106 réponses à ce sujet

[Commander Rpg]

I didn't see any effort made to stop Russia from harming and killing innocent people (chechens etc.) in the past. It baffles me to see these many useless tanks swarming around now.

[Althix]

harming innocent people how? in Chechnya?

[Commander Rpg]

https://en.wikipedia...rst_Chechen_War

https://en.wikipedia...ond_Chechen_War

[Althix]

... that's not really the arguments.

[Commander Rpg]

... that's not really the arguments.

I don't know what other arguments do you need.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Yeah, defensively. They made the western allies and Soviets fight for every inch.

 

When it came to conquering "Greater Germany", much of their success came from how poorly equipped, organized and trained their initial enemies were.

 

That's the same thing with ISIS. The reason why they look so powerful is because most of their local enemies are terribad.

 

This is not to say they are on the same level. Relatively speaking, the Wermacht is far more qualified. It's just that they're overhyped for similar reasons.

 

Turkey has a powerful army, if they attack ISIS in serious mode, they can defeat them. Iraq army is reconstructed by USA, but it seems it's still weak.

Poor Syria had a mediocre army (still stronger than Japan I think) but it was hated by its neighbors. That's because Syria is doing NoKay.

[Garryydde]

[Althix]

 

I don't know what other arguments do you need.

 

well maybe you will tell me some facts i don't know. about let say... Chechen Republic of Ichkeria how it was created and by whom. who was fighting for it.

maybe you will tell me about bombing in Moscow, about nord-ost.

 

or maybe you will provide some actual articles based on facts about evil russians "harming and killing innocent people" in Chechnya.

[Fidite Nemini]

 

A&M-T approved.

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

Soooo why you no Dominion Tank Police refference?

[AventuroLegendary]

Turkey has a powerful army, if they attack ISIS in serious mode, they can defeat them. Iraq army is reconstructed by USA, but it seems it's still weak.

Poor Syria had a mediocre army (still stronger than Japan I think) but it was hated by its neighbors. That's because Syria is doing NoKay.

 

The "Terribad" enemies I was referring to are the Iraqi armed forces. Turkey and Iran, both close neighbors, could crush ISIS in conventional warfare pretty thoroughly.

 

The problem is that neither country would be willing to step over their borders with a significant force. Turkey because ISIS just so happens to be fighting Kurdish separatists and Iran because of the regional/international backlash. At most, there would be airstrikes (already the case with Turkey).

 

I also mentioned about having a major insurgency on their hands. After seeing how the US, the biggest military power in the world, failed to establish order in Iraq, what chance would they have?

 

 

I didn't see any effort made to stop Russia from harming and killing innocent people (chechens etc.) in the past. It baffles me to see these many useless tanks swarming around now.

 

There was also that little Russian-sponsored ethnic cleansing of Georgians that the world conveniently forgot.

[Commander Rpg]

well maybe you will tell me some facts i don't know. about let say... Chechen Republic of Ichkeria how it was created and by whom. who was fighting for it.

maybe you will tell me about bombing in Moscow, about nord-ost.

 

or maybe you will provide some actual articles based on facts about evil russians "harming and killing innocent people" in Chechnya.

 

I have provided the articles you needed to know, given your first answer, but since you're implying Russia didn't commit aggressive wars even during the Cold War and after its ending, and that the US military force didn't bring the required help or not enough of it, it's up to you to tell how the real facts are, instead of telling me to show more than you know. Don't you think?

[Fidite Nemini]

 

When it came to conquering "Greater Germany", much of their success came from how poorly equipped, organized and trained their initial enemies were.

 

Actually, the Wehrmacht was no better equipped, if not worse than their primary enemies at the time. Especially their infamous mechanized divisions, those PzKpfW IIIs an IVs (keep in mind thoe IVs were not the upgunned version, but still in their original infantry fire support configuration) were no match against allied armor like the french Char B1. The allied had more and better materiel, it just happened they were stationed in accordance to an outdated combat doctrine and deployed as infantry support, whereas Germany had infantry support their armored forces. That meant that at any given time and place, Germany would field more armored forces for tactical superiourity.

 

And even that would've meant little had Germany not gambled it's way through the Ardennes in warfare history's biggest traffic jam and logistic nightmare. The fact they got through there relatively unnoticed is, even with their sophisticated masking operations and diversions, akin to winning the goddamn lottery. Had any of the therein stationed second rate reserve troops noticed and passed the word to Allied command, Germany's war would've ended then and there in the forests, quite possibly alongside the forest as the allies would've needed to just bomb the crap out of it and goodbye Wehrmacht.

 

People always rave about the supposed virtuosity of the Wehrmachts manouvre warfare in WW2, when in essence the biggest feats were little more than stupendous luck working in favour for desperate gambles like that. Sure, Germany fought well when they did and showed the world a things or two about manouvre and combined arms warfare, but had they not had such mindboggling luck, they would've manouvred themselves straight into losing the war. Not that they had much choice, since it was impossible to win against the Allies in a straight-up fight (which just means their biggest gamble, initiating the war in the first place, went exactly as you'd think it does ...).

 

 

 

But we're digressing:

 

[Althix]

I have provided the articles you needed to know, given your first answer, but since you're implying Russia didn't commit aggressive wars even during the Cold War and after its ending, and that the US military force didn't bring the required help or not enough of it, it's up to you to tell how the real facts are, instead of telling me to show more than you know. Don't you think?

So you provided me two links about two wars Russia waged on their own territory against terrorists who by force took control over capital of the Chechen republic. Terrorists who just in on year murdered up to 600 civilians, slavery and kidnapping become a everyday thing. And i really don't know how many stuff was looted.

So yeah. Russia began a war inside it's own territory against insurgency of terrorists.

 

So yeah any war is aggressive. In wars old, weak, crippled, children are the first victims. In wars human rights are getting violated.

 

And by all means, not US of A. Not NATO block have any rights to rebuke Russia in anything.

[thE-Ro]

And by all means, not US of A. Not NATO block have any rights to rebuke Russia in anything.

Well, I don't know that I agree. I think its up to BOTH The USA and Russia to call each other on their misdeeds. We need to be held accountable to each other as the nations with the ability to end the planet.

[Althix]

Well, I don't know that I agree. I think its up to BOTH The USA and Russia to call each other on their misdeeds. We need to be held accountable to each other as the nations with the ability to end the planet.

Look such deeds may only be judged by... people... whose arms are not covered in blood by the elbow. And Russia, US of A or NATO are not such people.

Besides as we all know, you can't force a super power to follow international laws or uphold human rights. It's impossible.

 

Recent example is Crimeria. US of A even have a law that violates human rights and international law.

[AventuroLegendary]

Look such deeds may only be judged by... people... whose arms are not covered in blood by the elbow. And Russia, US of A or NATO are not such people.

Besides as we all know, you can't force a super power to follow international laws or uphold human rights. It's impossible.

 

Recent example is Crimeria. US of A even have a law that violates human rights and international law.

 

Maybe an open dialogue between the two? That'd be hilarious.

 

"Remember how you..."

"Don't start."

[BroBear Berbil]

What is in Bulgaria that's important... apart from Rakia's bar.

 

This guy

 

[thE-Ro]

Look such deeds may only be judged by... people... whose arms are not covered in blood by the elbow. And Russia, US of A or NATO are not such people.
Besides as we all know, you can't force a super power to follow international laws or uphold human rights. It's impossible.
 
Recent example is Crimeria. US of A even have a law that violates human rights and international law.

The thing is, people are mostly helpless and for the most part dont care if it doesnt affect them. The only way to maintain the status quo is for The US and the Russian Federation to maintain a healthy respect for each other.

Its true, you cant make a super power do anything. They will look after their own interests, but thats ok, so long as they understand they can do as they wish WITH IN REASON because the other nation is staring them down.

[Althix]

and what is "with in reason?"

[Fidite Nemini]

and what is "with in reason?"

 

As far as political consensus goes, it's between "I don't care" and "I'll ****ing murder your people if you do that".

[Cyonan]

and what is "with in reason?"

 

The definition of what "Within reason" is, is up to the person with the biggest stick.

 

Of which the Americans aren't exactly in a great position to get into a fight with Russia right now. This particular move is just the marines making a small show of force.

[Althix]

The definition of what "Within reason" is, is up to the person with the biggest stick.

indeed. which means international norms are not concern of the person with the biggest stick.

 

As for marines in Bulgaria... *sigh* it's not even funny. Tank rush from Bulgaria to the nearest Russian border will take too long, and in order to cross Black Sea marines somehow should get pass Russian Black Sea fleet which is stationed in the naval base in Sevastopol. And that base is the reason why annexation happened in the first place.

[thE-Ro]

The definition of what "Within reason" is, is up to the person with the biggest stick.
 
Of which the Americans aren't exactly in a great position to get into a fight with Russia right now. This particular move is just the marines making a small show of force.

No one is in a position to get into a fight with Russia because of their nukes. The same way no one is in a position to fight the US(Even without our nukes, our complete and utter naval dominance renders us untouchable).

A US Russia conflict will turn nuclear the second our armored divisions enter Russia, and that would happen very quickly once we establish air superiority. And then the world ends. I see lots of guys saying how we could beat Russia easily, and well its only true if you ignore their nuclear arsenal. Nukes render you immune to invasion.

[thE-Ro]

indeed. which means international norms are not concern of the person with the biggest stick.
 
As for marines in Bulgaria... *sigh* it's not even funny. Tank rush from Bulgaria to the nearest Russian border will take too long, and in order to cross Black Sea marines somehow should get pass Russian Black Sea fleet which is stationed in the naval base in Sevastopol. And that base is the reason why annexation happened in the first place.

This is a defensive move. This small force is not meant to move on Russia, its to defend in case of aggression and buy time for a larger response, and to train alongside the bulgarians military to deepen ties between our armed forces.