DescentBB

What the f*ck is this, ladies and gentlemen?

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato- ... ZN2NL?il=0


I want to remind you an anecdote.

The child asks:
- Dad, how much time to fly to America?
Father:
- Approximately 15-20 minutes.
Mother:
- He asks you about the aircraft, not about your Topol-M.

this is a statement of current NATO policy. So?

I believe that NATO is an appendix, a rudiment of the 20th century, which would be better to painlessly remove the sooner the better. I have long do not understand why need NATO. This is some sort of meaningless organization. It reminds me of the Young Communist League or the Warsaw Pact, where everybody understands that it is no use to anyone, but all are required to pay dues to the club.

how about this.....you opine on organizations to which Russia belongs, we'll opine on organizations to which the US belongs. You are in no position to declare whether the Eastern part of Europe feels the need for further defense from your country. Their call.

callmeslick wrote:how about this.....you opine on organizations to which Russia belongs, we'll opine on organizations to which the US belongs. You are in no position to declare whether the Eastern part of Europe feels the need for further defense from your country. Their call.

Got up on the wrong side of the bed ?

callmeslick wrote:how about this.....you opine on organizations to which Russia belongs, we'll opine on organizations to which the US belongs. You are in no position to declare whether the Eastern part of Europe feels the need for further defense from your country. Their call.

If you still do not really understand that the so-called "Russian threat" is inflated, fictitious, deliberately imposed to maintain the idea of the US economy, for the most part by means of maintaining the US military industry... All of Russia's actions, including the military, it's always been a response to Western aggression.
Frankly, I'm a little surprised that a fairly intelligent man like you, can be influenced by such a simple ideology, which is very similar to communism. I hope that NATO will not have time to make a big mistake before the organization will die a natural death.
Everyone will be bad, it is will not a war in the style of the 20th century, it will be full f*cking hell for everyone.

Grendel wrote:

callmeslick wrote:how about this.....you opine on organizations to which Russia belongs, we'll opine on organizations to which the US belongs. You are in no position to declare whether the Eastern part of Europe feels the need for further defense from your country. Their call.

Got up on the wrong side of the bed ?

hardly. Actually been up all day and out in the heat for part of it. My point is that sigma declares NATO to be worthless, or, more like a relic. From the article, it seems the Eastern part of NATO wishes to be protected from Russia. That suggests a very real need, in the here and now.

It's sad really, that this movie still does not lose relevance.

sigma wrote:I believe that NATO is an appendix, a rudiment of the 20th century, which would be better to painlessly remove the sooner the better. I have long do not understand why need NATO. This is some sort of meaningless organization. It reminds me of the Young Communist League or the Warsaw Pact, where everybody understands that it is no use to anyone, but all are required to pay dues to the club.

Considering that your country just invaded and occupied part of one of your neighbors just in the past year or two, I'd say that NATO is more relevant now than it has been in years.

You have a very large cockroaches in your head, TG. I will not be mistaken if I say that they are the size of an elephant. You absolutely know nothing really, except CNBC/CNN news, I think.
If you want to understand, learn Russian history, at least superficially.

Superficial reading of recent Russian history: you took Crimea from the Ukraine. Next lesson?

sigma wrote:I believe that NATO is an appendix, a rudiment of the 20th century, which would be better to painlessly remove the sooner the better.

Modern medicine dictates we preserve the appendix as much as possible. Doctors see the organ as necessary to the body, not something to remove at the slightest trouble.

sigma wrote:I have long do not understand why need NATO. This is some sort of meaningless organization.

It has great meaning to those in NATO. I fully support NATO.

Top Gun wrote:Superficial reading of recent Russian history: you took Crimea from the Ukraine. Next lesson?

What could be the next lesson? You have education level of less than F now. Admit it, your historical books it is the newspapers, right?

Vision, clear. In other words, I do not understand why, but I fully support NATO. The impression is, if you refuse to support NATO, within 5 minutes to knock on your door polite people from the CIA.

sigma wrote:

Top Gun wrote:Superficial reading of recent Russian history: you took Crimea from the Ukraine. Next lesson?

What could be the next lesson? You have education level of less than F now. Admit it, your historical books it is the newspapers, right?

The next lesson is Russia trying to take over eastern Ukraine while blaming US for the bad govt. there as a cover story.

Woody, just for you, by mutual sympathy. You hardly know the meaning of these symbols. But precisely for this reason Russia will never not give away Ukraine to anyone.







As for NATO, I want to join this emotional expression of Sergei Lavrov.

sigma wrote:The impression is, if you refuse to support NATO, within 5 minutes to knock on your door polite people from the CIA.

Not true. In the USA we have freedom for political speech. I can say NATO is the worst organization in the world and the CIA can do nothing about it.

Well, it's nice to know if this is true.

sigma wrote:Woody, just for you, by mutual sympathy. You hardly know the meaning of these symbols. But precisely for this reason Russia will never not give away Ukraine to anyone.

even to the Ukranians, huh?

Yes. Ukrainians are well aware of the significance of this. Even the current pro-US government of Ukraine are well aware of this.

Ukraine used to be known as the bread basket of Russia back when Russia controlled it. Perhaps this is why the Russians want it back?

No, that would be too small.
This the bond of ancient blood, Woody.

Well sigma, after Stalin killed millions of Ukranians (look up word Holodomor) I doubt there is much of a blood bond left.

Slick, Vision, Tunnelcat, Woodship, I want to know your opinion on this issue. You do not have the impression that radical Islam has long wanted to set on each other's strongest nuclear powers to then establish a caliphate throughout the world? All have long known that the US is a puppet of Riyadh, they have achieved a lot. But not to the same high degree of threat and in an already fragile world peace.
Quite a big victory for them is successfully realized the Muslim expansion in Europe, for example, and not only
P.S. I think you can understand with the help of online translator what I mean.
http://ria.ru/world/20150123/1043983196.html

woodchip wrote:Well sigma, after Stalin killed millions of Ukranians (look up word Holodomor) I doubt there is much of a blood bond left.

It may already be enough to drag out a question of the Stalinist regime? I well know that it was a tragedy for Russia.

This won't help with Russian/U.S. relations one little bit. Since the "diplomat" (probable U.S. spy according to the Russians) was trying to seek refuge in our embassy when a Russian FSB guard beat him up, the Russian spy theory may have some merit. We've done this sort of spying crap before, then pulled them into our embassy to protect them from the Russians when they got caught. Tsk, tsk.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

The motive for the attack remains unclear. One U.S. official told me that the diplomat was seeking refuge in the embassy complex to avoid being detained by the Russian intelligence services. A different U.S. official told me the diplomat may have been working as a spy in Russia under what’s known as “diplomatic cover,” which means he was pretending to be a State Department employee.

Spokesmen for the both the State Department and the CIA declined to comment on the incident or whether or not the diplomat was in fact an undercover U.S. spy.

sigma, the invasion of Iraq was the single worst decision the U.S. has ever made. The second single worst decision may have been President Obama pulling the rest of our soldiers out of Iraq before things had became somewhat stable again, not that stability is something the Middle East ever follows and not that we want to become the new dictator of that country just to hold things in check with an iron fist, like Saddam did.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01322.html

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk ... reate-isis

All right, you're kind of getting off track here, TC. I mean that US policy is too often visited Saudi Arabia for consultations and recreation, to put it mildly.
The situation in Moscow US embassy is just the tip of the iceberg of what is happening now in the Russian and American secret services.

Well sigma, here's something "on track" for your post. We're "friends" with an Islamic despotic regime who hates us and all things Western because of one thing, OIL. In fact, I'm willing to bet a big chunk of our oil money gets funneled to Islamist radicals in some form or another by the Saudis, or even by few of the other Middle East nations we buy oil from. We're conveniently paying our enemy to attack and kill us. All the Russians have to do is sit back and allow our unprincipled U.S. foreign and trade policy to run it's course and eliminate us all by itself. Very simple, very easy Mr. Putin.

http://www.theatlantic.com/internationa ... ia/384805/

oh, Cat.. It is a pity this is not understood by those who need to understand it.

So if you want to address it, the goal is to start with ourselves!

sigma wrote:So if you want to address it, the goal is to start with ourselves!

so, you feel that Obama is doing a good thing?


Oh, and to TC. You are largely right....the Saudi relationship was forged in an era when we were both starved for oil from the Middle East, and needed balance versus both Iran and later Iraq. Part of the reason the Obama admin stuck to a largely supportive position on domestic oil extraction was to lessen that influence, and it largely succeeded. Right now, the Saudis do OUR bidding. They are pumping what could be seen as their national life savings out at a high rate just to keep Iran and you all, Sigma, in financial distress. It's a very odd relationship, and almost certainly, the Saudis have sheltered a bunch of people who have been financing terror. Now, with ISIS tossed into the mess, all the more complex a relationship, given that ISIS would be coming for the house of Saud at some point.

If he will do something good, I'll be not only pleased, but also surprised.

Slick, I don't really want to ask your opinion now, but maybe you will be able to give birth a normal response. Would you like to see right now of Richard Nixon as President?

callmeslick wrote:

sigma wrote:So if you want to address it, the goal is to start with ourselves!

so, you feel that Obama is doing a good thing?


Oh, and to TC. You are largely right....the Saudi relationship was forged in an era when we were both starved for oil from the Middle East, and needed balance versus both Iran and later Iraq. Part of the reason the Obama admin stuck to a largely supportive position on domestic oil extraction was to lessen that influence, and it largely succeeded. Right now, the Saudis do OUR bidding. They are pumping what could be seen as their national life savings out at a high rate just to keep Iran and you all, Sigma, in financial distress. It's a very odd relationship, and almost certainly, the Saudis have sheltered a bunch of people who have been financing terror. Now, with ISIS tossed into the mess, all the more complex a relationship, given that ISIS would be coming for the house of Saud at some point.

The Saudis seem to be taking exception at having to do our bidding, so they've been trying to stick it to our oil companies since 2014. They're still doing it today. Not that I don't like cheaper gas.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e39954.htm

sigma wrote:Slick, I don't really want to ask your opinion now, but maybe you will be able to give birth a normal response. Would you like to see right now of Richard Nixon as President?

I can't speak for slick, but even Richard Nixon looks downright favorable as our next president compared to Donald Trump, not that I would ever vote for either.

sigma wrote:oh, Cat.. It is a pity this is not understood by those who need to understand it.....

So if you want to address it, the goal is to start with ourselves!

From what I'm reading in your link, it sounds like it's a good thing that Obama wants to reduce the number of nuclear weapons sigma. I guess I don't understand your point or else something is getting lost in translation.

sigma wrote:Slick, I don't really want to ask your opinion now, but maybe you will be able to give birth a normal response. Would you like to see right now of Richard Nixon as President?

absolutely not.

"NIXON'S BAAAAAACK!!!"

callmeslick wrote:

sigma wrote:Slick, I don't really want to ask your opinion now, but maybe you will be able to give birth a normal response. Would you like to see right now of Richard Nixon as President?

absolutely not.

I knew in advance what you will answer, but thanks for the detailed response.

I kept it simple because I don't have any illusion that you really could grasp the subtlety of what made Nixon evil, and criminal. Given you said above that everything the US does passes through Saudi Arabia, I can't assume you really have a clue about reality here.

I don't want to go into that in my opinion, it you is live in a perverted reality really is. Nixon would have more advantages than disadvantages in the current situation, in my opinion.

nope, not ever. In fact, given the present day realities, more dangerous than ever. Deliver me from emperors and tyrants.