You are not logged in.
Tom, I don't think you're that stupid. I said you're trying to treat Russia as Germany after World War 1. Not 2, I said 1. That caused World War 2. And you are trying to cause another world war. Knock it off.
No one's trying to make Russia pay reparations for what they did during the Cold War, anyway the United States didn't demand reparations from Germany after World War I either, that was France and Great Britain. Imperial Germany didn't damage the United States much at all during World War I, and the United States lost the same amount of soldiers as they would later lose during the Vietnam War, or as had lost previously during the Battle of Gettysburg, about 50,000 lives.
You keep trying to be a bully. You keep trying to intimidate. What happened to France and Germany after World War 1? Or World War 2? What do you think would be left after Russia and American exchange their entire nuclear arsenal? Many scientists likened the Soviet vs American rivalry as two men standing in a room filled up to their waist with gasoline, and arguing over who has more matches. After Russia and America annihilate each other, there won't be some other country with a Marshall Plan to rebuild America. You could think China would dominate, after Russia and America destroyed each other. But nuclear war will trigger nuclear winter.
Why should we assume that anything we do would make the Russians more willing to die than they already are? Why should we give in to Russian demands in order to prevent the Russians from committing "suicide"? Launching a nuclear strike will not achieve what Putin is after, and following Hitler's path if taken far enough will only lead to a World War that we can't survive, so Russia's incentive not to do it is that they will die if they do, so we should make it clear to them that we will not allow them to conquer their neighbors under any circumstances. The problem with getting along with Russia and compromising with them is that it means sacrificing some other nations independence in order to do it. I'm sorry bit we cannot show such weakness towards Russia, because that will only encourage further acts of aggression towards other European states by Russia. I want Russia to think about the destruction that would be caused by World War III if they unleash it, Hitler didn't face this prospect in 1939, so that is the main difference between these two situations. Your basic assumption is that the Russians don't care if they die, so therefore we should give in to them, as we love our own lives more than they do theirs, and I believe that is wrong. The Russians don't want to either die or expand their Empire, they think we will allow them to expand their empire without stopping them, and I think we should show them they are wrong. For instance we could move troops into the Western Part of Ukraine, if the Russians attack us their, they know what will happen next, so they won't. I would also give nuclear weapons to Poland in order to discourage outside powers from attempting to change is borders once more. World War II started in Poland, North Korea has nuclear weapons, so I think is time some additional Western country gets nuclear weapons as well. Poland is at peace, no one has invaded it, so giving Poland nuclear weapons will ensure that no one will invade Poland in the future. We need to nail down Poland's borders because they are otherwise indefensible with conventional weapons, so no redrawing the borders of Europe without both countries mutual consent.
Here's a link to a movie called "The Day After", produced in 1983. Full movie uploaded to YouTube. It depicts what will happen after nuclear war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2B7sdLPMfc
I saw The Day After, and it depicts only what happened in the US side of the conflict, we don't get to see the destruction of Russian cities. The problem with movies like the Day After is that their message is aimed only at an American audience, you need two sides wanting to have peace in order to have peace, not just one. So if one side wants peace and the other does not, that is called surrender. We need movies to make the other side afraid of nuclear war, and Hollywood hasn't produced them, though it has sold many other movies to the foreign market. So what does movies like The Day After tell the Russians? It tells them that if they launch a nuclear attack on the United States, millions of Americans will die, not a very helpful message to be telling the Russians, or Pakistan for that matter. The assumption being is that the Russians want this and if they don't get it, they are willing to die in a nuclear war, I don't see any evidence for that, do you?
Or better yet, here is a lecture entitled "If You Love This Planet". 1982. The movie is 2 hours long, the lecture only 25 minutes and 50 seconds.
https://www.nfb.ca/film/if_you_love_this_planet/
I'm not saying a nuclear war won't kill us, what I'm saying is the Russians won't start one over this and we can call their bluff, as I am quite sure they wish to go on living. Besides we're not talking about an invasion of Russia, just the prevention of its further expansion, that is all. Russia permitted Ukraine to be independent in 1991, so it doesn't get to take that back now, to let them do that would be very dangerous to countries like Poland. We are not attacking Russia, we are simply saying to Russia that it cant take what I wants by force, which it has been trying to do.
And every time you demand that Russia surrender to the US, why don't you surrender to Russia? How well do you think that would work out? Do you really think any Russian would trust America any more than you would trust Russia?
Who's asking Russia to surrender, we are only asking Russia to stop attacking its neighbors as it has Georgia and Ukraine, this is not behavior worthy of a European Nation, and I am simply asking that Russia act like the other peaceful European Nations and to stop being a spoiler, we are not asking of them a whole lot, just simply to recognize borders that were established since 1991 and not to try and change them. Russia and Germany have the same size economies, I am simply asking the Russians to behave like the Germans now, not as the Germans of the 1930s. Germany is not now occupied, it is not defeated, it is doing rather well in fact and its standard of living is greater than Russia's and the reason for that is that Germany has learned how to behave after two World Wars. Russia has fought those two World Wars as well, not just one, so their is no need for them to learn the lessons of only one. As I recall, Russia made its own separate peace with Germany before World War I ended, they pulled out of World War I early, and since they were not among the victorious allies and had made concessions to the Germans as a condition to get the Germans to not attack them, the land they gave up for that peace with Germany was turned over to countries like Poland, and the Baltic Republics. That was just too bad for Russia, they wanted an early end to the war for themselves and Lenin promised the Russians "land, bread, and peace" and the price for that was that countries like Poland regained its independence instead of remaining divided between the Russian, Austrian, and German Empires. Russia has since invaded Poland 3 more times. Once in the 1920s, once in 1939, and once again in 1945. Russia needs to be strongly discouraged from invading Poland a fourth time, and I believe nuclear weapons will do the job. We should place them in Poland, and to prevent antinuclear protests, we should give them directly to the Polish government for them to control, and we'll just rely on Poland's common sense not to start any nuclear wars for any other reason besides national defense. The Russians already helped North Korea to get theirs and they are helping Iran get its nukes, I believe the West is due one or two additional nuclear powers to balance that out. Russia needs incentive not to proliferate nuclear weapons any more than it has, therefore it has to suffer some of the negative consequences of nuclear proliferation as well in order not to try and add more nations to this list. I figure since North Korea has nuclear weapons, so too should South Korea have them, and if Iran gets nukes, we should deliver ready made missiles and nuclear warheads to Poland and give them the launch codes and instructions on how to service and maintain them. It does appear that Iran will have them before the end of the Obama Administration, since Russia has already done this dirty deed, there is no need to be sneaky with Poland, we can just deliver completed nuclear weapons to Poland, we have plenty already, deliver them by railcar, unload them and help them dig silos for them in Polish soil, we can also sell them surplus nuclear missile subs from our stockpile, an strategic bombers so they can have their own mini-triad of nuclear deterrent. 1000 nuclear missiles should do the job, and we should send 1000 to South Korea as well, to discourage the North from lobbing shells into South Korea as they occasionally do. I say no more invasions! We need to nip this in the bud before it gets out of control!
Offline
@martienne: Sorry. I tried to argue with Tom. But he's intransigent. In the end I asked JoshNH4H to ban Tom from this discussion thread. After all, I started it. Josh responded that he can't ban anyone from one particular thread.
To set the record, straight, my response was as follows:
Not only is it impossible for me to ban a single user from a single thread, speaking as a forum moderator the content of his post has no bearing on his right to say it. Unless he says something that is offensive, racist, etc. I can't in good conscience silence him for being obnoxious or wrong.
I've found that he's not worth arguing with, you're better off just ignoring him.
My issue with banning him from the thread is not that the forum software does not enable it (As a moderator, I could, I suppose, tell someone that they were banned and enforce it with the threat of a more general ban), the issue is that there is no justification for it whatsoever and his speech is in no way less valuable than yours.
I don't even see the point in you asking to have Tom banned from this thread, as 80% of it has been you arguing with him.
Upon further consideration, I have decided to lock the thread. Congrats guys, we've all reminded ourselves why the Politics rule was a good one.
-Josh
Offline