The other side to Russia

[1_man_army]

I didn't, I mentioned Britain as well and we're discussing Russia here - that three.

 

 

 

I don't claim to know every nation that uses thermobarics I was making the point that you can't condemn Russia for using them and at the same time condone other nations using them. The point wasn't meant to single out America what I was trying to do was highlight the hypocracy of certain posters and the hypocracy in the way that this has been reported.

 

 

 

 

 

My point is basically; if a nation thinks it's acceptable to use these weapons they can't complain if another nation uses them.

 

 

 

 

 

I hope that clears things up.

[yomom1919]

I didn't, I mentioned Britain as well and we're discussing Russia here - that three.

 

 

 

I don't claim to know every nation that uses thermobarics I was making the point that you can't condemn Russia for using them and at the same time condone other nations using them. The point wasn't meant to single out America what I was trying to do was highlight the hypocracy of certain posters and the hypocracy in the way that this has been reported.

 

 

 

 

 

My point is basically; if a nation thinks it's acceptable to use these weapons they can't complain if another nation uses them.

 

 

 

 

 

I hope that clears things up.

 

 

 

Then, in that case, I completely agree with you. Except, of course, if the nation that is developing the WMD's is unstable. [i'm not pro-American or anti, I hope I'm not coming across as such].

[hohto]

None of those weapons are used for mass destruction of areas and for killing civilians. The Russian thermobaric weapon is capable of mass destruction.

 

 

 

I find that comment pretty darn funny. Both Russia and USA got enough nukes to destroy this plane x times where x is a number bigger than 1. Yes, this bomb has the ability for mass destruction, but so does around 10k of your bombs.

 

 

 

This is just one new thing in the heating Russia vs USA action. USA already launched their plans of the missile shield to the eastern/middle Europe and like I predicted, Russia didn't just watch it happen. It would have been a miracle if they didn't do anything for their military.

 

 

 

If we did it would've defeated the point [as little of a point there is] for being there.

 

 

 

I'd like to hear what's the point there? Strategically important place? Oil? Both?

[yomom1919]

None of those weapons are used for mass destruction of areas and for killing civilians. The Russian thermobaric weapon is capable of mass destruction.

 

 

 

I find that comment pretty darn funny. Both Russia and USA got enough nukes to destroy this plane x times where x is a number bigger than 1. Yes, this bomb has the ability for mass destruction, but so does around 10k of your bombs.

 

 

 

This is just one new thing in the heating Russia vs USA action. USA already launched their plans of the missile shield to the eastern/middle Europe and like I predicted, Russia didn't just watch it happen. It would have been a miracle if they didn't do anything for their military.

 

 

 

If we did it would've defeated the point [as little of a point there is] for being there.

 

 

 

I'd like to hear what's the point there? Strategically important place? Oil? Both?

 

 

 

As for the first quote, I was arguing his point of weapon usage in Afghanistan, not weapon holdings in general, please read through the whole series of quotes next time...

 

 

 

As for the second quote, don't be so literal; I was, obviously, referring to the 'claimed' point of removing Saddam from Iraq, and developing Iraq as a nation. Many political officials in support of the war claimed those goals. Therefore, using WMD's on Iraq would ultimately defeat the said purpose of reconstructing Iraq. My statement in brackets implies that there is little to no purpose of the Iraq conflict.

 

 

 

Please, next time, Read between the lines...

[Giordano]

I'll rather us all defending ourselfs for protection rather than just having a few countries with major defenses.

[AWMAGWD]

wtb fual air bomb

[Zonorhc]

Guess what, kids, countries other than American are allowed to have weaponry.

 

 

 

Startling news, I'm sure.

 

 

 

Also, stop parroting on that there are enough nukes anywhere to destroy the planet even once. The sheer amount of DET required to do that is, I believe, 10^32J, equivalent to 23,900,573,613,766,730,401,529.636711281 tons of TNT (rough calculation), as estimated from the death star calcs. For a nuclear barrage, which is certainly not DET, it would take much, much more to destroy Earth or an Earth-like planet.

[superson]

How come when the US has bombs it's all fine and good but other countries aren't allowed to?

 

 

 

(I'm from the US)

[Achilleus]

How come when the US has bombs it's all fine and good but other countries aren't allowed to?

 

 

 

(I'm from the US)

 

 

 

Well tbf Russia Did say they wre gonna point there missles at Europe, all about the US defence shield

 

 

 

So is Russia really Defending itself by threating other countries i.e Whole of Europe

[Gamerr]

How come when the US has bombs it's all fine and good but other countries aren't allowed to?

 

 

 

My point exactly.

[BlueTear]

Also, stop parroting on that there are enough nukes anywhere to destroy the planet even once. The sheer amount of DET required to do that is, I believe, 10^32J, equivalent to 23,900,573,613,766,730,401,529.636711281 tons of TNT (rough calculation), as estimated from the death star calcs. For a nuclear barrage, which is certainly not DET, it would take much, much more to destroy Earth or an Earth-like planet.

Do you mean "destroy" as in "shatter into space floating rubble" or destroy as in "make planet uninhabitable for human civilization as we know it"?

[kelem_ryu]

How come when the US has bombs it's all fine and good but other countries aren't allowed to?

 

 

 

(I'm from the US)

 

 

 

Well tbf Russia Did say they wre gonna point there missles at Europe, all about the US defence shield

 

 

 

So is Russia really Defending itself by threating other countries i.e Whole of Europe

 

 

 

Where did you hear that? They can't point there weapons at Europe. That would be political suicide.

[Mercifull]

I'm sure I saw on the news a couple of months ago some American test. I didn't see a thread of people then crying over it. Nor was there such a big fuss about Trident in the UK.

[AWMAGWD]

How come when the US has bombs it's all fine and good but other countries aren't allowed to?

 

 

 

(I'm from the US)

 

 

 

Well tbf Russia Did say they wre gonna point there missles at Europe, all about the US defence shield

 

 

 

So is Russia really Defending itself by threating other countries i.e Whole of Europe

 

 

 

Where did you hear that? They can't point there weapons at Europe. That would be political suicide.

 

 

 

lol dont you watch the news, usa wanted to make a missile shield in poland i think it was, and russia said if you build that i will point missiles at europe but that was like 2 or 3 months ago?

[kelem_ryu]

lol dont you watch the news?

 

 

 

No, i don't.

[preditormc]

we just beat em 3-0, uh-oh :ohnoes:

[Denismage]

Stop crying, not only USA is allowed to have weapons, you know.

[BlueTear]

And yet... The arming of a state where a fair portion of the citizenry support downright fascistic methods, more than half of the country's population do not believe the opposition should be _allowed_ to form a government, plauged by corruption and with a cultural complex that involvs the superiority of Russia both in terms of racism and imperialism, is hardly worth commending solely because "it's only fair"?

 

 

 

Maybe it's because I live in a country relatively close to Russia yet not under the protective envelope of NATO, but when today's Russia starts rattling it's sabers, I worry.

[Lenin64]

Hmm....so you whine about a country developing weapons in an age where most all countries are developing new weapons, when more unstable countries such as Iran and North Korea have The Bomb and are more likely to use it. makes perfect sense :roll:

[das1330]

And yet... The arming of a state where a fair portion of the citizenry support downright fascistic methods, more than half of the country's population do not believe the opposition should be _allowed_ to form a government, plagued by corruption and with a cultural complex that involves the superiority of Russia both in terms of racism and imperialism, is hardly worth commending solely because "it's only fair"?

 

 

 

Maybe it's because I live in a country relatively close to Russia yet not under the protective envelope of NATO, but when today's Russia starts rattling it's sabers, I worry.

 

 

 

My point exactly. The difference is that Russia has a bit more.... checkered past then NATO countries, including not having much of a problem with attacking civilians. Couple that with the fact that Russia is not nearly as stable as the NATO countries, and you have reason to worry. Sure, North Korea and Iran are bigger problems ATM, but this does represent a possibly dangerous development.

[HellsBells]

We're g4nn4 0wnz y0u nucl34r n00bs!

 

 

 

This is being blown waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of proportion.

 

 

 

Stop crying, not only USA is allowed to have weapons, you know.

 

 

 

THANK YOU!

[The Real ET]

And yet... The arming of a state where a fair portion of the citizenry support downright fascistic methods, more than half of the country's population do not believe the opposition should be _allowed_ to form a government, plagued by corruption and with a cultural complex that involves the superiority of Russia both in terms of racism and imperialism, is hardly worth commending solely because "it's only fair"?

 

 

 

Maybe it's because I live in a country relatively close to Russia yet not under the protective envelope of NATO, but when today's Russia starts rattling it's sabers, I worry.

 

 

 

My point exactly. The difference is that Russia has a bit more.... checkered past then NATO countries, including not having much of a problem with attacking civilians. Couple that with the fact that Russia is not nearly as stable as the NATO countries, and you have reason to worry. Sure, North Korea and Iran are bigger problems ATM, but this does represent a possibly dangerous development.

 

 

 

Russia is stabilizing pretty well politically by now. I think we should have your eyes more on North Korea and Iran than Russia. They are much more unstable. Besides, with such a low population these days they could be wiped them out if need be. I think this bomb was just made as a show that there aren't out of the game yet and to keep other countries off their backs.

[Achilleus]

And yet... The arming of a state where a fair portion of the citizenry support downright fascistic methods, more than half of the country's population do not believe the opposition should be _allowed_ to form a government, plagued by corruption and with a cultural complex that involves the superiority of Russia both in terms of racism and imperialism, is hardly worth commending solely because "it's only fair"?

 

 

 

Maybe it's because I live in a country relatively close to Russia yet not under the protective envelope of NATO, but when today's Russia starts rattling it's sabers, I worry.

 

 

 

My point exactly. The difference is that Russia has a bit more.... checkered past then NATO countries, including not having much of a problem with attacking civilians. Couple that with the fact that Russia is not nearly as stable as the NATO countries, and you have reason to worry. Sure, North Korea and Iran are bigger problems ATM, but this does represent a possibly dangerous development.

 

 

 

Russia is stabilizing pretty well politically by now. I think we should have your eyes more on North Korea and Iran than Russia. They are much more unstable. Besides, with such a low population these days they could be wiped them out if need be. I think this bomb was just made as a show that there aren't out of the game yet and to keep other countries off their backs.

 

 

 

Sorry, but arejoking,Have you not being watching or reading the news

 

 

 

 

 

1) They have said they will point there missles at Europe if American Builds this defensive shield

 

 

 

2) There flying bombers of routine flights, over the UK and other countries (They used to d this in the cold war)

 

 

 

3) They kill people on british soil with bloody polonium 210, And don't say the goverment or Mr Putin didnt know about it, I am sure they probably did

 

 

 

4) I can't really remember but they were mad at some country for tearing down a war memorial? Cant remember what they did

 

 

 

5) They cut off gas to a country, sorry Don't Know which one

 

 

 

But what I am trying to say is Russian is becoming politcal UNSTABLE

[BlueTear]

Russia is stabilizing pretty well politically by now. I think we should have your eyes more on North Korea and Iran than Russia. They are much more unstable. Besides, with such a low population these days they could be wiped them out if need be. I think this bomb was just made as a show that there aren't out of the game yet and to keep other countries off their backs.

If Russia showed any signs of actually stabilizing as a democracy, there'd be no sweat. But they aren't. Last years Nation Security Strategy of the USA, and I quote: "Recent trends regrettably point toward a dimishing committment to democratic freedoms and institutions".

 

 

 

They're rehabilitating Stalin in their history textbooks for crying out loud. If Germany were to do that with Hitler we'd be all over their [wagon]. A considerable portion of the population genuinely believe that Russia needs to be ruled in an autocratic fashion. That is every bit as scary as the fundamentalism of Iran and the brainwashinged person-cult in North Korea.

 

 

 

And that's not even touching questionable foreign policies in attempts to keep Moscow-friendly regimes in neighbouring states - whether these regimes are democratic or not.

[ltb2006]

I don't understand how its Moab's are designed to kill underground targets? Based on its design, it explodes just a few feetbefore impact, releasing huges amounts of energy, where as a bomb that denotaes apon impact, most of its explosive energy is negated from the ground.

 

 

 

I can understand surface targets getting completely obliterated.. but underground targets?

 

 

 

While I can that I don't think its right for us to be the only ones with technology and advanced weaponary, but usually being out numbered by other Nations and them giving weapons to terrorists.. makes me want us to always stay and hopefully surpass to cutting technology that one day Russia or China will be a Regular Power than a Super Power, for our own protection, of course. It looks like China and Russia are gearing up for a all out assault on USA, and all they need is a good excuse.

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

Yeah i think so too :roll: