MH17

namelessfly wrote:

turol wrote:
Why in God's name are they flying over a country in the midst of a Civil War?

Because man-portable SAMs can't hit airplanes that high and no-one believed Putin would be stupid enough to give those clowns all-up SAMs.

Putin was stupid enough to give full capability SAMs to the separatists because the Ukrainian Government was stupid enough to use fighter bombers and troop transports in it's military campaign against the seperatists.

Feel free to send over your SAS ( who are already there.). Don't be surprised if Putin responds by sending back some SS-18s.

How DARE the Ukrainian government use it's military air assets to help in the fight against the separatists. I mean.. really. Using their air force against the separatists who don't have one? How unfair and dastardly! They should fight with the same weapons the separatists are using and nothing more.

/eyeroll


What if the Ukrainian government asks the US for special ops? That effectively makes it legal for the US to be more involved. Putin would have no legal reasons for sending in the KGB types to help the separatists.

namelessfly wrote:The US needs to consider it's long term strategic interests rather than enshrine historical alliances.

I am quite content to see Russian separatists shoot down entire squadrons of airliners full of
Europeans if it will advance the long term strategic interests of the US.

Wow.. That's just.. wow. That is sick. It's literally; "I'm ok with the specific and deliberate slaughter of civilians if it advances my interests." That's just sick..

namelessfly wrote:The US needs to consider it's long term strategic interests rather than enshrine historical alliances.

Russia is no longer the USSR.
Russia is no longer communist.
Russia no longer has a totalitarian political ideology and economic system that it wishes to impose on the rest of the world.
Russia's economy is no longer large enough to allow it to sustain a military capable of rivaling the US.

The EU has an aggregate economy comparable to the US economy.
The EU has a host of political and economic ideologies that it wishes to impose on the rest of the world, or at least the US. The most pernicious of these ideologies is global warming theology which is intended to devastate the US economy.

The biggest threat facing the US is radical Islam.
Russia supports some totalitarian, radical Islamic states to undermine US power and influence.
Russia is also smart enough to perceive that Islamic radicalism is a threat to Russia.
The EU seeks to appease Islamic radicalism and eagerely embraces immigrants from radical, Islamic states who are more interested in imposing Islam on Europe than assimilating. The recent riots in France and the UK to protest the Israeli punitive incursion into Gaza illustrates this.

It is in the interest of the US to limit rather than nurture the economic and potential military power of the EU because the EU is an ally of radical Islam.

It is in the interest of the US to nurture the economic and military power of Russia to counterbalance the EU, as an ally against radical Islam, and to counterbalance the power of China.

I am quite content to see Russian separatists shoot down entire squadrons of airliners full of
Europeans if it will advance the long term strategic interests of the US.

Despite the up-down nature of US-Nato relationship; (and with 28 nations trying to reach consensus, bickering is bound to arise), and the implosion of the USSR, it remains Nato and US foreign policy to rein in Russia’s penchant for land grabbing. If for nothing else then pure self interest will play its part, given Russia’s large population and vast natural resources.
So no I don’t see a version of Pournell/Niven Russian-American Co-dominion arising, rather and more worrying in the long run is the increasing rapprochement between China and Russia. The 30 year natural gas agreement just entered between the two is a good example thereof. With Russia’s abundance and Chinas increasing need for natural raw materials to feed its industries, a Chinese Russian axis must seem to US-Nato long term strategic planners, a marriage made in Hell.
There’s even an element to play on your Islam fears, in that both countries are currently engaged in counter-insurgency operations against Islamic separatists. Russia in the Caucuses and China in Xinjiang against the Uyghur Muslim minority.

As to your callus and barbaric comment on having pro-Russian separatists bring down European civilian airliners as a boon for US foreign policy, I’d just like to add the following; if you even care, that there were 23 Americans and 80 children amongst the more then 300 victims on board Flight MH 71.

The last number I heard was that only two US citizens were on board.

My snarky comment is intentionally reminiscent of comments made by Eurotrash after 9-11 that the US deserved the attacks because of our imperialist policies.

One would presume that even Eurofucktards would have the good sense to divert air traffic from a war zone especially after several recent downings of Ukrainian aircraft.

Arol wrote:

namelessfly wrote:The US needs to consider it's long term strategic interests rather than enshrine historical alliances.

Russia is no longer the USSR.
Russia is no longer communist.
Russia no longer has a totalitarian political ideology and economic system that it wishes to impose on the rest of the world.
Russia's economy is no longer large enough to allow it to sustain a military capable of rivaling the US.

The EU has an aggregate economy comparable to the US economy.
The EU has a host of political and economic ideologies that it wishes to impose on the rest of the world, or at least the US. The most pernicious of these ideologies is global warming theology which is intended to devastate the US economy.

The biggest threat facing the US is radical Islam.
Russia supports some totalitarian, radical Islamic states to undermine US power and influence.
Russia is also smart enough to perceive that Islamic radicalism is a threat to Russia.
The EU seeks to appease Islamic radicalism and eagerely embraces immigrants from radical, Islamic states who are more interested in imposing Islam on Europe than assimilating. The recent riots in France and the UK to protest the Israeli punitive incursion into Gaza illustrates this.

It is in the interest of the US to limit rather than nurture the economic and potential military power of the EU because the EU is an ally of radical Islam.

It is in the interest of the US to nurture the economic and military power of Russia to counterbalance the EU, as an ally against radical Islam, and to counterbalance the power of China.

I am quite content to see Russian separatists shoot down entire squadrons of airliners full of
Europeans if it will advance the long term strategic interests of the US.

Despite the up-down nature of US-Nato relationship; (and with 28 nations trying to reach consensus, bickering is bound to arise), and the implosion of the USSR, it remains Nato and US foreign policy to rein in Russia’s penchant for land grabbing. If for nothing else then pure self interest will play its part, given Russia’s large population and vast natural resources.
So no I don’t see a version of Pournell/Niven Russian-American Co-dominion arising, rather and more worrying in the long run is the increasing rapprochement between China and Russia. The 30 year natural gas agreement just entered between the two is a good example thereof. With Russia’s abundance and Chinas increasing need for natural raw materials to feed its industries, a Chinese Russian axis must seem to US-Nato long term strategic planners, a marriage made in Hell.
There’s even an element to play on your Islam fears, in that both countries are currently engaged in counter-insurgency operations against Islamic separatists. Russia in the Caucuses and China in Xinjiang against the Uyghur Muslim minority.

As to your callus and barbaric comment on having pro-Russian separatists bring down European civilian airliners as a boon for US foreign policy, I’d just like to add the following; if you even care, that there were 23 Americans and 80 children amongst the more then 300 victims on board Flight MH 71.

Senator Ron Paul has insightful comments.

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/fe ... -media-won’t-report-about-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh17.aspx

How Dare the Russian Seperatists use the SAM systems available to them to shoot down Ukrainian aircraft that have been bombing them indiscriminately.

Zakharra wrote:

namelessfly wrote:

Putin was stupid enough to give full capability SAMs to the separatists because the Ukrainian Government was stupid enough to use fighter bombers and troop transports in it's military campaign against the seperatists.

Feel free to send over your SAS ( who are already there.). Don't be surprised if Putin responds by sending back some SS-18s.

How DARE the Ukrainian government use it's military air assets to help in the fight against the separatists. I mean.. really. Using their air force against the separatists who don't have one? How unfair and dastardly! They should fight with the same weapons the separatists are using and nothing more.

/eyeroll


What if the Ukrainian government asks the US for special ops? That effectively makes it legal for the US to be more involved. Putin would have no legal reasons for sending in the KGB types to help the separatists.

namelessfly wrote:The US needs to consider it's long term strategic interests rather than enshrine historical alliances.

I am quite content to see Russian separatists shoot down entire squadrons of airliners full of
Europeans if it will advance the long term strategic interests of the US.

Wow.. That's just.. wow. That is sick. It's literally; "I'm ok with the specific and deliberate slaughter of civilians if it advances my interests." That's just sick..

Careful, that's almost the exact same term you used when you were banned last time.

namelessfly wrote:...Eurofucktards...

Donnachaidh wrote:Careful, that's almost the exact same term you used when you were banned last time.

namelessfly wrote:...Eurofucktards...

I presume that more tolerance is allowed in politics.

I have friends that were injured by European built antitank missiles that were shipped to Iraq during the months leading up to the invasion.

Our European allies were just as culpable for those deaths as Putin allegedly is for the downed airliner.

Just wait until the thousands of shoulder fired SAMs that were looted from Daffy Gaddaffy's bunkers show up mat an airport near you.

namelessfly wrote:How Dare the Russian Seperatists use the SAM systems available to them to shoot down Ukrainian aircraft that have been bombing them indiscriminately.

Zakharra wrote:


Putin was stupid enough to give full capability SAMs to the separatists because the Ukrainian Government was stupid enough to use fighter bombers and troop transports in it's military campaign against the seperatists.

Feel free to send over your SAS ( who are already there.). Don't be surprised if Putin responds by sending back some SS-18s.[i]


How DARE the Ukrainian government use it's military air assets to help in the fight against the separatists. I mean.. really. Using their air force against the separatists who don't have one? How unfair and dastardly! They should fight with the same weapons the separatists are using and nothing more.

/eyeroll


What if the Ukrainian government asks the US for special ops? That effectively makes it legal for the US to be more involved. Putin would have no legal reasons for sending in the KGB types to help the separatists.


[i]The US needs to consider it's long term strategic interests rather than enshrine historical alliances.

I am quite content to see Russian separatists shoot down entire squadrons of airliners full of
Europeans if it will advance the long term strategic interests of the US.


Wow.. That's just.. wow. That is sick. It's literally; "I'm ok with the specific and deliberate slaughter of civilians if it advances my interests." That's just sick..

SAMs given to them by Russia in the first place. But note what I replied to in the first place; you saying that the Ukrainian government was stupid for using it's air assets, ie the transport and fighter/bombers, to help suppress and drive back the separatists. You made it sound like Ukraine was in the wrong for using its military, army and air force, to remove the separatists. You also somewhat taunted the US/England, daring them to send in their special forces so Putin's KGB knock offs could kill them. Sorry, but Russia has no legal standing in arming and helping these separatists in the first place. He's the one keeping them in the field.

Thankfully it looks like the separatists are going to get kicked out of Donetsk soon. The Ukrainian army has reached the outskirts of the city. The separatists are being pushed back and if they stand, will soon die. Unless they retreat to Russia.

On another forum I am on, one of the members there lives in Donetsk and he calls the separatists terrorists, He's also most definitely not supporting Russia's involvement, or meddling or apparent land grabs.

Then you spouted off about how the separatists shooting down squadrons of civilian airliners filled with Europeans would make you happy if it advanced the US's long term strategic interests. That's sick and you ever think that supporting allies is a long term strategic interest of the US? Having allies that can depend upon us is a very good thing. Having allies like Russia or China is only asking for a knife in the back, kidney and spleen since both of those nations view the US as an enemy. We are -not- their ally by any means. Better to be a friend of Europe than one of Russia and/or China.

Post by namelessfly » Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:38 pm

Donnachaidh wrote:Careful, that's almost the exact same term you used when you were banned last time.

namelessfly wrote:...Eurofucktards...

There's tolerance, then there's outright crude and rude behavior. There's a difference between tolerating someone with a different opinion and is polite about it and one who has a different opinion and is rude and offensive about it. You seem to be verging into the rude and offensive part.

This is very interesting. I'd love to know how European politicians managed to corruptly influence 97% of scientists world wide to falsely support a peer reviewed scientific theory, with the covert aim of devastating the US economy? If they can do that, then it's all over Europe rules.



"The EU has a host of political and economic ideologies that it wishes to impose on the rest of the world, or at least the US. The most pernicious of these ideologies is global warming theology which is intended to devastate the US economy."

Al Gore brought the European idea of Carbon Credits to the USA he made millions on it with his movie and books, President Obama campaigned saying he would destroy the coal industry in the USA, and has issued Executive orders to that effect. Coal is our most plentiful and cheapest to extract fossil fuel it's elimination will raise energy costs even more adversely effecting the economy. China and others are laughing behind our thread bare backs as we commit economic suicide.

Needless to say this causes a certain amount of frustration with the National Government, and frank hate of where the idea and location of 'junk science' came from, IE Europe. If you believe that science is free of political pressure you best stop smoking what you're smoking. The liberalization of our universities, 'political correctness' mean that alternate views are pounded down. Governmental funding of research to get the answers the government wants is not new, in the 1910s and 1920s governmental studies of native American tribes showing no concept of land ownership was used to reduce reservation lands even further!

Rant over, Poker.

PS Nameless not one name calling needed

Daryl wrote:This is very interesting. I'd love to know how European politicians managed to corruptly influence 97% of scientists world wide to falsely support a peer reviewed scientific theory, with the covert aim of devastating the US economy? If they can do that, then it's all over Europe rules.



"The EU has a host of political and economic ideologies that it wishes to impose on the rest of the world, or at least the US. The most pernicious of these ideologies is global warming theology which is intended to devastate the US economy."