Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
orionmetalhead
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 2460
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:20 am 
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7241470.stm

"Russia has said it may target its missiles at Ukraine if its neighbour joins Nato and accepts the deployment of the US missile defence shield."

Sounds like a good reason to support a missle defense system.

Nato has always seemed somewhat ineffectual from what I have read.
_________________
CONTAMINATED TONES - BLOG/LABEL/DISTRO
Facebook

Top
 Profile  
Kutulu
Tzeentchian Rubric Manipulator

Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 3:13 am
Posts: 684
Location: Prospero, Ultima Segmentum
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:35 am 
 

The fact that we haven't stopped the cold war mentality of where are nuclear weapons are pointed is the truly frightening thing. Especially with that same retaliatory mindset running rampant.

A missile defense system that would disable the capabilities of all long range ballistic nuclear weapons would be a great. I imagine it would ease international politics, if even slightly.

Also, I hope to see a START IV being drafted soon.
_________________
macrocosm wrote:
Since Chuck Schuldiner died of AIDS, I'm gonna say there is a pretty high chance of him being gay.

Top
 Profile  
Thorgrim_Honkronte
Imperius Rexxz

Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 4:40 pm
Posts: 2903
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am 
 

I can definitely understand the reasons behind Russian skepticism and hostility, but I also agree that a defense system would be very beneficial.

I hope we can really repair our relations with the rest of the world soon. It's fucking unfortunate what's become of our global image in recent times.
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/atrophyhouston

Strange Death Metal

Top
 Profile  
OzzyApu
Metal freak

Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 12:11 am
Posts: 9710
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:44 am 
 

Will the US take the role of defense once again? Thorgrim is correct in that our reputation has been seriously damaged these past number of years. Not only are we relied on, but we're also dismissed for our unwillingness to come forth and work together with others.

Undeniably, this issue has now drawn lines between allies of the US and those on unfriendly terms, namely Iran. Does anyone foresee any serious feud?
_________________
gomorro wrote:
Yesterday was the birthday of school pal and I met the chick of my sigh (I've talked about here before, the she-wolf I use to be inlove with)... Maaan she was using a mini-skirt too damn insane... Dude you could saw her entire soul every time she sit...

Top
 Profile  
Derigin
Anthropophagus

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:25 am
Posts: 2496
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:58 am 
 

Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I can definitely understand the reasons behind Russian skepticism and hostility, but I also agree that a defense system would be very beneficial.

I hope we can really repair our relations with the rest of the world soon. It's fucking unfortunate what's become of our global image in recent times.

I disagree regarding the missile shield.

By enacting the shield it will be beneficial in that it would force a rogue "state" to find other means of warfare, but what it's ultimately doing is breaking deterrence. That's far worse than the possibility a rogue state will gain a nuclear weapon. Deterrence is what keeps the nuclear powers from doing anything with their weapons. What this national shield will cause is a drastic shift in favor of the Western bloc. It would have - and still would - be more appropriate (internationally) for the United States to interact with all nuclear powers, and create a multilateral missile shield. It just seems, as was evident in the Cold War, that the current administration would rather throw away their international reputation in favor of strict national interests... which I don't agree with on a personal level, but does no good for decreasing animosity and lessening conflict. The move towards a more "civilizational" approach for this administration - as is evident with their use of Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" - suggests that they are opening up the possibility of another ideological war based on identity more than philosophies. Not a Cold War, per se. Unlike the Cold War, the international system is no longer bilateral, and wouldn't be bilateral - especially with the rise of China, and other peripheral states. Needless to say, perhaps this 'ideological base' will be downplayed in the next administration.

Not to mention the slow progression Russia is making towards a new form of ideology that doesn't fully embrace Western values, nor those of former Soviet ones. I find it more intriguing that it has only truly manifested itself during this last US administration, though Putin is an important aspect of it as well. It would not surprise me if the Russians seek to revitalize moreso an arms race of a more technological nature (which recent news articles seem to allude to). It would certainly drive the US out of an economic downturn.

The Russian-Ukrainian issue will more than likely not lead to a serious conflict. It is, at this point, Russia stretching its legs. It's nothing new for Russian foreign policy to negate NATO, shut down trade of certain resources, and to threaten. It generally seems to work for their favor so far. I'd be more concerned when it doesn't.

Top
 Profile  
orionmetalhead
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 2460
Location: United States
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:56 am 
 

Derigin wrote:
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I can definitely understand the reasons behind Russian skepticism and hostility, but I also agree that a defense system would be very beneficial.

I hope we can really repair our relations with the rest of the world soon. It's fucking unfortunate what's become of our global image in recent times.

I disagree regarding the missile shield.

What this national shield will cause is a drastic shift in favor of the Western bloc. It would have - and still would - be more appropriate (internationally) for the United States to interact with all nuclear powers, and create a multilateral missile shield.


Ultimately, You have to start somewhere to begin to create a global missile defense shield. I think its logical to start this in this region. We have allies there already and it is in a region with a lot of tension in the recent years. There are only two better places to try and set such a system up: around Korea or around Iran. Both are particularly dangerous when it comes to nuclear capability although I don't expect anyone to be so stupid as to set such a system up in these regions. It would lead to probably more conflict with those countries.

Maybe we should set one up around just our country... you know... to protect US. If other countries like the idea, they could set their own system up. Let us police and defend ourselves and not other countries.
_________________
CONTAMINATED TONES - BLOG/LABEL/DISTRO
Facebook

Top
 Profile  
Svartalf
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:22 am
Posts: 117
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:38 pm 
 

Derigin wrote:
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I can definitely understand the reasons behind Russian skepticism and hostility, but I also agree that a defense system would be very beneficial.

I hope we can really repair our relations with the rest of the world soon. It's fucking unfortunate what's become of our global image in recent times.

I disagree regarding the missile shield.

By enacting the shield it will be beneficial in that it would force a rogue "state" to find other means of warfare...


A well-known military doctrine states that if you only give your enemy one problem to solve, they will surely solve it.

Also, high-energy lasers mounted on large aircraft (or orbital platforms, though less likely) will make this "hit a bullet with a bullet" strategy obsolete soon enough. Much more fun to simply incinerate the missiles over the territory of the country who fired them and watch as the radioactive debris falls on them.

"Oops, I believe this belongs to you..."

Top
 Profile  
Gorgo
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 441
Location: Belgium
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:30 pm 
 

Russia is wrong with pointing their missiles on Ukraine, though I understand their point, but I totally agree with the missile defence system.

Really, I don't care if they build that crap because it can't handle the 1000's of rockets Russia would fire in a war, but not in Europe. Europe would get involved and also, America should just keep their hands out of Europe, especially with the modern day view we have of American politics.
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/midgaardslang
"Flemish Nationalistic Black Metal"

http://www.myspace.com/onrust1
"Acoustic music"

Top
 Profile  
Kutulu
Tzeentchian Rubric Manipulator

Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 3:13 am
Posts: 684
Location: Prospero, Ultima Segmentum
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:32 pm 
 

Svartalf wrote:
Much more fun to simply incinerate the missiles over the territory of the country who fired them and watch as the radioactive debris falls on them.
Wouldn't it be a rather minuscule amount? Fallout is created by the earth and debris thrown up in the initial explosion. Would an airborne detonation cause nearly as much harm as one done on the surface?
_________________
macrocosm wrote:
Since Chuck Schuldiner died of AIDS, I'm gonna say there is a pretty high chance of him being gay.

Top
 Profile  
Gorgo
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 441
Location: Belgium
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:40 pm 
 

No, but an explosion of a radioactive rocket above would create an invisible danger, radiation. You wouldn't have the damage by an explosion, but you would have the radioactivity for many years in the region and cause fatalities.
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/midgaardslang
"Flemish Nationalistic Black Metal"

http://www.myspace.com/onrust1
"Acoustic music"

Top
 Profile  
Thulsa_Doom
Metal newbie

Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:19 pm
Posts: 70
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:25 pm 
 

As a poster stated, the missle shield completely invalidates the concept of deterrence. Missle shields will only result in an arms race, making the world even more unsafe and unstable. And frankly, a far greater nuclear threat is of a warhead falling into the hands of terrorist groups. Frankly, Russia can barely afford basic maintenance on their nuclear sites or even to pay their soldiers. I can understand why they feel threatened but I can't help but feeling Putin is pining for the days of the USSR.

Top
 Profile  
Lumikuuro
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:50 am
Posts: 29
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:40 pm 
 

Thulsa_Doom wrote:
As a poster stated, the missle shield completely invalidates the concept of deterrence. Missle shields will only result in an arms race, making the world even more unsafe and unstable.


Exactly.

The Cold War is fucking over. We should be working on free, fair trade with Russia as oppossed to pointing missles at them. They're potentially our perfect ally if you think about it. A strong Russia would not only open up a huge trading partner for us, but it'd also be less likely that a terrorist group could nab a nuke from them if they could afford to maintain a better defense.

Top
 Profile  
Cjk10000
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:20 pm
Posts: 55
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:30 pm 
 

Gorgo wrote:
No, but an explosion of a radioactive rocket above would create an invisible danger, radiation. You wouldn't have the damage by an explosion, but you would have the radioactivity for many years in the region and cause fatalities.

When you destroy an armed nuclear missile, will that cause a nuclear bomb to go off at impact of a defensive missile? Or would the plutonium/U-(isotope whatever) just sail to the ground and create a small radioactive mess?
_________________
Lacking signature is lacking.

Top
 Profile  
caspian
Wanderer of the Wastes

Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:29 pm
Posts: 6101
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:50 pm 
 

Cjk10000 wrote:
Gorgo wrote:
No, but an explosion of a radioactive rocket above would create an invisible danger, radiation. You wouldn't have the damage by an explosion, but you would have the radioactivity for many years in the region and cause fatalities.

When you destroy an armed nuclear missile, will that cause a nuclear bomb to go off at impact of a defensive missile? Or would the plutonium/U-(isotope whatever) just sail to the ground and create a small radioactive mess?


A nuclear bomb is a precision device- it's basically impossible to set it off accidentally. However, 20 kilos of plutonium would be more then enough to kill a lot of people.

Top
 Profile  
josephus
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:04 am
Posts: 1288
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:45 am 
 

Cjk10000 wrote:
When you destroy an armed nuclear missile, will that cause a nuclear bomb to go off at impact of a defensive missile?
Nope.
Cjk10000 wrote:
Or would the plutonium/U-(isotope whatever) just sail to the ground and create a small radioactive mess?
This is more like it. Ideally they would aim to shoot them down over uninhabited territory.
_________________
Carrying Concealed

Top
 Profile  
Acrobat
Eric Olthwaite

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:53 am
Posts: 6551
Location: Fortress Northallerton, North Yorkshire
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:05 am 
 

Cold War II sucks! its just the same fear of nuclear apocalyse without the cold imagery

Top
 Profile  
Svartalf
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:22 am
Posts: 117
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:25 pm 
 

ANationalAcrobat wrote:
Cold War II sucks! its just the same fear of nuclear apocalyse without the cold imagery


:lol: Yeah, way less grim and frostbitten...

Top
 Profile  
Acrobat
Eric Olthwaite

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:53 am
Posts: 6551
Location: Fortress Northallerton, North Yorkshire
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:00 pm 
 

Svartalf wrote:
ANationalAcrobat wrote:
Cold War II sucks! its just the same fear of nuclear apocalyse without the cold imagery


:lol: Yeah, way less grim and frostbitten...


oops i meant cool imagery, the shame, the shame!

Top
 Profile  
orionmetalhead
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 2460
Location: United States
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:12 pm 
 

ANationalAcrobat wrote:
Cold War II sucks! its just the same fear of nuclear apocalyse without the cold imagery


You don't know how long I have been waiting to build my own nuclear fallout shelter...

I don't think that there is a large possibility of a cold war between Russia and the US at this moment in time. The US and Iran or US and North Korea is a different story though. A defense system in these regions would make more sense although the other arguments for and against the system are still valid in both cases.
_________________
CONTAMINATED TONES - BLOG/LABEL/DISTRO
Facebook

Top
 Profile  
Acrobat
Eric Olthwaite

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:53 am
Posts: 6551
Location: Fortress Northallerton, North Yorkshire
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:43 pm 
 

orionmetalhead wrote:
ANationalAcrobat wrote:
Cold War II sucks! its just the same fear of nuclear apocalyse without the cold imagery


You don't know how long I have been waiting to build my own nuclear fallout shelter...

I don't think that there is a large possibility of a cold war between Russia and the US at this moment in time. The US and Iran or US and North Korea is a different story though. A defense system in these regions would make more sense although the other arguments for and against the system are still valid in both cases.


personally im not sure these defence systems would make any sense, if someone nukes the US or attempts to their certainly going to get nuked back, if not from the US then from Israel perhaps. But if all these nuclear weapons are keeping the world in stalemate and avoiding a major world war then I quote the Groundhogs and say Thank Christ for the Bomb.

Top
 Profile  
DeathFog
Temporally-Displaced Fossil

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 9:20 am
Posts: 2021
Location: Estonia
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:35 pm 
 

If the USA are afraid of a nuclear attack from the middle east, they should have accepted the offer of Russia to use the Qabala Radar. That radar would be more suitable for the officially stated plans.

To me the deployment of this "shield" in Europe, seems like a provocation and the return to the cold war methods. USA exploit the puppet governments in the Eastern Europe to push forward their "national interests". I used clauses for the last phrase, because these are rather personal interests.

As for Russian missiles being pointed in the direction of NATO bases near their borders, it is logical and can be easily explained by the concept of national security. Russia's behaviour in this situation is far from being aggressive, but this cannot be said about the actions of the USA. The situation reminds of this :

Image

Just that the USA smiles and assures that they want cooperation, and Russia tells straight-away that they are not satisfied with the current state of things.

So, you see how the democracy works : people are against the USA military facilities in their countries, yet the governments, who are supposed to represent the people, welcome this idea .

I suggest renaming this thread into something like "Cold War II" or "The tensions between USA and Russian Federation", to cut in short to give this thread a more generalized name, as the situation is not really about Russia and Ukraine.
_________________
"Welcome to the sane asylum, you'll never leave if you keep trying" - Blind Illusion.

Top
 Profile  
Osmium
The Hateful Raven

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:18 am
Posts: 2521
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:36 am 
 

The sentiment conveyed in this article seems a little misplaced. Putin's rhetoric is fairly standard in its context, but it's little more than that. NATO has not proposed to house a missile shield in Ukraine--this is merely another example of Putin's pragmatic hostility to the west. Russia is an important international player, so the United States and its affiliates cannot ignore Russian demands as they might otherwise be able to do in other countries.

What disappoints me is how much money in Russia is spent on high-scale military projects (like the Father of all Bombs), yet how little attention is paid to the abysmal equivalent of boot camp.

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2563
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 1:18 am 
 

OzzyApu wrote:
Will the US take the role of defense once again? Thorgrim is correct in that our reputation has been seriously damaged these past number of years. Not only are we relied on, but we're also dismissed for our unwillingness to come forth and work together with others.

Undeniably, this issue has now drawn lines between allies of the US and those on unfriendly terms, namely Iran. Does anyone foresee any serious feud?



I have serious doubts that we'll be going to war with Iran. Bush spent so damn much money on much shittier and more worthless places like Iraq and Afghanistan that a war with an actual country would be cost-prohibitive. And Iran has a sizable military force. Our debt is beyond ridiculous right now. We're stretched too thin like Rome during the twilight years.
_________________
Check out Opinionhated from Amazon-Kindle

Top
 Profile  
idioteque04
Doesn't know how right he is. ^

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:07 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:06 am 
 

i am not that much into politics, however what would happen if the USA decided to stay out of everyones business and leave all contries they currently have millitary stations, ie iraq.

Would this be viewed as a positive or negative thing?

Top
 Profile  
Lunar_Strain
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 9:29 pm
Posts: 513
Location: Sweden
PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 4:44 pm 
 

I'm just worried about another World War.

You'd think that Ukraine and Russia would be on exceptionally good terms, being as they both are the foundations for the original Russian Kingdom..

Apparently, I'm an idiot when it comes to foriegn relations of other countries; I just always suspected that since all these Slavic countries in Eastern Europe tend to stick together due to such strength in their Slovonic Heritage, they'd be great allies for one another.

This worsens America's tensions with Russia. First off, if troops are deployed to Serbia, Russia will raise hell.

And if Russia aims missles at Ukraine, America will send in the World Police and retaliate in some form.

It really is the beginning of the end, isn't it? :ugh:
_________________
Napero wrote:
Lunar_Strain wrote:
Yes. Our Germanic brethren in the Northland never wore bear or wolf fur. =/

Yes they did, but they scavenged them from animals that had died naturally. "Viking" is actually an archaic word for "Vegan".

Top
 Profile  
Balth
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 1:24 am
Posts: 558
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:51 am 
 

Lunar_Strain wrote:
I'm just worried about another World War.

You'd think that Ukraine and Russia would be on exceptionally good terms, being as they both are the foundations for the original Russian Kingdom..

Apparently, I'm an idiot when it comes to foriegn relations of other countries; I just always suspected that since all these Slavic countries in Eastern Europe tend to stick together due to such strength in their Slovonic Heritage, they'd be great allies for one another.

This worsens America's tensions with Russia. First off, if troops are deployed to Serbia, Russia will raise hell.

And if Russia aims missles at Ukraine, America will send in the World Police and retaliate in some form.

It really is the beginning of the end, isn't it? :ugh:

And then China will enter on the side of the Russians, and then epic war ensues! :P

But nah, governments these days aren't nearly as aggressive and naive as they were back in WW2, and generally seem to avoid any drastic measures, such military action, when it's between two developed countries. In my opinion the very worst Russia would do in this situation is cut off trade with Ukraine (which would be pretty disastrous for the Ukraine as they rely heavily on oil from Russia) rather than use military force. I also doubt they'll do much if the US sends troops to Serbia and Kosovo, as while Russia is against the independence of Kosovo, it doesn't really directly affect Russia very much if the US try to take control of the situation.
It does annoy me that Russia are generally portrayed/viewed by the Western media and public as being aggressive, when a lot of the time it's been the US and NATO taking various measures to piss off Russia.
_________________
Metaluis90 wrote:
yeah, I like Fairyland, but I find their name brutally gay.

Top
 Profile  
rustyslacker
Metal newbie

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 3:14 pm
Posts: 85
PostPosted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:28 pm 
 

A missile defense system would only be a temporary solution for easing tension in global politics. Building one would start a kind of technological arms race, with countries looking for ways to beat the defense system, then other countires looking for better defense, and escalating.

Top
 Profile  
Avaddons_blood
Veteran

Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:23 am
Posts: 2677
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 7:32 am 
 

Balth wrote:
And then China will enter on the side of the Russians, and then epic war ensues! :P


Sounds like a good one.

Top
 Profile  
cinedracusio
Metalhead

Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:59 am
Posts: 493
Location: Romania
PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:40 am 
 

Kutulu wrote:
The fact that we haven't stopped the cold war mentality of where are nuclear weapons are pointed is the truly frightening thing. Especially with that same retaliatory mindset running rampant.

A missile defense system that would disable the capabilities of all long range ballistic nuclear weapons would be a great. I imagine it would ease international politics, if even slightly.

Also, I hope to see a START IV being drafted soon.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying too. That Cold War will be unstoppable for a loooooong time. Eventually until the continents return to the Pangaea/Panthalassa form.
_________________
invoked wrote:
Remember kids, retardation exists across all races, nationalities, and universities!

Top
 Profile  
Crepuscular
Metal newbie

Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:41 am
Posts: 381
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:21 am 
 

How epic. China with Russia just isn't a fair fight. Seeing as how they have a huge army and blah blah blah.

I wonder where Korea would stand in that mess....if there was a World War III

Top
 Profile  
rexxz
Retired

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 8:45 pm
Posts: 8754
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:27 pm 
 

Revived.

Top
 Profile  
Gorgo
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 441
Location: Belgium
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:32 pm 
 

Today Russia responded that it would take military action against the American rocket shield in Eastern Europe. A second cold war in the making or not?

I think it is and I'm really wondering how the Americans will react if one of their constructions gets destroyed by the Russians.
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/midgaardslang
"Flemish Nationalistic Black Metal"

http://www.myspace.com/onrust1
"Acoustic music"

Top
 Profile  
Balth
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 1:24 am
Posts: 558
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:02 pm 
 

I really don't understand why the US finds it so necessary to openly aggravate Russia by building this unnecessary missile shield. I can't help but see it as America trying to extend total influence and control into Europe and isolate Russia. Essentially an American invasion of Europe.
_________________
Metaluis90 wrote:
yeah, I like Fairyland, but I find their name brutally gay.

Top
 Profile  
The_Count
Village Idiot

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:04 pm
Posts: 407
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:04 pm 
 

Gorgo wrote:
Today Russia responded that it would take military action against the American rocket shield in Eastern Europe. A second cold war in the making or not?

I think it is and I'm really wondering how the Americans will react if one of their constructions gets destroyed by the Russians.


We will react as any other country would I am sure if military force is used against our possessions.
_________________
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I'd be more than welcome to take on the jihadists. If they think they are the only ones who know how to make home made bombs and use guns... well they know nothing about redneck America.

Top
 Profile  
Catachthonian
Metal freak

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:12 am
Posts: 4686
Location: Russia
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 2:27 am 
 

I just wonder how America would react if we deployed our missile defense system in Mexico or Cuba...

Top
 Profile  
Balth
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 1:24 am
Posts: 558
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 2:42 am 
 

Catachthonian wrote:
I just wonder how America would react if we deployed our missile defense system in Mexico or Cuba...

You already did. In 1962.
_________________
Metaluis90 wrote:
yeah, I like Fairyland, but I find their name brutally gay.

Top
 Profile  
Catachthonian
Metal freak

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:12 am
Posts: 4686
Location: Russia
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 2:46 am 
 

Balth wrote:
Catachthonian wrote:
I just wonder how America would react if we deployed our missile defense system in Mexico or Cuba...

You already did. In 1962.

I know. I meant today's America.

Top
 Profile  
Gorgo
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 441
Location: Belgium
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:08 am 
 

Well, there wasen't a military conflict between Russia and America when the Americans took down the Koersk, but then again, the torpedo hit was an accident, or so America claims.
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/midgaardslang
"Flemish Nationalistic Black Metal"

http://www.myspace.com/onrust1
"Acoustic music"

Top
 Profile  
Catachthonian
Metal freak

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:12 am
Posts: 4686
Location: Russia
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:47 am 
 

Do you mean Kursk?

Top
 Profile  
Gorgo
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 441
Location: Belgium
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:52 am 
 

Yes, I only know it is written here as Koersk so ...
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/midgaardslang
"Flemish Nationalistic Black Metal"

http://www.myspace.com/onrust1
"Acoustic music"

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BastardHead, Funeral Frog, Google [Bot], MrMcThrasher II, Mysticaloldbard, Stormrider, TheJizzHammer and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group