

Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 it seems. Why did it take 11 years and 2 planes to be benevolent about it?

Having the most of something doesn't necessarily mean you won't want more of it.

- - - Updated - - -



It just so appears that USA's interests of world domination collides with everyone else's interests of "we don't want a world war, ever again". That's it.

Go brush up on your history. We went to Irag twice.

And if the US wanted world domination, they would invade countries and take them over. Less hyperbolic bullshit please.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe it had something to do with a certain trade being planned to shift from dollars to another currency, but I suppose it was just a rumour (meaning lets forget little details and focus on another boogie man, Hussein).

Iirc correctly, that was Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, that wanted to do that. But keep trying.

[zmp]

Iirc correctly, that was Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, that wanted to do that. But keep trying.

Second attempt, quick google search.

[Deleted]

But keep trying.

I wouldn`t argue with the know-nothing idiots who believe oil had anything to do with US invasion of Iraq.

[enragedgorilla]

I wonder how much of the Russian arsenal is actually operationally ready. Size might not equal capability in this case.

Just need one to work...to start a mess.

[Deleted]

Second attempt, quick google search.

-

Pierre Shammas, a Middle East expert at the Cyprus-based Arab Press Service, calls the move an emotional one impossible to understand on economic grounds.

"As long as the euro goes down, you don't switch to a currency that goes down in value while the dollar goes up in value. Saddam has not spelled out his plan in detail. These are politicians talking. They are not experts, they are not central bankers, they are not even oil men."
[...]
But analysts say the political message Baghdad is sending is largely symbolic because the currency switch offers no gains or losses for any of the states involved except Iraq.

I suggest you to read what you link before you shitpost.

[Gorgodeus]

Second attempt, quick google search.

Switching to the euro had no bearing on what transpired. It only hurt Iraq. lol

[zmp]

Switching to the euro had no bearing on what transpired. It only hurt Iraq. lol

Good thing they switched back to dollars after Hussein was "removed". Gotta save them iraqi jobs... and stuff..