arock10

In adult forum (at least in the US) you'd just reply 18+

__________________
Sup

just a punk

I'm asking this because you are talking like a child. Russia does not threat any country including Poland. If our defense doctrine allows to use tactical nukes (as I said above they are now real powerful - like 4 Hiroshimas or so). That means we can use them in case of attack in the most efficient way. Let me explain in to you.

The USA have carrier battle groups. Those were effective in WWII and still are very useful in case of war against some 3rd-world country like Somalia ect. Their price is outstanding (this is how the US budget got wasted for nothing), but they can't stand a single cruise missile with a tactical nuclear warhead. If you are a businessman, you have to understand that it's very stupid to spend billions on building and servicing of your own carrier battle groups if one rather cheap missile cruiser like project 1164 "Atlant" is capable to sink up to two US carrier battle groups (according to the US military experts). Would you spend tons of money to have a symmetric-sized army if you can beat your enemy for a 1000's less price? We don't need to have a similar military budget to be able to defeat the US army (look at the results of Vietnam war as an example of what small David can do to big Goliaf with a simple sling). This is just a business, man. Just a business.



The same applies to the US missile defense complex in Poland. We have no ideological problems with that country. We don't hate them etc. We are are peaceful people, but if some country is ready to be used as a buffer (a cannon fodder) between two powers in exchange for money, it's their choice. Just a business again, because everything in this world has its price. It's strange that an adult person does not understand those simple things...

Hitler has already attacked us when we were not ready. As a result, we had heavy loses. Now we've got smarter and always have a very special plan "B" ;)

__________________
Obey the Cowgod

arock10

The words you type are hilarious. You could really save people time though by just saying USA bad, Russia good every thread


Btw, how is that 6.5 yr record low for oil feeling over in Russia. The oligarchs have to make stew out of the peasants yet?

__________________
Sup

aka123

Sure, sure, sure.. or as our somewhat latest defense related threat assessment said as threats; Russia, Russia, Russia. I would guess that in Ukraine they have somewhat similar feelings. That assessment was made before this war in Ukraine and I don't think the situation has changed to any better situation.

Though this is no new information or neither very surprising, especially context wise; south Estonia, west Sweden, north Norway, east Russia.

__________________

just a punk

What's wrong with the Ukraine? A civil war there? Do you know how many revolutions they had since their independence of 1991? Dare to count? So this is a normal situation for them. Believe me, if Russia would decide to occupy the Ukraine, the Russian army would be in Kiev less than in a half of a day. Everything you can see on the East of Ukraine is a local civilian war which is being backed up by many countries from both sides (yes, Russia also bucks up the rebels) and that's not a secret. Don't be that naive please.

I didn't say the USA is bad and Russia is good (these are just voices in your sick head, like you've caught some brain-damaging STD after unprotected sex with L-Pink).

I've just explained why Russian defense doctrine allows to use tactical nukes (e.g. against the carrier battle groups). Also I said that the US military spending are very ineffective (Vietnam was a good example of the military impotence). You can achieve a much better result by spending 1000's times less money. Just do it wisely.

__________________
Obey the Cowgod

aka123

I fixed it for you, maybe we too should have "special" plan B?

__________________

arock10

Also sadly it is no longer world war 2... Now every countries economies are intertwined and wars don't make a whole lot of sense (yes including the ones that the US fights).
So the US doesn't have to physically fight Russia. Russia is doing an excellent job destroying itself with it's not first world economy which relies nearly 50% on oil. The fuckin Saudis are basically taking Russia out now... prompted by the growth of the domestic US oil producers ;)
Also how about that Iran deal.... More cheap oil to come ;)

But as you've said before, great for you, you get paid in usd and euros. The rest of your countrymen are going to be awfully hungry for the next few years

__________________
Sup

arock10

Of course you did, this is a thread about google and you managed to turn it into some Russia v America thread

Hmm though actually to be fair aka had a pretty big role too

just a punk

Yes, you had it actually. The Finnish army has also used unsymmetrical way of war. That worked well for you. The same concept is being used by Russian (former Soviet) army against all the potential threats. Thus I don't understand why you are so worried about tactical nukes. Those are unsymmetrical answer. I thought a Finnish guy should understand it. I'm just not sure you are an adult...

I did not. Read it again. I've just explained to our little Finnish friend in which exactly cases Russia can use tactical nukes. He has asked, I've replied to his questions. Should I simple tell him "fuck off" or what? Please re-read this thread from the beginning and you'll see who has turned it into an off-topic.

P.S. And why always Russia vs the USA? The little Finnish guy is insisting on making this thread about Russia vs Poland, Russia vs Ukraine, Russia vs Finland, Russia vs everything - just read his posts, they are all about Russia and I also have no idea on how could it be related to Google (maybe because Sergey Brin is from Russia?)

Oh, just look at his another post below ↓

__________________
Obey the Cowgod

aka123

I would "understand" it better without historical context of you guys using your weapons against us Finnish. Besides history, the current situation doesn't look so good either. In the 90's there were a brief moment when "Great, Russia is becoming as a stable democracy that doesn't threaten its neighbors.", but that moment faded away.

__________________

aka123

My original point was that if someone is going to "brighten the future" (as you put it) with a bang, it is Russia, or maybe Russian Google gone mad.

Then you started defending how Russia is so fucking peaceful country.

__________________

just a punk

2arock10, anymore questions after these posts? That's how a thread goes to off-topic.

__________________
Obey the Cowgod

aka123

........

__________________

just a punk

Idiot, it was a joke inspired by the "Terminator" movie where Skynet has taken control over the US nuke missiles. As about "bright", so this word has a few meanings and what was also a joke (I believe the English-speaking people who looked at the picture have got it just easily). Why are you so dumb, ah? You have no good education nor a sense of humor in your gloomy and boring country.

__________________
Obey the Cowgod

aka123

I did get your joke. I just pointed out that it is more likely that Russian nukes "brighten" the future, and even without terminators.

__________________

pimpmaster9000

well they sure have the right name to take over the world alphabet is some str8 out of the movies shit...omnicorp, spectre corporation, umbrella corporation and now alphabet corporation...our life is slowly becoming like the movies where the corporation with the all encompassing name takes over everything


I wonder how long it will take them to get in to """"""""""""""defence""""""""""""

__________________
Report a suspicious cracker: Click Here

j3rkules

Google appears to want to become U.S. Robotics. Hope they figure out a way that keeps the bots true to the 3 Laws without causing them to lock up.

The first terminal cancer patient that dies on one of these AI bots is likely to lock them up hard.

__________________

astronaut x

What you said...

rowan

This is a remake. The original Swedish version (Real Humans / Äkta människor) is far superior. Finding a DVD or broadcast with English subtitles may be a challenge though.

The British and Swedish versions have some shared characters and themes, but there are some major differences. The Swedish one is a lot darker, and more realistic IMHO.

This clip doesn't do it much justice, but it's all I could find with subtitles

arock10

Watch Google’s new humanoid robot stomp around the woods like a drunk Iron Man - The Washington Post

Yea we fucked

__________________
Sup

j3rkules

It's great fun to watch this technology evolve.
When I'm a feeble old lady one of these will probably be living with me, helping me in and out of the bathroom.

__________________

CDSmith

Yes, I was aware that it was based on an original Swedish series, but have not seen it, so thank you for the clip. The original looks great.

I've been watching the Brit version and have really felt they are soft-shoeing it and pulling some key punches, punches that an HBO or a Showtime would have likely not been afriad to include. Still it's worth watching, but now I'm wishing they had have really followed the lead from the Swedes a little more closely.

__________________
Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!

ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634