Ukraine Protests

Status
Not open for further replies.
#4,478
#4,478
Grand Vol said:
In response to?

Tell the rest of the story Ras...
Click to expand...

And you tell the rest of the story in The Ukraine ("in response to").

I tell you right now, the best way to kick off WW III is to follow the path we are going down with respect to Ukraine, Poland and Georgia.
 
#4,479
#4,479
Rasputin_Vol said:
And you tell the rest of the story in The Ukraine ("in response to").

I tell you right now, the best way to kick off WW III is to follow the path we are going down with respect to Ukraine, Poland and Georgia.
Click to expand...

The rest of the story in Ukraine?

Easy, it's a CIA/NSA plot to ensure America gets into a nuclear conflict with Russia, thus destroying the world as we know it as the Illuminati and Freemasons rise from the ashes in Operation Phoenix to implement their New World Order over everyone.

Oh, and the dollar collapses somewhere in there as well.

Your turn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,480
#4,480
Grand Vol said:
The rest of the story in Ukraine?

Easy, it's a CIA/NSA plot to ensure America gets into a nuclear conflict with Russia, thus destroying the world as we know it as the Illuminati and Freemasons rise from the ashes in Operation Phoenix to implement their New World Order over everyone.

Oh, and the dollar collapses somewhere in there as well.

Your turn.
Click to expand...


Ummm. The Freemasons have nothing to do with that.

Carry on.
 
#4,481
#4,481
Grand Vol said:
The rest of the story in Ukraine?

Easy, it's a CIA/NSA plot to ensure America gets into a nuclear conflict with Russia, thus destroying the world as we know it as the Illuminati and Freemasons rise from the ashes in Operation Phoenix to implement their New World Order over everyone.

Oh, and the dollar collapses somewhere in there as well.

Your turn.
Click to expand...

IDK about the Freemasons and Illumanati stuff, but everything else was pretty spot on. We have people in our country that believe we can win a first strike nuclear war. Part of that strategy is putting military hardware and missiles in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. I don't see how that can be disputed at this point in the game.
 
#4,483
#4,483
Rasputin_Vol said:
IDK about the Freemasons and Illumanati stuff, but everything else was pretty spot on. We have people in our country that believe we can win a first strike nuclear war. Part of that strategy is putting military hardware and missiles in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. I don't see how that can be disputed at this point in the game.
Click to expand...

Really?

lulz
 
#4,484
#4,484
Rasputin_Vol said:
IDK about the Freemasons and Illumanati stuff, but everything else was pretty spot on. We have people in our country that believe we can win a first strike nuclear war. Part of that strategy is putting military hardware and missiles in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. I don't see how that can be disputed at this point in the game.
Click to expand...

I can assure you that no one in any level of civil or military leadership, in any nuclear armed country, think they can "win" a nuclear exchange :banghead2:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,489
#4,489
Russia's plan to keep Ukraine out of NATO is working splendidly.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YUMXJfx5Rg[/youtube]
 
#4,490
#4,490
Rasputin_Vol said:
The plan seems to be to get Russia preoccupied and tied down in The Ukraine while the US is able to overthrow Assad without Putin being able to interfere like he did last year. This govt and TPTB are hellbent on attacking Syria and will not stop until that objective is reached.
Click to expand...

wut
 
#4,491
#4,491
Burhead said:
I can assure you that no one in any level of civil or military leadership, in any nuclear armed country, think they can "win" a nuclear exchange :banghead2:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say no one thinks we can't win a first strike conflict. The CFR is the government's biggest think tank and this article was in their Foreign Affairs publication.
The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy | Foreign Affairs


Quote:
Today, for the first time in almost 50 years, the United States stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy. It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike. This dramatic shift in the nuclear balance of power stems from a series of improvements in the United States' nuclear systems, the precipitous decline of Russia's arsenal, and the glacial pace of modernization of China's nuclear forces. Unless Washington's policies change or Moscow and Beijing take steps to increase the size and readiness of their forces, Russia and China -- and the rest of the world -- will live in the shadow of U.S. nuclear primacy for many years to come.

The article is 8 years old and there has been at least 1 round of START treaties since then, but it shows someone has been thinking about it.
 
#4,492
#4,492
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In "Rebuilding Russia," an essay first published in 1990 in "Komsomolskaya Pravda" Solzhenitsyn urged Russia to cast off all non-Slav republics, which he claimed were sapping the Russian nation and he called for the creation of a new Slavic state bringing together Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and parts of Kazakhstan that he considered to be Russified.

In 2006 Solzhenitsyn accused NATO of trying to bring Russia under its control; he claimed this was visual because of its "ideological support for the 'colour revolutions' and the paradoxical forcing of North Atlantic interests on Central Asia". In an 2006 interview with Der Spiegel he stated "This was especially painful in the case of Ukraine, a country whose closeness to Russia is defined by literally millions of family ties among our peoples, relatives living on different sides of the national border. At one fell stroke, these families could be torn apart by a new dividing line, the border of a military bloc."
Click to expand...

It is clear exactly what is going on. The Color Revolutions of a decade ago were the writings on the wall. Oh boy... look a here:

Ukraine seeks NATO membership in response to Russia joining war | Reuters

Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk told a government meeting on Friday the cabinet would "bring before parliament a law to scrap the non-aligned status of the Ukrainian state and establish a course towards membership of NATO."
Click to expand...
 
#4,493
#4,493
Burhead said:
I can assure you that no one in any level of civil or military leadership, in any nuclear armed country, think they can "win" a nuclear exchange :banghead2:
Click to expand...

How can you say that with a straight face? This is from an article that YOU posted here in a thread earlier this month.

What a nuclear exchange with the USSR could have looked like?

Briefing the president but keeping the public in the dark | Center for Public Integrity

A majority of the group's reports expressed optimism that the United States would essentially "win" a nuclear war with the Soviets because fewer U.S. citizens would die and there would be less damage to its infrastructure.

The 1958 report by the Net Evaluation Subcommittee, for example, predicted more than 50 million Americans would die, nearly a third of the population, while more than 100 million Soviet Union citizens would die, more than half of the population. It nonetheless tried to look on the bright side, suggesting that “the balance of strength would be on the side of the United States” after the nuclear war, and that “the survival of the United States as a nation appears highly probable.”

“The idea is who dies a little bit less than the other guy,” said Alex Wellerstein, a nuclear weapons historian at the Stevens Institute of Technology, the author of “Restricted Data: The Nuclear Secrecy Blog,” and a former instructor at Harvard and Georgetown universities. “It’s about comparative destruction, where ‘Okay, we lose this many people but don’t worry, they lose a lot more’ right? You should have seen the other guy. Which is such a weird way to think about the value of war in general. We might lose a third of our population but he’ll lose half of his. Great, we win.”
Click to expand...

There are still plenty of people around that consider this outcome as a "win" for the US.
 
#4,494
#4,494
Rasputin_Vol said:
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



It is clear exactly what is going on. The Color Revolutions of a decade ago were the writings on the wall. Oh boy... look a here:

Ukraine seeks NATO membership in response to Russia joining war | Reuters
Click to expand...

The more you post, the more I believe you're one of those Ruskies paid to post on Internet forums. No way you can believe the shat you believe.

So we should believe a Russian expansionist who is in favor of taking land from other sovereign nations? Belarus? Kazakhstan? Are they looking for some Russian versions of the Sudetenland?

As far as Russia invading a sovereign Ukraine, I would seek help too if I were a sovereign nation being bullied by my more powerful neighbor with imperialistic intentions.
 
#4,495
#4,495
Ras, you still have yet to post anything that is proof of your claims. You have yet to show one article where anyone in the government thinks a nuclear war is "winnable" or any statements made that the alert levels are being raised.

Nothing.

You keep using the obscure think tank articles and twisting what's said to fit your agenda. And little else.
 
#4,496
#4,496
Rasputin_Vol said:
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



It is clear exactly what is going on. The Color Revolutions of a decade ago were the writings on the wall. Oh boy... look a here:

Ukraine seeks NATO membership in response to Russia joining war | Reuters
Click to expand...

So you quote a pan-Slavist dickhead that thinks Russia should control all these other peoples and point to Ukraine obviously being concerned about its perennially dickheaded neighbor as your strong points. By the way, in a recent poll some 50% of Ukrainians outright supported NATO membership (that's not even including those on the fence); it's not just the government thinking about it.

Had you been alive, I bet you would have been a Hitler apologist too.
 
#4,497
#4,497
Rasputin_Vol said:
How can you say that with a straight face? This is from an article that YOU posted here in a thread earlier this month.

What a nuclear exchange with the USSR could have looked like?

Briefing the president but keeping the public in the dark | Center for Public Integrity



There are still plenty of people around that consider this outcome as a "win" for the US.
Click to expand...

So govt. and independent studies determining the amount of casualties a nuclear war would incur means that a first strike attack is being intended?

Logic wasn't your strong suit in school, was it?
 
#4,498
#4,498
Grand Vol said:
You keep using the obscure think tank articles and twisting what's said to fit your agenda. And little else.
Click to expand...

How did I twist what the article said when you reached the same conclusion I did in the thread Burhead posted?

http://www.volnation.com/forum/politics/221724-what-nuclear-exchange-ussr-could-have.html

Grand Vol said:
It nonetheless tried to look on the bright side, suggesting that “the balance of strength would be on the side of the United States” after the nuclear war, and that “the survival of the United States as a nation appears highly probable.”
Click to expand...

Such notions would lead a person to believe a first strike scenario was an option and that a nuclear war is "winnable." I know it was 1958, but that thought process is never good. Because nobody wins in a nuclear war.
Click to expand...
 
#4,499
#4,499
#4,500
#4,500
Victoria Nuland passing out cookies & snacks this past December.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVs2tcSyyuA[/youtube]
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top