Forum home Road cycling forum Campaign

The cold war has started again

The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
edited December 1969 in Campaign
It was on the news last night that the cold war has started again.
How do we think this will affect us?
«1

Posts

  • FnaarFnaar Posts: 1,985
    Global warming will negate its effects. [:)]

    <b><font color="blue"><font face="Comic Sans MS">kinckers kanckers konckers</font id="Comic Sans MS"></font id="blue"></b> [:D]
  • Eat My DustEat My Dust Posts: 3,965
    Well if the US thinks it can do what ever it wants, anywhere in the world, without a reaction, this is what happens. I think Russia has every right to be hacked off about the situation. Maybe in years to come we'll find out that the US may not be the best allies to have!!

    SNAPS
  • SmeggersSmeggers Posts: 1,019
    Its only a radar station ffs.

    Why would Putin get so jumpy about putting a radar station (which would be 'pointed' at rogue nations such as N Korea and Iran incidentally and nowt to do with Russia), in a country that is also nowt to do with Russia (Czeck)?

    Has Putin forgetton that Castro is still in his pocket? Hypocrit.


    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
  • It's only a matter of time before China starts to exert it's presence, whoever she allies herself with Russia/US should put an end to any potential hostilities.

    As it is this is barely at "sabre-rattling" level, let alone reinstatement of the iron curtain!
  • at the moment they are expressing an objection to monkey boy's missiles.

    monkey boy is due to go and talk to the russian chief monkey, see what comes out of that before assuming a new cold war.
  • simoncpsimoncp Posts: 3,260
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Eat My Dust</i>

    Well if the US thinks it can do what ever it wants, anywhere in the world, without a reaction, this is what happens. I think Russia has every right to be hacked off about the situation. Maybe in years to come we'll find out that the US may not be the best allies to have!!

    SNAPS

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    The US does not think it can do whatever it wants. The Czech missile base will be built with the permission of the Czech elected government. The old Soviet empire did do what it wanted. The Czechs did not want Russian troops in their country but had no say in the matter.
  • MelvilMelvil Posts: 2,219
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by simoncp</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Eat My Dust</i>

    Well if the US thinks it can do what ever it wants, anywhere in the world, without a reaction, this is what happens. I think Russia has every right to be hacked off about the situation. Maybe in years to come we'll find out that the US may not be the best allies to have!!

    SNAPS

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    The US does not think it can do whatever it wants. The Czech missile base will be built with the permission of the Czech elected government. The old Soviet empire did do what it wanted. The Czechs did not want Russian troops in their country but had no say in the matter.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Saying OK with a probable covert threat of economic/trade/military sanctions if you don't have a missile base in your country is not quite the same as happily giving permission...?

    ******************************************************************************
    See Baby Elephants and more at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  • Eat My DustEat My Dust Posts: 3,965
    I saw Condoleezza Rice being interviewed on the TV and she actually laughed when asked about Russia's concerns over the missile sites, saying something along the lines that did Russia actually think that the US wouldn't do anything to maintain 'home security'. Very diplomatic.

    The Russian's are only reacting to the situation, which to the US is escalating the situation. Didn't they start it?

    SNAPS
  • simoncpsimoncp Posts: 3,260
    I don't think the Russians opinion is worth bothering with too much. The Russians thought it was perfectly OK to occupy half of Europe for 45 years, and they'd still be there now if their economy hadn't collapsed because of the crackpot way they chose to run it.

    The Czechs know just what the Russians are like. Perhaps that is why their government is inclined to allow the US missile base.
  • Cold War was a lot better than the global economic free for all that we have now.

    d.j.
    "Like a true nature's child,
    We were born,
    Born to drink mild"
  • bofbof Posts: 372
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by davej</i>

    Cold War was a lot better than the global economic free for all that we have now.

    d.j.
    "Like a true nature's child,
    We were born,
    Born to drink mild"
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    What like Korea, Cuba Missile Crisis, Vietnam, Angola, Afghanistan (round 1), countless Latin American conflicts, living in the old Eastern Europe? Cor, your specs are rose-tinted!
    The artist formally known as boring old fart
  • You can see why Putin is unhappy-it creates an imbalance, but the boast of targeting his doomsday weapons on European cities again shows how estranged from reality international statesmen are-to think of the criteria we use to section people when far more dangerous people run countries. Had any individual threatened on TV to target bombs on European cities, he'd perhaps be arrested by now. Putin's psychotic , but then so are many of them in charge of nuclear weapons

    ________Our behaviour is a function of our experience.
  • FnaarFnaar Posts: 1,985
    Why don't Bush and Putin just measure their willies on live TV? That's sort it out. [:(!]

    <b><font color="blue"><font face="Comic Sans MS">kinckers kanckers konckers</font id="Comic Sans MS"></font id="blue"></b> [:D]
  • Eat My DustEat My Dust Posts: 3,965
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by simoncp</i>

    The Russians thought it was perfectly OK to occupy half of Europe for 45 years<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Hmm, pot and kettle coming from someone in England.

    SNAPS
  • on the roadon the road Posts: 5,631
    I was under the impression that Russia couldn't afford more nuclear weapons.

    I know that Roman Abramovich is rich, but he's not that rich [:0]
  • linfordlunchboxlinfordlunchbox Posts: 4,834
    We need another cold war to give the Yoghurt knitters a real purpose (like chaining themselves to the perimeter fence @ Greenham Common) than all this bleating about how the world is going to end by 2100 from some globally warmed tsunami [:D]


    "I\'d clean my car with a baby elephant - if I had a baby elephant !"
  • papercorn2000papercorn2000 Posts: 4,517
    Well, global warming should sort out any coldness. Means we can have a nice, cosy, warm war.

    God told me to skin you alive.
    http://www.ekroadclub.co.uk/
    God told me to skin you alive.
    http://www.ekroadclub.co.uk/
  • papercorn2000papercorn2000 Posts: 4,517
    Well, global warming should sort out any coldness. Means we can have a nice, cosy, warm war.

    God told me to skin you alive.
    http://www.ekroadclub.co.uk/
    God told me to skin you alive.
    http://www.ekroadclub.co.uk/
  • ankev1ankev1 Posts: 3,686
    Putin's stance has no logic unless he has some very nasty long term plans. The weapon system is a defensive one, therefore it poses no threat to Russia, yet he claims it will "upset the balance". The only conclusion you can draw from this is that he thinks some sort of balance is maintained by Russia having the possibility open to it of launching missiles at Europe

    Putin, remember, is an ex-boss of the KGB and probably has a rigid cold war mindset. Add to that the fact that the Russians seem to resent that their empire disintegrated and you probably have his motivation. I wonder why the Russians can't grasp that nobody in his right mind would want to invade their country.

    The Yanks of course have been their usual shooting-themselves-in-the-foot complete and utter idiots in the way they have handled this but that aside, I think in this matter they are to be supported. Somebody mentioned that they were subjecting The Czech Republic to the covert threat of sanctions. It would be nice to see some evidence for this - perhaps a peep at the conspiracy theory thread would be instructive.
  • Eat My DustEat My Dust Posts: 3,965
    If Iran or North Korea were to fire missiles at the US, would they even go via Poland or the Czech Republic??

    SNAPS
  • ankev1ankev1 Posts: 3,686
    That would depend on the range of the missiles. It would be harder to imagine in the case of N Korea (over the pacific would be more obvious).

    However that question and the ideas behind it do not alter the fact that a defensive missile system poses no possible threat to Russia or anybody else for that matter. In fact one would have thought that any weapon system the sole function of which is to defend against aggression would win everyone's applause.
  • Eat My DustEat My Dust Posts: 3,965
    I would imagine the Russian possibly don't see the "defensive" missile as defensive at all. Is it possible that they see them as a system for giving the US an advantage in any future conflict between the two countries. The US have a right, as does any country (well apart from any country the US don't like) to defend themselves, but this still stinks of the US doing whatever it likes, and nobody (apart from Putin in this case) saying/doing anything about it, so as not to upset the all powerful US.

    SNAPS
  • ankev1ankev1 Posts: 3,686
    The point is that it is inconceivable that even the Yanks would want to invade the Russians and the Europeans would never permit an attack from their soil. Putin needs to wake up to the fact that his country is simply nobody's target of choice and given the problems the Russians have had in Chechnya, you'd think that they'd want to get on board in what effectively is a defensive measure against Islamic nutters. (BTW I'm no fan of the USA, it's just that in this case their position seems to be the more reasonable of the two.)
  • Gary AskwithGary Askwith Posts: 1,835
    From my understanding the rise of Putin and Russian nationalism was helped in no small measure by the US led forced imposistion (-after the fall of the Berlin wall) of crackpot US military game-theory inspired economic measures (and the dismantling of all remaining soviet institutions)
    Result: economic and social collapse, citizens even poorer than before and criminal gangs running the country while the west loooked the other way...Putin sorted them out at the price of personal freedoms but most Russians prefered, as they always had, bread on the table and security to libetarian chaos



    Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

    Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Gary Askwith</i>

    most Russians prefered, as they always had, bread on the table and security to libetarian chaos
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Which is the exact opposite of that depicted on Newsnight on Monday which said (showing people queuing at an empty bread shop under communism) that the soviet system had failed because it could not afford its military without starving its people. It then contrasted the present situation (with Ferrari dealerships in Moscow) which it said was all to do with lots of money from selling oil. I'd like to know if the oil money has trickled down sufficiently to feed the ordinary citizen any better than under communism though.
  • ankev1ankev1 Posts: 3,686
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Gary Askwith</i>

    From my understanding the rise of Putin and Russian nationalism was helped in no small measure by the US led forced imposistion (-after the fall of the Berlin wall) of crackpot US military game-theory inspired economic measures (and the dismantling of all remaining soviet institutions)
    Result: economic and social collapse, citizens even poorer than before and criminal gangs running the country while the west loooked the other way...Putin sorted them out at the price of personal freedoms but most Russians prefered, as they always had, bread on the table and security to libetarian chaos



    Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    I think it would be nice to see some evidence for yet another example of the Americans being responsible for everything which goes wrong in the world.

    The way things have turned out in Russia is no great surprise. It was always extremely unlikely that they would make the leap from monstrous dictatorship to touchy feely modern democracy in one step. Putin has probably realised this and his authoritarian approach might provide the necessary medium term stability which will pave the way for some sort of democracy (whether that is his long term goal or not). Up to now I've been cautiously apporoving of Putin but this infantile return to cold war tactics would be laughable if their wasn't a hint of real danger behind it.
  • simoncpsimoncp Posts: 3,260
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Gary Askwith</i>

    From my understanding the rise of Putin and Russian nationalism was helped in no small measure by the US led forced imposistion (-after the fall of the Berlin wall) of crackpot US military game-theory inspired economic measures (and the dismantling of all remaining soviet institutions)

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    The snag with this argument is that Russia managed to get involved with a totally disastrous and lunatic scheme called communism in 1917. This is usually blamed on the totally disastrous rule of the Tsars who failed to adapt to modern times. And now we have Putin and his new style authoritarianism. This goes to show that the Russians are completely capable of making a pig's ear of running their country however they run it. They don't need help from the Americans or anyone else to mess things up in a big way.

    Nice to see game theory getting a mention again.
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by davej</i>

    Cold War was a lot better than the global economic free for all that we have now.

    d.j.
    "Like a true nature's child,
    We were born,
    Born to drink mild"
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    spot on pal
    long live USSR.[:D][:D][:D]
    I reached the decision to go on the offensive - to put a check on government abuse of power, where others had failed in stopping the federal juggernaut running amok

    Timothy McVeigh
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by simoncp</i>

    I don't think the Russians opinion is worth bothering with too much. The Russians thought it was perfectly OK to occupy half of Europe for 45 years, and they'd still be there now if their economy hadn't collapsed because of the crackpot way they chose to run it.

    The Czechs know just what the Russians are like. Perhaps that is why their government is inclined to allow the US missile base.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    what about the British empire occuping half of the world for 80 years
    oppressing the natives and destroying their cultures
    executing their heroes (Dedan Kimathi)in Kenya.
    I reached the decision to go on the offensive - to put a check on government abuse of power, where others had failed in stopping the federal juggernaut running amok

    Timothy McVeigh
  • The EndorserThe Endorser Posts: 191
    I guess Russia are orried as it threoreticall givs the uS first strike capability with a good chance of intercepting any Russian missiles fired in retalition.

    Problem is, as much as the yanks like to bomb someone, especially some tinpot 3rd world country with massiv oil reserves (ever wondered why Zimbabwean humn rights don't matte to the US...?), it would'nt tak much of a bombardment to trigger a nuclear inter, which is bad. Additionally, any fallout from an american first strike would also make mos of Europe uninhabiable, which probably doesn't bother the yanks but some its allies might gt a bit shirty.

    When it comes down to it, the Russkies can moan all they want. There's nothing stopping them developing their own system - the physics of the inercption problem is quite simple - except the fact that their economy can't aford it! Still, they can afford to murder russian ex pats in London when it suits them!

    <i><b>Taking the moral high ground since 1969</b></i>
    <i><b>Commute - you might even enjoy it!</b></i>
Sign In or Register to comment.