Members banned from this thread: The Anonymous, cawacko, cancel2 2022, PostmodernProphet, Truth Detector, tsuke, Wolverine, Sailor, RB 60, Tranquillus in Exile, Eagle_Eye, Flash, volsrock, Guno צְבִי, anonymoose, Jack, NiftyNiblick, reagansghost, Into the Night, gfm7175, Earl, Grokmaster, ]2epo]v[an, AProudLefty, ExpressLane, Doc Dutch, Concart, Hawkeye10, Yakuda, Son of the Revolution, Lionfish, LurchAddams and FreeSpeech1789


Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 48

Thread: Russia cuts gas supply to NATO applicant, Finland

  1. #31 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    I really do not think you know what "hyper-militarized" is. I visited the USSR towards the end, when it was much less militarized. Russia has gotten even less militarized since then, but Russia is still far more militarized than anything in NATO.
    NATO allies together have a personnel count of 5.41 million, compared to Russia's 1.35 million, according to the graphic that was the same as Statista's figures.

    It also found NATO allies had 144,000 armored units, more than double that of Russia's 60,000, again a similar number to Statista.
    NATO once more outnumbered Russia with 20,700 aircraft, a factor of nearly five to one when compared to Russia's 4,170.
    Russia is also outnumbered in regard to its naval forces, which number 605—far lower than NATO's 2,049—once again a similar number to Statista.

    However, the graphic did highlight one area where Russia has numerical superiority over NATO allies, namely nuclear weapons.

    But nothing in Europe is "hyper-militarized".
    Ukraine is just the tip of the spear

    There would normally need to be a ceasefire, then a peace agreement, and finally much later we could start working on detente. 20 years later, Nixon could have detente with China, but Eisenhower could only get a ceasefire with China.
    We had detente with Russia during the Cold War.
    yes you are correct in the sequence -hence my post "gone are nay chances for detente"
    I dont even know when Ukraine will stop being a hot war

  2. #32 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    32,827
    Thanks
    19,711
    Thanked 9,447 Times in 7,737 Posts
    Groans
    835
    Groaned 509 Times in 502 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moon View Post
    The Fins should have held a referendum.




    The next prime minister, of course, will have differing ideas.

    Bad move, Finland.

  3. #33 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    28,499
    Thanks
    3,855
    Thanked 12,014 Times in 8,273 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 2,673 Times in 2,479 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    NATO allies together have a personnel count of 5.41 million, compared to Russia's 1.35 million, according to the graphic that was the same as Statista's figures.
    NATO has 946 million citizens, and 3.3 million active troops, or 3,500 troops for every million citizens. Russia has 145 million citizens, and 1.4 million active troops, or 9,700 troops for every million citizens. North Korea has 26 million citizens, and 1.3 million active troops, or 50,000 troops for every million citizens.

    So in absolute numbers, NATO has a bigger military, in terms of how militarized the society is, NATO is the least militarized. The same is even more true about military spending. NATO has to spend thousands of times as much as North Korea, but a lot less of the NATO economies is dedicated to military spending. Many NATO nations are having trouble hitting 2% of GDP, where North Korea is at 24%... And given that the military takes a lot of production without paying for it, is much actually much higher.

    On the spectrum of how militarized places are, NATO is several times less militarized than Russia, and North Korea is hyper-militarized. Ukraine is also becoming hyper-militarized. When a country is invaded, and is fighting for its survival, it becomes hyper-militarized. So I withdrawal my original statement that nothing in Europe is "hyper-militarized". No NATO nation is "hyper-militarized".

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    We had detente with Russia during the Cold War.
    The Cold War was not a shooting war. We did not have detente with the Chinese while we were fighting them in Korea.

    The first step, way before detente is a ceasefire. Everyone is trying to find Putin an offramp to get a ceasefire, but there is a problem. A ceasefire would mean that Russian troops would begin going home (if only to be replaced with new Russian troops). That means they would begin telling people back home how badly Putin failed. A ceasefire might be the end of Putin.

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    I dont even know when Ukraine will stop being a hot war
    You cannot have a lowering of tensions towards a more stable peace while there is a hot war. There is no peace for detente to make more stable.
    Daniel Patrick Moynihan said it best, "You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."
    Paul Begala, "Politics is show business for ugly people."
    Stephen Colbert, "Reality has a well known liberal bias."

  4. #34 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    32,827
    Thanks
    19,711
    Thanked 9,447 Times in 7,737 Posts
    Groans
    835
    Groaned 509 Times in 502 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moon View Post
    No- but when the Europeans see America making massive profits from fuel that used to be cheap from Russia- they're going to start asking what this war was all about.
    Then the effluent connects with the rotor.
    What if it wasn't such a profit and we were just supplying them because we have the resources?

    We do have the resources, but Biden fucked all that up on 1/20/2021.

  5. #35 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    28,499
    Thanks
    3,855
    Thanked 12,014 Times in 8,273 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 2,673 Times in 2,479 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    OMFG
    They have war-gammed under a unified military command

    Vostok-2018: Another Sign of Strengthening Russia-China Ties
    Not an Alliance, but Defense Cooperation Is Growing
    https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/public...sia-china-ties
    As a general rule, they will have one thousand or less troops from one side, and the rest from the other side. They also have separate war games where they practice for war against one another. The Chinese-Russian border is not the US-Canadian border. It is a highly militarized border.

    There is little chance that the USA would be able to land tanks in China. US tanks could conceivably move through North Korea, and attack China, but that is far fetched. Indian tanks would have a hard time getting over the Himalayan; a Sino-Indian war would not be fought with tanks. There are tens of thousands of Russian tanks poised on the Chinese border, so that is the main reason China has developed tanks.
    Daniel Patrick Moynihan said it best, "You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."
    Paul Begala, "Politics is show business for ugly people."
    Stephen Colbert, "Reality has a well known liberal bias."

  6. #36 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    28,499
    Thanks
    3,855
    Thanked 12,014 Times in 8,273 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 2,673 Times in 2,479 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moon View Post
    The Fins should have held a referendum.
    Support for joining NATO is about 70%, and their form of government does not require a referendum on every treaty question. Joining NATO is easily undone. If the Finns disagree with joining NATO, they can elect politicians that would withdraw them from NATO. It could all be done in a few days after a new government came to office.

    Should Putin have had a referendum before invading Ukraine?
    Daniel Patrick Moynihan said it best, "You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."
    Paul Begala, "Politics is show business for ugly people."
    Stephen Colbert, "Reality has a well known liberal bias."

  7. #37 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    As a general rule, they will have one thousand or less troops from one side, and the rest from the other side. They also have separate war games where they practice for war against one another. The Chinese-Russian border is not the US-Canadian border. It is a highly militarized border.

    There is little chance that the USA would be able to land tanks in China. US tanks could conceivably move through North Korea, and attack China, but that is far fetched. Indian tanks would have a hard time getting over the Himalayan; a Sino-Indian war would not be fought with tanks. There are tens of thousands of Russian tanks poised on the Chinese border, so that is the main reason China has developed tanks.
    The PLA’s land army is the world’s largest standing ground force with 915,000 active-duty troops,
    almost twice the US figure of 486,000 personnel, according to the Pentagon’s 2020 China Military Power
    with that many you have to have all phases of land army.
    And they could go Afghan - but China always relies on soft power first.

    There are no war games of Russia v China anymore on the border anymore.

    Russia and China are going to have tanks on a border, there was an
    agreement to have the same amount
    https://nuke.fas.org/control/mrmfba/index.html

    just as NATO has them across Europe - even though the potential of war with Russia is zilch

  8. #38 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    28,499
    Thanks
    3,855
    Thanked 12,014 Times in 8,273 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 2,673 Times in 2,479 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    The PLA’s land army is the world’s largest standing ground force with 915,000 active-duty troops,
    almost twice the US figure of 486,000 personnel, according to the Pentagon’s 2020 China Military Power
    The USA had 1.4 million active troops, and China has 2.2 million active troops. I think you are quoting army sizes, but I would assume the Marines, Navy, and Air Force would be involved in any war.

    Both numbers are highly misleading. The USA could never put all their troops against China (unless China invaded the USA), but also the USA would never go to war with China alone. There would be millions of other troops from allied militaries. Both sides would call up reserves, so both sides would have millions more troops.

    There is no obvious land battle location, and most of the less obvious land battle locations would not include many tanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    There are no war games of Russia v China anymore on the border anymore.
    Both the Russians and the Chinese have highly militarized their border. There are tens of thousands of tanks poised on either side of the border, ready to start a war. They are all training constantly.

    A war between Russia and China would involve tanks. It is actually a good terrain for tanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    just as NATO has them across Europe - even though the potential of war with Russia is zilch
    The Europeans do not agree with you. That becomes stronger and stronger the further east you go. The Baltic Countries are absolutely terrified. Fighting off a potential Russian invasion is the main reason Europeans have tanks.
    Daniel Patrick Moynihan said it best, "You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."
    Paul Begala, "Politics is show business for ugly people."
    Stephen Colbert, "Reality has a well known liberal bias."

  9. #39 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,903
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,395 Times in 6,142 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    It's kind of hard to choose if you have no choice.
    Again, ' No choice ' wasn't mentioned. Your strawmen are on fire. Go away.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  10. #40 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,903
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,395 Times in 6,142 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minister of Truth View Post
    I notice that it triumphed over the Soviets...
    The dissolution of the Soviet Union was due to the policies of Gorbachev , not direct NATO pressure. Russia consolidated its assets.

    Again, NATO is a self-fulfilling prophesy of war.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  11. #41 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,903
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,395 Times in 6,142 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    OMFG
    They have war-gammed under a unified military command
    Walt's ' reality ' is somewhat different to actualities.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  12. #42 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,903
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,395 Times in 6,142 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Support for joining NATO is about 70%, and their form of government does not require a referendum on every treaty question. Joining NATO is easily undone. If the Finns disagree with joining NATO, they can elect politicians that would withdraw them from NATO. It could all be done in a few days after a new government came to office.

    Should Putin have had a referendum before invading Ukraine?
    Ukraine had an election and the US undermined it.
    Without a referendum you can't know what the Fins think- and your invented statistics are already spurious.
    The Russians do not ape the mockery of democracy prevalent in the West- although ' the West ' would like them to.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  13. #43 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,903
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,395 Times in 6,142 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    walt;
    A ceasefire would mean that Russian troops would begin going home (if only to be replaced with new Russian troops). That means they would begin telling people back home how badly Putin failed.
    All war is failure. US vets told us how America failed- and America actually lost. Russia isn't losing- so your theory has no legs.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  14. #44 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,903
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,395 Times in 6,142 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Dillon View Post
    What if it wasn't such a profit and we were just supplying them because we have the resources?

    We do have the resources, but Biden fucked all that up on 1/20/2021.
    You believe in a benevolent America ?
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  15. #45 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,825
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,986 Times in 3,359 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 636 Times in 604 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moon View Post
    Again, ' No choice ' wasn't mentioned. Your strawmen are on fire. Go away.
    So if you use the word "or" you not saying it separates choices? Either you are an idiot or you are unfamiliar with the English language. (Those are 2 choices.)
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

Similar Threads

  1. Russia warns Sweden and Finland against Nato membership
    By moon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 09-15-2022, 11:20 AM
  2. Finland on the way to NATO
    By Alik Bahshi in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-15-2022, 05:57 PM
  3. Finland formally Announces It Wants to Join NATO
    By Guno צְבִי in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-15-2022, 11:44 AM
  4. Finland and Sweden could soon join NATO
    By Guno צְבִי in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 04-14-2022, 09:45 AM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-02-2018, 06:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •