Skip to content

Russia - the new giant terrorist state

Political Discussion
7 3 294
  • Well, read on.

    This country is getting very desperate.

    Intimidation, threats, veiled threats of nukes, and open

    aggression, first to Ukraine...

    and talk of them nuking us to stop nato impediments to

    their going for broke regaining the world superpower status,

    by taking back several countries, especially in the Baltics.

    Now, that is big, serious trouble. Because they know they have just

    a bit shy of two years of obamao cowardice and ineptness to accomplish it.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russian-doctor-military-sciences-says-181400470.html

  • Sounds like a knee jerk reaction to one politician pumping out propaganda for domestic consumption.

  • A picture isn't just one spec of paint. Truth is, russia was going to try to destabilize and take

    over those countries anyways.

    They are going for broke the next almost two years worth of completely inept presidency of Obamao.

    You NEVEr heard this crap and these actions when Bush was pres.

    Strong leadership gets respect. Worthless phoney pie the sky wifflewaffle liberal leadership...

    gets whats going on now.

    If it all falls apart, liberals who voted for this presidential ass will have only themselves to blame.

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/04/02/russia-reportedly-issues-new-threat-to-nato-over-forces-in-baltics/

  • Is this when we all get amnesia about Russia invading Georgia while Bush was in office? Putin will go after low hanging fruit no matter who is in office. It isn't our job to go in there and ref it. If Europe is worried, they can deal with it.

  • Is this when we all get amnesia about Russia invading Georgia while Bush was in office? Putin will go after low hanging fruit no matter who is in office. It isn't our job to go in there and ref it. If Europe is worried, they can deal with it.

    @logicisforsquares said:

    Is this when we all get amnesia about Russia invading Georgia while Bush was in office? Putin will go after low hanging fruit no matter who is in office. It isn't our job to go in there and ref it. If Europe is worried, they can deal with it.

    We are. Sort of. But, if there's a war between Europe and Russia, the US will be involved regardless.

  • @logicisforsquares said:

    Is this when we all get amnesia about Russia invading Georgia while Bush was in office? Putin will go after low hanging fruit no matter who is in office. It isn't our job to go in there and ref it. If Europe is worried, they can deal with it.

    We are. Sort of. But, if there's a war between Europe and Russia, the US will be involved regardless.

    @gftchris said:

    We are. Sort of. But, if there's a war between Europe and Russia, the US will be involved regardless.

    It doesn't matter what you guys do. The U.S. president determines everything that happens in the world, good or bad depending on the letter next to their name.

  • Posted Today, 09:59 AM


    Is this when we all get amnesia about Russia invading Georgia while Bush was in office? Logic

    ******************************************************************

    Oops for you, eh? Yeah, Bush was technically president. The war started in August of

    2008. Bush was on his way to retirement in two months, and whenever the official taking over

    by the next pres actually occured... Guess who got elected to be president not long afterwards?


    Btw, you mean, "NATO can deal with it". And we are part of NATO.


    Besides, that was long standing hostilities between S. Ossetia and Georgia. Only after Bush was at the end

    of his eight year presidency, did Russia move in. Which, btw, is a lesson in history. "Russian speaking separatists"

    started shelling Georgia, to be free of Georgia. And, to protect the russia speaking Ossetians, of course, the Russians

    moved in. Now, compare that mo by russia, to what they did in the Ukraine. Can I hear an "oh, what the hell...?" out there?


    Remember, HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF. Probably akin to the monomythical patterns in literature. There are psychological

    tendencies of human beings that lend to that history occurring again and again.


    Prior to WWII, England, especially Neville Chamberlain, didn't become wary of history soon enough, and look what happened.

    That's a good book to read - John F. Kennedy's "Why England Slept".