Russia's government are a bunch of illiterrate mofus who did not get enough of the first and second world war.
Wants a spot on the history books for war. Stupidity.
Topic: World War III (Read 34342 times)
nato warships hold drills in black sea near Russian vessels
rt.com/news/239377-nato-drills-black-sea/
rt.com/news/239377-nato-drills-black-sea/
The article you posted doesn't seem to mention the exercises as having been conducted in the vicinity of Russian vessels - only that they occurred in the Black Sea. But, I'm sure that if an "accident" were to happen in said exercises, they would be quick to use it to further the usual propaganda.
Putin knows Russia cant sustain a world war right now so hes going to keep what territory he gains from Ukraine and back down for a while until he finds his next victim like hitler.
Really? Did you have to go and prove Godwin's Law? Close the thread!
EDIT: Oh, I see it has already been proven several times in this thread alone - carry on then.
Putin knows Russia cant sustain a world war right now so hes going to keep what territory he gains from Ukraine and back down for a while until he finds his next victim like hitler.
nato warships hold drills in black sea near Russian vessels
rt.com/news/239377-nato-drills-black-sea/
rt.com/news/239377-nato-drills-black-sea/
Window on Eurasia: Putin Believes He can Win a War with NATO, Piontkovsky Says
Paul Goble
Staunton, August 9 – “No state or regime goes to war firmly convinced that it will lose it,” Andrey Piontkovsky says, and Vladimir Putin is no exception: if he goes to war with NATO and even if he escalates that conflict by using nuclear weapons, he will be acting on the basis of a belief that he can win it.
That belief, the Russian commentator says, is based on Putin’s assumption that the logic of mutually assured destruction (MAD) which prevented a major war between Russia and the West has broken down because of divisions within the West about how to respond to Russian use of a limited nuclear strike (www1.kasparov.org/material.php?id=53E4C598A8B3F).
Piontkovsky does not provide direct evidence for this, but his argument is both suggestive and disturbing because if he has read Putin correctly, the world is in a far more dangerous situation than most have thought and the risks to Russia’s neighbors, the West and Russia itself are far greater.
According to the commentator, “even the most modest practical realization of [Putin’s] idea of ‘assembling the Russian lands’ requires changes of state borders at least of two NATO member countries, Latvia and Estonia.” Because of the Western alliance’s Article 5 in which an attack on one is an attack on all, that would seem impossible given MAD.
But as many analysts have suggested before, “the MAD doctrine considered only a single most destructive scenario of a military conflict between nuclear powers, total war.” But there are other scenarios, including the limited use of nuclear weapons by one side under conditions when the other side does not respond lest that lead to “mutual suicide.”
It is “theoretically clear,” Piontkovsky argues, “that in a more volatile geopolitical situation, a nuclear power focused on changing the existing status quo, enjoying the advantage of political will and indifferent to the values of human lives (its own and others), and affected by a certain adventurism, could achieve serious foreign policy results by the threat of the application or the limited application of nuclear weapons.”
Clearly, he continues, Putin does not seek “the destruction of the hated United States,” a goal that he could achieve “only at the price of mutual suicide.” Instead, his goals are “significantly more modest: the maximum extension of the Russian World, the destruction of NATO, and the discrediting and humiliation of the US as the guarantor of the security of the West.”
To put it in simplest terms, Piontkovsky continues, Putin’s actions would be “revenge for the defeat of the USSR in the third (cold) world war just as the second world war was for Germany an attempt at revenge for defeat in the first.”
If the Russian speakers of Narva in Estonia were to conduct a referendum and Moscow sent in its forces overtly or covertly, how might NATO react? Piontkovsky asks. If NATO did not respond, “that would mean the end of NATO and the end of the US as a world power and the complete political dominance of Putin’s Russia not only in the area of the Russian World but in the entire European continent.”
But whether it would respond “is hardly obvious,” he suggests. Despite Article 5, many NATO countries would be reluctant to respond lest they trigger a nuclear war. “Putin knows that they know that if they come to the assistance of Estonia, then Putin can respond with a very limited nuclear strike and destroy for example two European capitals. Not London and not Paris, of course.”
Under those circumstances, Putin clearly assumes, many in the US would oppose responding. “All progressive and even all reactionary American society” would shout “’We do not want to die for f****** Narva, Mr. President!’” And 70 percent of Germans would insist on neutrality.
Putin therefore is “convinced that he can outplay [Western countries and leaders] in potential military conflicts which will arise on the path to the realization of the great idea of the Russian World despite the fact that Russia” is much weaker in conventional arms than NATO and does not have an advantage over the US in nuclear ones.
“By the spirit we will take them,” Putin calculates in Piontkovsky’s argument. “By the spirit and by boldness.”
Thus, Putin’s plans are “paradoxically adventurist but have chances for success,” all the more so because “in the case of failure, Putin always retains” the option to respond in ways that the MAD doctrine suggests and destroy the world along with Russia. That will induce “a paralyzing influence on his ‘partners.’”
Indeed, Piontkovsky says, there is evidence that it already has. It was no accident that the first response of US President Obama and NATO Secretary General Rasmussen to the Ukrainian crisis were “declarations that military intervention by the US and NATO were categorically excluded since Ukraine is not a member” of the Western alliance.
http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2014/08/window-on-eurasia-putin-believes-he-can.html?spref=fb
full article (RU) http://www1.kasparov.org/material.php?id=53E4C598A8B3F
Nuclear weapons in Crimea
Russia’s Foreign Minister Lavrov announced that Russia has every legitimate right to deploy nuclear weapons on the Crimean peninsula. This act not only violates multiple international treaties, but also threatens the security of the entire region.
http://uacrisis.org/nuclear-weapons-crimea/
Russia’s Foreign Minister Lavrov announced that Russia has every legitimate right to deploy nuclear weapons on the Crimean peninsula. This act not only violates multiple international treaties, but also threatens the security of the entire region.
http://uacrisis.org/nuclear-weapons-crimea/
Russia Seen Expanding Active Measures and Media Campaign Against Latvia in 2015
Staunton, January 5 – Riga faces a dramatically expanded Russian media campaign to discredit it in the eyes of Latvians and the West and an increase in the activity of Russian special services against it, according to Maris Tsepuritis, a researcher at the Riga Center for Research on the Politics of Eastern Europe.
The analyst says he bases his conclusion not only on existing trends in Russia’s handling of Latvia over the past year but also on the fact that Moscow is especially interested in blackening the reputation of Riga now that it has become for the next six months the presidency of the EU Council (rus.delfi.lv/news/daily/latvia/analitik-v-latvii-zametno-usilitsya-aktivnost-rossijskih-specsluzhb.d?id=45407842).
The way in which Moscow treated Lithuania during its EU presidency suggests some of the things Moscow may do to Latvia, according to Tsepuritis. Among them are cyber attacks against the country’s media networks and massive negative information campaigns to blacken Latvia’s reputation internationally.
In addition, Tsepuritis said, it is likely that Russian special services will also step up their activities in Latvia not only to gain access to various kinds of information but also to carry out “various destabilizing measures” and thus test NATO’s resolve concerning the defense of its Baltic member states (regnum.ru/news/polit/1882371.html).
http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2015/01/window-on-eurasia-russia-seen-expanding.html?m=1
Staunton, January 5 – Riga faces a dramatically expanded Russian media campaign to discredit it in the eyes of Latvians and the West and an increase in the activity of Russian special services against it, according to Maris Tsepuritis, a researcher at the Riga Center for Research on the Politics of Eastern Europe.
The analyst says he bases his conclusion not only on existing trends in Russia’s handling of Latvia over the past year but also on the fact that Moscow is especially interested in blackening the reputation of Riga now that it has become for the next six months the presidency of the EU Council (rus.delfi.lv/news/daily/latvia/analitik-v-latvii-zametno-usilitsya-aktivnost-rossijskih-specsluzhb.d?id=45407842).
The way in which Moscow treated Lithuania during its EU presidency suggests some of the things Moscow may do to Latvia, according to Tsepuritis. Among them are cyber attacks against the country’s media networks and massive negative information campaigns to blacken Latvia’s reputation internationally.
In addition, Tsepuritis said, it is likely that Russian special services will also step up their activities in Latvia not only to gain access to various kinds of information but also to carry out “various destabilizing measures” and thus test NATO’s resolve concerning the defense of its Baltic member states (regnum.ru/news/polit/1882371.html).
http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2015/01/window-on-eurasia-russia-seen-expanding.html?m=1
Happy New Year from Dmitry Rogozin, Deputy Prime Minister of Nazis Russia:
@Rogozin Дpyзья, пoздpaвляю вac c нacтyпaющим Hoвым Гoдoм! Mиpa, здopoвья и блaгoпoлyчия вaм в нoвoм 2015 гoдy!
https://twitter.com/Rogozin/status/550180497541062656/photo/1
@Rogozin Дpyзья, пoздpaвляю вac c нacтyпaющим Hoвым Гoдoм! Mиpa, здopoвья и блaгoпoлyчия вaм в нoвoм 2015 гoдy!
https://twitter.com/Rogozin/status/550180497541062656/photo/1
You can thanks Wall street and other bankster if a WW3 begin , more than a Putin, Ebomama or Hilarator ...
Extensive trade is one reason why countries might hesitate to start a war.
It will not be the cause for them.
You can thanks Wall street and other bankster if a WW3 begin , more than a Putin, Ebomama or Hilarator ...
War sucks, let's hope we ALL figure out a way to put an end to these unnecessary conflicts that cause so much pain and destruction. 
I don't mind Putin winning at all. Better Russia than the US.
It's not like the war hasn't been secretly going on, it's just a question of when it will escalate into full attacks from both sides.
It's not like the war hasn't been secretly going on, it's just a question of when it will escalate into full attacks from both sides.
Putin is Blocknet dev 
Putin Reopens Possibility for Preemptive Attack on the West, Zhilin Says
Staunton, December 21 – Aleksandr Zhilin, head of the Moscow Center for the Study of Applied Problems and a leading Russian military commentator, says that Vladimir Putin has now changed the country’s military doctrine in such a way that it will now allow for consideration of a pre-emptive military attack on the West in response to a range of Western threats.
In a comment for the Regnum news agency, Zhilin says that as Putin made clear at his meetings with the defense ministry collegium, “Russia does not intend to attack anyone.” But “nevertheless,” he continues, Moscow’s “military strategy is changing” in ways that lay the groundwork for an even more aggressive stance than now.
At earlier meetings with the top officials of the Russian defense ministry, Putin “began with the statement that we have no strategic enemies and therefore we do not see military threats to the country.” In the one just concluded, “he did not say this.” And Zhilin says that in his view, Putin “perfectly precisely” declared that Russia does have “a strategic enemy” – the US.
American efforts at building an ABM system and the increased activity of NATO “in Europe and above all in Eastern Europe” are cause for concern, Putin told the session, and consequently, in Zhilin’s telling, Russia must maintain or improve its ability to “destroy or at least inflict an unbearable strike on its opponent on another continent.”
The Russian president told the military commanders that “it is necessary to force ‘the development of all components of the strategic nuclear forces …[because] these forces are the most important factor of maintaining a global balance and in fact preclude the possibility of massive aggression against Russia.”
But even more important as an indication of Moscow’s intentions, Zhilin argues, the meeting shows that “Russia retains for itself the right in the case of a real threat of a nuclear attack by an opponent to launch a preventive one. Under Yeltsin, that point was cut out of our military doctrine” at American insistence, but now it is back.
In Putin’s own words, “Russia as always will consistently defend its interests and sovereignty and will seek to strengthen international stability and support equal security for all states and peoples.” And that means, Zhilin says, that “in the case of danger for Russia in financial, technological or raw material markets, our response can be military.”
“In other words,” the Moscow military commentator says, US President Barack Obama as a result of his foolish anti-Russian policy is significantly reducing the military security of his own country. The Americans are becoming hostages of the shortsightedness of the White House.”
Zhilin’s words may exaggerate how much Putin has changed Russia’s military doctrine, especially with regard to the possibility of responding militarily to economic challenges. But they are important as an indicator of how at least some in the Russian defense establishment see things and thus an indication of how much more dangerous Putin has made the world.
http://www.interpretermag.com/putin-reopens-possibility-for-preemptive-attack-on-the-west-zhilin-says/
Staunton, December 21 – Aleksandr Zhilin, head of the Moscow Center for the Study of Applied Problems and a leading Russian military commentator, says that Vladimir Putin has now changed the country’s military doctrine in such a way that it will now allow for consideration of a pre-emptive military attack on the West in response to a range of Western threats.
In a comment for the Regnum news agency, Zhilin says that as Putin made clear at his meetings with the defense ministry collegium, “Russia does not intend to attack anyone.” But “nevertheless,” he continues, Moscow’s “military strategy is changing” in ways that lay the groundwork for an even more aggressive stance than now.
At earlier meetings with the top officials of the Russian defense ministry, Putin “began with the statement that we have no strategic enemies and therefore we do not see military threats to the country.” In the one just concluded, “he did not say this.” And Zhilin says that in his view, Putin “perfectly precisely” declared that Russia does have “a strategic enemy” – the US.
American efforts at building an ABM system and the increased activity of NATO “in Europe and above all in Eastern Europe” are cause for concern, Putin told the session, and consequently, in Zhilin’s telling, Russia must maintain or improve its ability to “destroy or at least inflict an unbearable strike on its opponent on another continent.”
The Russian president told the military commanders that “it is necessary to force ‘the development of all components of the strategic nuclear forces …[because] these forces are the most important factor of maintaining a global balance and in fact preclude the possibility of massive aggression against Russia.”
But even more important as an indication of Moscow’s intentions, Zhilin argues, the meeting shows that “Russia retains for itself the right in the case of a real threat of a nuclear attack by an opponent to launch a preventive one. Under Yeltsin, that point was cut out of our military doctrine” at American insistence, but now it is back.
In Putin’s own words, “Russia as always will consistently defend its interests and sovereignty and will seek to strengthen international stability and support equal security for all states and peoples.” And that means, Zhilin says, that “in the case of danger for Russia in financial, technological or raw material markets, our response can be military.”
“In other words,” the Moscow military commentator says, US President Barack Obama as a result of his foolish anti-Russian policy is significantly reducing the military security of his own country. The Americans are becoming hostages of the shortsightedness of the White House.”
Zhilin’s words may exaggerate how much Putin has changed Russia’s military doctrine, especially with regard to the possibility of responding militarily to economic challenges. But they are important as an indicator of how at least some in the Russian defense establishment see things and thus an indication of how much more dangerous Putin has made the world.
http://www.interpretermag.com/putin-reopens-possibility-for-preemptive-attack-on-the-west-zhilin-says/
Don't worry, there is no world war III.
Because of the nuclear weapon.
There is no good for anyone.
None of dominant country can conquer the other dominant country.
You are probably right. What we have seen since nuclear weapons have been invented/created is proxy wars. Now it is still possible to defeat other major countries via proxy wars as the US beat the former USSR in afghanistan to end the cold war via a proxy war Because of the nuclear weapon.
There is no good for anyone.
None of dominant country can conquer the other dominant country.
Don't worry, there is no world war III.
Because of the nuclear weapon.
There is no good for anyone.
None of dominant country can conquer the other dominant country.
Because of the nuclear weapon.
There is no good for anyone.
None of dominant country can conquer the other dominant country.
It may not be the "countries" orchestrating this, the "countries" may be mere holding pens for us cattle.
Maybe this is being orchestrated by the farmers and the farmers may have fireproof suits in which to enjoy the pyrotechnic spectacle.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=10&q=p53+radiation+protection
Don't worry, there is no world war III.
Because of the nuclear weapon.
There is no good for anyone.
None of dominant country can conquer the other dominant country.
Because of the nuclear weapon.
There is no good for anyone.
None of dominant country can conquer the other dominant country.
Chaaaaaaange! http://rt.com/news/213747-latvia-us-armored-vehicles/ both sides are preparing... The cold war never ended it was just not reported in the news for 2 decades.
I sure hope Russia/China also has laser technology to take down drones otherwise this will be a fairly one sided fight.
I somewhat doubt we will see another world war that looks like prior world wars. The advent of nuclear weapons means that countries are less willing to fight eachother and tend to engage in proxy wars. I sure hope Russia/China also has laser technology to take down drones otherwise this will be a fairly one sided fight.
Countries will still have military buldups and will have a weaponized military but will rarely be used
ON FINDINGS AS FOR SPECIAL OPERATION PLANNED IN LATGALE
This week, an increased data-flow coming from Latvia has called the attention of CESI’s analysts. Data processing speaks for the fact that Moscow is likely to stage a destabilizing operation in Latvia in spring 2015.
This scenario foresees initiating local referendums in Latgale – the eastern region of Latvia, occupying nearly a quarter of country’s territory. As of 2010, the Russians account for approximately 40% of regional population.
The operation is not aimed at annexation of territories, but pursues a goal of creating temporary trouble spots, triggering Latvian authorities’ tough actions on suppressing secessionism in these territories. As a result, Moscow expects the operation to give an impetus to Latvia’s authorities to revise the Russian-speaking population policy, introduce zero-citizenship, lift the existing restrictions on Russian language use, thus enabling to enlarge the number of pro-Russian forces in power.
Data evaluation suggests that this scenario is a transitional one, while the maximum task is to provide conditions for establishing wide autonomies for Russian-speaking territories. According to our estimations, that would be too hard for Kremlin to implement the scenario of total annexation of Latvia’s part without embarking on hostilities, as it is in the east of Ukraine. Compact territory, in such a case, will enable the RF to bring the «peacekeeping» troops that would occupy a part of the territory and initiate the Latvians’ migration flow, thus tilting the ethnic balance in favor of the Russians.
We expect Russia’s agent cells to be expanded within Latgale’s territory, the pro-Russian propaganda activity to grow, and windows to be formed on the Russian border for movement of arms in case the operation is launched. Analysis of the Russians’ activity sequence in Ukraine speaks for possible work of their intelligence agencies with local government leaders from among the ethnic Russians, having got authority for organizing local population’s mass-scale support while conducting the operation.
http://eurasianintelligence.org/news.php?new=213&num
This week, an increased data-flow coming from Latvia has called the attention of CESI’s analysts. Data processing speaks for the fact that Moscow is likely to stage a destabilizing operation in Latvia in spring 2015.
This scenario foresees initiating local referendums in Latgale – the eastern region of Latvia, occupying nearly a quarter of country’s territory. As of 2010, the Russians account for approximately 40% of regional population.
The operation is not aimed at annexation of territories, but pursues a goal of creating temporary trouble spots, triggering Latvian authorities’ tough actions on suppressing secessionism in these territories. As a result, Moscow expects the operation to give an impetus to Latvia’s authorities to revise the Russian-speaking population policy, introduce zero-citizenship, lift the existing restrictions on Russian language use, thus enabling to enlarge the number of pro-Russian forces in power.
Data evaluation suggests that this scenario is a transitional one, while the maximum task is to provide conditions for establishing wide autonomies for Russian-speaking territories. According to our estimations, that would be too hard for Kremlin to implement the scenario of total annexation of Latvia’s part without embarking on hostilities, as it is in the east of Ukraine. Compact territory, in such a case, will enable the RF to bring the «peacekeeping» troops that would occupy a part of the territory and initiate the Latvians’ migration flow, thus tilting the ethnic balance in favor of the Russians.
We expect Russia’s agent cells to be expanded within Latgale’s territory, the pro-Russian propaganda activity to grow, and windows to be formed on the Russian border for movement of arms in case the operation is launched. Analysis of the Russians’ activity sequence in Ukraine speaks for possible work of their intelligence agencies with local government leaders from among the ethnic Russians, having got authority for organizing local population’s mass-scale support while conducting the operation.
http://eurasianintelligence.org/news.php?new=213&num
Jump to: