74 replies to this topic

[Zarrka]

well.. that quietened things down..

[mike250]

the Russia of today is certainly not what it was 20-30 years ago.

[Brainbox]

Nor is the EU, China, the US. And Croetsjov passed away years ago. Does anyone even remember Stalin? The EU wasn't even in existence back then. Cold war? No. New tensions? Yes.

[Mind]

Funny how the leftist media jumped all over the "new cold war" line....then a couple days later Putin is on TV talking about shared missile installations in Turkey, Iraq, maybe at sea, and again in Azerbaijan. The new world conflict is between radical Islam and democratic nations of the world. Russia, China, the EU, U.S., and most countries of the world are not only connected economically but very literally through the internet and the worldwide communication network. The world is gradually becoming one country. Any war now between modern nations would be more like a "civil war" than anything else.

ABM treaty? I am not sure there are too many countries in the world that honor 30 year old treaties with countries that no longer exist. I don't think there are any. It doesn't make sense from a legal standpoint....or from any standpoint. Complaining that the Bush administration didn't replace the ABM with a new treaty...fine...but complaining about the U.S. no longer honoring treaties with the U.S.S.R.... doesn't make sense to me.

[Brainbox]

ABM treaty? I am not sure there are too many countries in the world that honor 30 year old treaties with countries that no longer exist. I don't think there are any. It doesn't make sense from a legal standpoint....or from any standpoint. Complaining that the Bush administration didn't replace the ABM with a new treaty...fine...but complaining about the U.S. no longer honoring treaties with the U.S.S.R.... doesn't make sense to me.

Yes, indeed. But from a more "human" standpoint all people are (informal) stakeholders. This doesn't make sense from a legal standpoint and probably seen from a few other points of view as well. But, what I'm trying to say is that all world inhabitants do have their interests to in a safe world. The scope of these treaties goes beyond the few countries that committed to it. If the US administration is of good will, it must be possible to address and honour this and convert these treaties to something with better legal status in the current situation. Like you said, we are almost one global village but the political structures are lagging way behind. The UN might be of value, but I guess that as long as the Bush administration is in position this value will not be used to the max. In the contrary.

[Mind]

Like you said, we are almost one global village but the political structures are lagging way behind.

I think most of the stupid militaristic posturing that goes on between China, Russia, the U.S., is just older generations/politicians that haven't awakened to the new world that we live in. Dammit, they had better not send us back into the dark ages....we are so close to a better world. The main threat is radical islam.

[Aegist]

I think most of the stupid militaristic posturing that goes on between China, Russia, the U.S., is just older generations/politicians that haven't awakened to the new world that we live in.

Totally agree.

I think the new generation coming up now, my age and younger, will make huge improvements in our world because of the total world wide immersion we have started finding. Because of exposure to good will innovations, like open source, wikipedia, and a host of other "Do good things, and good things will happen to you in return" style projects which have gained popular attention.

[Zarrka]

I agree Mind. but, given that the issue is radical Islam, does anyone know the % of muslims living in Russia..? i know its really high, and am hesitant to put a number on it.

Not that i think Russia will ever be ruled by Islamic leaders, but just to give an indication..

[struct]

The main threat is radical islam.

The main threat is christianity [lol] and the rest of the religions [thumb] . Sounds good when one identifies some religion as a threat; but, I think it is even better to be complete about it by including the other religions.

Edited by struct, 21 June 2007 - 04:04 AM.

[Mind]

I understand your point Struct.

[Cyberbrain]

The main threat is radical islam.

The main threat is christianity [lol] and the rest of the religions [thumb] . Sounds good when one identifies some religion as a threat; but, I think it is even better to be complete about it by including the other religions.

I agree. No, one religion can be held accountable for all the wrong doings in this world.

[Lazarus Long]

No, one religion can be held accountable for all the wrong doings in this world.

This is a valid observation, which if pursed to its logical conclusion suggests that together all religion is responsible for the worst partisan character of strife we witness around the world. In other words, there are no innocent religions, together they are all *guilty* of the problem in a kind of contributory fashion the way a court would assess the percentage of *contributory negligence* as a factor in tort law.

Religion as a social institution evolved out of our social psychology but it is now a memetic that has outlived its usefulness and is becoming a vulnerable and potentially crippling vestigial social organ. It is now more a part of the problem than the cure to what ails society. However I suggest this aspect of the Cold War debate be pursued in another associated thread, somewhere between here and the question of "Religion IS social fitness."

[Mind]

I understand your point Struct. I was just pointing out the most violent religion in the modern era and the one at greatest odds against the ideals of individual freedom and common law/democracy.

[struct]

What to expect!? they are at war (Warm War). Instable.
If an army from, let say, Iran conquers USA (or part of it) wouldn't many christians be reactive and justify their violent acts by their bible. I bet there would be radical christians that would act similar to those radical islamists if not worse.
The dirty deeds of a particular religion take place when the thorny occasion arises.

[Live Forever]

What to expect!? they are at war (Warm War).  Instable.
If an army from, let say, Iran conquers USA (or part of it) wouldn't many christians be reactive and justify their violent acts by their bible.  I bet there would be radical christians that would act similar to those radical islamists if not worse.
The dirty deeds of a particular religion take place when the thorny occasion arises.

If an army from Iran conquers the USA (or part of it), I would hope that Christians and non-Christians alike would resist them violently. I'm agnostic, and I sure as hell would.

[Lazarus Long]

Worth the read since it is on topic and to the point whether you agree with it or not. I will go into a more formal reply to posts later time permitting but for now we can at least better familiarze ourselves with the Russian POV.

http://www.timesonli...icle1896029.ece

June 7, 2007

It’s the West that’s starting this new Cold War
Russia’s belligerence is hardly surprisingAnatole Kaletsky
Know your enemy – a phrase coined by Sun Tzu, the Chinese military strategist, 2,000 years ago – is even more critical in diplomacy than it is in warfare. As the leaders of the world’s most powerful nations gathered in Germany last night for the annual G8 summit, the identity of the enemy was pretty clear.

He was not, as might have been expected, George W. Bush. Nobody can be bothered to talk to the White House any longer about Iraq and Iran, while on climate change Washington has successfully created a diversion and thwarted the German and British desire to make this the summit’s central issue. Best of all, an alternative villain has suddenly upstaged the hapless President Bush. Enter Vladimir Putin, the new global enemy No 1.

Casting Russia as the enemy suits everyone at this year’s summit. It distracts attention from President Bush’s contempt for Europeans on climate change and his geopolitical blunders. It helps Angela Merkel and Tony Blair to disguise the failure of their Atlanticist diplomacy while allowing Nicolas Sarkozy to sound tough, without being antiAmerican. It gives all the European leaders at the summit a chance to “show solidarity” with the EU’s newly admitted Eastern members without making any concessions on the discriminatory economic and labour policies that will keep these countries firmly in their place for decades ahead. And best of all, from every nation’s standpoint, the starring role of villain is one that President Putin himself craves.
(excerpt)

[struct]

All religions are not the same.

That is true. For example Christians have a book called 'Bible', Muslims have one called 'Kuran' (totally two different words);
Christians read their Holy Sheets of their Bible from left to right, Muslims read their Holy Sheets from right to left; and countless other differences. But I was talking about a common feature that religions share; their delusional nature.

If we have enough sense to distinguish good people from bad people, then we should also have the ability to discriminate between belief systems which are largely beneficial (or at least neutral) from those which are predominately negative in their influence.

Only religious people have 'enough sense[s]' to distinguish 'good' and 'bad', and 'goods' and 'bads' differ from one religion to another because their Holy Sheets are not exactly the same.

This is an example of the politically correct thinking we are inculcated with in our institutions of higher learning: either all religions are equally good or all religions are equally bad. The result of this is that we lose our ability to think...but at least nobody is offended (or everybody is equally offended.)

I thought I was politically incorrect. To be politically correct in USA (in relation with religion) one should say 'Islam is bad, Christianity is good'. To be politically correct in Iran one should say 'Christianity Sucks!, Islam Rocks!'

[samson]

I've noticed a tendency on these boards, that all discussion always slowly reels towards religion like a train wreck on a thursday afternoon, if trainwrecks reeled towards religion on thursday afternoons. ...Which they don't. Shame though. Also annoying.

Anyways, on the matter of sov-, I mean, russian and american relationships. The matter is in my opinion not so much an intelligent effort as a series of unfortunate if foreseeable events. I mean, it's both. Of what, I have no idea. Okay, I do, but read on anyways.
You see children, it all goes back year whatever, when the great and glorious CCCP and the Warsaw Union fell, taking away from Russia it's massive national penis of self-esteem. Nothing to do with the matter at hand, actually. I just thought it was funny. Also, it's the reason why Russia reacted the way it did. Russia cuurently aims at reconstructing it's political grip on it's surrounding nations, the ones that were part of the Warsaw Pact. Revitalization of zealous, politically endorsed patriotism and all that. US was coming onto their sphere of influence, hence the hostile reaction. It's not like any global superpower wants foreign missile defence systems on their lap. Though I do ponder if the the wording of Russias was intentionally hostile, to put America into a position it couldn't back out...
I believe that the missile system being installed was at first an honest deterrent against middle eastern missiles, but it has been turned into something else. You see, after the announcement that the missile defence system is planned to be installed in the Poland and Czech Rebublic, there was really no way that America could've backed down from the deal without disgracing itself politically. The cold war may be over, but the set up is still there.
Anyways, my point is that the situation is the result of Russian hopes for regaining it's position as a superpower, Americas situation of not being able to yield to it's former rival, and the collective dick waving competition between all parties involved.

[niner]

If an army from, let say, Iran conquers USA (or part of it)

This is about as likely as if an army from, say, Pluto conquers USA. About as likely as "Communists" conquering the USA in the 1950's, and our collective response is equally idiotic today. We are looking at the new McCarthyism, more or less, ginned up for the benefit of the military industrial complex and the New Authoritarianism. You can get the public to go along with just about anything if you scare the shit out of them and start talking about God and Patriotism. It worked in Germany in the 1930's and it's worked like a charm here recently. Fortunately I am seeing some signs of a return to reason. All it took was the destruction of a few hundred thousand lives, the destabilization of the Middle East, and the squandering of a trillion dollars.

Regarding religion, ludongbin is right on the money. I can't add anything to what he's already said.

[struct]

Regarding religion, ludongbin is right on the money. I can't add anything to what he's already said.

Since you totally agree with him I am tempted to reply to some of ludongbin's nonsenses, even though initially I decided not to reply to him because of the drifting away from the 'Cold War'.

If you were to base all your choices only on rational thinking and scientific evidence you would be completely paralyzed.

Guess what!? I am not paralyzed. You might say 'you don't base all your choices only on rational thinking and scientific evidence despite of your claim'. OK then, forget about me, show me how one that bases all his choices only on rational thinking and scientific evidence would be completely paralyzed.

At the core we, as human beings, are not rational; the strongest forces that move us - love, hate, joy, hope, fear, etc. - are irrational and often delusional.

At some point you mentioned that I apparently missed orientation at my university. Impressive. I actually did miss orientation; instead I went to the beach. Let me make a guess about you two guys. You apparently missed a lot of science classes at high school (I doubt that you made it to (a) universit(ies)y. There are only four forces in this universe: gravitational, electric (magnetic is derived from electric), weak, and strong; and only two of them move us: electric and gravitational. In what Holy Sheet did you find love, hate, etc to be the strongest forces. They are not forces to begin with.

Even on this board, many members put their highest hopes in some hoped-for "singularity" to come in the future

There are different kinds of 'hopes': educated hopes that are based on rational thinking and delusional hopes that are based on delusive thinking.

Only religious people have 'enough sense[s]' to distinguish 'good' and 'bad', and 'goods' and 'bads' differ from one religion to another because their Holy Sheets are not exactly the same.

Nonsense. How do you decide what you eat?

I am having hard time these days to decide what to eat.

How do you decide who to vote for?

What are you talking about!? I am not allowed to vote. I am an alien in the USA.

'bad' and 'good' are relative. According to what you say I also have enough sense to distinguish 'good' and 'bad'. OK then let me say:
Religion is really bad. Hmm. it doesn't sound that bad to say 'bad'. I guess you are right about 'bad' and 'good'.

  I thought I was politically incorrect.

You apparently missed orientation at your university. It is perfectly acceptable to criticize Christianity at the vast majority of U.S. universities either in class or in casual conversation (in fact it is cool and marks you as an intellectual), whereas criticism of other religions, in particular Islam, marks you as an intolerant bigot and will likely lead to the PC police coming down on your head like a figurative ton of bricks. In Islamic countries criticism of Islam is likely to lead to an actual ton of bricks coming down on your head (on second thought I think the ton of bricks on the head deal is the punishment for women who commit adultery; I think its a simple beheading for blasphemy.)

So you are saying that I am politically correct. So what!? (I didn't even payed much attention if I was or not politically correct; I don't care, I am not running for the president of the USA at this point)!? Does that mean that I am incorrect because I am politically correct on this matter. Once in a while you can actually be at the same time correct and politically correct. Are you saying that by being politically correct one is automatically incorrect?

[Cyberbrain]

Tensions are rising even more higher as Russia is urging the US to stop their new missile. Plus things aren't looking good with Iran.

[Athan]

What's up with the States and Russia?

http://en.wikinews.o...r_World_War_III

I'm not suggesting that there's actually going to be another World War, but the relations between the U.S. and Russia have been getting increasingly strained as of late and it would really be counterproductive for another Cold War to take place.

It's not that easy to extrapolate at the moment; thoughts?

[Cyberbrain]

Things are getting hotter ...

Russian jets 'intercepted by US'

Two Russian bombers approached a US aircraft carrier in the Pacific and were intercepted by American fighter jets, US defence officials say.

The unnamed officials told news agencies that the Russian bombers had flown over the USS Nimitz in the western Pacific on Saturday.

Four F-18 jets escorted the bombers out of the area, they added.

Russia resumed long-range bomber flights last August, in a move regarded as a flexing of military muscle.

Russian officials were not immediately available to comment on Saturday's incident.

It was the first time a Russian bomber had flown over a US aircraft carrier since July 2004.

Meanwhile, Japan has lodged a complaint with Moscow over allegations that a Russian bomber, thought to be one of those involved in the Nimitz fly-over, intruded into Japanese airspace on Saturday.

The incident comes amid renewed tensions between the Moscow and Washington over American plans for a missile defense system based in Poland and the Czech Republic.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/7240197.stm

Edited by Kostas, 12 February 2008 - 03:36 AM.

[niner]

Things are getting hotter ...

Russian jets 'intercepted by US'

http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/7240197.stm

Well, warmer anyway. Doesn't this kind of thing happen kind of a lot? Oh, lookee there... way back in ought four!
It is a form of "chickens coming home to roost". We're getting a lot of that these days. The next president is going to have a lot of crap to clean up. They may also get blamed for a lot of what blows up because of Bush's policy errors.

[Lazarus Long]

I have actually seen numerous reports on this and things are getting hotter in more than one way. Putin is also putting the screws on the Eastern European nations with respect to oil and economic policy, there have been numerous espionage cases and even that murder in Britain of a Russian ex pat. Today the US announced the arrests of 6 deep cover moles and one in the aerospace industry with top secret clearances that fed the Chinese a lot of our space tech and advance missile engine and guidance technology. The lead arrest in that case apparently goes back to the "70's in place.

The Russians have gone ahead and provided Iran with nuclear fuel that is only the beginning of the rising tension.

Everyone is upset about Poland going ahead and approving our Star Wars program installations and we have announced that we are going to research an orbital power generating platform that is for generating electricity but is also considered a possible shoot down location from orbit. We tossed out the weapons in space treaty and so there is that element of the space race gearing up and for now it is going to help fund the start up but if the politics gets too hot then it closes down space to all civilian development.

Gates is upset because NATO is splitting apart over providing troops to Afghanistan and now even to other possible theaters of operation. The Iraq war is only beginning to show the severely negative side effects we all predicted when it didn't need to happen in the first place.

Our troop status is going down and the opposition is using our aggressive behavior and their economic problems as an opportunity to recruit many of the best and we cannot even retain some of the worst. We have had to lower academic standards considerably just to keep enlistments in par with minimal demand and the state governors are ready to revolt over the long term commitments of their National Guards.

[niner]

Sounds like Bush policy, Laz. Two Hummers in every garage and a new chicken coming home to roost every day.

[basho]

Our troop status is going down and the opposition is using our aggressive behavior and their economic problems as an opportunity to recruit many of the best and we cannot even retain some of the worst. We have had to lower academic standards considerably just to keep enlistments in par with minimal demand and the state governors are ready to revolt over the long term commitments of their National Guards.

Interestingly though, the 2009 defense budget, when adjusted for inflation, will be the highest since World War II and possibly larger than the defense budgets of all other countries combined. Over half a trillion dollars is the public figure and that does not include supplemental spending to cover existing war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, nor does it cover nuclear weapons or the secretive black programs.

But what does it mean? Where is all the money going? They had better be building a space plane or a stargate or something just as exciting with all that cash.

[Lazarus Long]

The Pentagon is investing in building a robot army. Obviously they didn't really get the intended message from watching Star Wars.

Well no one has ever expected great depth of understanding from militarists.

The disparity between the general intelligence of the military and the increasing complexity of the technical demands of higher and higher technology is created a bifurcation and class structure within the military. There has always been a divide between grunts and techs but it is getting worse as pampered specialists get to live stateside in comfort and operate remote controlled weapons in the air over Iraq. Our troops in the field do not have the ability to field strip and maintain the next generation of weapons being contemplated. They will be button pushers at best and our battle line troops are becoming more and more treated like second class expendable citizens by a general staff enamored of their expensive toys.

The techs routinely kill civilians in accidents and yet are divorced from reality because they do not have to see the carnage first hand, smell the catastrophe up close and personal or clean up the mess. We are becoming known as cowards that hide behind our technology. Both sides in this conflict are moving to the lowest common denominator of conduct.

More and more we are building an army that cannot support itself and instead is totally dependent on the private sector to provide support, a private sector that is unaccountable and will not operate if it is held accountable under international law. We have made terrible mistakes and now we are compounding them with even worse ones.
The MIC wanted a state of constant war, a return to the conditions of the Cold War to force society to return to a condition of support for its profits but the overall impact of that process will be a destruction of the very core of our social ideology and it will not provide the promised security but instead will heighten risks.

Sadly it may already be too late to stop this runaway train; It has left the station on the wrong track, accelerating, and apparently not listening to anyone or paying attention to reality.


Russia warns of new arms race without space ban

Kosovo independence move would hit security: Russia

A World in Conflict

Former Boeing Engineer Allegedly Shared Shuttle, Rocket Secrets With China

In the archives I have a thread called Intelligence Lessons. It is all about the last example and there have actually been a slew of such examples lately and that thread could use some updating. Along with a number of examples of the rising tension leading to a new cold war, a cold war BTW that may unite not only China WITH Russia but a considerable amount of our industrial support base against our interests as well.

Chavez is no Castro and his popularity is slipping but recent moves by industry to utilize foreign courts to uphold their assets in that country (something they clearly have the right to do) is causing Chavez to threaten to cut off all oil shipments to the US. But our standing in Latin America is slipping and we are being accused of spying in more than Venezuela and the fact is the accusations are probably true.

Morales accuses US official of spying

The markets do not hae a great problem with this right now because his is a lone voice but more and more are thinking of using the oil card again to force US policy and Putin is really the chess master at playing that game. I wonder how much the Russians are influencing the catastrophic fall of our *ally* in Pakistan.

Putin to attend NATO summit

Russia surprised by U.S. reaction to bomber flights

Musharraf's Popularity Dives Ahead of Election

What the *Cold War* represents is a form of continuous quasi-HOT, proxy war on a global scale as a surrogate for a direct confrontation in the form of a true World War in the classic sense. Those that have intentionally conspired to reinstate that global condition as a method of ensuring profits to their industrial sector are not merely venal traitors to my mind they are stupid children playing with fire and risking that they can control something, which they have not demonstrated any ability to understand.