EEU = Soviet Lite

[S2]

"...Russia is supporting one side in your civil war. Its a local thing not our concern..."

Well...it's BECAUSE Russia supports one side that it's a civil war at all or this little fracas would have been over last August.

Hardly makes it "...local...".

Of course, that'd be ignoring Russia directly seizing Ukrainian Crimea.

So ISIS is only our fourth greatest threat? But were bombing the sh!t outta them? Ahhh...because...we can? Because they don't have nukes? Got it.

That's why I should worry about ISIS but when the pre-eminent nuclear power in the world goes all paranoid-delusional and begins mumbling about slingin' nukes if Finland falls to NATO that's no sweat.

Just a local thingy.

[Versus]

"...Russia is supporting one side in your civil war. Its a local thing not our concern..."

Well...it's BECAUSE Russia supports one side that it's a civil war at all or this little fracas would have been over last August.

Hardly makes it "...local...".



Of course, that'd be ignoring Russia directly seizing Ukrainian Crimea.

So ISIS is only our fourth greatest threat? But were bombing the sh!t outta them? Ahhh...because...we can? Because they don't have nukes? Got it.

That's why I should worry about ISIS but when the pre-eminent nuclear power in the world goes all paranoid-delusional and begins mumbling about slingin' nukes if Finland falls to NATO that's no sweat.

Just a local thingy.

S2, how many people, trough the course of history, has been killed by nuclear weapons and how many with conventional weapons? Also,as far as ISIS story goes, things are not that black and white...

[S2]

"S2, how many people, trough the course of history, has been killed by nuclear weapons and how many with conventional weapons...?"

Good question-so if a baby starves in North Korea, does that count? After all, isn't it a nuclear weapon pointed at Seoul (or elsewhere) by the DPRK framing their deterrence to "regime change"? So...on it goes and babies starve but they weren't killed by a nuke in the hands of the wrong guys?

Now Russia issues threats to non-aligned nations in the Baltic north of Europe. Pre-emptive threats of nuclear targeting if they should join NATO. So you're cool with that level of coercion in day-to-day normal statecraft?

Nothing to worry about here?

"...Also,as far as ISIS story goes, things are not that black and white..."

Of course not. Nor is that the case WRT Ukraine. This is no "...black and white..." local dispute. It didn't start that way with Russia's invasion of a sovereign state, which is really all about forcing upon others a way of life that is a decisive failure.

[Versus]

"S2, how many people, trough the course of history, has been killed by nuclear weapons and how many with conventional weapons...?"

Good question-so if a baby starves in North Korea, does that count? After all, isn't it a nuclear weapon pointed at Seoul (or elsewhere) by the DPRK framing their deterrence to "regime change"? So...on it goes and babies starve but they weren't killed by a nuke in the hands of the wrong guys?

Now Russia issues threats to non-aligned nations in the Baltic north of Europe. Pre-emptive threats of nuclear targeting if they should join NATO. So you're cool with that level of coercion in day-to-day normal statecraft?

Nothing to worry about here?

"...Also,as far as ISIS story goes, things are not that black and white..."

Of course not. Nor is that the case WRT Ukraine. This is no "...black and white..." local dispute. It didn't start that way with Russia's invasion of a sovereign state, which is really all about forcing upon others a way of life that is a decisive failure.

No, I am not cool. The ballistic shield base or what ever it is called, is in Romania and NATO has a base in Kosovo, which makes us targets too, even if we are not aligned. Nuclear strike on those targets would be the same as hitting us directly. The rumor here says that US is bombing ISIS by day, but delivering weapons by night. Now I don't know what to think. My experience says that there is more than meets the eye.

[Doktor]

"S2, how many people, trough the course of history, has been killed by nuclear weapons and how many with conventional weapons...?"

Good question-so if a baby starves in North Korea, does that count? After all, isn't it a nuclear weapon pointed at Seoul (or elsewhere) by the DPRK framing their deterrence to "regime change"? So...on it goes and babies starve but they weren't killed by a nuke in the hands of the wrong guys?

Now Russia issues threats to non-aligned nations in the Baltic north of Europe. Pre-emptive threats of nuclear targeting if they should join NATO. So you're cool with that level of coercion in day-to-day normal statecraft?

Nothing to worry about here?

Don't you think it's just for the ponies? Let's say Russia point missiles towards Finland? Then what? More targets for less nukes. Would they hit a NATO country? Did they ever? Matter of fact, any nuclear country but USA on Japan hit another country? With nukes that is.

"...Also,as far as ISIS story goes, things are not that black and white..."

Of course not. Nor is that the case WRT Ukraine. This is no "...black and white..." local dispute. It didn't start that way with Russia's invasion of a sovereign state, which is really all about forcing upon others a way of life that is a decisive failure.

So, again, which is that Cossackia country mentioned in that PDF that I attached above?

Let's say there is a referendum in Ukraine tomorrow for Eastern parts to secede and later join Mother Russia, what you think the outcome will be as of today?

[Versus]

Doc, depends how you want to see it. If you accept the stance that West stands behind everything that is good and just and that its intentions are always for the greater good, yeah, this logic is fully acceptable. Than truly, Russia is a monster that needs to be contained by any mean necessary. Unfortunately, our experience tells otherwise and places this context in a category that is more suitable for, I don't know, "Avengers 5" plot or some other block buster. Our experience tells us that the West is just as brutal as the East in achieving its goals. That is why I am suspicious towards everything that is in a public discourse and I am prone to criticize and disagree with most of it. There are no innocents in this, on both sides.

[S2]

Dok,

"So, again, which is that Cossackia country mentioned in that PDF that I attached above..?"

I don't know. Did you e-mail the authors of that legislation…from 1959?

"...Let's say there is a referendum in Ukraine tomorrow for Eastern parts to secede and later join Mother Russia, what you think the outcome will be as of today?"

Unanimous for Russia. Tomorrow, right? Elections held under the aegis of Russian/LPR/DPR "officials"?

No question.

Now…as those areas are currently part of a sovereign nation, their vote for secession must meet the concurrence of the rest of that nation's citizens…or, at least, enough to constitute an electoral majority. At least where I come from, and we've fought a civil war objecting to the notion of southern secession.

Nevermind that the rest of that nation might object to electoral standards established and regulated by the currently presiding authority (such as it is) in Luhansk/Donetsk. I would.

Would you?

[Doktor]

And then we have Kosovo to which Russia objected. This card will be drawn over and over and over again.

[S2]

"Our experience tells us that the West is just as brutal as the East in achieving its goals."

Seriously? The "west"? Which "west" is that?

In any case, rank amateurs compared to Stalin and Mao.

Anyway, glad you can comfortably wear a gross stereotype after insisting things aren't so "...black and white...".

[Doktor]

Are we in blocs again?

Geographically and culturally, we are in the middle. Versus, if the "West" is so bad, why most of our compatriots leave in that direction and not eastwards?

[snapper]

So, again, which is that Cossackia country mentioned in that PDF that I attached above?

"Cossackia" is an old term used by exiles after WW2 roughly relating to the land south east of the Dnieper to the Don, many of whom had hoped for independence from the Soviet Union during WW2; a kind a 'Prometheian' hope that they could form their own 'Sich' sans Uncle Joe.

[snapper]

We reinforce Poland , Romania and the Baltic because they are NATO allies and we don't want your mess spilling over to their countries.

Training troops. Lets you kill each other more efficently so we don't have to get involved. Maybe you can fix your own mess

So bear with me a moment... If it is NOT a "Ukrainian civil war" then who is Putin waging war on? Perhaps that is why re-enforcement of the Central European nations is considered necessary?

[Versus]

"Our experience tells us that the West is just as brutal as the East in achieving its goals."

Seriously? The "west"? Which "west" is that?

In any case, rank amateurs compared to Stalin and Mao.

Anyway, glad you can comfortably wear a gross stereotype after insisting things aren't so "...black and white...".

How did you come to that conclusion?

[Versus]

Are we in blocs again?

Geographically and culturally, we are in the middle. Versus, if the "West" is so bad, why most of our compatriots leave in that direction and not eastwards?

Because there is no "East" and the bias is artificial. Russia is an "attempt of the West" and reading those historical books, I see now that it always has been like that.

[S2]

Versus,

"How did you come to that conclusion?"

Your comment quoted in bold is a rather gross stereotype. Luxembourg and Canada object. So too many others. Most notably the very cold corpses of Stalin and Mao.

They both had forgotten more about brutality than any run-of-the-mill western despot could imagine in his/her wildest dreams. That's just me, though.