The Resurrection of the Soviet Union?

[PlutonianEmpire]

Yuriy Solomonov, director of the Moscow Institute of Heat Technology and designer-general of the Topol family of missiles...

The first thing that came to my mind instantly after reading this, was that if you take the "y" out of the end of his first name, he would be "Yuri Solomonov," and for a second, I actually thought that the "Yuri" character from "Red Alert 2" had come to life!

Seriously!

Before we know it, this guy could have psychically-controlled troops invading the US!

(Sorry, but it was too much for me to ignore... )

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

Yuri was one of the best and most orginal Villains I've ever seen in my opinion. A real world version of Red Alert2 would be very, very scary. Thats why this entire Russian thing is disturbing in my opinion.

The Soviet Union collapsed when I was very young(like 8 or so), the idea of having another nation like the United States, only Fascist is frankly, terrorifing to me.

 

[Greek Stud]

I would like to see a stronger Russia. Although I don't believe the incident in the Ukraine happened because of Empirial reasons.

The only reason Russia would either want to corrupt the Ukraine is to continue its control over ports in the Black Sea or to counter balance the EU. The Ukraine and Belarus could more easily be persuaded by Russia than entering the EU.

The only threat to Russia is in the Trancaucuses of terrorism. The only intention for it to balk about weapons is to scare the Chechens and other indigenous groups about sovereignty. That is why it is making headlines about their enemies, providing technology to Iran (Persia). If Persia is armed those states will need alliances, and the Soviets were the only troops to protect that region while Turkey and Persia continued to invade their lands. Just like how the US spent money to increase their arms to distroy the Soviet dream, now Russia is trying to make an image of strong influence and power so that these groups lose their vision of separation.

 

[shortguy]

I fail to see the reason to build new nuclear weapons anyway. It isn't as if this new type of missle will make a nuclear war any more winnable, and the US missle defense system is an absolute farce.

 

[Sims2789]

Russia is too poor to renew the cold war, and it have plenty of interior problems.

but a cold war (or just a new Empire) distracts the people from these problems.

 

[Winner]

Hi Gelion, I have some informations about Abchazia you wanted Recently, i've been searching for some info about trady and somehow I've founded something you may be interested in:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3261059.stm

Excerpt:

At the time of the collapse of the USSR in 1991, less than a fifth of the people of Abkhazia were ethnic Abkhaz while the rest of the population was made up largely of Georgians.

I am waiting for your apologies

 

[Gelion]

Well winner I did not even expect an appology from you when I gve 2 links about the genocide of russians by chechenians (40000 deaths pre-1994) .... so I think its irrelevant.
+ Georgians would not allow them to separate regardless of the number of non-Georgians..... talk about resssurection of the Georgian Empire....

I have many Georgian friends myself so lets not get into this. Again.

 

[Winner]

Well winner I did not even expect an appology from you when I gve 2 links about the genocide of russians by chechenians

...in Russian... very useful for me indeed

(40000 deaths pre-1994)

Russians killed more than 200,000 during few years, so I can "congratulate" you, you are many times more efficient in killing innocent people than your enemies...

+ Georgians would not allow them to separate regardless of the number of non-Georgians..... talk about resssurection of the Georgian Empire....

alibism...

BTW:

Tension rose and in 1992 Georgia sent troops to enforce the status quo. In late 1993, they were driven out amidst fierce fighting. Several thousand people were killed. About 250,000 Georgians became refugees and are still unable to return. Most of those who remained have since left too.

Cost of their "self-determination" is really high. And Russia supported this ethnic cleansing, which is in fact bigger than in Kosovo during 1999. But i am sure you don't consider it wrong, as usual. Russia cannot do wrong things, you are only defending yourselves, hehe

Small question on you: were you against accession of Poland, Hungary and Czech rep. to NATO?

 

[Gelion]

...in Russian... very useful for me indeed

I did provide them and did say that things like that are never published in English. I wonder if you considered that a great number of Chechenians were killed by their own people. But again "when in doubt - blame Russians". To be blunt I'm through with you. You were the first to ask to stop this debate. I did. What is your problem? We suffered the most under USSR as a nation and I find it amusing that you blame the Russians for everything. Big win of US propaganda. The fact is that you will be trown to die as long as you are no longer needed. Look at Pinochet and Saddam.

In short do not start this on me again or I will report you for something ....

I had enough. As for the point that Russians did not change yet in comparison to Germans:
- they were cleared and "guided" by US
- US poured enormous money into Germany
- they were totalitatian much less
- they had more time

So ask me in 50 years. And for now try and read some newspapers from the other side. They may be biased but at least they mention things that your media is afraid to mention. I do read papers from the West btw. I like BBC, but that doesn't prevent me to be critical of it as well as my national papers.

 

[Greek Stud]

Regarding building nuclear weapons. It affirms or strengthens the influence of Russia as modern power. It obviously does not support your nation to weaken your military because when you look at Greece, I believe had they spent the money to strengthen their military, no one would question that the Turkish invasion of Cyprus was no less illegal than the Greek invasion of Ancyra. Greece, is spending less and less and has cut American aid for a long time, yet for some reason Turkey is given billions of dollars to cover its continuous failure in economic policy by spending over 1/3rd of its gross national product on military.

Point being, Russia raises a strong military force for political influence. Turkey raises military force for political influence. Russia has maped the Transcaucas States under Russian territory, Turkey mapped (with the Soviets) Pontus/Armenia/Kurdistan and regained Ionia/Troas/Bythion/Thrace/Constantinople because of its military power.

What use does Russia have with nuclear power? Because obviously land forces are not persuasive enough in Groznyy, and maybe Russians want to stop dying by standing guard in a city the cannot protect by being present. Strengthening their influence can also persuade Chechens that they will profit more under Russia than by independence.

The problem with convincing these tiny states that independence is not good for them, is because before Soviets/Persians/Turks/Mongols attacked them, they were very rich countries, they won all their battles against Mongols/Romans/Greeks/Assyrians.

The Georgians are a mixture of ethnicities anyways? And even though they still have instability at times, there are still great prospects for the nation. Ossetia has been given great autonomy, as well as it is in Russia.

 

[Blackbird_SR-71]

Regarding building nuclear weapons. It affirms or strengthens the influence of Russia as modern power. It obviously does not support your nation to weaken your military because when you look at Greece, I believe had they spent the money to strengthen their military, no one would question that the Turkish invasion of Cyprus was no less illegal than the Greek invasion of Ancyra. Greece, is spending less and less and has cut American aid for a long time, yet for some reason Turkey is given billions of dollars to cover its continuous failure in economic policy by spending over 1/3rd of its gross national product on military.

Point being, Russia raises a strong military force for political influence. Turkey raises military force for political influence. Russia has maped the Transcaucas States under Russian territory, Turkey mapped (with the Soviets) Pontus/Armenia/Kurdistan and regained Ionia/Troas/Bythion/Thrace/Constantinople because of its military power.

What use does Russia have with nuclear power? Because obviously land forces are not persuasive enough in Groznyy, and maybe Russians want to stop dying by standing guard in a city the cannot protect by being present. Strengthening their influence can also persuade Chechens that they will profit more under Russia than by independence.

The problem with convincing these tiny states that independence is not good for them, is because before Soviets/Persians/Turks/Mongols attacked them, they were very rich countries, they won all their battles against Mongols/Romans/Greeks/Assyrians.

The Georgians are a mixture of ethnicities anyways? And even though they still have instability at times, there are still great prospects for the nation. Ossetia has been given great autonomy, as well as it is in Russia.

you are right that a bigger military means more political influence but that isn't always correct. Take in account India has more nukes and the second or third biggest army in the world yet they don't have as much influence as lets say France which has a smaller army with less nukes. it really depends on how you exert your power. as for Russia trying to not let provinces to break away, having a bigger military and more influence will not nesseccarly make Chechans(spelling?) want to gain independence any less. This will probably give the Chechans more rights to break away as they don't want to be part of a Russia that has a big military and is controlled by a Communist leader in Democratic clothes aka Vladmir Putin. Chechans will always want to break away because they want to be independent and they say they don't mix with the Russians.

 

[Winner]

I did provide them and did say that things like that are never published in English. I wonder if you considered that a great number of Chechenians were killed by their own people. But again "when in doubt - blame Russians". To be blunt I'm through with you. You were the first to ask to stop this debate. I did. What is your problem? We suffered the most under USSR as a nation and I find it amusing that you blame the Russians for everything.

I don't blame them for everything, only for certain things.

Big win of US propaganda.

Sounds like cold-war propaganda to me

I'll explain it on example:

You know some man, who beats you every day for 40 years. Then some day he suffers car accident, comes to you and says: "oh, forgive me, i am completely new man and i suffered too".

Some things are not so easily forgiven, count with this. You cannot expect you say "we are completely new Russia, so treat us like the others". No.

Russians did not change yet in comparison to Germans:
- they were cleared and "guided" by US
- US poured enormous money into Germany
- they were totalitatian much less
- they had more time.

So ask me in 50 years. And for now try and read some newspapers from the other side. They may be biased but at least they mention things that your media is afraid to mention. I do read papers from the West btw. I like BBC, but that doesn't prevent me to be critical of it as well as my national papers.

Medias in my country are not afraid to mention anything - they never say "russians are evil" or so. They only show very convincing material and when most of western (=free) media do the same, there is no need for resenting them. I think you just don't like the truth so you are more open to governmental propaganda

Tak, a dost, už jsem se dostatečně pobavil

 

[Blackbird_SR-71]

@Winner

i agree totally with your post

 

[Winner]

@Winner

i agree totally with your post

Thanx

 

[The Omega]

Oh no, he's making more nukes we're all doomed! Wait, isn't practically every country with nuclear capabilities trying to make their nukes better? But since Russia was our enemy during the Cold War, they must obviosly be trying to recreate a failed system that would probably be less succesful now then it was then! It all makes sense!

 

[Winner]

We aren't talking only about this. Russia is now only slightly more democratic than Iran, but you feel comfortable with them having nearly as big nuclear arsenal as you have. Routine, i guess

 

[Greek Stud]

That is a good example of a failed Military Build-Up teachnique. The only difference I see between France and India, is that their span of influence was created in different terms.

France grew a reputation of Empirial characteristics, esp with Napoleon.
India had some influence in Pakistan, Nepal, Kashmir, Bangledesh, Sri Lanka, (Burma/Sia/Kampuchea/Vietnam), but they didnt get recognition through Empiralistic means. India just grew the strongest, and had the best ties with Western Nations. ALthough Thailand also did...

So maybe you're right in that Chechens will not be influenced, as other nations are not by India, but I do believe the nuke build-up is a tactic to suppress that idealism (of independence).

I also believe that it is a counterbalance technique to the US. Terrirts might have hope in hearing that the US forces are spread thin, but knowing that Russia is not, puts fears in their mind that if the US doesn't do anything Russia will. Wear nations are often (what I would term) "bought" by stronger nations. This is through capitalism. Like with the crisis in Sudan, US investments are very low there, so thats why the extra effort to send troops from our country hasn't been made. And it would also make our war on terrorism look like a war against muslims. If any power has interests in Sudan, it is the money invested in China which capitalizes over oil-drilling there, and has a plan to drill more. I feel China won't intervene as long as their investments are safe, and also because they are distracted by Korea.


I have a suspicion between the nations of Russia-Turkey-Iran over any involement in the Trans caususes area. Russia has always looked out for what was in the best interests of the people, but hasn't made fair cuts to all the natives. Turkey and Iran are land grabbers. The only interest they have always had was in themselves. And considering that those are the only three nations that have substantial influence, I put my trust in Russia having the most power.

I would disagree that the media in AMerica is free, it is definitely not balanced. I also think that the BBC is the worst example of western media. If any network has an agenda it is the BBC. The fairest journalism I have ever seen in my life is FOX News Network. They do ignore important world events, but that comes into any American media. I have never seen any network put effort to make programs based on a balanced global position. The closest thing is FOX's "Around the World in 80 seconds". The media itself in America is so narrow in its topics on focus that it alot of times represents incorrect data (facts). Because the journalists dont take the short time to research their reports anymore, Americans themselves have to report the correct info, which is often ignored because journalists for the ODDEST reason have more credibility than the experts in America.

 

[nico65]

Well does anybody really know what kind of new nukes we are talking about? Couldn't it be that the russians have build something like he nuclear bunker-busters the US is working on.

 

[allhailIndia]

I wonder how much Russia will be willing to sell these nifty things for

I hope they throw in a discount if you order an aircraft carrier and offer some gpt and spices