week4paug.net

Where's the stage? Spurious Generalities => Politiw00kchat => Topic started by: VA $l!m on March 03, 2014, 06:37:38 PM

Title: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VA $l!m on March 03, 2014, 06:37:38 PM
i know i am not the only person over 35 that has felt that cold war vibe creep into their mind with the current situation in the Ukraine.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: mbw on March 03, 2014, 06:45:09 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/vTK2uId.gif)
(http://i.imgur.com/DweDDx0.gif)
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VA $l!m on March 03, 2014, 06:54:23 PM
 :-D
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: mbw on March 03, 2014, 06:58:39 PM
 :-D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-6HX62ZoPc
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: rowjimmy on March 03, 2014, 06:59:13 PM
I will answer the lead-off question and say that I am not ready for a nuclear war.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: emay on March 03, 2014, 09:15:57 PM
:-D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-6HX62ZoPc

 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard


Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: twatts on March 04, 2014, 07:45:38 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Georgia%E2%80%93Russia_crisis#War
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: justjezmund on March 04, 2014, 11:24:20 AM
No thanks.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: slslbs on March 15, 2014, 07:06:49 PM
not me
living through that hysteria once was enough.

Do you remember fire drills?

we used to have air raid drills and nuclear war drills in grade school.

no, I'm not shitting you.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VA $l!m on March 15, 2014, 11:48:57 PM
not me
living through that hysteria once was enough.

Do you remember fire drills?

we used to have air raid drills and nuclear war drills in grade school.

no, I'm not shitting you.

you know what i mean then.
obviously we dont live in the same world anymore, but that whole Ukraine sitchey had that 'feel' that i remember growing up.
the feeling that we most likely  would all eventually die from a nuke one day.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: Augustus on March 16, 2014, 07:26:59 AM
Personally, I'd interested in a new, cooler war.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VA $l!m on March 16, 2014, 04:30:47 PM
Personally, I'd interested in a new, cooler war.
:rawk:
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: justjezmund on March 17, 2014, 01:20:02 PM
Personally, I'd interested in a new, cooler war.
:rawk:

like cooler ranch?  you know the recipe was exactly the same right?

And just for the record, no bombs please.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: Buffalo Budd on March 17, 2014, 01:39:56 PM
Will someone please fix the spelling of nuclear?
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: runawayjimbo on March 17, 2014, 01:56:41 PM
Will someone please fix the spelling of nuclear?

You misspelled nucular, dude.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: PIE-GUY on March 17, 2014, 08:04:20 PM
Will someone please fix the spelling of nuclear?

Thread was clearly started by someone who types "voyeur" into search fields pretty regularly.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VDB on March 18, 2014, 09:01:25 AM
So I have an honest question that I'll pose since I don't seem to hear anybody out there talking about it.

Crimea being a fairly autonomous republic with its own parliament, constitution etc., and apparently chock-full of Russophiles, what exactly would be the acceptable approach to secession for them? Let's say the parent country would never, ever grant permission because, hey, what country would want to lose territory -- does that mean the region would never, ever be allowed to break away?

You'd think if Ukraine wanted to fight a civil war over it they'd have made moves at the first signs of Russian incursions. Instead it appears they stood back and allowed the Ruskies to flood the peninsula, protesting with hands firmly under buttocks. Makes it a little harder to ratchet up your response when Putin can sit there saying "They voted to break away, became free, and we annexed them. If you want it, come and take it."

P.S. And as a U.S. American I have very little interest in expending our own lives and resources to mediate this dispute by force.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: twatts on March 18, 2014, 11:53:56 AM
So I have an honest question that I'll pose since I don't seem to hear anybody out there talking about it.

Crimea being a fairly autonomous republic with its own parliament, constitution etc., and apparently chock-full of Russophiles, what exactly would be the acceptable approach to secession for them? Let's say the parent country would never, ever grant permission because, hey, what country would want to lose territory -- does that mean the region would never, ever be allowed to break away?

Assuming we want to do this entirely legally...

They have a means with which to Secede - a national referendum.  It is contradictory for a nation to have a democratic vote and "never, ever grant permission" - if the country votes to allow one region to Secede, the representative government would have to abide, that's the nature of Democracy under the Constitution...

You'd think if Ukraine wanted to fight a civil war over it they'd have made moves at the first signs of Russian incursions. Instead it appears they stood back and allowed the Ruskies to flood the peninsula, protesting with hands firmly under buttocks. Makes it a little harder to ratchet up your response when Putin can sit there saying "They voted to break away, became free, and we annexed them. If you want it, come and take it."

The Ukranians would have gotten smashed within hours, and more than just their pride would have been injured.  The Ukranians did the only thing they could do - step aside and hope the West could do something...


As a U.S. American I have very little interest in expending our own lives and resources to mediate this dispute by force.

And the Russians have a ton of historical, military, and national interest in Crimea.  While the West needed to voice their disapproval over this, there was (and will never) be anything any country can do about it...

Terry

Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VDB on March 18, 2014, 12:21:25 PM
if the country votes to allow one region to Secede, the representative government would have to abide

I don't mean the nation as a whole allowing one region to quit but rather what happens when the region wants to and the parentals say no? (For sake of discussion I'm also talking about the hypothetical; I know there was plenty of shadiness going on in Crimea from the get-go.)

This guy on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/17/opinion/crimea-vote-putin-obama/index.html?hpt=hp_c2) says we can't all pretend the Crimea annexation can't or won't stick, but we should toughen up on Putin to keep him from flexing nuts elsewhere.

This lady on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/17/opinion/ghitis-crimea-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_c2) echoes the sentiment but says the whole Crimea thing was a farce.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: runawayjimbo on March 18, 2014, 12:24:57 PM
So I have an honest question that I'll pose since I don't seem to hear anybody out there talking about it.

Crimea being a fairly autonomous republic with its own parliament, constitution etc., and apparently chock-full of Russophiles, what exactly would be the acceptable approach to secession for them? Let's say the parent country would never, ever grant permission because, hey, what country would want to lose territory -- does that mean the region would never, ever be allowed to break away?

Assuming we want to do this entirely legally...

They have a means with which to Secede - a national referendum.  It is contradictory for a nation to have a democratic vote and "never, ever grant permission" - if the country votes to allow one region to Secede, the representative government would have to abide, that's the nature of Democracy under the Constitution...

I'd add that although Crimea has it's own parliament, I'm pretty sure it's largely symbolic: the Ukraine parliament doesn't recognize the Crimean parliament's legitimacy. They kind of look at it like "aww, that's cute, you guys think you have your own gov't" when really they would still be subject to Ukrainian laws. Like KY Jelly said, the "legit" way would be to have a national referendum, although I disagree with him that the gov't would "have to abide." The much more likely scenario, IMO, would be that if 97% of Crimea voted for secession and they ended up losing, it would devolve into civil war rather quickly.

You'd think if Ukraine wanted to fight a civil war over it they'd have made moves at the first signs of Russian incursions. Instead it appears they stood back and allowed the Ruskies to flood the peninsula, protesting with hands firmly under buttocks. Makes it a little harder to ratchet up your response when Putin can sit there saying "They voted to break away, became free, and we annexed them. If you want it, come and take it."

The Ukranians would have gotten smashed within hours, and more than just their pride would have been injured.  The Ukranians did the only thing they could do - step aside and hope the West could do something...

One of the (many) things that's bugged me about the West's response has been how everyone seems to take it as a given that Putin will move from Crimea into eastern Ukraine (and with it the obligatory Hitler appeasement comparisons). Now, I'm not saying Putin wouldn't advance if regions in eastern Ukraine (which are also pro-Russia although not nearly as ethnically Russian as Crimea) also voted to join the Russian Federation. But to assume that Crimea was Phase I in an all out assault to reclaim the power and influence of great and glorious USSR is a bit much for me. That's a whole lot of Cold War paranoia without any of the benefits like another movie where Rocky kicks that commie bastard's ass.

PS - things are heating up (http://www.trust.org/item/20140318155255-owkyc/)

Quote
Ukrainian serviceman killed in attack on base
Source: Reuters - Tue, 18 Mar 2014 04:15 PM
Author: Reuters

KIEV, March 18 (Reuters) - A Ukrainian serviceman was killed on Tuesday at a Ukrainian base that came under attack in Crimea's main town Simferopol, a military spokesman said.

Vladislav Seleznyov, speaking to Reuters by telephone from Crimea, said one serviceman at the base had died of his wounds. A second man, a captain, was injured.

Seleznyov said it was unclear who had staged the assault, but described the attackers, as "unknown forces, fully equipped and their faces covered".
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VDB on March 18, 2014, 01:08:00 PM
I'd add that although Crimea has it's own parliament, I'm pretty sure it's largely symbolic: the Ukraine parliament doesn't recognize the Crimean parliament's legitimacy. They kind of look at it like "aww, that's cute, you guys think you have your own gov't"

Doesn't sound like a very harmonious union in the first place to me.

PS - things are heating up (http://www.trust.org/item/20140318155255-owkyc/)

Quote
Ukrainian serviceman killed in attack on base
Source: Reuters - Tue, 18 Mar 2014 04:15 PM
Author: Reuters

KIEV, March 18 (Reuters) - A Ukrainian serviceman was killed on Tuesday at a Ukrainian base that came under attack in Crimea's main town Simferopol, a military spokesman said.

Vladislav Seleznyov, speaking to Reuters by telephone from Crimea, said one serviceman at the base had died of his wounds. A second man, a captain, was injured.

Seleznyov said it was unclear who had staged the assault, but described the attackers, as "unknown forces, fully equipped and their faces covered".

I love how in one breath Putin will say that Russian forces are there to ensure the safety of ethnic Russians, while in another he'll claim to not know who these mysterious, unmarked, convoy-driving vigilantes could possibly be.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: twatts on March 18, 2014, 01:21:51 PM
So I have an honest question that I'll pose since I don't seem to hear anybody out there talking about it.

Crimea being a fairly autonomous republic with its own parliament, constitution etc., and apparently chock-full of Russophiles, what exactly would be the acceptable approach to secession for them? Let's say the parent country would never, ever grant permission because, hey, what country would want to lose territory -- does that mean the region would never, ever be allowed to break away?

Assuming we want to do this entirely legally...

They have a means with which to Secede - a national referendum.  It is contradictory for a nation to have a democratic vote and "never, ever grant permission" - if the country votes to allow one region to Secede, the representative government would have to abide, that's the nature of Democracy under the Constitution...

I'd add that although Crimea has it's own parliament, I'm pretty sure it's largely symbolic: the Ukraine parliament doesn't recognize the Crimean parliament's legitimacy. They kind of look at it like "aww, that's cute, you guys think you have your own gov't" when really they would still be subject to Ukrainian laws. Like KY Jelly said, the "legit" way would be to have a national referendum, although I disagree with him that the gov't would "have to abide." The much more likely scenario, IMO, would be that if 97% of Crimea voted for secession and they ended up losing, it would devolve into civil war rather quickly.


That's why I used the "legally" qualifier...

That said, I don't think the rest of the Ukraine would allow such a referendum, and if so, they would likely not vote to allow secession...  So yeah, I would have to agree that there would be some kind of armed struggle when Crimea tried to do what it wants...  And it would have spelled doom for Ukraine - it would have pulled Russia into their civil war and they would have been screwed... 

The whole situation was a lose-lose for Ukraine.  The West can (and should, perhaps) only symbolically "fight" for their sovereignty, IMO...

Terry

Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: runawayjimbo on April 13, 2014, 09:23:36 AM
Ukraine is totes fixed

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303887804579498871951664710?mod=djemalertNEWS

Quote
Ukraine Crisis: Deadly Clashes Break Out in Slovyansk
Interior Minister Arsen Avakov Says Ukrainian Special Forces Officer Is Killed

A Ukrainian special forces officer was killed and five others wounded Sunday in a gunbattle with heavily armed pro-Russian forces who had commandeered a police station in the eastern city of Slovyansk, Ukraine's top police official said.

The firefight erupted early Sunday as Ukrainian forces moved to clear the building where approximately 20 men dressed in camouflage had seized control the day before. Interior Minister Arsen Avakov said an unspecified number of the pro-Russian activists had been wounded in the exchange.

In addition to the dead and wounded at the police station, Russia's Interfax news agency reported one person was killed and four others wounded in a gunfight at a checkpoint that appeared to have been set up by pro-Russian forces along the road leading from Slovyansk to the regional capital of Donetsk.

The bloody standoff comes as Kiev faces increasing unrest in the eastern, majority ethnic Russian part of the country that had been the base of support for recently ousted President Viktor Yanukovych. Ukraine's new government and the West have accused Russia of helping instigate the protests.

On Saturday, pro-Russian mobs--some in unmarked, military-style uniforms and carrying military weapons–attacked government buildings in at least seven cities in the Donetsk region, many of them the site of key railways stations, road junctions or airports. Local Ukrainian news outlets reported Sunday that protests had spread to at least two other cities, Kharkiv and Mariupol, that lie outside of the region.

A week earlier, pro-Russian vigilantes seized control of government buildings in Donetsk, Kharkiv and Luhansk, demanding a referendum be held on granting the region more autonomy. The men were later driven out of Kharkiv and Ukrainian officials say negotiations have been ongoing to end the standoff in the other two cities.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, secretary-general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, said the appearance of heavily armed men in unmarked uniforms drew alarming parallels to the takeover of Crimea by Russian troops last month ahead of a referendum for the region to secede from Ukraine and Russia's annexing the territory.

"The reappearance of men with specialized Russian weapons and identical uniforms without insignia, as previously worn by Russian troops during Russia's illegal and illegitimate seizure of Crimea, is a grave development," he said. "I call on Russia to de-escalate the crisis and pull back its large number of troops, including special forces, from the area around Ukraine's border."

On Saturday, the White House said it warned Russian President Vladimir Putin against using the clashes in Ukraine's east as a pretext for seizing more territory. Moscow says it reserves the right to send troops into eastern Ukraine to protect ethnic Russians there from an alleged threat of violence against them from nationalists in the Ukrainian government, although Russia has presented little concrete evidence such a threat exists.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov Saturday denied Moscow had any role in the recent unrest.

The most dramatic standoff this weekend emerged in Slovyansk, where some 20 men wearing camouflage and with military-style equipment and weapons commandeered the police station and security-service office early Saturday. The small city previously hadn't seen the kind of pro-Russian fervor that erupted anew in the area last weekend.

Mr. Avakov dubbed the operation to clear the anti-Kiev forces from Slovyansk an "antiterrorist action" that involved Ukraine's state security service and military and police units from across the country.

"May God be with them," Mr. Avakov wrote on his Facebook page early Sunday, announcing the operation had begun.

A short time later, he said the men holed up inside the building had begun firing at Ukrainian forces and urged residents in the center of the eastern Ukrainian city to remain indoors and away from their windows.

Residents reported seeing armored personnel carriers approaching the city and helicopters flying overhead. Tires that had been used as a barricade in front of the building were set on fire, sending black smoke over the city.

As the day progressed, it appeared the fighting had subsided, but the mood in the city remained tense.

Witnesses said the men who took over the buildings in Slovyansk—who demanded a referendum on granting the region greater autonomy from Kiev—weren't the local activists who had led protests in the region in recent weeks. Instead, they appeared better equipped and trained.

This weekend's unrest has been concentrated in the region between the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk, an area close to Russia that has seen a surge in pro-Moscow sentiment since the ouster of Mr. Yanukovych, a Donetsk native and Kremlin ally, in February.

Western officials say Moscow has tens of thousands of troops on its side of the border that could invade Ukraine in a matter of hours. Moscow insists the soldiers are there as part of a training exercise.

Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk Friday touted a plan to hand more power to the country's regions as a way to defuse unrest in the east.

Kiev has offered an amnesty to protesters if they lay down their weapons and leave the buildings, but authorities have warned they could send security forces to storm the occupied buildings if demonstrators don't withdraw.

(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-CI826_3ukrai_G_20140413065749.jpg)

(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-CI821_2ukrai_G_20140413052239.jpg)

Quote
Maxim Eristavi @MaximEristavi
#Mariupol City Hall in Donetsk province right now, seized by separatists
pics via @0629ComUa
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BlGUq0hCAAA6TVX.jpg)
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: VDB on April 13, 2014, 08:15:44 PM
Ukraine is totes fucked

fyp
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: antelope19 on April 13, 2017, 11:21:49 PM
This shit is starting to get really scary.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: mbw on April 14, 2017, 08:35:41 AM
This shit is starting to get really scary.

At least we an intelligent, level headed, calm statesmen making the decisions.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: runawayjimbo on April 14, 2017, 10:42:23 AM
I know it's pretty gauche to agree with Russia right now, but this dude pretty much nails it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_KOREAS_TENSION_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-14-00-38-08

Quote
A senior Russian lawmaker says the U.S. is a greater threat to global peace than North Korea.

Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the upper house of Russian parliament, said Friday "the most alarming thing about the current U.S. administration is that you can't be sure if it is bluffing or really going to implement its threats."

He says "America objectively poses a greater threat to peace than North Korea," adding that "the entire world is scared and left guessing if it strikes or not."

Kosachev says there is a "small hope" that President Donald Trump's administration would listen to warnings from Russia and China not to use military force against nuclear-armed Pyongyang.

Fucking maniac
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: mbw on April 14, 2017, 11:17:16 AM
I know it's pretty gauche to agree with Russia right now, but this dude pretty much nails it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_KOREAS_TENSION_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-14-00-38-08

Quote
A senior Russian lawmaker says the U.S. is a greater threat to global peace than North Korea.

Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the upper house of Russian parliament, said Friday "the most alarming thing about the current U.S. administration is that you can't be sure if it is bluffing or really going to implement its threats."

He says "America objectively poses a greater threat to peace than North Korea," adding that "the entire world is scared and left guessing if it strikes or not."

Kosachev says there is a "small hope" that President Donald Trump's administration would listen to warnings from Russia and China not to use military force against nuclear-armed Pyongyang.

Fucking maniac

which maniac are you referring to?
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: runawayjimbo on April 14, 2017, 11:42:19 AM
I know it's pretty gauche to agree with Russia right now, but this dude pretty much nails it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_KOREAS_TENSION_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-14-00-38-08

Quote
A senior Russian lawmaker says the U.S. is a greater threat to global peace than North Korea.

Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the upper house of Russian parliament, said Friday "the most alarming thing about the current U.S. administration is that you can't be sure if it is bluffing or really going to implement its threats."

He says "America objectively poses a greater threat to peace than North Korea," adding that "the entire world is scared and left guessing if it strikes or not."

Kosachev says there is a "small hope" that President Donald Trump's administration would listen to warnings from Russia and China not to use military force against nuclear-armed Pyongyang.

Fucking maniac

which maniac are you referring to?

Ours
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: gah on April 14, 2017, 11:46:32 AM
I know it's pretty gauche to agree with Russia right now, but this dude pretty much nails it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_KOREAS_TENSION_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-14-00-38-08

Quote
A senior Russian lawmaker says the U.S. is a greater threat to global peace than North Korea.

Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the upper house of Russian parliament, said Friday "the most alarming thing about the current U.S. administration is that you can't be sure if it is bluffing or really going to implement its threats."

He says "America objectively poses a greater threat to peace than North Korea," adding that "the entire world is scared and left guessing if it strikes or not."

Kosachev says there is a "small hope" that President Donald Trump's administration would listen to warnings from Russia and China not to use military force against nuclear-armed Pyongyang.

Fucking maniac

which maniac are you referring to?

Ours

 :hereitisyousentimentalbastard  :shakehead:

It's funny (and sad) because it's true.

Still.....better than having someone that would allow their emails to get hacked running the country. Now, THAT would've been crazy.
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: slslbs on April 15, 2017, 08:24:25 PM
So who do you trust less - someone who had email issues or someone who doesn't disclose his tax returns
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: gah on April 17, 2017, 11:33:56 AM
So who do you trust less - someone who had email issues or someone who doesn't disclose his tax returns

Know what I don't trust? Someone with no grounding thoughts or ideas, that creates chaos and instability through seemingly random decisions, and is easily influenced by those around them. What's that saying, if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything? I don't even have to agree with someone's idea's, but I appreciate those that have some sense of guiding ideals in their life.

In any case, now you've got Pence saber rattling with his own words telling North Korea "do not test the resolve of the US or the strength of our military forces" and "the era of strategic patience is over".

Awesome.

 :shakehead:
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: slslbs on August 09, 2017, 04:09:04 PM
thought this thread deserved a bump

 :|
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: gah on August 09, 2017, 05:04:32 PM
from the WaPo:

Quote
The president had discussed escalating his rhetoric with chief of staff John F. Kelly and other advisers, but his warning of "fire and fury" was unscripted, according to officials with knowledge of the situation.


Awesome.

 :shakehead:
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: mattstick on August 10, 2017, 08:31:47 AM

...
Title: Re: so who's ready for a nucleur war?
Post by: gah on August 10, 2017, 01:23:06 PM
ha! and the funniest part, the motherfucker's on vacation!!!  :hereitisyousentimentalbastard :hereitisyousentimentalbastard :hereitisyousentimentalbastard