Elections, Hacking, Russia, And Trump: This Is Serious

[Novus America]

While I am obviously not a fan of Putin and have no idea what the right sees in him, Russia is not a credible rival or a threat to the US beyond its nuclear weapons. We have over twice the population, 15 times the economy. And they are not catching up, actually falling further behind.
http://rbth.com/defence/2016/12/14/russ ... ars_657428
Russia cannot keep up, it will keep falling further and further behind other powers.
Our population and economy are growing faster. The real threat is China.

Just because they have a smaller economy and population, doesn't mean they can't exert their own influence. They ally with the wrong people and they meddle in other countries' business. Russia is still a threat that we have to be concerned about.

Well they are a concern, I should have said direct threat. True, them allying with China is a problem, though this would be the argument to try to work more with them, a hardline stance only drives them closer to China. Nixon got friendly with China to turn them against the Soviets. It worked from a strategic perspective, morally yes well it was bad. We got friendly with Mao and Pol Pot.

So there is a lot to consider here, it is a complicated situation.

Regardless our obsession with Russia is a problem, we should be treating China like we now treat Russia, and focus less on Russia.
Sure we have to keep an eye on Russia, but our focus needs to be on the much bigger problem.

[Uxupox]

While I am obviously not a fan of Putin and have no idea what the right sees in him, Russia is not a credible rival or a threat to the US beyond its nuclear weapons. We have over twice the population, 15 times the economy. And they are not catching up, actually falling further behind.
http://rbth.com/defence/2016/12/14/russ ... ars_657428
Russia cannot keep up, it will keep falling further and further behind other powers.
Our population and economy are growing faster. The real threat is China.

Coalitions and hegemony are far more important than head-to-head national statistics.

The Europeans can form their own coalition just fine without our help. They have the capacity to arm themselves greatly but they refuse.

[New Werpland]

Generally people believe less death is a good thing. On that basis I can argue with Uxopox over what stance is better.

Yes, but that is off topic. That is a whole other topic. Just because you prefer a political outcome does not mean other people cannot legitimately prefer another outcome. And they are not doing something illegal or unethical just by disagreeing.

You are not making any sense. I disagree with Uxopox so I argue with him on the internet. If nothing can be objectively wrong there is no reason to have forums like this.

Maybe the line of discussion isn't on topic, but so is half of this thread.

[Lady Scylla]

Coalitions and hegemony are far more important than head-to-head national statistics.

The Europeans can form their own coalition just fine without our help. They have the capacity to arm themselves greatly but they refuse.

With blackjack and hookers?

[New Werpland]

Coalitions and hegemony are far more important than head-to-head national statistics.

The Europeans can form their own coalition just fine without our help. They have the capacity to arm themselves greatly but they refuse.

Why should we give up our influence?

[Uxupox]

The Europeans can form their own coalition just fine without our help. They have the capacity to arm themselves greatly but they refuse.

With blackjack and hookers?

More like with brooms.

[Conserative Morality]

The Europeans can form their own coalition just fine without our help. They have the capacity to arm themselves greatly but they refuse.

To remove the US and US allies from the European coalition would weaken us both. I don't argue that they should meet the recommended spending for NATO countries and that we should apply pressure on that. But if you want to see more of the world carved out by the Chinese and Russian spheres of influence, splitting us up is how you do it.

[Novus America]

While I am obviously not a fan of Putin and have no idea what the right sees in him, Russia is not a credible rival or a threat to the US beyond its nuclear weapons. We have over twice the population, 15 times the economy. And they are not catching up, actually falling further behind.
http://rbth.com/defence/2016/12/14/russ ... ars_657428
Russia cannot keep up, it will keep falling further and further behind other powers.
Our population and economy are growing faster. The real threat is China.

Coalitions and hegemony are far more important than head-to-head national statistics.

Well true, but in coalitions the biggest party in the coalition. Russia and China together are a problem, but well at the risk of the Nazi comparison, Italy was not the big threat in WWII.
But now we are straying off topic. Again nobody has been able to demonstrate the emails leaked change the outcome of the election, and seem to have hurt Trump far more the helped.

[Uxupox]

The Europeans can form their own coalition just fine without our help. They have the capacity to arm themselves greatly but they refuse.

Why should we give up our influence?

Because it has cost way both american and non-american lives. Too many deaths by our own hand.

[Gauthier]

The Europeans can form their own coalition just fine without our help. They have the capacity to arm themselves greatly but they refuse.

Why should we give up our influence?

We need to worship Putin it seems.

[Uxupox]

Why should we give up our influence?

We need to worship Putin it seems.

You'd love to bomb Russia wouldn't you.

[The Kievan People]

Comparing a private conversation with an interview for a tabloid show. Classy.

He obviously didn't intend those remarks to be broadcast to the public or even his family and did not think they would be. And they weren't until he happened to run for office years after the fact, so his expectation they would not be made public was evidently reasonable.

But it's always going to be fair game to you because he's on the wrong side of the chart.

[Lady Scylla]

We need to worship Putin it seems.

You'd love to bomb Russia wouldn't you.

I'm perfectly fine with the US standing up to Russia, prefer it really. I don't like the idea of our soon to be President being Putin's ten-dime whore.

[New Werpland]

Why should we give up our influence?

Because it has cost way both american and non-american lives. Too many deaths by our own hand.

When have people died due to our membership in NATO? It is a fact that without it Europe would be much more violent than it is today.

[New Scario]

Just because they have a smaller economy and population, doesn't mean they can't exert their own influence. They ally with the wrong people and they meddle in other countries' business. Russia is still a threat that we have to be concerned about.

Well they are a concern, I should have said direct threat. True, them allying with China is a problem, though this would be the argument to try to work more with them, a hardline stance only drives them closer to China. Nixon got friendly with China to turn them against the Soviets. It worked from a strategic perspective, morally yes well it was bad. We go friendly with Mao and Pol Pot.

So there is a lot to consider here, it is a complicated situation.

Regardless our obsession with Russia is a problem, we should be treating China like we now treat Russia, and focus less on Russia.
Sure we have to keep an eye on Russia, but our focus needs to be on the much bigger problem.

Russia merely feeds off the fact we focus on them exclusively. We need to treat China the same way we treat Russia right now and treat Russia the same way we do China now.

[Uxupox]

You'd love to bomb Russia wouldn't you.

I'm perfectly fine with the US standing up to Russia, prefer it really. I don't like the idea of our soon to be President being Putin's ten-dime whore.

I'd prefer it if we avoid occupying countries that no connection to the terror attacks.

[Uxupox]

Because it has cost way both american and non-american lives. Too many deaths by our own hand.

When have people died due to our membership in NATO? It is a fact that without it Europe would be much more violent than it is today.

Libya comes to mind with the forcing of american airstrikes and no-fly zones over the region.

[Geilinor]

I'm perfectly fine with the US standing up to Russia, prefer it really. I don't like the idea of our soon to be President being Putin's ten-dime whore.

I'd prefer it if we avoid occupying countries that no connection to the terror attacks.

What does that have to do with Russian interference? You don't care when they occupy.

[Lady Scylla]

I'm perfectly fine with the US standing up to Russia, prefer it really. I don't like the idea of our soon to be President being Putin's ten-dime whore.

I'd prefer it if we avoid occupying countries that no connection to the terror attacks.

I don't disagree, but I'd also like Russia to know their place in the world and to GTFO of Ukraine.

[Uxupox]

I'd prefer it if we avoid occupying countries that no connection to the terror attacks.

I don't disagree, but I'd also like Russia to know their place in the world and to GTFO of Ukraine.

They won't.

I'd prefer it if we avoid occupying countries that no connection to the terror attacks.

What does that have to do with Russian interference? You don't care when they occupy.

Huh. I completely disavow any sort of occupation from any nation to another.

[Geilinor]

I don't disagree, but I'd also like Russia to know their place in the world and to GTFO of Ukraine.

They won't.

What does that have to do with Russian interference? You don't care when they occupy.

Huh. I completely disavow any sort of occupation from any nation to another.

You always say "it's not our problem".

[Novus America]

Well they are a concern, I should have said direct threat. True, them allying with China is a problem, though this would be the argument to try to work more with them, a hardline stance only drives them closer to China. Nixon got friendly with China to turn them against the Soviets. It worked from a strategic perspective, morally yes well it was bad. We go friendly with Mao and Pol Pot.

So there is a lot to consider here, it is a complicated situation.

Regardless our obsession with Russia is a problem, we should be treating China like we now treat Russia, and focus less on Russia.
Sure we have to keep an eye on Russia, but our focus needs to be on the much bigger problem.

Russia merely feeds off the fact we focus on them exclusively. We need to treat China the same way we treat Russia right now and treat Russia the same way we do China now.

I was about to say that, but minus the fact the right now we bend over to China, let them screw us and have an insane trade deficit. So I would not treat Russia like we treat China now. More like we treat Cuba now maybe.

But yes, out obsession with Russia, and focusing so much on them is counterproductive. Russia feeds off it, and it distracts us from the real threat.

But yes this is off topic. This is no proof of great Russian power or influence. I mean at most they hacked an email account. That is not a great accomplishment.

[Uxupox]

They won't.



Huh. I completely disavow any sort of occupation from any nation to another.

You always say "it's not our problem".

Yes it's not our problem but doesn't mean I support it...

[New Werpland]

When have people died due to our membership in NATO? It is a fact that without it Europe would be much more violent than it is today.

Libya comes to mind with the forcing of american airstrikes and no-fly zones over the region.

Was our intervention in Libya a necessity of our membership in NATO?

[Hittanryan]

When have people died due to our membership in NATO? It is a fact that without it Europe would be much more violent than it is today.

Libya comes to mind with the forcing of american airstrikes and no-fly zones over the region.

And how about when Russian troops moved into Ukraine?