Twice!
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Russia vs. Ukraine Part 2
- Thread starter Bigtanker
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
Okay. What this essentially does.. is really stretches the border Russian has to patrol. By quite a bit.. this will stretch the already thin Russian troops not involved in the Ukranian conflict even more..
it doubles the amount of border between Nato nations and Russia..
In short if Putin was trying to push "Nato" back by taking Ukraine.. he just shot himself in the foot.
it doubles the amount of border between Nato nations and Russia..
In short if Putin was trying to push "Nato" back by taking Ukraine.. he just shot himself in the foot.
Finland is the lego to the Russian Godzilla...if he steps there it's going to hurt (and he knows it); and with NATO it's going to hurt a lot more.
The Ruskies only consider NATO membership a threat because they intended on invading these countries anyway...and now the calculus is changed not in their favor. Like the sheep dogs say, flock them.
The Ruskies only consider NATO membership a threat because they intended on invading these countries anyway...and now the calculus is changed not in their favor. Like the sheep dogs say, flock them.
AndreusMaximus
Master
Not trying to justify Russia at all, but this does seem a little unfair to them. How do you think we would react if Russia wanted to form an alliance with countries that are right on our doorstep and do things like station weapons and missiles in them? Wait, seems like that's happened before...
I assume you are talking about Cuba. I know for a fact that the Russians had troops on the ground in Cuba throughout the 1960's and 1970's. Cannot vouch for times after that. But they were not in uniform, they were "cultural tourists"
This is why I would rather not see Ukraine join NATO.
Russia has a long, long history feeling persecuted and looked down on by the West. Right or wrong, it affects their politics and view of the world.
Well golly, we wouldn't want to hurt their feelz...
Dude, that's pretty much what world politics is, feelz.
Maybe if we thought about Germany's feelz after WWI, we wouldn't have had WWII.
Same reason we stick to the One China Policy. Feelz.
That is incredibly naive. But you live in NPR world, so I've come to expect that.
NO,NO,NO....they may oniy be 6 minutes from Moscow...but you can only say RUSSIA,RUSSIA,RUSSIA!
AndreusMaximus
Master
I think this is the first time I've heard someone imply that they do NOT believe that the excessively harsh terms imposed on Germany (along with the random chopping up of the Austro-Hungarian empire without any regard for the "feelz" of the people living there) after WWI were a significant factor in the politics that lead up to WWII. I should greatly like to hear this elaborated on, if you don't mind.
When your country throws the entire world into chaos, don't be surprised when the consequences are harsh.
AndreusMaximus
Master
So if I am understanding correctly, you don't have any problem with agreeing that the harsh consequences imposed after WWI were a significant factor in causing WWII; you're simply arguing that those consequences were well deserved?
I don't really have any argument against the fact that they were very much deserved, and to tie back into the subject at hand, I don't doubt that Russia deserves harsh consequences for their unprovoked invasion. However, I would say it's more naive to focus simply on getting back out our enemies to make sure they "get what they deserve" than it is to look for a longer-term solution, even if it involves some degree of mercy where it is not deserved.
To be clear, I am not advocating that we somehow need to be more soft on Russia right now; the time for that is past, and as long as they continue waging this war, I believe we should deal with them as harshly and decisively as we can without risking an all-out nuclear war.
But if (hopefully when) the times come when a decisive defeat is dealt to Russia, I hope we (or NATO, or Ukraine, or whoever is setting the terms of the surrender) can remember that harsh punishments doled out to an entire people, which effect not only the people living there today but also their future generations, have never served as a good recipe for long-term peace. I would much rather see an effort to help the people of Russia rebuild, and make them into a long-term ally, like what we did with Germany and Japan after WWII.
I'm pretty sure DoggyDaddy was riled up about something I said in another thread and it bled over here. Hence the ad hominem NPR comment.
(Sorry DD if I got too active in that other thread)
Warring nation states should be punished, but if that punishment is too harsh (deserved for not), you end up hurting your own nation in the long run.
I was listening to (not an NPR) podcast and the guest was making the point that we should have helped rebuild Russia after the USSR collapse...
Ah, it was Hardcore History Addendum and the guest was Max Brooks.
Just jumping in on WWI comments.
In the era of WWI countries that went to war normally settled the war with territory gained or lost. Then it stopped. Britain holds the colonies. The colonies rebel. The colonies win. Britain loses the territory. Britain invades the USA in 1812. Britain loses. No territory gained or lost. No reparations.
The turn of the 20th century saw massive social and economic changes. In so doing the entire concept of reparations was born. The problem is that the German system was entirely gutted. On the borders they lost massive amounts of mining, smelting, and other commodities. Refining of all sorts lost. And the STILL had to pay reparations. Germany was in truly horrific shape.
Even IF Hitler hadn't come along there would have been another war, although probably not to the extent of WWII.
I remember hearing a story that Woodrow Wilson's wife came into a room and found about a dozen president's and prime ministers all crawling on the floor looking at a map. She said they looked like little boys playing. When asked what they were doing, they were carving up Europe so a war would never happen again.
Their problem was they didn't understand squat! The didn't understand the ethnic diversity they were working with. I think they did try, but they didn't understand how ignorant they were.
And technically, Germany didn't start the war, Austro-Hungary did with the invasion of Serbia. The Black Hand society assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand because the Archduke was planning on making Serbia an equal partner in the empire. They knew that if he succeeded Serbia would never be truly independent because the people would be happy being part of a great empire.
Regards,
Doug
In the era of WWI countries that went to war normally settled the war with territory gained or lost. Then it stopped. Britain holds the colonies. The colonies rebel. The colonies win. Britain loses the territory. Britain invades the USA in 1812. Britain loses. No territory gained or lost. No reparations.
The turn of the 20th century saw massive social and economic changes. In so doing the entire concept of reparations was born. The problem is that the German system was entirely gutted. On the borders they lost massive amounts of mining, smelting, and other commodities. Refining of all sorts lost. And the STILL had to pay reparations. Germany was in truly horrific shape.
Even IF Hitler hadn't come along there would have been another war, although probably not to the extent of WWII.
I remember hearing a story that Woodrow Wilson's wife came into a room and found about a dozen president's and prime ministers all crawling on the floor looking at a map. She said they looked like little boys playing. When asked what they were doing, they were carving up Europe so a war would never happen again.
Their problem was they didn't understand squat! The didn't understand the ethnic diversity they were working with. I think they did try, but they didn't understand how ignorant they were.
And technically, Germany didn't start the war, Austro-Hungary did with the invasion of Serbia. The Black Hand society assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand because the Archduke was planning on making Serbia an equal partner in the empire. They knew that if he succeeded Serbia would never be truly independent because the people would be happy being part of a great empire.
Regards,
Doug
- Status
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
d.kaufmanStill Here
Members online
- Ark
- Frank_N_Stein
- Dechrissen
- chef larry
- BAgun
- BeDome
- jwamplerusa
- BIGE7.62
- joe138
- DangerousDave
- Fireman85
- Wolfhound
- indykid
- d.kaufman
- Gabriel
- JDTaylor
- dustinfz6r
- mrm
- Bosshoss
- Bollorollo
- Zombie
- DoggyDaddy
- SnoopLoggyDog
- pokersamurai
- Hoosierdood
- cobber
- Ozark1897
- syntax357
- oldschool1911
- rbhargan
- KeeperoftheH
- Ingomike
- INgunowner
- DRob
- bwframe
- Mr24g
- Patched
- BP84
- diver dan
- Limpy88
- Rafterman
- deo62
- dsol
- Malware
- Mice54
- Sagamore - One
- Anonymous
- Georgemartinn
- JRR85
- efd1295
