Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Military Crisis in Ukraine

2,481 replies to this topic
Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#2461

Posted 13 January 2017 - 12:52 PM

Care to elaborate? What gives you the impression that President Obama would have used drones against rioting in the United States?

cj2000
  • cj2000

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • None
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground]

#2462

Posted 13 January 2017 - 12:54 PM

Care to elaborate? What gives you the impression that President Obama would have used drones against rioting in the United States?

Sending drones to kill somebody, he don´t like, is the only answer Obama knows.


Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#2463

Posted 13 January 2017 - 12:56 PM

Care to elaborate? What gives you the impression that President Obama would have used drones against rioting in the United States?

Sending drones to kill somebody, he don´t like, is the only answer Obama knows.


Care to cite some examples of when President Obama have done that?

And also, why is Donald Trump still alive then?

cj2000
  • cj2000

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • None
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground]

#2464

Posted 13 January 2017 - 12:59 PM

 

 

Care to elaborate? What gives you the impression that President Obama would have used drones against rioting in the United States?

Sending drones to kill somebody, he don´t like, is the only answer Obama knows.

 


Care to cite some examples of when President Obama have done that?

And also, why is Donald Trump still alive then?

 

So why didn´t you asked about Putin, who is the person, Obama hate the most?

Obama can do that only with people, having no posibility to response.


Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#2465

Posted 13 January 2017 - 01:34 PM

Since you brought him up, why is President Putin still alive then? Has President Obama even attempted or suggested to kill him with a drone? I must say I am disappointed in President Obama, since I would have expected a lot more people to be dead by now. So not only a tyrant but also weak?
  • Tchuck, Sir Michael and Cripto136 like this

The Yokel
  • The Yokel

    Tokel. Never forgetti.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2007
  • Jamaica

#2466

Posted 13 January 2017 - 02:47 PM

So why didn´t you asked about Putin, who is the person, Obama hate the most?

Obama can do that only with people, having no posibility to response.

Are you literally 8 years old?

  • El Diablo, Tchuck, Eutyphro and 2 others like this

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Jo Nškyvi Pohjan Portit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • European-Union
  • Contribution Award [D&D, General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011

#2467

Posted 13 January 2017 - 03:28 PM

Let's keep the posts here within the standards of D&D. Nonsensical one liners aren't welcome here.
  • Eutyphro, RedDagger and Michael like this

cj2000
  • cj2000

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • None
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground]

#2468

Posted 16 January 2017 - 12:00 PM

Since you brought him up, why is President Putin still alive then? Has President Obama even attempted or suggested to kill him with a drone? I must say I am disappointed in President Obama, since I would have expected a lot more people to be dead by now. So not only a tyrant but also weak?

I already gave you the answer, Putin can strike back and Obama is to spineless, to mess with somebody like that.


Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#2469

Posted 16 January 2017 - 12:38 PM

 

Since you brought him up, why is President Putin still alive then? Has President Obama even attempted or suggested to kill him with a drone? I must say I am disappointed in President Obama, since I would have expected a lot more people to be dead by now. So not only a tyrant but also weak?

I already gave you the answer, Putin can strike back and Obama is to spineless, to mess with somebody like that.

 

 

Spineless? Not assassinating one of the world's strongest leaders and throwing the world into a nuclear war is spineless? What the f*ck have you been smoking?

  • Sir Michael and Cripto136 like this

cj2000
  • cj2000

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • None
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground]

#2470

Posted 16 January 2017 - 12:47 PM

 

 

Since you brought him up, why is President Putin still alive then? Has President Obama even attempted or suggested to kill him with a drone? I must say I am disappointed in President Obama, since I would have expected a lot more people to be dead by now. So not only a tyrant but also weak?

I already gave you the answer, Putin can strike back and Obama is to spineless, to mess with somebody like that.

 

 

Spineless? Not assassinating one of the world's strongest leaders and throwing the world into a nuclear war is spineless? What the f*ck have you been smoking?

 

May be spineles wath the wrong word, googletranslator gave me.


Street Mix
  • Street Mix

    The Infidel

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2008
  • Kosovo

#2471

Posted 16 January 2017 - 12:48 PM

 

 

Since you brought him up, why is President Putin still alive then? Has President Obama even attempted or suggested to kill him with a drone? I must say I am disappointed in President Obama, since I would have expected a lot more people to be dead by now. So not only a tyrant but also weak?

I already gave you the answer, Putin can strike back and Obama is to spineless, to mess with somebody like that.

 

 

Spineless? Not assassinating one of the world's strongest leaders and throwing the world into a nuclear war is spineless? What the f*ck have you been smoking?

 

Frankly russia can't be proper lead belligerent in a world war. So everytime I hear about WW3 between USA and russia, I LOL hard. China - yes. UK, France - yes. russia - no never. It won't be a war. It'll be annihilation


Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#2472

Posted 16 January 2017 - 01:50 PM

China, UK and France also have nukes. But if nukes gets involved, it will be annihilation.

cj2000
  • cj2000

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • None
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground]

#2473

Posted 16 January 2017 - 02:02 PM

China, UK and France also have nukes. But if nukes gets involved, it will be annihilation.

Still think annihilation to be the wrong word, as not only USA and Russia will be destroied, but the whole world.


Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#2474

Posted 16 January 2017 - 02:15 PM

China, UK and France also have nukes. But if nukes gets involved, it will be annihilation.

Still think annihilation to be the wrong word, as not only USA and Russia will be destroied, but the whole world.


That sounds exactly like annihilation.
  • Tchuck, Davo the Assassin and Sir Michael like this

Cripto136
  • Cripto136

    Processing...

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 01 Jan 2014
  • United-States
  • Helpfulness Award [Reporting]

#2475

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:38 PM

So what's everyone's thought on Operation Atlantic Resolve?

acmilano
  • acmilano

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2011

#2476

Posted 24 March 2017 - 07:00 AM

http://www.bbc.com/n...europe-39363416

 

A huge arms depot in eastern Ukraine exploded. Could be separatist or an accident,but if it is an sabotage it could restart some hostilitis in Donbass area again.


krypt0s
  • krypt0s

    Ice-Nine

  • Facade Corporation
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2016
  • None

#2477

Posted 24 March 2017 - 11:06 AM

"According to preliminary data ... as a result of sabotage…fire and explosions caused the detonation of ammunition at several sites storing rockets and artillery weapons," chief military prosecutor Anatoly Matios had written on Facebook.

Witnesses had heard a sound resembling that of a drone in flight before the blasts began.

Ukrainian Defence Minister also said as much that the fire had likely been staged by Russian or separatist saboteurs using a drone. Also, this was not the first time the depot was attacked.

cj2000
  • cj2000

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • None
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground]

#2478

Posted 24 March 2017 - 12:35 PM

 

 

China, UK and France also have nukes. But if nukes gets involved, it will be annihilation.

Still think annihilation to be the wrong word, as not only USA and Russia will be destroied, but the whole world.

 


That sounds exactly like annihilation.

 

Read somwhere the explanation of annihilation as pair destruction and this explanation doesn´t feat in this case.


Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#2479

Posted 24 March 2017 - 12:59 PM

Annihilation means total destruction. If the whole world is destroyed, the world has been annihilated.

I am not sure what 'pair destruction' is supposed to mean. But annihilation is more severe than destruction.
  • cj2000 likes this

cj2000
  • cj2000

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • None
  • Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground]

#2480

Posted 24 March 2017 - 01:16 PM Edited by cj2000, 24 March 2017 - 01:17 PM.

Annihilation means total destruction. If the whole world is destroyed, the world has been annihilated.

I am not sure what 'pair destruction' is supposed to mean. But annihilation is more severe than destruction.

Thanks for explanation, this was an other case Wikipedia gave a wrong explanation.

So if keeping with your explanation, annihilation is the right word.


Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None
  • Best Returning Member 2014
    Lifetime Achievement Award

#2481

Posted 24 March 2017 - 01:29 PM Edited by Svip, 26 March 2017 - 09:33 AM.

Annihilation means total destruction. If the whole world is destroyed, the world has been annihilated.

I am not sure what 'pair destruction' is supposed to mean. But annihilation is more severe than destruction.

Thanks for explanation, this was an other case Wikipedia gave a wrong explanation.
So if keeping with your explanation, annihilation is the right word.


Ah, that's because Wikipedia is talking about the concept in physics. That's similar but somewhat different. It's what happens when a particle collides with an antiparticle, and they both cease to exist. It's the same with matter and antimatter - supposedly - that when they touch, they annihilate one another.

In terms of nuclear annihilation - or human extinction - the term is more associated with Mutual assured destruction, a term referring to the strategy that suggested if one side with nuclear weapons attacked another side with nuclear weapons, they would eventually wipe each other out. Therefore effectively - at least in theory - preventing either side from making the first strike, because their own demise would have been certain.

Why it's called 'mutual assured destruction' and not say 'mutual assured annihilation' is purely a style choice, particularly because 'mutual assured destruction' can be abbreviated as 'MAD'.

Perhaps, Wilkie Collins wrote it best in 1870 during the Franco-Prussian war (before the invention of the nuclear bomb):
 

"I begin to believe in only one civilizing influence—the discovery one of these days of a destructive agent so terrible that War shall mean annihilation and men's fears will force them to keep the peace."

  • Triple Vacuum Seal, krypt0s and Thesmophoriazusae like this

Triple Vacuum Seal
  • Triple Vacuum Seal

    If you ♥ the $, then prepare to die for it.

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2011
  • United-States

#2482

Posted 25 March 2017 - 06:41 PM Edited by Triple Vacuum Seal, 25 March 2017 - 06:43 PM.

well put by Collins.  One wonders if the mere fear of annihilation is a sufficient deterrent.  While the technocratic upper echelon of the political and military establishment are relatively devoid of ideology/religion in practice (with the alarming exception of Judeo-Christian rapture musings among conservative elites), their collective ability to end the world can be (and arguably has been) an extortionate tool for controlling the general global public.  As it stands now, we have been conditioned to capitulate to the profiteers of these tensions in order to reduce them.  When rich old, delusional, miserable, pseudo-cynical men are at the helm, this model loses sustainability as those responsible for fearing annihilation on our behalf have the least to lose.  I'm clearly no expert on these things.  Just my two cents.

 

 

 

It will be interesting to see what the Trump administration's response if any to Russian aggression in Ukraine will be.  More tests to NATO's resolve under Trump leadership are sure to come.  There aren't much specifics regarding his Russia policy.  As of now, it's some variant of  "pay up NATO members or those of you in Eastern Europe better start learning Russian."  I honestly think Ukraine will be relegated back to Kremlin puppet state status.  Any large scale conflict will surely result in another mass migration to western Europe, a Ukrainian diaspora, or a well-supported Ukrainian insurgency if not all 3.  Poland would be spared to the extent that it becomes a further militarized buffer state.  All bad news for the funding and political feasibility of NATO in its current undermined state.  Putin is creating conditions that politically incentivize short term western isolationism from the Ukraine conflict in lieu of any increased commitments to NATO in that region.

 

 

On the bright side, foreign affairs leaders in Trump's cabinet are no longer far off from an HRC admin. as far as Russian containment goes. There's even talk of Fiona Hill coming on board I think.  He's got these good people here and there, so he's got some good advise at his disposal.  Trump just needs to relinquish his control on policy towards Russia because he's to unwise to be advised on these matters otherwise.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users