• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

‘They Will Die in Tallinn’

Tim the plumber said:

Yes, it did sound a little optimistic to catch an already accelerated ICBM.

Any idea why he Russians are so concearned about them? Or is it just the usual cold war style kicking up a fuss?
Click to expand...

It is Putin being Putin.... 24 units when Russia has 1000 plus missiles.

The new Cold War.

That and the Russians have already placed Iskanders in place. The he claim it is a reaction to Poland is more BS.
 
Fledermaus said:
It is Putin being Putin.... 24 units when Russia has 1000 plus missiles.

The new Cold War.

That and the Russians have already placed Iskanders in place. The he claim it is a reaction to Poland is more BS.
Click to expand...

I would not worry that much, the Russians chose to demonstrate their strenght in Syria by having their mercenaries attack an American mercenary unit. The Russians lost some thousand or thousands and the Americans didn't lose anybody. When you are out teched it is bad.

The Russians will not want to repeat that on their door step.
 
Frankly, the discussion has turned into a triumph of ignorance and arrogance over facts.


To be clear, Russia is not a full spectrum military competitor to the US. But it is capable of destroying it, and it will retain that capability no matter how much the US tries to achieve invulnerability. The US maintains an incredibly expensive global military empire, Russia competes with the US only in certain selected fields - but it has the scientific know how to do that very effectively, and in a few key fields is ahead of the US.

No state on earth has ever achieved invulnerability. It's just complacent arrogance and wishful thinking to think the US can do this. Diplomacy must prevail over futile attempts to impose your will by force or the threat of it.
 
The rational and sensible solution is to cut a deal with the Russians. Negotiate the dismantling or mothballing of the ABM sites in Poland and Romania in return for the full and permanent withdrawal of intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles from Kaliningrad with a one-year abrogation clause so that nobody is caught with their pants down in the future, should relations go further south. Tie this agreement to an explicit agreement that Ukraine will not be allowed to join NATO for at least 25 years or the life of the ABM/Kaliningrad agreement (which ever is shorter) and have Russia commit to withdrawing all military forces from the three oblasts of Ukraine where Russian military and materiel support is propping up armed separatists. Cut another tied-deal where the Ukrainian rebels, after confessing to all crimes before truth and reconciliation commissions, can live in exile in Russia for up to 20 years and then be returned to the Ukraine without prosecution for the crimes they confessed to from international and Ukrainian authorities. Crimea remains Russian (Khrushchev's strategic error of 1953 corrected) and Russia agrees to stop destabilising Ukraine, the Baltic States and Poland both overtly and covertly. If possible also tie this agreement package to the permanent retirement of Vladimir Putin from Russian politics, but that may be a stretch-goal which is unattainable.

This is the kind of deal which President John F. Kennedy did with Nikita Khrushchev after the US deployment of nuclear-tipped missiles into Turkey in the late 1950's triggered the Sioviet Union to respond in kind by deploying nuclear tipped missiles and long-range SAM systems into Cuba in the early 1960's. Do we really have to get to the brink of global thermonuclear destruction once again before a deal is cut, like in the case of the Cuban Missile Crisis? Both sides need to grow up and stop posturing like puffed-up street gangs in competition for turf which is in fact not their own. These aren't chains and knives they're wielding so if someone makes a mistake there is no turf left to fight over and no one left to fight.
 
Last edited:
Manc Skipper said:
In defending itself? Or relying on Trump for backup?
Click to expand...
Maybe they should turn to the kneeling subjects in the UK for backup? They can teach them how to surrender rights and grovel and eat **** for the crown.
 
Evilroddy said:
The rational and sensible solution is to cut a deal with the Russians. Negotiate the dismantling or mothballing of the ABM sites in Poland and Romania in return for the full and permanent withdrawal of intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles from Kaliningrad with a one-year abrogation clause so that nobody is caught with their pants down in the future, should relations go further south. Tie this agreement to an explicit agreement that Ukraine will not be allowed to join NATO for at least 25 years or the life of the ABM/Kaliningrad agreement (which ever is shorter) and have Russia commit to withdrawing all military forces from the three oblasts of Ukraine where Russian military and materiel support is propping up armed separatists. Cut another tied-deal where the Ukrainian rebels, after confessing to all crimes before truth and reconciliation commissions, can live in exile in Russia for up to 20 years and then be returned to the Ukraine without prosecution for the crimes they confessed to from international and Ukrainian authorities. Crimea remains Russian (Khrushchev's strategic error of 1953 corrected) and Russia agrees to stop destabilising Ukraine, the Baltic States and Poland both overtly and covertly. If possible also tie this agreement package to the permanent retirement of Vladimir Putin from Russian politics, but that may be a stretch-goal which is unattainable.

This is the kind of deal which President John F. Kennedy did with Nikita Khrushchev after the US deployment of nuclear-tipped missiles into Turkey in the late 1950's triggered the Sioviet Union to respond in kind by deploying nuclear tipped missiles and long-range SAM systems into Cuba in the early 1960's. Do we really have to get to the brink of global thermonuclear destruction once again before a deal is cut, like in the case of the Cuban Missile Crisis? Both sides need to grow up and stop posturing like puffed-up street gangs in competition for turf which is in fact not their own. These aren't chains and knives they're wielding so if someone makes a mistake there is no turf left to fight over and no one left to fight.
Click to expand...

Yes, these are really sensible suggestions which wise leaders would pursue. To be realistic though, it is primarily the West which has backed itself into a corner of irrelevance as it did with its equally unrealistic 'Assad must go' policy in Syria. Trump may be inclined to negotiate a settlement but he is clearly not going to be allowed to do it.

The only completely unrealistic demand, which you recognise as such, is that Putin should retire. He is of course a legitimate leader of the Russian state, and such a demand should only be made in the context of the forced retirement of all the western leaders who have presided over a vain-glorious and absurd attempt to isolate Russia and demand its capitulation to their will, and the trial for war crimes of Bush and Blair over Iraq.

Bringing the world back to the possibility of a nuclear conflict within 25 years of the end of the Cold War is a truly gargantuan achievement - testament to monumental arrogance and hubris by the victorious western powers in their treatment of Russia.
 
Westphalian said:
Bringing the world back to the possibility of a nuclear conflict within 25 years of the end of the Cold War is a truly gargantuan achievement
Click to expand...

Putin accomplished it in 17 years. Just a few reminders for you.....

Vladimir Putin’s nuclear posturing is a dangerous escalation

Russia responds with veiled nuclear, death threats to UK nerve agent attack

Putin boasts military might with animation of Florida nuke strike

Putin Threatens U.S. Arms Race With New Missiles Declaration
 
Westphalian said:
Frankly, the discussion has turned into a triumph of ignorance and arrogance over facts.


To be clear, Russia is not a full spectrum military competitor to the US. But it is capable of destroying it, and it will retain that capability no matter how much the US tries to achieve invulnerability. The US maintains an incredibly expensive global military empire, Russia competes with the US only in certain selected fields - but it has the scientific know how to do that very effectively, and in a few key fields is ahead of the US.

No state on earth has ever achieved invulnerability. It's just complacent arrogance and wishful thinking to think the US can do this. Diplomacy must prevail over futile attempts to impose your will by force or the threat of it.
Click to expand...

Gee bud, have you tried telling Putin that?

Oh wait, that's right.......by "diplomacy" you mean "letting Russia make all the land grabs it wants" and "imposing your will" I said what you think the US protecting its allies counts as.
 
Evilroddy said:
The rational and sensible solution is to cut a deal with the Russians. Negotiate the dismantling or mothballing of the ABM sites in Poland and Romania in return for the full and permanent withdrawal of intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles from Kaliningrad with a one-year abrogation clause so that nobody is caught with their pants down in the future, should relations go further south. Tie this agreement to an explicit agreement that Ukraine will not be allowed to join NATO for at least 25 years or the life of the ABM/Kaliningrad agreement (which ever is shorter) and have Russia commit to withdrawing all military forces from the three oblasts of Ukraine where Russian military and materiel support is propping up armed separatists. Cut another tied-deal where the Ukrainian rebels, after confessing to all crimes before truth and reconciliation commissions, can live in exile in Russia for up to 20 years and then be returned to the Ukraine without prosecution for the crimes they confessed to from international and Ukrainian authorities. Crimea remains Russian (Khrushchev's strategic error of 1953 corrected) and Russia agrees to stop destabilising Ukraine, the Baltic States and Poland both overtly and covertly. If possible also tie this agreement package to the permanent retirement of Vladimir Putin from Russian politics, but that may be a stretch-goal which is unattainable.

This is the kind of deal which President John F. Kennedy did with Nikita Khrushchev after the US deployment of nuclear-tipped missiles into Turkey in the late 1950's triggered the Sioviet Union to respond in kind by deploying nuclear tipped missiles and long-range SAM systems into Cuba in the early 1960's. Do we really have to get to the brink of global thermonuclear destruction once again before a deal is cut, like in the case of the Cuban Missile Crisis? Both sides need to grow up and stop posturing like puffed-up street gangs in competition for turf which is in fact not their own. These aren't chains and knives they're wielding so if someone makes a mistake there is no turf left to fight over and no one left to fight.
Click to expand...

Except for that to work Putin has to actually be willing to follow through on his part. If your plan were ever to be implemented it is far more likely that the Russians would simply claim they have ceased and desisted while continuing the same old tactics, having ensured that the Ukraine is vulnerable for another couple decades at the least.
 
Russia's population is in decline having never truly recovered from two world wars, several communist induced famines, an abortion rate that outpaces its live births by 30%, an elderly population approaching 15%, high divorce rates, and a severe HIV epidemic. Absorbing Estonia and other nearby countries may be the only way Russia can survive. Perhaps that is Putin's long term plan. The US backs out of NATO, Russia moves in and absorbs these counties which have a significant percentage of ethnic Russians.
 
Oceanborn said:
Russia's population is in decline having never truly recovered from two world wars, several communist induced famines, an abortion rate that outpaces its live births by 30%, an elderly population approaching 15%, high divorce rates, and a severe HIV epidemic. Absorbing Estonia and other nearby countries may be the only way Russia can survive. Perhaps that is Putin's long term plan. The US backs out of NATO, Russia moves in and absorbs these counties which have a significant percentage of ethnic Russians.
Click to expand...

Latvia and Estonia have a significant ethnic Russian population (~25%) due to Moscow replacing (ethnic cleansing) all the Latvians and Estonians deported in trains to Siberia with Russians after WWII.

The same ethnic cleansing and replacement with Russians occurred in Crimea after Stalin deported the Crimean Tatar people in 1944.
 
Oceanborn said:
Russia's population is in decline having never truly recovered from two world wars, several communist induced famines, an abortion rate that outpaces its live births by 30%, an elderly population approaching 15%, high divorce rates, and a severe HIV epidemic. Absorbing Estonia and other nearby countries may be the only way Russia can survive. Perhaps that is Putin's long term plan. The US backs out of NATO, Russia moves in and absorbs these counties which have a significant percentage of ethnic Russians.
Click to expand...

With respect, this is a monumentally stupid comment.

If you want to see states with real population problems, look no further than Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Latvia's population has declined by 18% since 2000!

If Russia wanted to grow its population, risking nuclear war in order to absorb the Baltic states (all declining from a small base) would be bottom of anybody's list. It's far easier to do what western states are doing - get immigrants and encourage residents to have more babies.
 
I agree that absorbing the couple of million Baltics (6 mio.) will hardly have an impact on Russian demographics, she'd be far better off getting the people of the old Soviet Union back.

Taking Crimea was already a good start even where the majority of Tatars already live in deportation or other forms of diaspora.
 
Chagos said:
I agree that absorbing the couple of million Baltics (6 mio.) will hardly have an impact on Russian demographics, she'd be far better off getting the people of the old Soviet Union back.

Taking Crimea was already a good start even where the majority of Tatars already live in deportation or other forms of diaspora.
Click to expand...

Crimea was only another 1½ million ethnic Russians with most of them elderly. Not helpful to the declining Russian population demographics.

There are many Russian speaking peoples on their periphery, but they're too brown for the ruling European Russians and the white-nationalists.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Crimea was only another 1½ million ethnic Russians with most of them elderly. Not helpful to the declining Russian population demographics.

There are many Russian speaking peoples on their periphery, but they're too brown for the ruling European Russians and the white-nationalists.
Click to expand...
I know, I've been to Sevastopol once. But it was a long time ago, long before the annexation.
 
Chagos said:
I know, I've been to Sevastopol once. But it was a long time ago, long before the annexation.
Click to expand...

I lived for a bit in Crimea maybe eight years ago. Near Yalta.
 
Rogue Valley said:
I lived for a bit in Crimea maybe eight years ago. Near Yalta.
Click to expand...
stayed there a couple of nights too, nice place. Local functionary (Soviet) showed me around the Livadia palace. Took a rain check on Vorontsov since I found it quite gross on photographs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom