Thrawn's Revenge
Off Topic => The Lounge => Topic started by: Meyer on February 20, 2008, 08:17:51 AM
-
Kosovo declared it's independence few days ago. Do you support it? And do you fear it might have some international consequences?
-
Does it affect anyone else?
-
don't know yet. but I do know that Russia is not happy about Kosovo's independence. And Russia and USA also have their relations a bit cooler thanks to the missile defense system USA is planning on Europe. And now this.
-
Really, Russia is going to make a big uproar about it. But they aren't going to fight over the issue too much. They just don't want us in their backyard, but as long as the UN still has some recognition there, few things are going to change. It's the same status quo... you have to realize that Serbia hasn't had control of the Kosovo for years. The chances are they will never gain it back.
-
not without war they won't. but whose to say they aren't foolish enough to start one.
-
the mother land (im Russian so i refer to it as so as is custom) does not support this because the counties territory used to be ussr
-
But do you?
-
the mother land (im Russian so i refer to it as so as is custom) does not support this because the counties territory used to be ussr
Notice how the USSR no longer exists. I like hte idea of Kosovo declaring independence. One more thing just to secretly piss of Vladimir Putin and his *cough*communist*cough* buddies. But Russia won't due anything yet. they still need their new tanks and planes to be produced. Anbd they only have one aircraft carrier. ::)
-
where would they need carriers? There's this new invention: ICBMs. But I doubt there will be a large scale problem because of Kosovo. Maybe a little problems in Balkan but nothing international.
-
where would they need carriers? There's this new invention: ICBMs. But I doubt there will be a large scale problem because of Kosovo. Maybe a little problems in Balkan but nothing international.
And then America has that nice interceptor missile shield, which could just as easily defend against Russia as the so-called "rogue states" they claim its meant to protect against.
-
and going of topic. main problem in Balkan will be Serbia.
-
Serbia, its fun to say.
-
what's so funny in it?
-
I said its fun to say. Just say it... SERBIA!
-
I don't see anything fun in it.
-
And then America has that nice interceptor missile shield, which could just as easily defend against Russia as the so-called "rogue states" they claim its meant to protect against.
Let's face it, if Russia really wanted to launch their missiles, they would launch a lot of them. Our missile shield could never intercept all of them. In case one accidentally got launched (by Russia or a rogue state), we would have something to cover people.
-
yeah you have a system never tested on real life. ;D ;D
but why would russia start sending missiles to USA because of Kosovo? Russia would support and arm Serbia and NATo and EU would back Kosovo.
-
yeah you have a system never tested on real life. ;D ;D
Didnt they use the interceptor missiles on that out-of-control-and-extremely-dangerous satellite?
-
which is much easier target than fast moving missile, don't you think? And wasn't that Aegis combat system they used?
-
NORAD in general proved just how good it was on 9/11, so North America is pretty much screwed when something decides to fly at it.
Either way, in regards to the Kosovo thing... I support it. I hope it doesn't result in a war, but that'll be decided later.
-
NORAD in general proved just how good it was on 9/11, so North America is pretty much screwed when something decides to fly at it.
NORAD didn't keep track of the hundreds of commercial flights flying within the US.....
-
but they do now.
-
i would like to point out that mother Russia has very few nuclear weapons left. not enough to throw up a suggested "cloud" of warheads that would be unstoppable. also the reason i just found out that the motherland extended it's empire to serbia so there is a possibility that kosovo has hidden ex-soviet nukes.
They have plenty of nukes left... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons :police:
~Enceladus~
-
Get your facts straight. And also..aircraft carriers are very f*cking important.
-
enceladus i happen to be from Mother Russia i think i would know. wikipedia is edited anyways. these facts are during the nuclear age not post nuclear.
-
Actually, the reference for Russia's nuclear armament is from a 2006 journal article (found here (http://www.carnegieendowment.org/static/npp/Nuke_Notebook_Russia_2006.pdf)), which concerned current and projected future armament.
-
Wasn't Putin head of the KGB?
(don't follow Russian politics that much, too busy worrying about my country to care much....)
-
Wasn't Putin head of the KGB?
(don't follow Russian politics that much, too busy worrying about my country to care much....)
He wasn't the head, but he was a ranking member. And Isamu...sadly YOU ARE WRONG. They still have plenty of nukes within Russia. Also this is is not a post-nuclear age yet. And buddy...you're not the only one that has some heritage in Russia.
-
according to that list Russia has more nukes than USA. but I think that USA has more modern nukes. But how did we come to this? From Kosovo and it's independence to the amount of nukes in Russia and USA. And also to debate whether carriers are important or not.
-
Wasn't Putin head of the KGB?
(don't follow Russian politics that much, too busy worrying about my country to care much....)
He wasn't the head, but he was a ranking member. And Isamu...sadly YOU ARE WRONG. They still have plenty of nukes within Russia. Also this is is not a post-nuclear age yet. And buddy...you're not the only one that has some heritage in Russia.
okay you may have Russian heritage but did you live there? and most existing nukes controlled by ussr are tactical nuclear weapons. not like the massive ones that icbms deliver most people would think of. the same is also true for the united states.
-
In July of '07, it was estimated Russia had over 2000 ICBM warheads.....
And what does living in a country have anything to do with your knowledge of its nuclear stockpiles?
-
Wasn't Putin head of the KGB?
(don't follow Russian politics that much, too busy worrying about my country to care much....)
He wasn't the head, but he was a ranking member. And Isamu...sadly YOU ARE WRONG. They still have plenty of nukes within Russia. Also this is is not a post-nuclear age yet. And buddy...you're not the only one that has some heritage in Russia.
okay you may have Russian heritage but did you live there? and most existing nukes controlled by ussr are tactical nuclear weapons. not like the massive ones that icbms deliver most people would think of. the same is also true for the united states.
Those are mroe than enough warheads to put the U.S.A back into the Stone Age. Their quality does not matter. Also alst time I heard...Putin doesn't reveal very much to the Russian public. Especially concerning the current status of their nuclear weapons.
-
it wouldn't take too many nukes to put any country to the 3rd world country rating. you just need to take out the top 5 or 6 major cities and the entire nation probably crumbles with it.
-
The "Stone Age" isnt the same as a "Third World" country.
-
it wouldn't take too many nukes to put any country to the 3rd world country rating. you just need to take out the top 5 or 6 major cities and the entire nation probably crumbles with it.
I don't think 5 or 6 cities would crumble a nation. First, the only thing a city is really good for is holding people, you would still have plenty of other cities to form a government in and still have all your farmland/natural resources.
-
By doing that and stopping there, all you'll REALLY do is piss off the locals and get them to fire THEIR nukes at you......
-
Wow, Kalo is pissed. Anyway, if you nuked New York, that would do serious damage to the US. Just saying, hitting the right cities does do some damage.
-
How does losing New York do serious damage?
-
I think that taking out the industry would do more harm than destroying cities. Industry and infrastructure are the key.
-
with all it's been through, kosovo deserves its independence. however, from a military point of view, it will pretty much always be a protectorate. it is barely larger than luxembourg, and if serbia attacks, i would not be surprised if russia attacked. also, d
serbia is on the cusp of electing an ultra-right president who was a minister on milosevic's government. so i really do not know if is kosovo's time, not that i don't support its independence.
-
I think that taking out the industry would do more harm than destroying cities. Industry and infrastructure are the key.
most major industry infrastructures are in the major cities. so once again, if you nuke the countries 6 biggest cities, their economy collapses.
-
And how many industrial centers HAVE to be miles away (out of range of a blast) from the city because they have dangerous materials? Also, by nuking cities, you have to deal with the uproar from OTHER countries. So, you MIGHT defeat ONE enemy, but now you have a lot of OTHER countries trying to kill you. Smooth.
-
And once again, an economy won't collapse from losing cities, no majorly important and crucial industries are located within major cities
-
i looked at some stuff on the internet and so far from what I can tell the results of having cities nuked can swing either way. the only way to find out what would happen to a countries economy after having it's major cities destroyed is to do it to a country and see what happens. it also depends on the country.
-
So the point of that post was to admit that i have no idea what i'm talking about?
-
So the point of that post was to admit that i have no idea what i'm talking about?
I think so. =D
-
sure but if you think about it none of us did it can go either way. if it were a country like the usa taking out our 6 largest cities wouldn't be the same as taking out the 6 largest of a country like kuwait or khazakstan or any smaller countries.
-
Oh, that is brilliant. Let's attack smaller countries and hops our fellow large countries don't get pissed. I love this train of thought.
-
Oh, that is brilliant. Let's attack smaller countries and hops our fellow large countries don't get pissed. I love this train of thought.
depends on which countries you attack.
-
Oh, that is brilliant. Let's attack smaller countries and hops our fellow large countries don't get pissed. I love this train of thought.
depends on which countries you attack.
Yes, lets nuke Kosovo!How does losing New York do serious damage?
Because the stock market is there.
-
And once again, an economy won't collapse from losing cities, no majorly important and crucial industries are located within major cities
heard of wall street? FTSE? an economy will collapse from destroying the makor cities! databanks will be destroyed! data wil be lost! billions will be lost. and the stock market will be annihilated!
-
Why you support the independence of Kosovo if you want to nuke it?
And I don't think that the loss of wall street would do serious damage world wide. There are other important stocks in the world these days. the loss of one, even one of the important ones, is easily recovered I think. Data is usually stored in many places so that loss of one doesn't compromise it. and What does Wall street have to do with industry?
-
And I don't think that the loss of wall street would do serious damage world wide.
Sure it would, did you not hear about the shock waves that rippled through the global stock markets after the stocks on Wall Street fell over fears of a US recession?
-
No it had no affect in here. Maybe some rich Swedish bastards lost a few bucks. But those things have no affect in most people.
-
Why you support the independence of Kosovo if you want to nuke it?
And I don't think that the loss of wall street would do serious damage world wide. There are other important stocks in the world these days. the loss of one, even one of the important ones, is easily recovered I think. Data is usually stored in many places so that loss of one doesn't compromise it. and What does Wall street have to do with industry?
i don't want to nuke kosovo. it deserves independence. i am anti-nuclear (weapons, i am pro-nuclear power) i was saying that nuking kosovo would be pointless in that russia is the most likely to nuke kosovo, but it would also affect serbia, as a country, and oveall, more serbs would probably die. nuclear weapons should never be used. no good can come out of them. i never said i wanted to nuke kosovo
-
the united states of all countries should support countries gaigning their independance...
-
i never said i wanted to nuke kosovo
I think Meyer was responding to GrndAdmrlPellaeon with that part of his post.
-
sure but if you think about it none of us did it can go either way. if it were a country like the usa taking out our 6 largest cities wouldn't be the same as taking out the 6 largest of a country like kuwait or khazakstan or any smaller countries.
you do realise kazakhstan is the 9th largest country in the world? so it doesnn;t really apply to yo r statement, although yes, only a few large cities exist, such as astana, and almaty.
-
It'd be kinda like Canada. Nuke Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver and we're pretty much raped.
-
Sure it would, did you not hear about the shock waves that rippled through the global stock markets after the stocks on Wall Street fell over fears of a US recession?
Thats because of whats actually happening to the stock market, the stock market is not a building, the stock market is simply data, stored all over the US. Destroying the building that currently houses the New York stock exchange does little.
heard of wall street? FTSE? an economy will collapse from destroying the makor cities! databanks will be destroyed! data wil be lost! billions will be lost. and the stock market will be annihilated!
The amount of data stored in major cities in few in comparison to whats kept in rural, out of the way places. Once again, destroying the building housing the stock exchange does not annihilate a stock market, simply is an inconvenience for those who work there.
-
i guess the united states would remain intact if we lost our major cites because we have tons of fertal farm land. it doesn't mean we would be exporting or importing a whole lot. and arbiter I don't think you need to worry about canada getting nuked. no one hates them like the usa or anything.
-
No, theres North Korea, they hate everyone
-
No, theres North Korea, they hate everyone
yea but i'm pretty sure their missiles cannot reach the west coast
-
Are you one of those people who think that nothing bad can happen to you or your country? And when something happens you're all shoked and scream revenge against the first one you think is behind the strike.
-
No, theres North Korea, they hate everyone
yea but i'm pretty sure their missiles cannot reach the west coast
They can reach Alaska(if they actually work, the last test didn't go so well.)
-
Are you one of those people who think that nothing bad can happen to you or your country? And when something happens you're all shoked and scream revenge against the first one you think is behind the strike.
Settle down Meyer, hes just doubting the capabilitys of North Korean technology
-
Are you one of those people who think that nothing bad can happen to you or your country? And when something happens you're all shoked and scream revenge against the first one you think is behind the strike.
no i'm just saying that north korea couldn't do a large amount of damage to usa cities without somehow sneaking warheads into the cities and using suicide bombers to light them up.
-
and I'm saying that I believe you're wrong. Nobody believed or thought that something like the WTC strikes could happen and that didn't stop terrorists.
-
thats true. are you one of those people that wants to overthrow the us government and redo it?
-
the present government, yes. I have great ideas to remodel usa. but I don't say anything about the government that you have after election. maybe they do better.
-
i just read that benjamine franklin thought our government should completely change every 20 years to avoide corruption.
-
I actually LIKE that idea, but I can understand several problems. First, how do you smoothly transfer the power? And second, what's stopping one government from REFUSING to change?
-
after a while the transission would be smooth. as for releasing power. it would probably be no different than a presidential election.
-
That's just changing ONE office, not an entire government! Do you think, even if was in the Constitution, that you could just walk up to the entire Senate and House, the Supreme Court, and the President and say, "Well, time's up, hand over the keys."?
-
depends on if we had been doing it for a long time. as a brand new policy i don't think it would hold through very well. if it was a tradition so to speek then it may work just fine.
-
Then, all it takes is for a group of individuals to band together and refuse to. All they need to do is APPEAR to be meeting the people's needs and they won't care if they remain in office. After that comes a transition to an empire ruled by an elite class of families.
-
as long as that elite class does a good job they can avoid revolution. in my point of view however, revolution is an improvment of a country.
-
Depends on who leads it.
-
that's what i was getting at.
-
Okay, we can go ahead and head back towards topic....
-
what does kosovo have to offer the world that its former ruling country didnt?
-
it is a matter of democracy.
-
do they have a stable government yet?
-
do they have a stable government yet?
does serbia? its about to elect tomislak nicolic, a ultra-right politician who served under milosevic. and does kosovo even technically have a government yet?
-
sorry i meant kosovo
-
sorry i meant kosovo
i know. serbia is to be unstable with nikolic.
kosovo is probably going to have nato protection for some time yet. oh, and kosovo is very rich in minerals, so it mey have a future.
-
you can't blame them for suceeding with a government like what they had
-
no, he is the leading candidate for the election. it is clear that serbia's population have not moved on. kosovo needs independence, or it will be oppressed. of course, it will need protection from other governments.
-
nato will probably step in this is their kind of thing
-
Maybe, but you have to remember that Kosovo has been under the UN for the past decade.
-
yes but now that dependence is official serbia is pissed
-
yeah. and now some idiots are claiming that the independence of Kosovo is illegal.
-
meh its no big deal unless he can out gun usa and nato amoung other supporting nations
-
serbia isn't the issue. russia is the issue.
-
are you saying my people are an issue? the only reason the mother land would need to be worried is if the kosovo government dug up cold war soviet nukes, that they would sell them which almost nobody is that stupid.
-
I still wonder why would they found russian nukes from a country that was part of Yugoslavia.
-
because that entire area was under soviet rule
-
no it wasn't. soviet union had very little power in Yugoslavia.
-
but it had technical control over it.
-
no they didn't. Yugoslavia was the only country in east-europe that wasn't controlled by the russian communists.
-
i said russia is the problem because they have an alliance with serbia going back over 100 years. russia is one of the few countries that can be considered a worthy enemy of the west, even though, to an extent, they are the west.