View Poll Results: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

Voters
710. You may not vote on this poll
  • Multi-Polar World

    458 64.51%
  • Nuclear War

    252 35.49%
Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 157

Thread: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

  1. #111
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    My criticism hasn't been that the US was courting Ukraine in an attempt to pull them into western influence, all along, Russia was doing the same. My problem begins when Ukraine moves the direction that the US was attempting to block, and the subsequent US/EU response which has given a measure of credibility to Putins action.
    Exactly. The thing is this, if the U.S. is going to promote democracy, we need to be able to live with the results, if we don't it becomes a sham. That is likely why Putin felt he had to make a move on Crimea. Russia was willing to play the democracy game in Ukraine. But when it saw that the U.S. was perfectly willing to help facilitate the demise of a democratically elected government because things did not go it's way, Russia felt that there interests in Crimea were to vital to be left to such foolishness. As a result we are were we are today.

  2. #112
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    There are more "crazies" here than I am comfortable with . Hatred and conservatism will do that to a man .And, indeed, the original question will not generate good debate ..

  3. #113
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Exactly. The thing is this, if the U.S. is going to promote democracy, we need to be able to live with the results, if we don't it becomes a sham. That is likely why Putin felt he had to make a move on Crimea. Russia was willing to play the democracy game in Ukraine. But when it saw that the U.S. was perfectly willing to help facilitate the demise of a democratically elected government because things did not go it's way, Russia felt that there interests in Crimea were to vital to be left to such foolishness. As a result we are were we are today.
    Bingo!! You've got it dude. As a matter of fact, Russia had every reasonable expectation that NATO would wind up with its only viable warm water ports in Crimea, and that was not going to happen, so absolutely, Putins move was deliberate and in response to US/EU manipulation in Kiev.
    Last edited by Montecresto; 02-11-15 at 09:04 PM.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fleming View Post
    This is a conflict in which only one side (Russia) has nuclear weapons. The US and its allies Will never go to war with Russia over Ukraine.
    I don't think that is an absolute at all. If the U.S. escalates by sending arms to Ukraine, Russia will likely escalate. It could very well escalate to the extent that Russia decides to invade Ukraine and occupy western Ukraine. Then what? Then the voices will loudly proclaim that Russia cannot be allowed to redraw the map, Putin is Hitler and must be stopped, and the U.S. is weak because it is not doing anything. Air power would then be on the table, and then we would surely be walking down the road to nuclear confrontation.

  5. #115
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayton3 View Post
    That heart quit beating 25 years ago.

    The Russians are not going to go nuclear over a peninsula in the Black Sea.
    No it did not. Obama declared that Russia was a regional power. That is likely because Russia can project regional power in the Black Sea area from it's base at Sevastopol. Indeed it can control Ukraine from this position. Its strategic significance is very important to Russia and should not be underestimated.

  6. #116
    Educator
    Dayton3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    07-20-17 @ 01:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,153

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    No it did not. Obama declared that Russia was a regional power. .
    Obama an ill informed idiot. What is your point.

  7. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayton3 View Post
    Obama an ill informed idiot. What is your point.
    My point now is that you don't have a point, unless one considers malice to be noteworthy. Viewed from that perspective your post was noteworthy.

  8. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Bingo!! You've got it dude. As a matter of fact, Russia had every reasonable expectation that NATO would wind up with its only viable warm water ports in Crimea, and that was not going to happen, so absolutely, Putins move was deliberate and in response to US/EU manipulation in Kiev.
    No doubt. That whole NATO expansion was about containing Russia. Ariel Cohen said that in return for western investment Russia should accept NATO expansion. So that was the thing. Get Russia dependent on foreign investment and strategically position NATO such that Russia would essentially be impotent.

  9. #119
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Brussels
    Last Seen
    02-12-15 @ 11:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    154

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    I don't think that is an absolute at all. If the U.S. escalates by sending arms to Ukraine, Russia will likely escalate. It could very well escalate to the extent that Russia decides to invade Ukraine and occupy western Ukraine. Then what? Then the voices will loudly proclaim that Russia cannot be allowed to redraw the map, Putin is Hitler and must be stopped, and the U.S. is weak because it is not doing anything. Air power would then be on the table, and then we would surely be walking down the road to nuclear confrontation.
    Even if the US starts to ship arms to Ukraine this Will not make the Ukrainian military a match for Russia. It Will be more diffficult for the Ukranian military to learn to use this materiŽl ( which they are unfamiliar with) than for Russia to destroy it ( or capture Some of it). Putin doesn't need to invade and conquer all of Ukraine to actieve His aims. But even if he does, the US is not going to send in an army to fight him and start a war over Ukraine.
    Finally, Putin is NOT Hitler. Trying to turn every authoritarian and unfriendly leader into Hitler is completely ahistorical and not very smart. Putin's goals are limited, very Unlike Hitler's.

  10. #120
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Brussels
    Last Seen
    02-12-15 @ 11:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    154

    Re: Which is better, a multi polar world or a nuclear war?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    No it did not. Obama declared that Russia was a regional power. That is likely because Russia can project regional power in the Black Sea area from it's base at Sevastopol. Indeed it can control Ukraine from this position. Its strategic significance is very important to Russia and should not be underestimated.
    And its importance and strategie significance to the US is exactly zero.

Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •