Speaker to Animals wrote:That's what they said when I first showed up to college out of the military and tried to explain to my communist professor (not hyperbole) that we needed to maintain the defense budget because it was only a matter of time before we were dragged into wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (Bin Laden).
I don't know what to tell you, man. That we are headed towards a war with Islam seems pretty obvious to me. I am not sure if the US is going to split up, but it's looking more possible as time marches on.
Well when that war is underway, then a temporary alliance will probably go down in regards to taking down Radical Islam. Such an alliance will only last as long as threat warrants it though, it will be an alliance of convenience like in WWII.
The most likely scenario that brings about a US-Russian alliance though is the Russian establishment is overthrown by a regime that doesn't require an American boogeyman to justify their existence. That's best case scenario for America and would allow for a more long lasting alliance than any of the other scenarios presented. As long as both countries are major nuclear powers, I don't see any theoretical alliance within that framework lasting very long.
Last edited by StCapps on Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The idea that Russia is this huge enemy is silly. It's perpetuated by senile neocon senators who are trying to sell boots and kit now to little tiny nations with armies that number about two thousand people. It's not about defense anymore. NATO is Amway for defense contractors.
Speaker to Animals wrote:The idea that Russia is this huge enemy is silly. It's perpetuated by senile neocon senators who are trying to sell boots and kit now to little tiny nations with armies that number about two thousand people. It's not about defense anymore. NATO is Amway for defense contractors.
They can nuke your nukes and force you to capitulate via nuclear blackmail, and/or they can nuke your major population centers, Radical Islam cannot. That makes them more dangerous than any other enemy you could possibly face, including China. It isn't just Neocon senators who realize that reality and oversell the threat to justify more defense spending.
If you want to keep your nukes and the Russians want to keep theirs, then you are natural enemies. The Balance of Terror insures it.
Last edited by StCapps on Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Except neither Russia nor China has declared war on the US, whereas radical Islam has.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.
Okeefenokee wrote:Except neither Russia nor China has declared war on the US, whereas radical Islam has.
If they did though you are in much bigger trouble by several orders of magnitude. The Russians can make the sky fall on you, Radical Islam is a mere pest by comparison.
Last edited by StCapps on Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Okeefenokee wrote:Except neither Russia nor China has declared war on the US, whereas radical Islam has.
If they did though you are in much bigger trouble. The Russians can make the sky fall on you, Radical Islam is a mere pest by comparison.
You are forgetting the part about another capable entity not by default being a threat just because they are also capable. That's neocon thinking.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.
Okeefenokee wrote:You are forgetting the part about another capable entity not by default being a threat just because they are also capable. That's neocon thinking.
One threat is clearly much greater than the other, and until that changes I see no reason to act as if the situation has already changed. Talk to me when the Russians point their nukes at Radical Islamic strongholds and not American cities and military installations. That isn't just neocon thinking, that's common fucking sense. The neocons aren't wrong about everything, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Don't be a word thinker and just put a negative label on something so you can convince yourself that you don't have discuss the merits of the argument because "that's neocon thinking" and not even worth considering.
That's just lazy bro, you're better than that.
Last edited by StCapps on Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I don't really get how anybody could consider terrorism more of an existential threat than 1200 nukes aimed at you...
Oh..and StA, I think you should read up on Putin's view on Islam, and generally how many Muslims live in Russia and under what conditions. For one, Russia already allows sharia law in its Muslim regions and Putin has publicly said that he considers Islam closer to their Orthodox faith than Catholics.
So, if you expect Putin to be your bestest friend in that regard... realities will disappoint.
BjornP wrote:I don't really get how anybody could consider terrorism more of an existential threat than 1200 nukes aimed at you...
Me either, now if I were to be a dickbag I could say "that's Obama thinking" and dismiss their arguments with a negative label, but that would be lame. That said Mitt Romney was right about this.
Last edited by StCapps on Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
