Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Ukraine, revisiting the cold war


  • Please log in to reply
174 replies to this topic

#1 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 10 February 2022 - 03:18 PM

Figured this one is probably worth its own thread at some point.  So from what I can tell the conflict has everything to do with NATO and countries falling like dominos over the past thirty years since the collapse of the soviet union. In Russia's mind promises were made that NATO was not going to expand to basically surround Russia. The best way to picture it is to think of the Cuban missile crisis. The hysteria it created having a country so close to America's border fall to the "enemy" So they see the falling countries as a betrayal of that fact. The Ukraine was like jewel of the CCP, so to many Russians they still consider it part of that old block, it was why Putin was so easily able to sneak into crimea and take the place over, plenty of people were happy with it.

 

The domino effect is where I find myself a little lost. What is the truth there, did those countries chase democracy on their own or was there intentional foreign intervention that may have tipped the scales. My guess is the answer is complicated, probably a bit of both to allow both sides to feel like they are in the right, likely a different story for each country 


  • deepblueseawhale and ItBeBasidia like this

#2 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 10 February 2022 - 03:32 PM

 That journalist asking questions is what good reporting looks like to me. I hear unverified or classified sources and my attention gets peaked

 

https://www.axios.co...b43193fce6.html



#3 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 12 February 2022 - 09:51 AM

Advising citizens to leave the country is not a great sign, feeling like destiny may have its day

 

https://sports.yahoo...-113126695.html

 

https://www.msn.com/...ours/vi-AATLymu



#4 TVCasualty

TVCasualty

    Embrace Your Damage

  • Moderator
  • 15,061 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 12 February 2022 - 12:16 PM

An armored butterfly with guided missiles is about to flap its wings.

 

It could very well blow-back a hurricane on Russia. All the so-called major "powers" of this world (not sure any qualify as "super" anymore) are in a much more precarious situation than they appear to be or will ever admit, so these kinds of moves could prove disastrous in ways that cannot be anticipated. For one thing, I doubt that many Russians are into the idea of their sons dying in Ukraine for the foreseeable future (because there will be a well-organized and well-funded insurgency against any occupation).

 

 

It sure would be inconvenient for the West if a lot of its cities and capitals are clogged up with and distracted by hordes of Useful Idiots in trucks during the impending invasion. But I'm sure that's just a coincidence.


  • HrVanker and FLASHINGROOSTER like this

#5 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 13 February 2022 - 10:31 AM

This is totally reinforcing my cognitive bias but this gentleman lays out the idea far better than I can. I watch a history of imperialism and invading nations and in my eyes the west is the aggressor. Russia is no saint, but not quite the evil empire that the nightly news wants to make them out to be. As per usual in the Post Trump world, anything he touched (Russia) became so twisted up in reality it was hard to tell who was on the side of sanity. Not to mention the remnants of the cold war and the generations of pro western propaganda that we have to contend with.

 

[Direct Link]

 

 

How much of it is our own media propagating us to continue the evil Russian narrative, to get the population ready for another war they want nothing to do with. It is hard for us to imagine over here because we make the false assumption that spreading democracy somehow makes you infallible. We assume it makes life better so how could we be wrong? People over here have no perception of how the west is viewed on the world stage

 

It is always possible that some dank memes helped inflame the trucker situation. I think its more than a stretch to link Putin and his troll farms as the route cause behind feelings of people being dismissed, belittled, talked down to, and forced into compliance. That would be my guess for causation of the trucker convoy not this. 

 

[Direct Link]


Edited by FLASHINGROOSTER, 13 February 2022 - 10:40 AM.

  • Microbe likes this

#6 Myc

Myc

    El Jardinero

  • App Administrator
  • 7,974 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 13 February 2022 - 11:17 AM

I agree with some of your sentiments.

 

A careful study of our history will show that had it not been for Russia's resistance of Germany during WWII - we might all have been under nazi rule all this time.

We actively supported and cooperated with our friends the Russians. We built rail lines from Saudi Arabia into the Ural mountains to serve as a backup supply chain (my grandfather was one of the engineers who worked on the project).

 

After that, the major powers started back-stabbing and looting intellectual property (our operation Paper Clip) for their own gains.

Funny how that tiny group of individuals (leadership) who can't seem to get along - always manage to get us little guys mad enough to do their fighting.

I would imagine that the average Russian likes the same things I do - A beer in one hand and a burrito in the other, a warm afternoon with friends and family, -- I suggest that all of these things have been deliberately upset in order to goad the people of the world into a state of unease so that we're more easily manipulated.

For once, I would like to see these "leaders" square-off with one another in the octagon. I don't care who wins as their will be no award for winning the contest. It would just be fun to watch some out-of-shape dinosaurs go at each other. And I would love to hear Joe Rogan do the commentary. ;)


  • HrVanker, deepblueseawhale, ItBeBasidia and 1 other like this

#7 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 10,083 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 13 February 2022 - 12:58 PM

I'm sorry, but as F'ed up as we are here in the west I cant say that justifies as a valid excuses for Russia to invade a sovereign nation.   


  • HrVanker likes this

#8 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 13 February 2022 - 01:15 PM

It is difficult to picture us as the aggressor but if you do things start to make more sense. This is about a country that is backed into a corner, try to put the shoe on the other foot. Imagine if Ukraine was Mexico. And Russia declared back in 2008 that it was going to proceed with plans to give Mexico membership into the soviet block. What do you think Americas reaction would be? Would they simply throw their arms up in the air and say oh well. Its the new century peace and love and all. We would not mind if they allowed Russia to build a few military bases either. Or maybe they would start massing troops on their own border because of the feelings that their sovereignty was being encroached upon

 

 Russia views the last thirty years or so as an slow and deliberate encroachment of their territory by nato and Ukraine is the last straw.

We are right in Russia's back yard with the plan to give Ukraine nato membership

 

I thought this was a good timeline of the history

 

https://www.opb.org/...-through-today/

 

 

This was in December of 2021

 

 

December

President Biden, speaking with Putin on a phone call, urges Russia not to invade Ukraine, warning of "real costs" of doing so.

Putin issues a contentious set of security demands. Among them, he asks NATO to permanently bar Ukraine from membership and to withdraw forces stationed in countries that joined the alliance after 1997, including the Balkans and Romania. Putin also demands a written response from the U.S. and NATO.

 

Hard to justify Russia invading Crimea but this is where the sentiment comes from IMHO


Edited by FLASHINGROOSTER, 13 February 2022 - 01:59 PM.


#9 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 10,083 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 13 February 2022 - 04:49 PM

The reason it's hard to justify is that there is no legitimate  justification for Russia to invade.  Do you think Russia has a right to invade Finland as well, seeing as they are in the EU, and are a western friendly nation that boarders them?

 

Another point, if russia were to take over the Ukraine to keep a potential NATO member off of it's boarder they would then have a boarder with Poland, who is already a full NATO member.  So I'm not buy into the logic of your argument.  IMO Putin is trying to reform the soviet union, what they are attempting to do is nothing more then a land grab for a valuable warm water port.

 

The Ukraine is a sovereign nation, and I hope the western powers do all they can to keep it such.  If Putin pushes the point, it's going to open up a shit storm for the whole world, but I'm personally of the opinion this is a hill worth fighting for.


  • HrVanker and rockyfungus like this

#10 TVCasualty

TVCasualty

    Embrace Your Damage

  • Moderator
  • 15,061 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 13 February 2022 - 05:13 PM

NATO should play 4-D chess and invade northern Russia and take St. Petersburg. Bet they won't see THAT coming. It would be in accord with our traditional Cold War strategy of appearing crazy and unpredictable, which was a key part of our Game Theory-inspired foreign policy during that era.

 

But don't drop too many bombs on it please. It's actually an impressive and historic city; the Hermitage Museum is there, which is mind-blowing (I've visited it). If you spent 1 minute looking at everything on display at the Hermitage it would take you 11 years to see everything, and that's not even counting what's not on display.

 

 

I've also been reading about the oil/gas/pipeline stuff, and it looks like Putin stands to become the richest man in the world (and history) if he can pull off whatever he has in mind with Ukraine (look into the oil fields/pipeline stuff).

 

The US has also been sending Ukraine a lot of high-tech anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles (the hand-held kinds, like Stingers). That evens the playing field tremendously so long as nukes aren't used, which they won't be since Putin is greedy, not fanatical. Every tank taken out by a missile is three dead Russians,and if the citizens of Russia start to think their sons are dying for Putin to get even richer then they might not be into it anymore and begin to act accordingly. Their newest tank (the T-14) is very tough to immobilize or kill, but the missiles we sent are capable and that will be strategically significant as far as how events are likely to unfold.

 

 

How do we contact the Russians and the Chinese (their citizens, not their insane governments) and work it out amongst ourselves (so not our insane government, either) so that We the Peasants can work together to dismantle the parasitic ruling class that's fucking all of us over before it's too late to matter?


Edited by TVCasualty, 13 February 2022 - 05:15 PM.

  • Myc, HrVanker and rockyfungus like this

#11 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 14 February 2022 - 09:27 AM

It seems to be a complex argument depending on who you ask. There are plenty of pro western ukranians that would echo what your saying Juthro and then pro Russian Ukrainians that support the other side. When you dig into ukriane it actually becomes a bit of your typical conservatives vs liberals battle with the civil war going on there.

 

Right from the bears mouth, propoganda? or the truth?

 

[Direct Link]



#12 TVCasualty

TVCasualty

    Embrace Your Damage

  • Moderator
  • 15,061 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 14 February 2022 - 05:06 PM

I finally got around to watching the Chernobyl series from HBO, and the first 30 minutes of the first episode are among the freakiest and most intense scenes I've ever seen in a dramatization of a historic event, and most of that takes place in the first 10 minutes. It's an astounding series.

 

I didn't know until watching that the burning core was ~48 hours away from a 2 to 3 megaton thermal (steam) explosion that was only averted because a nuclear physicist noticed a detail no one else had just in time (and the scientist advising Party officials listened to her, fortunately). A 2.5 megaton explosion would roughly equal somewhere between 140 and 200 times the power of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima (the Hiroshima bomb was estimated to yield 12-18 KT). From steam. That's inconceivable to me, but then most of the Universe is.

 

If that had happened, millions across Europe would have died from the fallout (possibly hundreds of thousands from the initial blast since Pripyat hadn't been evacuated yet) and much of Eastern and a good bit of Western Europe would've been rendered uninhabitable for centuries. And that wasn't the only civilization-threatening close call. It's hard to quantify just how lucky the world got, relatively speaking. It depended on a lot of men knowingly walking back into the plant, and therefore to their deaths, because they knew if they didn't they would all die anyway but at least this gave their families a chance (this doesn't even count the firefighters who initially entered the scene not knowing they were pretty much doomed as soon as they arrived).

 

 

 

The series is a vivid reminder that the former USSR (now Russia, basically) has already wiped out ~1000 sq. miles (or 2,600 sq. Canadian/European miles) of Ukrainian territory (some of which extends into Belarus, too). So after WWII, Ukraine got screwed first by the Soviets (for decades), next by Chernobyl (for centuries), and now by greed for oil and gas and whatever insane nuclear-brinksmanship games the Oligarchs (Biden, Putin, the wizards behind the curtains, etc.) are playing. What went down there in WWII was ...complicated. So I just arbitrarily began with post-war events for simplicity.

 

 

And if Putin didn't want US missiles parking so close then he shouldn't have developed hypersonic missiles that effectively negate the formerly-strategic buffer of vast distance which used to give each side enough time to detect and launch a nuclear counter-strike, which was the cornerstone of the Cold War policy of "mutually-assured destruction." It'll be back in balance once both sides have enough hypersonic missiles to destroy each other; peace at last...?

 

 


  • Myc, Juthro, Microbe and 2 others like this

#13 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 15 February 2022 - 03:56 PM

A weapon system that seeks to subvert mutually assured destruction where have I heard that before. You mean Star wars? The American missle defense system that Russia has been complaining about for decades. The one that Reagan refused to give up and in turn potentially blocked a nuclear disarmament treaty from happening. From what I can tell the nuclear arms race usually takes two to tango, and it seems like there are more than two teams in the game now anyway. There have been some concerns on both sides shifting nuclear arsenals in the last few years. Miniaturization appears to be be route America took, shock and awe for the Russians. We have seen proof of the miniaturization in use with the controversial uranium tipped tank shells that were used in Iraq. The Iraq scandal is a can of worms on classification of arms in itself and brings light onto the issue.

 

Suppressed information during the Iraq war? I don't believe it. haaaaaaa

 

We have the luxury of history on this one

 

 

 

How the World Health Organisation covered up Iraq's nuclear nightmare

 

https://www.theguard...epleted-uranium

 

 

An article on the not so new nuclear arms race below

 

In the preface to the Nuclear Posture Review, released in February by the Trump Administration, Secretary of Defense James Mattis expresses the new American point of view: “We must look reality in the eye and see the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.” That reality, according to the Pentagon, requires a full renovation of the Cold War nuclear triad—new intercontinental ballistic missiles, new long-range bombers, and new ballistic-missile submarines. It also requires new, low-yield “tactical” warheads and bombs, a category of weapons once considered so destabilizing that President George H. W. Bush removed almost all of them from active service, in 1991. The cost of rebuilding America’s nuclear arsenal is projected to be more than a trillion dollars, spent over the course of thirty years.

 

 

https://www.newyorke...clear-arms-race

 

 

It feels like a good time to go watch Dr.Strangelove again.


Edited by FLASHINGROOSTER, 15 February 2022 - 03:57 PM.


#14 Juthro

Juthro

    dope smoking hillbilly

  • OG VIP
  • 10,083 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 15 February 2022 - 04:31 PM

To be fair, the depleted uranium(DU) rounds are not miniaturized  atomic weapons.  They are a conventional weapon made with the nuclear waste left over once U-235 is extracted from elemental uranium.   

 

The DU rounds are pyrophoric.  Their is no nuclear chain reaction causing an explosion's.  The intense heat is created when the  massive pressure from impact is put on the point of the DU round, this causes the DU to vaporize at exstream temps at the point of impact.  As such it also turns the inside of the target into a fiery inferno when it punches through.   

 

It's real claim to fame is cost.  It is quite expensive to machine tungsten dart rounds, using the plentiful supply of preexisting nuclear waste turns out to be much cheaper.

 

This is not to say that there isn't a perpetuation of the arms race, but my OCD couldn't let it slide.  :blush:

 

PS It is not just a US thing, there are 8 or 10 countries in the world that make and stockpile DU rounds.


Edited by Juthro, 15 February 2022 - 04:38 PM.

  • FLASHINGROOSTER and rockyfungus like this

#15 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 15 February 2022 - 05:26 PM

The controversy seems to be in the classification. Technically not nuclear but the radiation comes into question. I am not sure what technically classifies something as a nuclear weapon to be honest. FWIW they have been phasing them out as newer technology takes its place

 

Good point though it appears some are saying it is the metal toxicity that is suspect for the illness rather than the low amounts of NORM radiation. It appears to be something there may not be a clear answer on. I don't mean to single out America that was another good add, coalition forces would have been a better description

 

 

 

Controversy

 

While U-235 levels are much lower in depleted uranium, it still remains somewhat radioactive. Furthermore, it is a poisonous heavy metal, and can have negative effects on human health. [4] Studies have suggested that significant exposure to depleted uranium can lead to impairment or cancer of the kidneys and lungs. [1] However, these are not entirely conclusive, and the UN suggests that there is not enough evidence to declare depleted uranium a health hazard. [1] However, the government of the United States has nonetheless created an official policy of only using such weapons against armored targets, and avoiding their usage in civilian areas. [5] Depleted uranium was first used in combat by the United States during the Gulf War, when US tanks used depleted uranium shells in their fight against Iraqi tanks. Despite the policy against usage against soft targets, the weapons were also used in civilian areas in Iraq in 2003, and most recently, against ISIS targets in Syria in 2014. [6] This usage in densely populated civilian areas caused outrage internationally, and Iraqi doctors have reported large increases in cancers and birth defects in areas in which such projectiles were used. [6,7] Depleted uranium fragments can become embedded in skin, or inhaled. [1] Those who say that they have been exposed to depleted uranium report health problems, and express concern over being exposed to radiation. [6]


Edited by FLASHINGROOSTER, 15 February 2022 - 05:35 PM.


#16 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 15 February 2022 - 05:48 PM

Okay I think I got my terminology messed up. I would say the controversy would be calling them radioactive weapons. Not nuclear. More like dirty bomb I guess


  • coorsmikey, Juthro and rockyfungus like this

#17 coorsmikey

coorsmikey

    Passenger

  • App Administrator
  • 9,176 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 15 February 2022 - 10:01 PM

Well, I think if the forces that are accumulating on the border for whatever reason they are there, are not fully vaccinated and wearing masks then they have no business preparing for conflict or exercising. Who do they think they are distracting us from the real problem in this world, or pointing out the obvious. Excuse me though, I really don't know shit, I just like to think I do as I age. Not like when I was 18 and knew I knew everything there was to know.


  • Juthro, FLASHINGROOSTER and rockyfungus like this

#18 TVCasualty

TVCasualty

    Embrace Your Damage

  • Moderator
  • 15,061 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 16 February 2022 - 08:37 PM

What if there really aren't any big nuclear weapons?

 

The most secretive programs in history building weapons that we can never use but require total security and secrecy and untold billions of dollars decade after decade seem like a great way to scam the peasants; who can tell? Is that big metal tube in the silo a missile or just a big metal tube that looks like one? Actually building lots of functional nukes threatens the existence of the very people who threaten each other with them (world leaders), so not building them while pocketing most of the money seems like the greatest potential scam in history (right up there with the Iraq War).

 

But that's just crazy talk, right?

 

The following article made me consider the possibility, which I found in the Irish Times many years ago (late-1990's) and have have had a hell of a time finding this exact article again since their Archive doesn't have a search function (glad I copied the text!), I haven't searched Vlast (a Russian magazine), and scroogle doesn't seem to know about it when I search the text:

 

 

 

Red Square parade 
missiles were dummies

Many of the monstrous strategic missiles displayed in Red Square parades during the Soviet era were only dummies, but they scared the West into an expensive response, a Russian magazine claimed yesterday.


 

One such fake, GR-1, an acronym for Global Missile, showed during a parade in May 1965 prompted the United States to build an anti-missile defence system worth billions of pounds, said the weekly Vlast (Power).


 

In fact, the Soviets had abandoned the GR-1 project long before the parade.


 

Another two mobile ballistic missiles shown on the same day were also fakes, their test launches having been a complete failure, the magazine said.


 

"Foreign military attaches were scared to death, triggering panic in NATO headquarters," it said. "A huge international uproar followed, and only those who prepared this demonstration knew they were dummies."

 


One of the authors of the Vlast report worked as a Soviet missile engineer and said he had personally worked on a support system for one of the fake missiles to prevent it from bouncing on the stone-paved Red Square.
The magazine said Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev first bluffed the West with the legend of powerful Russian missiles, saying the Soviet Union was making them "like sausage."


 

"Such comparison sounded ambiguous for the Soviet people, because the sausage was in deficit, but it duly impressed foreigners," it said.


 

At the time Krushchev made the comment, the Soviets only had four intercontinental ballistic missiles on duty, while the United States had 60.

 


It wasn't until 1970 that the Soviet Union reached a parity with the United States on land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, and the nuclear balance was attained shortly before the 1991 Soviet collapse, Vlast said.

 

 

 

 

I just looked again, and I found a few other sources reporting on the original Russian article in Vlast that use the exact same text as the Irish Times article, which until TODAY was the only place I'd seen the fake missiles mentioned (I haven't thought about that article in years).

 

See: https://apnews.com/a...7df9a7eea4671e5

or https://www.independ...es-1185682.html

 

Most if not all nukes being fake would also explain the baffling fact that we're still here. If the world's nuclear weapon stockpile was truly what it's been reported to be then chances seem REALLY high (to me) that we would have nuked ourselves to extinction by now.

 

The fact that we haven't turned Earth into a smoking ruin in a world of religious zealots, a preponderance of high-functioning psychopaths in positions of power, ubiquitous governmental incompetence and greed (Chernobyl being a related example), and the ever-present specter of Murphy's Law (aka Applied Chaos Theory; see Dr. Strangelove) strongly suggests to me that the weapons that should have wiped us out ten times over by now don't actually exist, or at least not to the extent that they present an existential threat.

 

I guess that's actually good news, if true.


Edited by TVCasualty, 16 February 2022 - 08:38 PM.

  • FLASHINGROOSTER likes this

#19 FLASHINGROOSTER

FLASHINGROOSTER

    Semi-Pro Taco Robot

  • Black VIP
  • 3,315 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 16 February 2022 - 09:29 PM

 think it was the guardian article, that did have some somewhat promising parts about Obama working to scale the nuclear force down. As low as 400 sounds so much better than the 20,000 it was decades ago. They really have no tactical use other than global annihilation. Well that and deterring larger armies from invading your country but not everybody has that problem. 

 

It really is wild to think about how the first nuclear test was completed, and then the first and last bombs ever used in warfare happened within such a short time frame. Ever since then we have been building these insanely destructive and expensive weapon systems that have never been used. Outside of Russia pretending to have a larger ballistic missile force, I think there were plenty of decoys that were built on either side right?



#20 Baphom3t

Baphom3t

    When we agree about our hallucinations we call that reality.

  • VIP
  • 857 posts

Donator

Posted 17 February 2022 - 02:32 PM

I'm gonna put this as softly as I can.
I hope everything comes to a head.
I hope everyone goes to war.
I hope all ends in a fiery death spiral. It needs to start over again; "god" fucked up yet once again with creation. (so much for omnipotence! ) 
I wish and hope future beings will see our mistakes and think they can do better, but I have already seen where it is going from observation and we are only doomed to repeat the same fucking thing again because we are ignorant and it is apart of universal learning. I'm not sure we and others can truly work together to keep our species in the chain of universal life with the way our current paths are.


Edited by Baphom3t, 17 February 2022 - 02:41 PM.

  • TVCasualty and rockyfungus like this




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!