|
WWIII (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Psyshell
Yeh but the difference between now and the cold war is that in the cold war it was two super powers of competing ideologies competing for the people and minds of the planet. Right now it's merely a medium sized power causing trouble and expanding a bit. It's not even like the Russian economy has had massive growth lately. I'd be more worried about China's attempts at expansion as they're more of an actual threat. |
Russia is an ideology. Russia is not like any other culture or country on the planet. Russians are Russian and there is very little anyone can relate to them, only Russians understand Russians. Their ideology is spreading themselves. It isn't even like US cultural imperialism, the Russians want to physically control as much as they can for themselves and then put Russians there to populate the lands and drive out the "natives". Their imperialism is a 19th or 18th century style imperialism. Russia has done this before, and thinking that the threat ended with the Soviets is naive.
I am less worried about China, China has never had massive expansionist ideologies, even for the thousands of years when they were the most powerful civilization on earth. China is an economic threat, and possibly a cultural threat, but they aren't going to come busting in through your door and raping women and children and pillaging like the Russians would do even today. |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Russia is an ideology. Russia is not like any other culture or country on the planet. Russians are Russian and there is very little anyone can relate to them, only Russians understand Russians. Their ideology is spreading themselves. It isn't even like US cultural imperialism, the Russians want to physically control as much as they can for themselves and then put Russians there to populate the lands and drive out the "natives". Their imperialism is a 19th or 18th century style imperialism. Russia has done this before, and thinking that the threat ended with the Soviets is naive.
I am less worried about China, China has never had massive expansionist ideologies, even for the thousands of years when they were the most powerful civilization on earth. China is an economic threat, and possibly a cultural threat, but they aren't going to come busting in through your door and raping women and children and pillaging like the Russians would do even today. |
 |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jon_Snow
|
The only thing IGK knows about Russia is the rampant child sex industry there. If you picked up an actual book, and not some dirty smut rag you'd actually know something about the country. |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
| Reading you trying to express your world views is like watching a retard eating soup with a fork. You had me at "Russians are Russians..." :stongue: |
|
|
| DJRYAN™ |
| We should just all relax and love each other and live happy butterflies and rainbows. That will bring the Earth Peace and Love and We'll be Unified, and all filled with the Respect of the World because that's how its supposed to be. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jon_Snow
Reading you trying to express your world views is like watching a retard eating soup with a fork. |
:stongue: That is a great bit of imagery. |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
:stongue: That is a great bit of imagery. |
thx. You can't beat a good cutlery joke. |
|
|
| SkyHigh |
| Ok..I ,as I in russian gotta intervene in all this .. .. |
|
|
| Lagrangian |
| quote: | | For those living in Europe who are exposed to the possible fallout that would result from the loss of supplies of Russian energy, the time to begin preparing is right now. As we say often on this site, you’d much rather be a year early than a day late in your preparations. |
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...aine-flashpoint
| quote: | Even though the geopolitical realities have changed drastically since 1945, when the set-up of the current Council was decided, the Security Council has changed very little during this long period. The winners of Second World War shaped the Charter of the United Nations in their national interests, dividing the veto-power pertinent to the permanent seats amongst themselves.[3] With the enlargement of the United Nations membership and increasing self-confidence among the new members, going hand in hand with processes of decolonization, old structures and procedures were increasingly challenged. The imbalance between the number of seats in the Security Council and the total number of member States became evident and the only significant reform of the Security Council came to pass in 1965 after the ratification of two-thirds of the membership, including the five permanent members of the Security Council (that have a veto right on Charter changes).[4] The reform included an increase of the non-permanent membership from six to 10 members.[5] With Boutros Boutros-Ghali elected as Secretary-General in 1992, the reform discussions of the UN Security Council were launched again as he started his new term with the first-ever summit of the Security Council and thereafter published "An Agenda for Peace". His motivation was to restructure the composition and anachronistic procedures of the UN organ recognizing the changed world.[5]
By 1992, Japan and Germany had become the second and third largest contributor to the United Nations and started to demand a permanent seat. Also Brazil (fifth largest country in terms of territory) and India (second largest country in terms of population) as the most powerful countries within their regional groups and key players within their regions saw themselves with a permanent seat. This group of four countries formed an interest group later known as the G4.
On the other hand their regional rivals were opposed to the G4 becoming permanent members with a veto power. They favored the expansion of the non-permanent category of seats with members to be elected on a regional basis. Italy, Pakistan, Mexico and Egypt started to form an interest group, known as the “Coffee Club” and later “Uniting for Consensus”.
Simultaneously, the African Group started to demand two permanent seats for themselves, on the basis of historical injustices and the fact that a large part of the Council’s agenda is concentrated on the continent. Those two seats would be permanent African seats, that rotate between African countries chosen by the African group.[6]
The existing permanent members, each holding the right of veto on Security Council reform, announced their positions reluctantly. The United States supported the permanent membership of Japan and India and a small number of additional non-permanent members. The United Kingdom and France essentially supported the G4 position, with the expansion of permanent and non-permanent members and the accession of Germany, Brazil, India and Japan to permanent member status, as well as an increase the presence by African countries on the Council. China supported the stronger representation of developing countries, voicing support for the Republic of India.[7] Russia, India's long time friend and ally has also endorsed the fast growing power's candidature to assume a seat of a permanent member on the Security Council.[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform...ecurity_Council |
| quote: | he UN Charter established six main organs of the United Nations, including the Security Council. It gives primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security to the Security Council, which may meet whenever peace is threatened.
According to the Charter, the United Nations has four purposes:
to maintain international peace and security;
to develop friendly relations among nations;
to cooperate in solving international problems and in promoting respect for human rights;
and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations.
http://www.un.org/en/sc/members/
|
My view: Germany is acting a bit shifty. The Germans are quite misunderstood people, they are geographically at odds with their own heritage; in the middle of Europe. Last year, Germany filed a request to withdraw all gold reserves held in U.S banks & financial institutions under Federal Reserve oversight - Clearly, Germany feels it does not need a weak United States holding their 'emergency funds' . Germany is focused on its conglomerates: Siemens, SAP, etc. It also knows that behind them are a fiscally armed falange of 'Cinderella's' that comprise the EU, holding vested interest in their 'contractual debt obligations' to Germany, they could facilitate commerce without the intervention or oversight of 'American eyes'. This Trans-Atlantatic deal is evidence of America's interest to grapple control on the EU. |
|
|
| FuzzQi |
You will never watch world war III unfold and purge the Earth of evil
 |
|
|
| ViceroySF |
Where are we with this?
Let's keep this thread factual and amicably serious.
Rubio, from the gutters of Hialeah, is a puppet of the Koch Bros. The Masonic NWO is plotting a covert dethroning of Putin. To that I posit, at all cost? How far will the powers that be go... to overthrow Assad and Putin?
The neo ottomen want Sheria Law and a One World Caliphate.
Who is right? In my opinion, the people are always right, the constitution grants powers to the United States not the other way around. We, the people, have no representation!
We have no reason to go to war with Russia, nor do we want to arm the opposition. We don't want to be involved in foreign wars. We want the borders secured and care only for the welfare of the population. So why do the powerful men of Washington play games with the world at the expense of the rest? When in a twist of faith and chance, that same government, could itself be overthrowned; in lieu of constitutional rights, granted to Us, to bear arms, a right to form militias and stand against the oppressors. |
|
|
| Marcus Summers |
| Is that alberto falk thread still around? |
|
|
|
|
