Twelve not allowed angry mutants

I can respect that. So we can all agree no one is able to take a moral high ground here? And I mean neither Russia or China nor the US or even the EU.
 
Here's an interesting question. If any superpower throughout 20th century history obtained the same position that the United States has currently excluding Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, would the world look vastly different or exactly the same in a political light not counting technological particularities?


I have a theory that it would look the same with different flags and hats and other meaningless nationalist garbage. Most atrocities that countries perpetrate seem to be done out of weakness more than strength.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hand waving, whos handwaving?

What, you want us to go to the Hague or something? You want us to cry our eyes out and say how sorry we were? It was a shitty time and shit happens. I'll give you one example as explanation.

We needed GB and France to counter the USSR. France wanted us to not help the Viet Minh. GB wanted us to oust Mossadegh. Get it now? To make friends with one, we fuck over someone else. Its CHOICE and CONSEQUENCE. How can it be that hard to understand? Its not wrong and its not right, its shit that needed to be DONE. You know you can't save everyone, so you make the less painful choice that benefits YOU.

We had a world with many big assholes, that didn't end up going too good. So after picking up the pieces, we cut those assholes down to only two. No world wars, but proxy wars.

We got close to a nuke fight sometimes but its going to happen. It was a new era where the power of the atom was still being understood. Nuclear weapons were still new and both sides toyed with the possibility of their deployment like kids with new toys.

And yes Gonzalez, your right. We are all fucking assholes. The United States became the 'bigger', asshole because we won the cold war. Had it turned the other way, the USSR/Warsaw Pact would have been the 'bigger', asshole. They would have intervened, blown shit up, killed people, etc. In short, the USSR would have shaped the world towards the needs of them and their alies. This isn't new people, its been happening back since the first hegemon popped up.
 
Everyone gets so personal about the relative landmass they were born in that exploits taxes from them.
 
Well, quality of life for the LOSERS, AKA the west/nato, would have been not very good. You know, with the whole vengeance thing and all that. The other side might have arguably gotten better. The Nazis had it good for a while as all the resources they gobbled up went straight to the homeland and its allies. The same could be said of the USSR and warsaw pact countries.
 
'facepalm' Loads of the shit America did was after the cold war genius! Again handwaving, you're justifying America ruining ountries because it was a shitty time. Yeah, real good reasoning. What if... no... what if America didn't intervene in South America and the Middle East. Maybe things would have been... better? Impossible! Anything but democracy and America means anarchy and destruction! So let's stop that by replacing it with anarchy and destruction! I doubt the American government literally thought that but it does fit their actions. They assume anarchy and shitty countries will come out... so they replace them with actually shitty countries. There are a few good examples, mainly South Korea and Tawian, but they're few and just fall flat in comparison.
 
South America was primarily replacing pro-communist leaders with pro-western ones.

So far, we have left S. America alone. That Griega case, as shitty as the ruling is (I agree with you folks, that asshole hedge fund is going to disrupt a lot of payments because they are greedy fucks), is a economic one, lobbied by an american company. As far as I know, we haven't supported a coup for sometime.

Your putting words in my mouth. Of course life would have been better for the natives had the big assholes not intervened. Eastern europe and S. America would have been vastly different if a hypothetical hegemon had kept both the USSR and America in check. This is assuming said countries also deealt with internal problems effectively like corruption, crime and education.

But you know what? It would have been shitty for America had the Soviets started moving in and making deals. FFS, imagine if it wasn't America but Brazil who lead a S. American version of NATO. Brazil would fuck over America IN A FUCKING HEARTBEAT, if it meant that it would be stronger against the soviets.

The ME, sure. I admitted Iraq and Afghanistan was shitty. AGAIN, do you want us to go to the Hague or something? Brazil would do the same shit we did. Get it now?
 
What's the point? The place got fucked up in the cold war... what with Honduras, El Salvador and other places... They might have dealt with them decently if America, instead of having the leaders killed or overthrown actually tried to help the economy or give aid. Not create more war and death. Well actually, loads of communist movements were supported by the people, and they showed lots of promise, making some good changes. Majority didn't last for a year, so we can't say the USSR would be as bad. The Soviets were weaker anyway. That's a well known fact. Also the Soviets weren't as interested in foreign policy. China supported world revolution far more then the USSR, which is why they argued commonly. Why do we have to go to the Hague? Why do you keep mentioning that? Every country did the same shit, but we're not talking about whether they would do it or not, I was discussing more of what could have happened if America wasn't so fucking worried about communists and wasn't so interested in power. Understand now?
 
So I have to spell it out for you? We had the soviets and potential nuclear war to deal with, we had no time for aid and decent treatment. If your government disagreed with us, war and death, here it comes.

And why the hell, would we aid countries if they were leaning towards a more communist-socialist stance anyways? We would WANT to replace those leaders with ones who like us. That's the more pragmatic approach.

Che Gueveras, 'New Hombre', plan was a failure. Same with the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Maybe some Latin American countries might have gotten communism to work, maybe not. Either way, its in the past.

I bring up the Hague because I am confused. You keep bringing up what we did and S. America and all I have said was 'I hear you loud and clear'. What do you want me to say?

Lastly, one needs power to fight the USSR.
 
Actually they did... but you know... who cares bout that right? A more pragmatic approach that ruins countries and create mass detah and suffering. The country becomes worthless and you get barely anything out of it. Ever heard of the quote 'if we don't know our history we are doomed to repeat it'? Okay... China could have done that. And it wasn't all shit in the USSR. You have to live there to know.
 
The Dopamine Cleric said:
Here's an interesting question. If any superpower throughout 20th century history obtained the same position that the United States has currently excluding Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, would the world look vastly different or exactly the same in a political light not counting technological particularities?


I have a theory that it would look the same with different flags and hats and other meaningless nationalist garbage. Most atrocities that countries perpetrate seem to be done out of weakness more than strength.
Click to expand...

That's an intersting question, and I guess there is no way to know how the situation would be today if China or the Sovietunion became the dominant power of the 21st century. So it really all remains speculation.

However, I would wager that the situation for western Europe and the USA would not change in a way where either the Sovietunion or China totally dominated those nations, not when you consider the nuclear arsenal at their disposal. Any military move would be suicide. After the SU colapsed we didn't sacked Russia either. Many believe anyway that even with the Sovietunion coming out as dominate power they would have one way or another initated democratic reforms, China would have most probably continued on its current course becoming more capitalistic and allowing for more economical freedom. The US and Europe would have been more isolationistic for sure, but would the world be a lot worse compared to today? As said, we will never know this, but I think not, well not by much.

I mean neither the SU nor Russia or China could really engage in more proxy wars than the US, particularly not abroad, outside of their own hemisphere, they would spread small military bases around the world like we do, but the whole picture would look probably similar where they had to deal with the same issues like today, terrorism, fundametalism, refugees etc. I mean look at the late 50s and early 1960s. A lot of European nations still had a strong sense of colonialism, you really can't get much worse than Belgium, France and Britain in that respect. All democratic nations. More or less.
 
Last edited:
Can we all agree that both USA and Russia and everybody else are shit and that Antarctica is the best?
 
Crni Vuk said:
[Nirvana Fallacy + Tu Quoque Fallacy]
Click to expand...

Jesus fucking Christ, Crni, where do I start? Your silly demand that NATO has to consist of perfect democracies, otherwise it's a whore is ridiculous. As is your insistence that because at some point in the past a given nation wasn't democratic or free, it completely destroys their credibility. We've had this discussion before and you haven't improved your argument since.

Also, I never supported the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. Both have been destabilizing to the region and the global economy. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of the belief that war can be clean and safe for everyone involved. It never is. Even war for the most justifiable reasons isn't, because humans aren't robots and they can't be programmed to be perfectly well.
 
Expecting the NATO and the nations inside it to live up to their own standarts is a fallacy, gotcha!

Explain that to the people in Kosovo which got promised heaven and paradise by the NATO if they get their indepence which was also a breach of international law. The same kind of thing that you and others demand from Putin and the rest of the world to comply with. And not only do we not help the Kosovo to get on it's feet, we also have the nerve to tell the people trying to flee from extreme poverty that they have no fucking right for doing so.

At least we had the luck to be born on the right side of the fence I suppose ...
 
Last edited:
Crni Vuk said:
Expecting the NATO and the nations inside it to live up to the own standarts is a fallacy, gotcha!
Click to expand...

The fallacy is your insistence that something is either perfect or completely corrupt, with no middle ground in between. Which is absurd and ignorant. Really, the fact that you put Russia, China, and fucking NATO side-by-side and conclude that they're all the same thing should clue you in that maybe your reasoning is wrong.
 
Crni Vuk said:
Again, explain this to the people that have to suffer from this.
Click to expand...

What kind of argument is that? Again with the goddamn nirvana fallacy. 'Oh, it doesn't matter if even a single person gets hurt'. Yes, it sucks that people get hurt. No, it's not alright. Yes, we are trying to do the right thing. No, your whining that it's irrelevant because people get hurt in the first place is not some sort of sage wisdom.

It's apathy and abdication of your responsibility. If you hate it here so much, move to Russia or China, or better yet, Saudi Arabia, if it's just like NATO countries. At least you'll be free from the hypocrisy.
 
I will not hide the fact that I am biased. I even agree with that. When I look at Yugoslavia and my relatives down there? Than I am sorry that I can not have very strong positive feelings for the NATO. I see the role it once had during the Cold War, the need for the west/east block. I hate what communists did to Serbia and Yugoslavia as whole. However, I see absolutely no need for the NATO today and it is just one more way for the western world to push their interest trough by military means and beeing the biggest bully in the school yard. Call me bigoted if you want. We all have our different opinions I guess.
 
http://www.eutimes.net/2015/10/angry-putin-authorizes-shootdown-of-us-planes-over-syria/



The Ministry of Defense (MoD) is reporting today that President Putin has authorized the immediate deployment to the Levant War Zone (Syria) of at least 30 additional Aerospace Forces air-to-airSukhoi Su-30 fighter jets that have proven capable of defeatingtheir most sophisticated counterparts used by the US Air Force.
The mission of these Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets, this report explains, is to “deter/target/destroy” Obama regime forces aircraft that have illegally begun dropping war supplies to Islamic terrorists in Syria in violation of international law after Aerospace Forces have nearly obliterated all of ISIS/ISIL forces ammunition and heavy vehicleswithin this war zone.
In a public address earlier today castigating the Obama regime for arming these Islamic terrorists, this report says, President Putin further stated: “Now they announced that they are supplying the Free Syrian Army with weapons, ammunition. Where is this Free Syrian Army? If they just unload and throw these arms, weapons and ammunition out of air, where is the guarantee that it would not fall into the hands of ISIL like it was during the preparation of another makeup of the Syrian army?”
This report notes that the Obama regimes propaganda about the existence of a Free Syrian Army was proven to be a myth by one of America’s own mainstream news sources, NBC, who in examining these alleged fighters described them as: “The Free Syrian Army is an army in name only. It is made up of hundreds of small units, some secular, some religious – whether mainstream or radical. Others are family gangs, or simply criminals.”
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, this report further explains, who has “no doubt” these Obama regime weapons have fallen into Islamic terrorists hands, even asked his Obama regime counterpart, US Secretary of State John Kerry, to provide information about this “fake” army so that Russia might coordinate with them, a request to which Secretary Kerry did not even reply.
lO2J5rk.jpg

With the Obama regimes actions in regard to protecting their Islamic terrorists, this report continues, they have, also, become more insane by the day as aside from them now dropping war supplies to them, they have now begun assisting Turkey in bombing the Kurdish fighters in Iraq whom, likewise, had just been supplied with American arms and ammunition.
Upon Turkey’s bombing of these Kurdish forces fighting against Islamic terrorists, this report says, President Putin held an urgent meeting with the Turkish ambassador to Moscow, Mr Ümit Yardim, wherein Russia’s leader told him: “…tell your dictator president he can go to hell along with his ISIS terrorists and I shall make Syria to nothing but a ‘Big Stalingrad’, for Erdoğan and his Saudi allies are no less vicious than Adolf Hitler.”
Also, this report continues, President Putin delivered the same “forceful” message to Saudi Arabia’s defence minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Salman when they met this past weekend in response to Saudi clerics declaring war against Russia.
President Putin’s “verbal imagery” comparing the Great Patriotic War (World War II) Battle of Stalingrad to what is now happening in Syria to both Turkey and Saudi Arabia, this report details, should not be lost in its fullest meeting as that strategic confrontation against Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany was over the oil resources in that region—and to which Hitler accurately described its critical importance by stating: “If I do not get the oil of Maikop and Grozny then I must finish [liquidieren; “kill off”, “liquidate”] this war.”
And as Stalingrad was the “linchpin” which determined the fate of Russia against Nazi Germany in World War II, this report continues explaining, so is Syria today as the Obama regime and its Western allies continue to support the cruel, barbaric and despotic Islamic theocracies of Saudi Arabia and its Gulf State monarchies who remain so out of step of with the modern world their societies can only be described in the most medieval of terms.
As energy is the foundation of Russia, its economy, its government, and its political system, this report warns, the last few years has seen the threats to Russia’s energy industry from an increasingly desperate West led by the Obama regime multiply and intensify to such an extent that they now pose an existential threat to the industry—and therefore to the Russian economy—meaning Russia itself.
To what is fueling this conflict, this report further explains, are the pipelines (existing and proposed) transiting both Syria and Iraq which the West seeks to control, but which Russia is determined to never allow.
With the West knowing this fact that Russia’s very survival is at threat in this conflict, this report further warns, the Obama regime and its allies continue to spout propaganda lies to their people about what this war is about—and leading some commentators in America to wonder if President Obama is actually trying to start World War III.
And with the US Senate now insanely proposing that Syrian refugees be used as human shields to protect these Islamic terrorists, this report grimly notes, even US Senator Rand Paul has had to warn his nation that such a move would lead to World War III.
And with Russia being the world’s richest country when it comes to natural resources having a value of $75.7 trillion, and a paltry debt against it of only $246 billion, this report concludes, the United States total natural resources worth of $45 trillionis massively dwarfed by its staggering debt of $116 trillion ($18 trillion actual and $98 trillion in unfunded liabilities), thus showing clearly why the bankrupt Obama regime needs to destroy Russia.
After all, a tyrannical empire ruling over an ignorant population is only as successful as the nations it can plunder—it remains highly doubtful that Russia is going to be one of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top