solletica
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2011
- Messages
- 6,073
- Reaction score
- 926
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Russia has stronger leadership. That is the difference.
Putin can beat up a B-2 bomber w/judo. I've seen it
Russia has stronger leadership. That is the difference.
Russia has stronger leadership. That is the difference.
Where did I say I admired Putin?Well color me shocked that the fascist, islamophone admires a tyrant like Putin.
Despite Russia's latest escapades I'd like to remind you it's no longer 1980.
Russia's "power" is absolutely in no way comparable to the U.S. in any way, economically, militarily or politically as it was as the Soviet Union, I notice there's a trend among Cold War era fellas like yourself to severely overestimate Russia's power.
But Ukraine does want membership, and Putin will resist it, and I don't blame him.
No, it's not clear. And China isn't interested in closing sea lanes, they're even creating a new one as we speak in Central America. It's just that there's at least some that they want to control! And that's the rub for America, but, nobody remains in control forever.
I didn't say China was interested in closing sea lanes. You said that. China is interested in dominating sea lanes to the detriment of other, smaller nation states - see Viet Nam, Phillipines and Japan, for example. They're interested in seizing land as well. Russia is behaving similarly. They pursue dominance through force to achieve what they cannot economically.
Good morning, humbolt. :2wave:
:agree: China is interested in a few contested islands in the area of the South China Sea that they feel are theirs, and they want them back. Throw another log on the global fire....
Good morning Pol. Yep. China is interested in dominating the South China Sea, among other things. It is understandable that they will dominate that region economically. However, extending hegemony through force to the detriment of surrounding nations runs counter to that which we typically associate with free trade and good will. Russia, in similar fashion holds Europe hostage to fuel while taking those pieces through force it deems necessary for it's planned dominance of the eastern Mediterranean. Arguments that the US does similar things do not match the actions those two states are committed to. While it's true our slate is not clean and never will be, we do not take actions that rise to the level we are witnessing from China and Russia, and others, like Iran.
I didn't say China was interested in closing sea lanes. You said that. China is interested in dominating sea lanes to the detriment of other, smaller nation states - see Viet Nam, Phillipines and Japan, for example. They're interested in seizing land as well. Russia is behaving similarly. They pursue dominance through force to achieve what they cannot economically.
:agree: None of them seem to worry over-much about what we may think, either, and I find that disturbing. Are we being baited to learn something they need to know? When ancient adversaries like Russia and China - both secretive as a people - become allies and team up, it does make one wonder what's up!
Hi Polgara. I don't wonder. The demarcation was Libya, and the abuse of UNR1973. They were both vocal about it, and vetoed all three Obama attempts to secure a resolution for use of force in Syria because of it. They both are increasingly dismayed by USFP. And USFP for sometime now, has been pushing those two unlikely partners closer together. We're at economic warfare with one of them now. And don't forget Obama's speech a couple years back in Australia, directed toward China!
I didn't say China was interested in closing sea lanes. You said that. China is interested in dominating sea lanes to the detriment of other, smaller nation states - see Viet Nam, Phillipines and Japan, for example. They're interested in seizing land as well. Russia is behaving similarly. They pursue dominance through force to achieve what they cannot economically.
Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:
I tend to worry too much about possible futures, but you are correct. Past events do have a way of telling us what we may possibly expect to see in the future, don't they? It's just that there are so many variables to what may happen that it's frustrating. As an example, today is the Ides of March, when Julius Caesar was assassinated. Horrible way to be betrayed by those you considered friends, but that act in 44BC marked the transition from the Roman Republic which had endured for 450 years to the Roman empire, which also eventually fell to barbarians! Past events sometimes do foreshadow the future, and history does tend to repeat itself. Is the failure ours, as humans, that we haven't yet grasped that concept, and hope that this time it may be different? Sometimes it does look that way.....
Yes, that Chinese canal across Nicaragua carrying more tonnage than Panama will change this part of the world dramatically but it's importance isn't getting much play. Also the Russians will never get the eastern portion of their country returned now that it is in largely Chinese hands. The Chinese are moving subtly around the world and doing very well.
I know Nicaragua reasonably well and that Ortega is one of the most corrupt, and wealthiest, leaders in the western hemisphere. The fine Nicaraguan people have suffered greatly under his regime but it's still too early to say whether the Chinese will have a positive or negative effect. I have heard stories of people being forced off their land, without recourse, to make way for the canal and its surrounding areas but the stories may have been exaggerated. Or man's inhumanity continues to grow.It's really not so subtle. US media doesn't run it much though, so you're right to the extent that most Americans aren't seeing it. It's a natural progression though, and not necessarily bad.
I know Nicaragua reasonably well and that Ortega is one of the most corrupt, and wealthiest, leaders in the western hemisphere. The fine Nicaraguan people have suffered greatly under his regime but it's still too early to say whether the Chinese will have a positive or negative effect. I have heard stories of people being forced off their land, without recourse, to make way for the canal and its surrounding areas but the stories may have been exaggerated. Or man's inhumanity continues to grow.
Well color me shocked that the fascist, islamophone admires a tyrant like Putin.
More proof the extreme right are more impressed with displays of bravado rather than effective policy.
If you think Russia has strong leadership, when a lot of its government is beholden to criminal elements, high levels of corruption incompetence and their president has gambled away the economy for a few scraps of land well then I'm afraid it makes it all the more clear how you really think.
3/16/2015
Russian President Vladimir Putin said he considered putting the country’s vast nuclear arsenal on alert to prevent outside agents from stopping the Kremlin’s forced annexation of the Crimea peninsula from Ukraine last year. Putin’s admission was aired during a prerecorded documentary called Homeward Bound, which was broadcast on a state-backed television network Sunday in the run-up to the first anniversary of Crimea’s annexation later this week.
In the interview, Putin claimed he began hatching plans to seize the peninsula after Ukrainian President Viktor F. Yanukovych fled the country following months of protests. Putin also alleged he personally delivered direct orders to the country’s armed forces, as thousands of elite Russian soldiers fanned out across Crimea last March. When asked whether Moscow’s nuclear capabilities were also on standby, Putin answered bluntly: “We were ready to do it.”
Simpleχity;1064427056 said:Vladimir Putin Admits to Weighing Nuclear Option During Crimea Conflict Considering placing nuclear weapons on standby to secure the theft of Crimea? THAT is downright crazy.
If that's the usual response to international news then I can understand why the US MSM doesn't bother much with it.Yes, about the same fate met the land owners pushed aside to build the Panama Canal.
If that's the usual response to international news then I can understand why the US MSM doesn't bother much with it.
Right. Like I said, it's been the US dominating sea lanes, and that's changing, better be prepared to live with it.
The US's chief interest is keeping free trade and open sea lanes. As I said, that is patently NOT the objective of either the Chinese or the Russians. You should appreciate that difference because it's rather significant.
Really? What sea lanes have the Russians or Chinese closed?