Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Cold War II

    Share

    Palestinian
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 30
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2012-08-06

    Cold War II

    Post  Palestinian on Sat Dec 08, 2012 12:27 am

    Russia has accused the United States of engaging in cold war tactics and threatened tit-for-tat retaliation after the US Senate passed a bill banning Russian officials accused of human rights abuses from travelling to the country.

    The US Senate on Thursday passed the Magnitsky Act, named after a Russian lawyer for London-based investor William Browder, who died in prison, as part of a bill that lifts Soviet-era trade restrictions on Russia. The bill, which must be signed by President Barack Obama before coming into force, includes a visa ban and asset freeze on those officials involved in Magnitsky's death.

    Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, said after meeting Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, in Dublin late on Thursday that Russia would retaliate. "We will also close entry to Americans who are guilty of human rights violations," he said.

    Many Russians laughed off the threat, noting that the Russian propensity to keep assets and property in the US is not reciprocated. "And now they'll shut down entry to Russia for some American officials who are involved, let's say, in the death of Afghan kids. What are they going to do, cry?" Margarita Simonyan, the Kremlin-friendly head of Russia Today, the state-run international news channel, wrote on Twitter.

    The Kremlin marshalled the Young Guard, the youth wing of the ruling United Russia party, to protest. The group held a protest in front of the US embassy in Moscow on Friday with the sign:''The US is a police state.""The US positions itself as a country of freedom. And yet, the American leadership is itself infringing upon the freedom of citizens of another country," Maxim Rudnev, a member of the Young Guard, said in a statement. "It's worth asking: is the United States deserving of hosting the Statue of Liberty?"
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/07/russia-us-cold-war-tactics

    SOC
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 595
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 38
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  SOC on Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:54 am

    Somebody here actually had an intelligent comment: if Congress thinks this is a good idea, why aren't they applying it to ALL nations?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 08, 2012 8:22 am

    What part of the US government is not responsible for guantanimo and of course rendition etc etc.

    This is clearly a direct shot at Russia... or very few Chinese officials would be able to travel to the US.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    chenzhao
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 18
    Points : 22
    Join date : 2012-12-20
    Location : Shanghai

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  chenzhao on Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:26 am

    Similar event happened to China before, in 19-89, similar laws was passed to forbidden Chinese officials who invloved Tian~an~men square incident to visit USA. Very obviously, USA is supporting a so called "color-revolution" in Russia.

    russianumber1
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2013-12-18

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  russianumber1 on Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:42 pm

    in the area of ​​Arctic Russia is at odds with other countries like canada and can be real war still has a U.S. plan that I can not remember the name sa bases to cause a disabling attack using conventional ICBMs with conventional warheads barren and hypersonic missiles I found an article of onten the voice of russia'll see if I can find that is good again seems possible a new cold war with the substance

    russianumber1
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2013-12-18

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  russianumber1 on Sat Dec 21, 2013 3:05 pm

    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia expects the Eurasian Economic Union to be formed in early 2015, said Deputy Foreign Minister Grigori Karasin Russian, noting that "some years ago that Russia aspires to strengthen and deepen the Eurasian integration ".

    Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Belarus, International

    The Russian diplomat continued stating that, in the early próximasemana in Mosco the Supreme Council of Eurasia which will feature the participation of the presidents of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be held.

    "Our policy considers that the integration processes do not contradict each other and complement each other," explained Karasin.oque Ukraine will be in the meeting seems that Russia is consequindo dictate its strategy of union euro asiatica to russia with union comsiquira grow more and continue to fund the purchase of weapons))) I know it's just an economic union but it seems that Moscow intends a military union with time)))

    etaepsilonk
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 717
    Points : 699
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  etaepsilonk on Sat Dec 21, 2013 3:54 pm

    russianumber1 wrote: but it seems that Moscow intends a military union with time)))

    You mean, something like this?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Organization

    russianumber1
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2013-12-18

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  russianumber1 on Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:13 pm

    no better total union will be virtually the same army, CSTO is just an alliance of mutual defense not a full military alliance would almost single parents who are not officially be logically and did not worry about riots in Moscow, because they will not admitdo other countries It almost seemed part of Russia, which are independent, they can evolve into CSTO is a broader military union with Ukraine and the Eurasian Union care seemed to question the asiatica euro economic union has nothing aver but with CSTO is an amalgamation of countries, but not Moscow admitting

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1957
    Points : 1964
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  Regular on Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:27 pm

    etaepsilonk wrote:Dudes, I think, that disscussing, which war is likely and which not, is pointless. The job of the military is to prepare for EVERY contingency, be it war with NATO, China, Kazakhstan, Ukraine or Boris Nemtsov.
    True. There is nothing better than to have military with good morale, career opportunities and weapon industry backing it.
    War with NATO or China doesn't seem to be very likely thanks to pragmatism.. Cold war LITE VERSION is possible.

    russianumber1
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2013-12-18

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  russianumber1 on Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:38 pm

    most likely a new cold war but you never know

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:51 pm

    GarryB wrote:In a war with all of NATO tanks will be irrelevant... that is what the nuclear deterrent is for.

    Tactical nukes will make up for any numbers shortage.

    China vs Russia is a western wet dream.

    The most likely conflict China faces is over soverignty of islands near it, or the declaration of independence by Taiwan... the latter will test US resolve as they have pledged to support Taiwan independence if sought AFAIK.

    By 2020 the Russian military will be well into its reforms with 70 percent new equipment... by 2025 it should be 90%.

    From what we have seen they are developing training and testing equipment as well as production equipment etc so by 2020 they should be in a good position to produce things rather more rapidly.


    ...It's their wet dream, and its a circle jerk with concern-trolls like Zbignew Bryznski and Rand Corporation Neo-Con's like Andrew Marshall salivating over a dream that's not likely to happen:

    China shares Russian concerns over US missile defense plans

    MOSCOW, November 29. /ITAR-TASS/. China shared Russian concerns about US missile defense plans, Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said on Friday.

    “Our dialogue with China on missile defense is very important," he told a media briefing at Itar-Tass news agency. "Our colleagues from the People’s Republic of China have the same concerns on US global missile defense plans.”
    Military-technical cooperation with China was developing progressively and was oriented “at the development of state-of-the art arms and hardware”, Antonov said, telling reporters that earlier in the year, the Chinese president visited the defense ministry, the first-ever by a Chinese leader.
    “Following instructions from our countries’ leaders, co-operation between the defense ministries of Russia and China has received an additional boost,” the deputy minister said, noting that the joint naval exercise Sea Co-operation in July and the anti-terrorist exercise Peace Mission 2013 from July to August were culminating points in military co-operation this year.
    Focusing on military and military-technical co-operation between Russia and India, Antonov said transfer of the aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya to the Indian navy was “the milestone event of the year”.
    “When the Indian defense minister visited Moscow, agreements were reached to continue regular joint exercises and to continue negotiations between the headquarters on adding global and regional security to their agendas,” he said.

    http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/709553


    What's so fascinating about this story is that there was a previous story from the Washington Post back in the month of May, that revealed that the Chinese obtained blueprints and sensitive information on programs like Aegis, THAAD, standard missile systems, PAC-3, etc. via hacking; the Chinese could very well be sharing that information with the Russian MOD:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/a-list-of-the-us-weapons-designs-and-technologies-compromised-by-hackers/2013/05/27/a95b2b12-c483-11e2-9fe2-6ee52d0eb7c1_story.html

    Here's a quote from a similar article: “This is billions of dollars of combat advantage for China. They’ve just saved themselves 25 years of research and development. It’s nuts.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/confidential-report-lists-us-weapons-system-designs-compromised-by-chinese-cyberspies/2013/05/27/a42c3e1c-c2dd-11e2-8c3b-0b5e9247e8ca_story.html


    ...And apparently it turns out China might possibly have very well obtained PAC-3 tech and sold blueprints to Iran and possibly mordern version's of Iran's pre-revolution standard missiles; here's a video from another thread:


    Hannibal Barca
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1219
    Points : 1241
    Join date : 2013-12-13

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  Hannibal Barca on Sat Dec 21, 2013 5:45 pm

    We pretty much entered Cold War II around 2007-08. Starting event is not yet broadly agreed. It can be the real estate bubble burst in US, it might be the Lehman brothers thing in December 2007, but if you ask me, it is the Georgian war that gave the signal for the second round.

    If you see the G20 countries is about 8 with the East about 8 with the West and there are 3-4 undecided cases, the most interesting of whom are Germany and Australia as it stands now.

    I don't see a major conflict in the near future, but with all this tension rising month by month and with the event of a relatively bloodless drone or space war becoming more possible in the distant future, I wouldn't be shocked if we see something relatively big in the next couple decades and quite a few minors along the way.

    PS By the way, obviously the match started with the West having the complete initiative but the long term fundamentals favor the East heavily. We shall see. Interesting times ahead.

    mack8
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 923
    Points : 983
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  mack8 on Sat Dec 21, 2013 9:51 pm

    If there's going to be another Cold War i hope Russia and China learned the lessons from the previous one this time. The antagonism between them starting in the early sixties worked wonders against BOTH, that WAS the yanks' wet dream.  Things are different today though, China is world's most successful communist (by name only though, they are light years away from what image the word "communism" invokes) country ever, second most powerful economy, while Russia is recovering from the 15 years lost after the dissolution of the USSR and looks set to recover it's strength. So this time, the yanks have a very real chance of LOOSING this new cold war, and i didn't think there are many to shed a tear for them, that is IF  Russia and China stand together this time. I wish the sino-indian relations will be also greatly improved and for them to go over whatever differences they have, again, this only works against BOTH, and wonderfully serves the US "divide and conquer" strategy. Imagine a joint block of China, Russia and India (and even add the likes of Brazil too!), man the yanks would be *** bricks! Payback is a female dog, as they say.

    Now, don't get me wrong, i am NOT looking forward to more wars, let alone WW3, or actually bringing back again some oppressive bolshevik or maoist regimes, far from that. I'm sure that would not even be possible given the evolutions in the russian and chinese societies these days, even if there is always room for improvement.  But as the yanks self-entitled themselves the "policeman of the world", they have aptly proven to be an increasingly corrupt, violent and turbulent, blood-tainted with the lives of MILLIONS they killed kind of  "policeman", the type of policeman most everyone fears but also everyone loaths  and everyone looks forward to him being found in a ditch or something. They are a FAILED "policeman", so it's time they are sacked from their "position".

    One of the side effects of the yanks loosing this Cold War II would be, from my point of view, the very real possibility of the creation of a true, United EU as the world's fourth superpower, free from the domination, hegemony and sabotage of the americans, we can take care of ourselves very well, thank you. Europe is too small a place for all the little countries here to NOT stand and work together, and certainly NOT be part (as mere vassals) of the americans' criminal politics and corporate profit  driven wars, this standing in contrast with the overwhelming will and the values of  the european society in  in general. This is what i dream about, however utopian it might sound.

    I always thought that various characters claiming to be  russian or chinese etc. who wet themselves on the www and stir things up at the prospect of an imminent conflict between the two in which obviously their side will win and smash the "inferior" other side, they are not really russian nor chinese, but some sort of sock puppets based in Langley... divide and conquer, remember?

    russianumber1
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2013-12-18

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  russianumber1 on Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:15 am

    I appreciated your comment

    russianumber1
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2013-12-18

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  russianumber1 on Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:53 am

    Russia's Strategy in Asia

    Read more at: Putin, Asia-Pacific, Pacific Rim

    12/19/2013 12:02

    FENENKO, Alexei

    Last November, could be called Asian Month in Russian foreign policy. The first Russian-Japanese negotiations in 2 +2 format were held in November 1-2. On November 12, President Putin visited Vietnam, where several inter-institutional cooperation projects and individual economic agreements were signed, including military and technological cooperation. Vietnam, Russia's president, went to South Korea, where he signed several innovative document: beyond economic cooperation agreements, the parties agreed to visa-free entry in both directions.

    These visits were crucial as Putin determined priorities of Russia's foreign policy in the Asia Pacific region. In his interview with South Korean KBS TV, he supported the initiative of Eurasia advanced by South Korean President Park Geun Hye. The initiative concerns a Eurasian economic union, part of which includes connecting the Korean railway system with the Trans-Siberian Railway. According to Putin, the next steps should include standardized between the DPRK and South Korea relations, and the construction of a Trans-Korean gas pipeline. American experts were quick to see an 'Asian offensive by the Kremlin "in the declaration of Putin. Historic with the early 20th century parallel, when the Russian Empire pursued a "great Asian strategy" as he tried to gain a foothold in Korea and ice-free port in the Pacific are becoming increasingly popular.

    Three turning points

    Indeed, the goals of Russia in the Pacific is not that ambitious. The search for a new Asian strategy is not proactive but rather a reaction to the weakening of its position in the Asia-Pacific region, which occurred around 2011-2012.

    Over the past twenty years, the Russian policy in the Asia-Pacific region has experienced decisive moments on three occasions. The first was during the visit of President Boris Yeltsin to Beijing in December 1992, when the leaders of Russia and China announced plans to build a strategic partnership. The next 10 years were an attempt to implement this objective and included the launch of Shanghai, demilitarization of the border process, signing the Joint Declaration on a Multipolar World (1997), and the Russian-Chinese Treaty (2001). The last mutual commitments in a similar matter to forge an alliance and cooperation included consultations on international issues, the development of common foreign policy strategies and mutual diplomatic support.

    The second turning point in Russia's Pacific policy came in the fall of 2002. By that time, the Kremlin realized that a strategic partnership with China was not enough. In order to build a more comprehensive policy, the Kremlin initiated dialogues with Vietnam, Japan, South Korea and ASEAN. These hopes were not realized, and Russia failed to sign a single free trade area agreement, much less a consultative pact with any of these countries. Moscow did sign several joint declarations with ASEAN however. But still, Russia was not invited to attend the East Asia Summit (EAS) in the ASEAN summit in Kuala Lumpur in 2005, which meant that he was not recognized as a full member of the integration processes in the region Asia-Pacific. Efforts for the preferential partnership between Russia and ASEAN fell through.

    The third turning point came around in 2009, when the Kremlin introduced the concept of a pivot to Asia. This thesis was made public by President Dmitry Medvedev at the APEC Summit in Singapore in 2009. It has become very popular as various integration projects were becoming available. Moscow not only got accession East Asia Summit (2010), but she was assigned the chairmanship of APEC (2012). The idea of ​​investing in the modernization of the Russian Far East and to promote integration initiatives has been gaining popularity. Was extensively discussed the possibility of Russian participation in integration projects trans-Pacific APEC ranging from a hypothetical northern alternative to ASEAN. Notably, in 2012, the Presidential Council on Defense and Foreign Policy initiated discussions about the potential relocation of the Russian capital for a city in Siberia and the Russian Far East.

    The third stage of Russia's Pacific policy was ended in early 2012. The United States lost interest in APEC as a mechanism for building a free trade zone blocking trans-Pacific and China's economic initiatives. Washington has since accelerated the implementation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which is based on the integration of the Pacific without China Association. Initially, the TPP was supported by small South Pacific nations. However, in late 2011, the United States began negotiations with Vietnam, Japan and South Korea on the TPP accession to turn it into a viable alternative to the approach China with ASEAN.

    However, Russia has little presence in regional integration. Whatever the outcome of discussions on the TPP, Russia is unlikely to become a member of the association for the foreseeable future. A consultation mechanism favored between Russia and ASEAN also failed to materialize. Russia has only been a member of APEC since 1995 and that due to U.S. support. However, the role of APEC is decreasing. The development of Russian-Chinese relations is becoming a real alternative to Moscow, something that is being promoted as part of the treaty of 2001. But the political priority of building relations with someone other than China has so far been unsuccessful.

    Taken together, these predetermined circumstances underperformance of Russia in Vladivostok APEC Summit in September 2012. The real agenda was not energy initiatives from Moscow, but the establishment of the TPP. Russia filed its ambitious projects in the Asia-Pacific region immediately after the return of Vladimir Putin to the Kremlin in the spring of 2012. An ambitious advancement in Asia has not been done.

    Window for dialogue

    Putin visits to Hanoi and Seoul revealed the foundations for a new strategy. Russia wants to maximize the window to a dialogue with other Pacific nations. The major economic projects of the early 2010s were postponed indefinitely. Instead, Moscow is building an economic dialogue with the countries of Asia-Pacific, without having to connect to all rigid mutual commitments. This approach allows four sets to solve the problems. Firstly, dialogue with the Pacific countries must demonstrate that Russia has an alternative to its relations with China in Asia. Of course, Beijing will be the next priority partner for Russia's future. But Moscow is seeking to create economic relationships that can compensate for the excessive dependence on the Russian Far East economic ties with China.

    Secondly, the Kremlin is using this dialogue to prove its foreign policy in Asia has been successful over the last 10 years. Moscow has a good chance to return to previously unrealized economic projects in the Pacific region.

    Thirdly, the fact that Moscow has more than one potential partner will ask China to pay more attention to the interests of Russia.

    Fourth, Russia is expanding its economic relations as a platform to attract investments. China imports raw materials and high-tech Russian (military and aerospace). However, Russia is seeking new partners who will be willing to invest in developing its infrastructure of transport and logistics in the Russian Far East.

    A puzzle

    However, the polarization of the Asia-Pacific region is on track to a new Asian strategy of Russia. The policy of the Obama administration to contain China will lead to a division in the region. This puts Russia in a difficult situation in which he will have to choose between a strategic partnership with China and advance its relations with the countries of Southeast Asia. Russian diplomacy has a lot of leeway here. The countries of Southeast Asia are beginning to realize Russia as an ally of China, cooperating with Beijing on military-technical programs and energy resources. China sees Russia's contacts with U.S. allies as a violation of the spirit of the treaty of 2001 (we recall that the contacts between the Russian Space Agency and Australia and New Zealand, in December 2010, were deprecated in Beijing).

    These variables raise doubts about the ability of the Kremlin to pursue a multi-vector policy in Asia. Sooner or later, Moscow will have to decide if its relations with U.S. allies are harmful to the Russian-Chinese Treaty of 2001.

    Alexei Fenenko leader is Research Fellow, Institute of International Security Studies of RAS, Russian Academy of Sciences. The opinions expressed are those of individual members and Contributors, rather than the club, unless otherwise indicated.

    russianumber1
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2013-12-18

    Cold War II

    Post  russianumber1 on Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:12 am

    Does Russia Reel back or fight back?

    Read more: Cold War, Ukraine, EU, NATO, Russian elites

    12/19/2013 11:30

    BOVT Georgy far can the confrontation between Russia and the West go? There is a line where the two sides will stop before you start with a clean sheet? So far, the confrontation was only growing. The Cold War II can start any day, if not already in progress. It seems that the West and the Kremlin have no answers to these questions. They leave everything to chance. No country stopped to think that the world will be like in the mid-2020s, nor is anyone developing a short term policy, according to a long-term strategy. They forget that there are limits beyond which can grow dangerous confrontation.

    Take Ukraine. It seems EU officials underestimated the Kremlin and Putin's determination to avoid calling Euro integration. Do not be fooled by their sovereign choice words about the Ukrainians. "EU officials may express his outrage at Putin's" blackmail "poor Yanukovych as much as they want. But when they and the Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland visit opposition from Kiev, Independence Square, to shake hands with the protesters and distribute breads between protesters and police, as did Ms. Nuland, the Kremlin definitely see this as fresh evidence that the unrest in Ukraine is being financed by external forces and it is directed against Russia.

    The Russian ruling class firmly believe that nothing happens without a reason, and that most of what happens is directed against Russia.

    Does anyone consider the integration of Ukraine if not for its eastern neighbor and its president? Who would have the courage to say "no" to this question?

    According to the predominant, or better, the only belief in the Kremlin next stop after Ukraine NATO European integration would, with tanks and missiles block, let alone the defense system against ballistic missiles deployed near Belgorod and Kursk . Not even the girls administrator in western Kremlin guarantees confidence that the BMD system is not directed at Russia.

    The Russian ruling class believes that the loss of Ukraine, and that is how your "escape" to the West, either via European integration or otherwise, is seen, is a threat to the survival of Russia, which must be fought by all available means, even by military force if all other methods fail.

    Unfortunately, the Russian ruling class traditionally sees the world around him as a conglomerate of threats, large and small, rather than opportunities.

    One can explain this by post-imperial complexes, theories that work well for all types of seminars held in centers of business pleasant five star hotels. When the Kremlin denounced eastward expansion of NATO through Georgia and Ukraine as an unacceptable threat, few people in the West thought Moscow would resort to military force, as it did in 2008, and would even consider marching all the way to Tbilisi. But that's what happened, and at a time when Russia-West relations were better than they are now and a different president sat in the Kremlin.

    Will the authorities in Brussels, keep this in mind when they say they will not discuss the problem of Ukraine with Russia in a trilateral format, because "colonial era" is past, and refuse to admit that Moscow has an area of ​​interest National? These may be the right words, but they are good only for the bright future when, as Mikhail Gorbachev put it, the world will be ruled by a new political thinking. But this age is not nothing but a dream. They can refuse to admit it, but EU officials do not see the Ukrainian bid as part of their big game with Moscow? EU policy in Ukraine is not limited to this game, but it is certainly an aspect of its policy, mainly at the insistence of former allies of Russia Warsaw Pact.

    Putin is not the most popular politician in the West, and his government do not incorporate the values ​​that form the basis of the Euro-Atlantic civilization. Moreover, Putin has changed since the early 2000s. He now says that Russia has its own set of different values ​​and do not live according to Western values.

    Interestingly, there is a parallel between the current complaint of "tolerance asexual" and accusations of "rootless cosmopolitanism" in early 1950.

    Does this mean that Putin's Russia should be controlled to give the wrong step and subsequently forced to become one of the calls rogue nations? This is the number of people in the Russian ruling class to evaluate the current situation, because they are always ready to find evidence of this in both objective reality and the things that only exist in a paranoid mind. Many believe that Russia is pushing in that group of nations with their own unhealthy actions. But when EU officials encouraging a boycott of the Sochi Olympics, has to wonder why they do it. Moscow has troops deployed in Afghanistan again?

    It is true that the Russian authorities often use obsolete methods appropriate to the 1960s or even worse, in the Middle Ages to fight the generally recognized standards of behavior in the economy, cooperation and human rights. But this is not the point. The question is: What happens when Russia is pushed out of the group of major nations, to the delight of his enemies in the West and, as a result of the persistent efforts of the Russian kleptocracy? Will the world order be ideal with a marginalized and ostracized Russia?

    Moreover, being a rogue country is not so bad. For example, Iran has threatened to destroy Israel, denounced the United States as the Great Satan, and has worked to create a nuclear bomb. The international community imposed sanctions against him, of course, but Iran still earned dollars 69,000 million in revenues from oil exports in 2012.

    This is still not a war, but there is no notion of unacceptable damage, and the damage threshold for Western civilization, with its "tolerant asexual" and comforts of consumption, is getting smaller. Now it is much lower than during the Berlin Crisis in 1948, or the missile crisis in Cuba in 1962. They say Putin is the Big Bad Wolf, who imprisoned Pussy Riot and hates gays. At the same time, they are strangely euphoric about the new president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, who smiles and calls almost daily Barack Obama, unlike his predecessor. They are happy that he seems willing to discuss the Iranian nuclear program. These smiles, photos of secretary of state John Kerry shaking hands with well-educated and Western-educated hopes Chancellor naive and Iran that the Iranian thugs will eventually embrace "new thinking" overshadowed the essence of the Geneva meeting, which recognized Iran's right to develop a nuclear program.

    This means that the worse you behave the more readily the world will shake hands with you if you promise to mend his ways?

    The North Korean dictator is almost the darling of the West. Pakistan can do anything, provided you keep nuclear weapons away from the Taliban. India a wonderful young democracy, forbade homosexual sex and no one in the West as much as turned a hair. It is a strange logic that underlies Western actions.

    President Putin probably do not know how far it goes in its confrontation with the West. But the logic of his actions shows that he became disillusioned in cooperation with the West as he saw in September 2001, he suffered the consequences of their hypocritical policy of double standards, and is preparing for a long conflict and increasingly intense .

    This explains the policy sovereignization elites. In the not so distant future, we may find that in 2013 we were only at the beginning of this difficult path and that sovereignization of elites, or the Orthodox Taliban as some describe this process, also affected the general public and is becoming manifest in politics, the economy and everyday life. The public increasingly feel the weight of the new spiritual values, and views of people like St. Petersburg politician Vitaly Milonov, who tried to establish the law of God, attacking homosexuals, will become the dominant ideology.

    One element of this new policy is the focus on rearmament. It is interesting to note, however, that the armies are never reset, so as to create new jobs and new technologies, but in preparation for a war.

    Putin did not say a word about foreign investment in his speech to parliament in 2013. But he spoke of the return of capital to the country, which is another element of the dependency of power and resources of a policy. More and more bastions counter-advertising are appearing in the imagination of the Western Front, and they will soon appear in the Russian-speaking Internet in the form of firewalls prohibitive.

    Many Western officials responsible for policy towards Russia and on Ukraine and the entire post-Soviet space, believes that Russia is weak and many of their economic interests (ie the interests of the ruling bureaucracy) are located in the "potential adversary countries." They think there will come a day that the Kremlin will reel back, swallow your pride and accept his new role, humiliating before crawling away - figuratively and literally - in Europe and pro-European values ​​and to the East.

    These arguments are supported by rational economic calculations and comparisons of technological achievements. But what if rationalism is a bad counselor, in this case, as in the West turns out to be wrong?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  GarryB on Sun Dec 22, 2013 9:35 am

    a U.S. plan that I can not remember the name sa bases to cause a disabling attack using conventional ICBMs with conventional warheads barren and hypersonic missiles I found an article of onten the voice of russia'll see if I can find that is good again seems possible a new cold war with the substance

    The US would no more be able to fire ICBMs conventionally armed or nuclear armed at Russia than it would be able to launch a cruise missile at Russia.

    By the time the US gets conventional weapons on ICBMs Russia will have S-500s in operation.

    Very simply the question the US needs to ask itself before firing at anything on Russian territory, is do we want to start WWIII?

    There is a reason US drones kill people in Pakistan and Yemen and not Russia or even North Korea.

    I think Russia and the other countries of BRICSA and any countries that want to join them should not consider world police roles... that should never be the goal. It is the West that wants to spread its moral code... a code it clearly is not interested in following itself. The west is broken and it was broken from the inside by large companies... the main check and balance in the west used to be a free media... that no longer exists so real corruption is ignored or mislabelled.

    The real amusing thing is the direction the US is taking... its Republican party seems to be getting more religious and more anti science every year.

    Not that it is any of my business.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1957
    Points : 1964
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    in the area of ​​Arctic Russia is at odds with

    Post  Regular on Sun Dec 22, 2013 5:06 pm

    Yeah, US should world police thing to UN even if they are not active bunch, but they aren't spreading "democracy" on every corner.
    I respect Russian army for not concentrating on expeditionary warfare, but rather on fighting on it's own territory, with weapons suited for Russian environment.
    Strategic potential is being kept in a good shape and it is better than having power projection in the form of boots. And nukes are the best peacekeepers since beginning of cold war.

    Palestinian
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 30
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2012-08-06

    Cold War II

    Post  Palestinian on Sat Mar 22, 2014 12:00 am

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/us-russia-exchange-threats-at-tense-un-meeting/2014/03/19/0ea22b4c-afca-11e3-b8b3-44b1d1cd4c1f_story.html
    UNITED NATIONS — Russia and the United States exchanged threats Wednesday at a tense U.N. Security Council meeting over the Ukraine crisis, with Moscow’s envoy warning that the U.S. ambassador’s “insults” are jeopardizing Moscow’s willingness to cooperate with Washington on other diplomatic matters.

    It was the council’s eighth meeting in less than three weeks on Ukraine, a show of determination by Western powers to highlight Russia’s diplomatic isolation over the Crimean Peninsula — even if the council is powerless to act because of Moscow’s veto power as a permanent council member.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 22, 2014 9:11 am

    Clearly the US needs to impose an embargo on all Russian companies like the ones providing about 70% of the Titanium for the F-35 production... or perhaps the company that makes the rocket engines the US uses to put things in space...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Map: East-Europe Forces against Russia Forces

    Post  nemrod on Sun May 18, 2014 3:00 pm


    Russia's forces against East Europe



    Or here, if you prefer.

    Since the begining of these sad events America did what it is possible in order to trigger a civil war in Ukraine, untill now, unfortunetly, they successfully won. The next chalenge for US, and they did what is possible in for Europe to be away from Russia. For US bastards leaderships the goal is simple, as Russia, and China became ennemies, hence, it is no use to repay their huge debts vis a vis Russia and China. This is their ultimate goal.

    Meanwhile, they will declare that they won't pay their debts, they are destabilzed every countries that have good relationships with Russia, and China. Nigeria is the the top, and they helped Boko-Haram in order replace the actual president Goodluck by another president who is the new US-french puppets. Isn't a hasard if Boko-Haram attacked christians, and ...chinese factories. The goal is simple, US want to do another big alliance against Russia, China, India, Brasil big more dynamic economies. As they are successfully doing this with Ukraine.



    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  sepheronx on Sun May 18, 2014 3:36 pm

    That map does not seem accurate, to me atleast. I think Russia has more tanks and aircrafts than that.

    Anyway, Russia may have lost partially a sinking ship known as Ukraine, but EU amd US gained nothing of real value. All the while, Latin American countries, excluding Columbia, are moving away from US due to historical reasons. Europe is in trouble economically, and they are hoping Ukraine would be a way out of the slump, but their economic policies are about being stingint rather than investing in infrastructure development, so Ukraine will be a big loss. As well, Ukraine along with other nations like Bulgaria share a history with Russia where I highly doubt they would be willing to wage a war with a nation they are related to. Add in Turkey, they are following a different path these days and are a wild card. They have a lot of investments in Russia.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Chuck Hagel stated Russia is at NATO doorstep

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Oct 16, 2014 8:19 pm

    http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/754838

    I think its time Russia moves their troops to the NATO borders, because now revisionists in NATO are stating Russia moved its borders near NATO (what?). Maybe its time to give ultimatum to Europe and state that the more they continue this, the closer they get to war, and they can kiss their economies goodbye. I think its time to be more then prepared, by showcasing the movement of nukes, talk of new placement warheads and start moving equipment to allied nations like Cuba. Tell the US that the closer they move to Russian border, the more they are at fault for anything bad that happens.

    I think it is Russias complacensy that is allowing US to push itself towards Russia and trying to bully it. If Russia steps up and starts doing something back, then Chances are US will step back cause they will know.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:10 pm

    sepheronx wrote:http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/754838

    I think its time Russia moves their troops to the NATO borders, because now revisionists in NATO are stating Russia moved its borders near NATO (what?). Maybe its time to give ultimatum to Europe and state that the more they continue this, the closer they get to war, and they can kiss their economies goodbye. I think its time to be more then prepared, by showcasing the movement of nukes, talk of new placement warheads and start moving equipment to allied nations like Cuba. Tell the US that the closer they move to Russian border, the more they are at fault for anything bad that happens.

    I think it is Russias complacensy that is allowing US to push itself towards Russia and trying to bully it. If Russia steps up and starts doing something back, then Chances are US will step back cause they will know.

    +1

    I completley aggree.
    Russia can not allow to pardon one offense after another and aggression by NATO mafia while doing nothing to showcasing that the RED line has crossed long time ago and still talks of "partners" while the US and NATO dogs have openly declared war against Russia with such crap like the "Russian Aggression Preventation Act" which literally gives and encourages and even binds key members of NATO to deplyo troops,hardware, information and readiness for direct war with Russia when the US says so.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:35 pm

    The pacts are useless. The turkeys will turn and run as soon as a major war happens. After the firs tactical nuke is dropped, killing 10's of thousands of US troops in one go, people here will be screaming and crying, asking "how did it get this far?". In the end, a war with Russia may be the last war humanity will fight, and maybe people are starting to forget this, especially now that Russia stopped doing physical tests of its nukes. Maybe that should be the next step, launch nukes as tests off the coasts of certain nations and state: "we are simply testing our capabilities if you guys ever decide to attack us". And then people may start to say: "hey, maybe we should give Russia a little room here and stop antagonizing it.

    Russian gov, for shits and giggles should come up with a "nato" or "us" military aggresson prevention act. And in it, state every country US bombed in its short time, just to remind people when they post it on western media screaming about it, that hey, were the aggressors!

    Sponsored content

    Re: Cold War II

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 11:22 pm


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 11:22 pm