russia
- Thread starter madmal_1
- Start date
sabre-rattling by george w bush
i wonder the need for a missile defence system for the usa and europe in such times
esp the "main enemies" of the world seemed to be using less discreet weapons than missiles. and the fact that iran doesnt have a missle that can reach europe blows usa's arguements for the system to b put in place
i wonder the need for a missile defence system for the usa and europe in such times
esp the "main enemies" of the world seemed to be using less discreet weapons than missiles. and the fact that iran doesnt have a missle that can reach europe blows usa's arguements for the system to b put in place
As usual, failure to recognize who the real enemy is. The Russians never stopped targeting Europe, (or the U.S), with their missiles. Now headed by Putin, (former KGB), they have imposed a tight control on political life, allowed the state seizure of private assets held by political opponents, threatened to cut off energy to former Soviet satellites, blockaded the Estonian embassy in Moscow and refused to cooperate with a British police investigation into a murder committed by Russian agents in London. Iran, (with assistance from Russia), has in the past year overcome stumbling blocks in its long range missile system. They now have the Shahab 3 and Shahab 4. Won't be long before they improve even more and begin targeting Europe.
Dosnt matter how warm nations are to each other there will always be a niggling doubt. The way things are going at the moment others will benifit from this unease and chilling of relations between the big 2. This will run and run in circles until they eventually see sense before it goes too far.
In response to Tokyo, opps sorry Washington Rose, the reasons the Russians are the bad guys again is that G Bush's "War on Terror" has been proven to be a complete falacy and the powers that be who control American foriegn policy have decided that the "American Empire" needs to stir up public feeling about a new threat to justify the spending of billions of $$s on the military. Eisenhower in his farewell address warned America about the need to keep an eye on the industrial MilitaryDefense complex , something which we have forgotten , and now we are reaping the results.
Re. Putin being ex KGB , I seem to remember one of the jobs the father of the current President held prior to being Vice President and subsequently President was head of the CIA, (seems odd his offspring never held a previous post in National/Federal Govt. prior to his election, maybe a lack of mental qualifications dis-qualified him) .
History prooves one thing , every 'empire' has had the need to keep expanding , otherwise it stagnates and collapses on itself
The reasons the Iranians have the Shahab 3 and 4 missile systems are purely defensive, seems to me if Pakistan can have US supplied nuclear technology (the Islamic bomb) surley the Iranians can be allowed the similar technology, One important thing to remember about the Iranian revolution in late 78/early 79 is that only one foriegner died during the whole upheaval and he was a CIA operative so on the whole it was quite peaceful except to those who were members of the Savak .
You often come on here talking pro-American rubbish, but you never seem to be able to see that it is the very fact that you and others like you never see the other mans point of view that causes most of the problems. The Russians are like the rest of us, they bring their children up hoping they will have a better life than their parents did, they are not evil baby killing machines, they are ordinary human beings and they want the best they can have in their world, why should America need the early warning system if they hold, Such high principles as 'Peace on Earth and good will to all men'
Your's is supposed to be a mainly Christian society and yet you seem to have forgotten that Christianity is supposed to be built on forgiveness rather than revenge.
At the moment wanting to place these 'early warning', systems seems provocative rather than helpful, perhaps it's a case of lets get the revenge in before the other man hits?
This being Bushs' last term in office i would'nt put anything past him & his cronies before he goes.When the American people wake up & vote back in a Democratic government(thats if it's not another rigged election) 2 decades of bridge building between Russia & the west will have to start all over again as Bush demolishes it before he goes.The U.S government is proberbly the biggest threat to world peace there is,and Bush now has such illusions of granduer he thinks the U.S can impose its will on any country they wish(though obviously,with a man with such limited intelliegence as him,others are pulling the strings).He is a tyrannical leader of the free world who intends to rule through fear.
I think Russia have a very valid point. They can't just sit there while governments start erecting anti-missile systems literally just outside their country. There needs to be a strategic balance of power, because I don't trust Bush or any leader for that matter, to have such enormous power.
So , show of hands, who would trust GW Bush with anything more valuable than a pound coin??????
<Ians hands stay firmly routed in his pockets>(And no Neil they aren't doing THAT either)
Shouldn't that read, who would trust GW Bush with anything as valuable as a pound coin?
GW is probalbly the most dangerous man in the world, not because he is evil, but because he is thick. An American reporter once referred to him as the "dimmest man ever to hold the office of President." And the real scarey thing is that there are millions of American voters who support him! Before the latest US screw up in the Middle East, a poll revealed that only 17% of Americans could find Iraq on a map. (Fortunately for George most of these were Marines). The US is the major threat to world peace. Many of those in power still believe that a nuclear war is "winnable" ... The Russians are not the evil Empire, they never were. They are no better, and no worse than are we in the west.
What about the UK? You guys are a nuclear power. The RN may no longer rule the waves, but British Trident subs could make a hell of a mess of large portions of the planet. Where does the UK stand in this argument? Not only the govt., but the ordinary, the real people?
Thank god Canada refuses to be a nuclear power. (But on the other hand we are one of the world's largest sources of uranium).
What about the UK? You guys are a nuclear power. The RN may no longer rule the waves, but British Trident subs could make a hell of a mess of large portions of the planet. Where does the UK stand in this argument? Not only the govt., but the ordinary, the real people?
Thank god Canada refuses to be a nuclear power. (But on the other hand we are one of the world's largest sources of uranium).