What is Digg?Sponsored by openforum.com
"Think outside the shoebox" - The Foot Petals Rule view!
openforum.com - Fashion or comfort? A decision Tina Aldatz was tired of making when she started her line of designer in soles.
270 Comments
- cruzlee, on 10/11/2007, -10/+287Could somebody tell me why this world seems to be governed by ***** RETARDS!!??
- atdigg, on 10/11/2007, -43/+247you are both idiots
- BeefBaron, on 10/11/2007, -14/+161@cruzlee
Because only rich bastards get on the ballots, and rich bastards dont give a ***** about us non-rich normal people. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -9/+118I don't think anything huge is going to come out of this. Putin sees the U.S. putting anti-missile systems -- that he knows wouldn't even put a dent in the damage Russia's nuclear arsenal would do to U.S. or European targets -- in his back yard. He can't have the U.S. looking like it's trying to protect Europe from anyone, whether it's him or Iran or North Korea -- whose eventual nuclear arsenals this kind of defense system *would* have a chance of stopping (if and when Iran has nuclear missiles, they won't launch a thousand at a time, as Russia can, they'll launch one or two or half a dozen, that an anti-missile system, if it works, can shoot down). So he makes big threats about aiming at European targets. Well in this day and age, a missile can be re-targeted in a matter of minutes. Missile submarines and other mobile missile systems, for example, have to do it immediately before launch because they're constantly on the move. Where a missile is pointed now doesn't mean that's where it's going.
It's all just a big prick-waving dick fight. - smackywentz, on 10/11/2007, -71/+162I'd say onionizer is right. The U.S. has been violating S.O.F.A. agreements throughout Europe and other parts of the world for some time now. Those S.O.F.A. agreements by the way are heavily favorable for the U.S. and really gives the occupied country no power. We have been clearly taking advantage of their hospitality, consent or not, and most Europeans are getting ***** tired of it. You know why we wanted Iraq? Not just oil, a base. Saudi Arabia got tired of us and got us the hell out of their country. Germany is literally waiting for us to ***** up one more time so they can get us the ***** out of their country. We've been there since WWII.
- KyleGoetz, on 10/11/2007, -9/+89@hbndonut: I don't think Putin is a wuss. I'm not sure if you were baiting the informed on Digg, but Putin is a 6th degree black belt in judo (even famous for his skill) and is ex-KGB. You can't get to be less of a wuss than Putin is.
- wreckosaurus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+81God I'll be happy when bush and putin are both gone.
Also stop with the nationalistic *****. This isn't youtube. - onionizer, on 10/11/2007, -10/+74I'd say that I wouldn't have the need to be backed by anyone.
- Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -12/+68@joeroot1: Europeans are the ones granting permission for these bases to be built and renditions to take place in their countries. You should be questioning your political leaders rather than blaming the US for everything.
- zKman, on 10/11/2007, -9/+65"Putin also suggested that in the absence of a real threat from Iranian and North Korean missiles, the U.S. plan could be an attempt to spoil Russia's relations with Europe."
And aiming nuclear missiles at Europe doesn't? Or cutting off natural gas supplies? Or killing ex-spies on European soil? Or DDoSing an entire European nation?
Seriously, any missile defense system won't stop Russian multiple-warhead ICBMs anyway. Who are they kidding? - kingkilr, on 10/11/2007, -14/+70I hardly think they don't care about people because they are rich, they are just bastards.
- mwsherman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+55Not exactly. Russia's economy is seriously on track, they are still one of the richer countries in the world, and they control buttloads of oil and natural gas. And unlike the middle east, they are constantly finding new reserves in Russia and huge pieces remain almost entirely unexplored. They are certainly powerful enough that a war is, well, mutually assured destruction. Attempts to slightly alter the balance of this mutually assured destruction is all it takes for another "cold war" to start, albeit a slightly less isolationist one. And probably not as severe or polarizing as the first.
The best thing the US and Europe can do to, 'stop', Russia is to invest in non-petroleum based energy. This is why America is looking into Ethanol. It's not better for the environment, it's better because we can make it ourselves. If the market for oil and natural gas disappeared, the vast flight of wealth from Russia would probably trigger another Revolution. - N4KMM, on 10/11/2007, -34/+83@ Gherikill You sir, are a moron.
- johnwc723, on 10/11/2007, -3/+50pretty much sums it up
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end.php - allywilson, on 10/11/2007, -6/+50This whole Russia vs USA thing is pretty old to be honest. If the talk is Europe - then the EU itself is a lot stronger than either if it were to ever federalise. If the Russians want to aim missiles - let them. If the US wants to - let them. Do you really think Europe will let itself become a battleground again? If either launched a strike against each other and it was over Europe, don't you think the combined power of the EU would just neutralise both powers within its borders? Remember, both world wars were caused by issues within Europe - not between 2 super powers outside influencing. They were brought in as allies - to supplement the lack of money and manpower.
Europe no longer has to ask for it. - comradeTJH, on 10/11/2007, -2/+45Well I'm Swiss as well, and I don't think anyone (no matter from where) wants to attack its own savings... :)
- onionizer, on 10/11/2007, -11/+52@nixonrichard: Good, we'll send you a bunch of t-shirts, now get out of my county.
- Hoov, on 10/11/2007, -1/+40Hoorah for another campaign of fear mongering and manipulation!
- tizz66, on 10/11/2007, -3/+41I have a proposal. All of us normal people go and live somewhere, and let all these idiots running our countries live somewhere else. They can do what they want to each other, and the rest of us will just get on with our lives on our piece of land. Deal?
- airwalkery2k, on 10/11/2007, -3/+37@nixonrichard
His profile says Italy. - ATHEISTinHELL, on 10/11/2007, -2/+35@kingkilr
Thats what we wanted you to think!
*unfurls soviet flag* - HBNDonut, on 10/11/2007, -19/+51What a total wuss! A real man wouldn't hide behind missiles! He would walk up to all those millions of people and challenge them to a good ol' fashioned bout of fisty cuffs.
- ATHEISTinHELL, on 10/11/2007, -5/+33Cold war baby. Looks like we getting our pre 9/11 paranoia back. I wonder if Bert the turtle will make a reappearance?
- rupaw, on 10/11/2007, -7/+34Wow, now the U.S. starts another Cold War. For the rest of the world this period was over, for good but not for the Reagan's, Clinton's and Bushies and the american industrial military complex. I know that it's all about money and that the US economy would take a deep dive if the government there wouldn't spend money on military research projects and WMD like a drunk sailor.
As a European citizen I couldn't care less. It's not my money anyhow. It's not my economy either. If there wouldn't be the problem that the lunatics in the White House try to invole Europe by bribing some underdeveloped countries like Poland and the Czech. I just say this: Back off America, otherwise you will have to protect your embassies in Europe similar as you do it right now in the Middle East. Europeans are so fed up with your foreign policy. You might be able to line the pockets of some 3rd class politicians in Europe and "convince" them that a missle shield is a great idea, but know that this is against the will of the people ANYWHERE!
Leave Europe alone! Withdraw your troops from European soil and stop whining about WW2 and how ungrateful we are... We don't owe you anything anymore the same way as you don't owe anything to the French anymore just because they saved your asses during the war against England and the Spanish. Got that? - roosterjm2k2, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30FTA: "He also lashes out at NATO and insists he's world's only true democrat."
I read a nice little quote one day, and it applies here more than ever... A true democracy is a very BAD thing, indeed.
"A true democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner." - EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -4/+29"Missile submarines and other mobile missile systems, for example, have to do it immediately before launch because they're constantly on the move. Where a missile is pointed now doesn't mean that's where it's going."
Just an FYI. The Russian Nuclear aresenal is currently aimed into the ocean (which, I don't know). To me, this was the true end to the cold war -- they re-targeted AWAY from American cities, and into the sea -- but very few people know about it because it was the day after Nancy Kerigan was attacked and had her knees beaten. Kerrigan got front page, lead coverage, and overshadowed the re-targeting of Russia's missiles.
Just in case you're wondering which newspaper to buy, the Chicago Tribune and New York Times were the only ones that lead with the Nuclear Missiles, and not Kerrigan (I did a survey of about 20, incuding the Los Angeles Times and Miami Herald). Sadly, the New York Times has become so anti-Bush, it's effected their ability to report accurately and truthfully. They can be biased all they want -- every news source is -- but when they it effects accuracy of what they report, they've crossed an ethical line. (I subscribed for 12 years.)
-Pie - Nocturnalis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24Seems like everyone is aiming their missiles at the wrong funking people if you ask me.
- nixonrichard, on 10/11/2007, -6/+28It's good to see the old Russia is back. We missed you tovarisch!
- donveto, on 10/11/2007, -18/+39ALL YOUR BASES ARE BELONG TO US
- DesuKN, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21Ah, I've always wanted to know how Digg would've covered the cold war.
- crote, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22@allywilson
Seeing as the term was coined after WWII, there were no super powers involved in either world war. Even if you were to apply the term anachronistically, you would attribute it to Britain, the various central powers, and/or the Nazis, definitely not the US or Czarist/Soviet Russia.
Plus, the Russians were involved in both wars from the very beginning, and the US was forced into the second war due to a hostile attack. The "brought in as allies - to supplement the lack of money and manpower" model only applies to US involvement in WWI, and even then only kinda sorta.
Other than that, though, great post. - EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -18/+36"this is why the majority of europe hates americans. you go round the world swinging your dicks around and attacking countries unjustifiably,"
Wait a sec. Last I checked, Putin was a RUSSIAN, not an American. He's the one doing the swinging, and yet you blame... America? It's our fault? Not the fault that he's a megalomaniacal dictator (or "near-dictator" as the article states). And you get positive diggs -- reflecting that we base decisions on emotion rather than logic and truth.
-Pie - Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -26/+44Perhaps Russia should set up bases all around the US and see how many of you start bleating in fear. As soon as Putin opens his mouth people on digg start to quake in terror as if Russia is the one building bases all over the world, when in fact it's the US.
- Pseudorious, on 10/11/2007, -8/+25Kids, kids kids. Calm down. This is standard Russian rhetoric. Being perceived as powerful is the goal abroad, hence the interview with the Globe and Mail. If you are truly interested in the subject, two recent graduates of Harvard's Davis Institute for Russian Studies run a blog translating and analyzing Russian political speeches in the press. They have some material directly dealing with this controversy, and I'd read them now before they get their job offers from the CIA and have to close shop.
http://notesfromrussia.wordpress.com
Also, Poland and the Czech Republic are democracies who can make their own choices. They are not the poor, stupid nations being portrayed here, can make free agreements with America, Russia, or other EU nations as they see fit, and they do not need any outside management. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+21"During a lengthy dinner, Russia's President defended his semi-authoritarian style and insisted he is the world's only true democrat."
Michael Moore and Putin should have a death match. The survivor gets to claim that title. - SonnyW, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17The problem is many people have an outdated view of Russia. They are quickly climbing the ranks of the richest and most aggressive world powers again.
- AirRaven, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17How about a pan-European Alliance that stands upon its own two feet?
The EU has a greater population than the USA and Russia. The EU already has nuclear weapons aplenty. The EU has one of the largest economies in the world.
Since when have we needed American/Russian backing to survive in the Post-Cold War Era?
Unless an EU-Russia War escalated to the point of nuclear arsenals being brought into play, the (Western) EU could hold its own reasonably well without American Backing.
Granted, we'd run screaming to the USA begging them to uphold their obligations as a part of NATO. But we wouldn't be doomed even if they pulled out.
Of course, that's assuming that nukes *don't* come into play. In that case, Russia'd be able to reduce the overwhelming majority of Western Europe to an uninhabitable wasteland in a matter of days. - joeroot1, on 10/11/2007, -11/+26@Osjpr - if you look at the countries in which you are setting up the missiles, they are all ex soviet-bloc countries, who are still in comparions to the rest of europe incredibly poor. Their leaders have been pretty much forced into a corner over this, as turning money down is implausible for them, hence in effect America are just manipulating the poor with your excessive wealth.
- whaambulance, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17The Canadian Dollar is poised to surpass the USD in value in the next few months. It is currently about .93 cents. It's going to feel good to turn those dollar jokes around on the US :p
- comradeTJH, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Deal!
- EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14"Yes, he got dugg up. It's because the US has been occupying parts of Europe for over half a century now. Last I checked, Russia gave up on their occupation of much of Europe. And now the US is moving in to occupy the countries Russia moved out of. But it's all Russia's fault, right? You know nothing of logic or truth."
Heh. I like that last line, very funny. :p
Reason requires correct use of our language of choice -- English in this case. US is *occupying* European countries? Name one. Please, just one, where we have troops there by *force.*
You see, I have some knowledge of history. Take Poland for example. It was completely *occupied* prior to WWI, to the point that it didn't techically exist. Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary divided Poland in three parts, and occupied. On the Russian side, they made Polish folk songs illegal, Polish history illegal and Polish the language illegal (I'd have to double-check that last, but IIRC it was illegal to teach Polish). Illegal in this case meant, you were killed by your Russian occupiers if you were caught. Killed. No trial, no nothing.
Fortunately, Austria-Hungary was much more lenient. Though it was illegal to teach folk songs and history, it wasn't enforced. But they were still a puppet government, as all three other regions.
We could also talk about Catherine the Great, who had the whole of the Polish parliament shot dead so she could install her own puppet leader prior to occupation.
You are twisting the term "occupation" well past the point of breaking. Occupation is not fun stuff at all. And it's a FAR CRY from anything the US is doing in Europe. We are not an occupying force in any European country. And military bases -- allowed by each country's government -- does not an occupation make. Period.
-Pie - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18Actually, it was Dobby from Harry Potter. I'm always mixing up my fantasy goblins.
- massrox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kn8GuyPWDo
awesome. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13Russia and Central Asian Allies Conduct War Games in Response to US Threats - August 24, 2006
Barely acknowledged by the Western media, military exercises organized by Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan under the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, (CSTO) were launched on the 24th of August. These war games, officially tagged as part of a counter terrorism program, are in direct response to US military threats in the region including the planned attacks against Iran.
The Rubezh-2006 exercise, is scheduled to take place from August 24-29 near the Kazak port city of Aktau:
"It will be the first joint military exercise undertaken by CSTO countries, and will involve 2,500 members drawn from various armed services of member states, with Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan the principal participants. Uzbekistan, which has recently rejoined the CSTO, will send observers, while the two other pact members, Belarus and Armenia, will not be taking part .( IPWR News Briefing Central Asia)
Press reports from the region describe these war games as a response to US military presence and ambitions in Central Asia:
"The growing militarisation is connected with mutual mistrust among countries in the region, say analysts. Iranian media have speculated that the United States is using Azerbaijan to create a military counterweight to Iran on the Caspian. It is possible that the exercise conducted by the CSTO – in which Russia is dominant – represents a response to concerns about United States involvement in developing Kazakstan’s navy. Observers say Russia is leaning more and more towards the Iranian view that countries from outside should be banned from having armed forces in the Caspian Sea."
Experts say the US is trying to step up the pressure on Iran, as well as to defend its own investments in Azerbaijan and Kazakstan. It is also trying to guarantee the security of the strategically vital Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline.
A military presence on the Caspian would give the United States an opportunity to at least partially offset its weakening influence in Central Asia, as seen in the closure of its airbase in Uzbekistan, the increased rent it is having to pay for the Manas base in Kyrgyzstan, and the diplomatic scandal that resulted in the expulsion of two Americans from Kyrgyzstan.
According to analysts, genuine security in the region can be achieved only if the military interests of all five Caspian countries are coordinated. At an international conference in Astrakhan in July 2005, Russia proposed the formation of a Caspian naval coordination group, but to date the initiative has not had much of a response.(Ibid)
Iran War Games coincide with those organized by the CSTO
The entire region seems to be on a war footing. These CSTO war games should be seen in relation to those launched barely a week earlier by Iran, in response to continued US military threats. These war games coincide with the showdown at the UN Security Council and the negotiations between permanent members regarding a Security Council resolution pertaining to Iran's nuclear program. "They are taking place within the window of time that has been predicted by analysts for the initiation of an American or an American-led attack against Iran" (see Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, 21 August 2006):
"War games and military exercises are now well underway within Iran and its territory. The Iranian Armed Forces—the Regular Armed Forces and the Revolutionary Guards Corps—began the first stage of massive nationwide war games along border areas of the province of Sistan and Baluchistan1 in the southeast of Iran bordering the Gulf of Oman, Pakistan, and NATO garrisoned Afghanistan to the east on Saturday, August 19, 2006. These war games that are underway are to unfold and intensify over a five week period and possibly even last longer, meaning they will continue till the end of September and possibly overlap into October, 2006". (Ibid, emphasis added)
While Iran is not a member of the CSTO, it has observer status in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), of which China is a member.
The SCO has a close relationship to the CSTO. The structure of military alliances is crucial. In case of an attack on Iran, Russia and its CSTO allies will not remain neutral. In April, Iran was invited to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
Sofar no concrete timetable for Iran's accession to the SCO has been set. This enlargement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which also includes observer status for India, Pakistan and Mongolia counters US military and strategic objectives in the broader region. Moreover, China and Russia, which are partners in the SCO also have a longstanding bilateral military cooperation agreement. In August 2005, China and Russia conducted joint militart exercises.
The conduct of the CSTO war games must be seen as a signal to Washington that an attack on Iran could lead to a much broader military conflict in which Russia and the member states of the CSTO could potentially be involved, siding with Iran and Syria.
Also of significance is the structure of bilateral military cooperation agreements. Russia and China are the main suppliers of advanced weapons systems of Iran and Syria. Russia is contemplating the installation of a Navy base in Syria on the eastern Mediterranean coastline. In turn, the US and Israel have military cooperation agreements with Azerbaijan and Georgia.
China War Games
In recent developments, China and Kazakhstan have initiated war games (August 24, 2006) under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). These war games are being held concurrently with those conducted under the CSTO, which are also being held in Kazakhstan.
India-Russia military Cooperation
India and Russia have signed on August 20th, a farreaching military cooperation agreement. Although not officially directed against the US, the purpose of this agreement is understood. The two countries have "agreed to focus on joint war games in services-to-services interaction, joint development of new weapons systems and training of Indian military personnel", (Press Trust of India, 21 August 2006). - MichaelBradley, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Now there is a mental image i didn't need...
- Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11 WooHoo
Everything old is new again!!!
Where are my parachute pants??
- there, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11
I've never understood why even one European tolerates American troops on their soil. WW2 was a long time ago and they serve no purpose other than to project American power and make Europe a target for everyone that hates expansionist American policies. (Come to think of it I can't understand why Americans fund troops on foreign soil when it isn't a time of war and nukes exist. Dreams of a global Roman Empire?)
How does any of this benefit Europe or democratic principles? If anything it makes Europeans appear like weak satellite states of the US (similar to Warsaw Pact of the Soviet Union). Furthermore those troops certainly cannot protect Europe from a nuclear attack in modern age.
I think its time that Europe stood on its own two feet and booted those bases back to America. Putin may be a hypocrite when in comes to democracy but that doesn't mean he's wrong about America starting a new arms race (US military spending is going through the roof and need I mention PNAC?). The US is also being very provocative militarily (in Iraq and with threats of violence and homicide in other counties), has no respect for international law and the UN, and has WAY too much influence in the world (and those bases certainly don't help curb that). Can American leaders like Bush be trusted to look after the interests of foreign countries? Don't bet on it. Based on the disaster of his presidency I don't think he can't even be trusted to look after average American interests much less anyone else. Under his watch American seems to be sliding backwards into mysticism and a 19th century political perspective.
Despite all the "freedom" talk aimed at America voters, I seriously believe it is now one of the LEAST free nations among the established first world with far rightwing propagandists on the war path against the world on TV and radio (Coultier, Rush, Beck, O'Reilly, etc...hate EVERYONE other than the American rightwing collective of course) If any one says anything in disagreement to the extremist policies of this political machine they are labeled traitors (which is a not-so-subtle way of suggesting an eventual secret torture trip to Gitmo).
It is indeed undemocratic for one nation to have so much power in the world.... and especially one in which power is so centralized and radical. The US is primarily on the Republican end of the democracy scale now while nations in Europe are closer to idealized democratic principles than the US (especially the Swiss).
I think after the cold war some people forgot why communism spread so rapidly in the world in the first place (especially Americans).... to counter pure capitalism which is also oppressive and anti-freedom. America changed to a more moderate position post New-deal but it seems after the fall of the Soviet Union there has been a resurgence and romance of radical far right ideology and an erosion of that moderate position. Many Americans are themselves against this but need Europe's (and the rest of the world) help to shut down these power obsessed violent maniacs.
Bush and cronies like to portray themselves as peace lovers and civil while they are simultaneously responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, use torture, spy on their own citizens and in principle have removed habeas corpus. Inch by inch they are becoming bullies just like the Soviets were. And just like the Soviets were kicked out of Eastern Europe....I think its high time that the cold war finally is put to an end by kicking out imperialist American bases from Western Europe. Americans need to start behaving and sounding like fellow citizens of this world instead of elitist two-bit dictators.
I don't hate capitalism or socialism but I do hate pure versions of both because they solve one problem at the expense of another and both appear to end in tyranny. If this planet is going to go much further this sort of political extremism needs to end. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11This is what happens under a President who doesn't believe in diplomacy. This could have easily been avoided. Heckuva job Mr. Bush.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Why is he aiming missiles at Europe? Why not the US?
- EmailAddress, on 10/11/2007, -9/+17The US missile base in EU is like putting the foot in the door. If you put your foot in the door, then getting in will be easy. After the anti-missile base(using missiles to hit missiles) is installed(if it is installed), they could 'upgrade' the site to one which uses lasers to hit missiles. So as Russian missiles are going up, they can be shot down by a laser system.
Cuban missile crisis meets the Poland/Czech missile crisis... -
Show 51 - 100 of 272 discussions
