Your example was from woman's perspective and mindset. Men don't think how to explain some madness to executioners, as they know it's no use. Instead of that they think how to eliminate the threat.

In that situation men's body starts to produce big quantities of adrenaline and testosterone, as men ideally prepare to kill. That is how it has been done in the long human history and evolution and that's how it's done today.

No one keeps the mother's situation as good or desireble, but reaction to it is differently.

You know how much slave workers died during building his rockets, and he developed them like a mad man because hitler wanted to bomb the shit out of UK. The man is a nazi, worked for the nazis, built by slaves to bomb cities full of civilians.

The world is full of hypocrites, when someone with a wrap sheet like this can make another (enemy) country millions to billions of dollars, they ignore everything and the president shakes hands with him.

the biggest oil producer

First, It is not my definition of war. I do not consider myself smarter then officials ,like you consider yourself.

That was not war because there were no extreme violence and destruction . You have pasted official definition there but you are saying it is not good one, right? I will repeat (because you deliberately ignored most important thing ) : "...characterised by extreme violence, social disruption and economic destruction...".

So now, go on and show me destruction and extreme violence that happened in Crimea?
Question, why it is defined as crysis and you are only one insisting that is a war?

no military operation? Placing nukes is medical action I guess? Or humanitarian action. US Army Navy blockade was not also military move?


oh..really, nothing to talk about..small maybe for you but for killed people whose parents or grandparents experienced same several times in history it is not small,at all.

As I am concerned, very good indicator what to expect and that is why I've concentrated of your explanation that army is used to protect, but in reality it will be used in wars on other country soil. So with your last statement you basically admitted that you thing army should be used in attack on other countries that are not attacking you and do not have any business with you?

One more thing you skipped: where did I say that Germany (or any other country) have no right to defend itself? (but this is irrelevant now after your last statement) . I've just said that no one is considering attacking Germany (except in your own mind)

Not sure when you last checked your sources, but there is no Soviet Union for more then 20 years. This reminds me of Japanese guy that lived most of his life in Jungle without info that war was over decades ago.

What Russian threat? Russia is surrounded with NATO countries and rocket "shield" pushed under their nose. NATO is organizing military drills with Ukrainians or Georgia and you are talking about Russia threatening someone? How many times Europeans tried to conquer Russia? Crazy...but crazy or not ,there are people like you ignoring facts and calling to arms.

It seems history as teacher is not good enough for you.

I didn't say it's your definition. I said "quoted". The first sentence defines the war. And I am not the only one saying it's war.

There are nukes all over the world, it's not action of war per se. And not all military moves makes a war, but troops invading foreign country makes.


I didn't say army should be used to attack some other countries, that is quite far fetched. I just said that some foreign military operation doesn't exclude the fact that the army is used to protect it's home country.

This conversation starts so be pretty pointless.

I said that Soviet Union is now Russia, as it is. Russia is Soviet Union's legal successor, even with debt and all.

Russian threat, it means military threat from Russia. Russia did attack in WWII to Poland, Baltic countries and to Finland. After WWII Soviet Union did attack to Poland, Hungary and Afghanistan. Recently is has attacked Georgia and Ukraine. Quite enough to say it imposes a threat.

Being "surrounded" by countries and military drills are not attacks. There is nothing wrong to prepare defences or practise.

So if you have article in front of you, you are reading only first sentence, or just one that you like? Definition is several sentences long and all of them are equally important.

I've pasted you link above where it is officially named Crimean Crysis, and not Crimean war.
How do you explain that, especially coming from "western" source?



Who and when tried to conquer country with nukes? Give me example and compare it how many countries without nukes were attacked in last several decades (some with three times bigger army then German now).Show us.


Ok, then explain why Germany needed protection back in 1999 so it went almost 1000 km to bomb?

Not for me, I've responded to every single thing you tried to show in different light and yet I didn't gate answer to all those questions above sent to you.

Easy. USA. we had the best chance of directing the outcome of the war and the next 75 years, as we have done.

It doesn't make sense to look at it as if 1 leader between 1939 and 1945 would have made a difference. We had some of the best leaders ever at that time and everyone still died.

Instead, i look at it as which country would be influential for the future and that country is the USA.

Military threat from Russia is only in brainwashed heads. Who is putting military pressure on Russia but NATO?

When was Russian Georgian war? In 2008.
When US started negotiating with Poland anti balsitic shield? let me save you time: 2002. 6 years before.

Russian attacked Poland in WW2, AFTER germans already did it. So if you are trying to make such conculsions based on historical info, Germany is far greater threat,like it was back in 1914 or 1939 .

US also attacked Afghanistan recently.

How many NATO bases are worldwide and how many Russian?

https://socioecohistory.files.wordpr...tary_bases.jpg

After missing so much info in your logic, there is no use to try to make difference between Soviet Union and Russia. Education is not free. At least not anymore.

They were in peace with germany at this time
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov...ibbentrop_Pact

also read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre

About the "Crimean crisis". Haven't you heard about politics? As there are no formal war declaration it would be politically kinda hard to call it as a war. Even the president of Estonia said about current developments in Ukraine that "Normally this would be called as war." Russia hides in the shadows of uncertainty.

And what that nuke issue got's to do with what I just said? Nothing. I said that there are nukes all over the world and those presence is not act of war. Using them against someone is.

And I am through with this issue about Germany. Think whatever you want about the Yugoslavian campaign, that was backed by UN, where also Russia had it's vote about it, and it didn't vote against the campaign.

Lol, I wasn't expecting someone is actually reading what I am writing.
You didn't understand my sentence there, I am talking about German attack on Poland. Since guy is saying that Russians are threat because of that , but somehow he forgot that Germany attacked Poland first:

"On 17 September, sixteen days after Nazi Germany invaded Poland from the west, the Soviet Union did so from the east. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland



It was done by soviets and head of operation was Georgian , Lavrentiy Beria and his chief Josef Stalin, also Georgian.

But yet, people are blaming Russians. Very simple to understand. (same those Georgians that were in war with Russia back in 2008)

Pressure and pressure, I am more concerned about the actions. You can talk as much about pressure, bases and such, but only Russia has recently materialized it's threat.

Soviet Union did split up Poland with Nazi-Germany in their peace agreement, and both invaded after that to take their own half. Just like they agreed. So, no evil surprise attacks in there, except for Poland.

Here?s my woman?s perspective and I?ll throw in my mindset as a bonus. Compassion and the potential to be violent are not mutually exclusive. I end threats with sound judgment. You?re right. I don?t get all that emotion. Anyone that presents a threat to me, I?ll coolly end his or her life.

Let?s see who really stands where. I?ll show you mine then you show me yours. Here?s how I ?prepare to kill.? A .45 Judge Public Defender that shoots .410 slugs or .45 Colt long rounds, two 1911s, a Glock 40 that shoots hollow points and a Glock 9 that will fuck you up with the ammo I pack in it.

Now let?s see what your testosterone and adrenaline have prepared in your defense. The prosecution rests.

http://linkification.com/www/gun_walk.jpg

If you haven't yet realized, I don't live in US, and outside US weapon arsenals are usually forbidden. Although I am trained soldier (not profession) and I possess some hunting and sport shooting guns. I won't list those in here.

This isn't some competition about guns or braveness or anything. I just told you some biological facts. If I have to defence myself, I preferably do it as a part of well trained army, and not some Rambo style.

I've gave you "western "source so you can't blame it on politics and propaganda. Everything else is your personal opinion, that is not backing official categorazation

Estonia? Lol...NATO memeber with population of 1.3 millions people.

What are you talking about? All what I was telling from the beginning is that army without nukes can be considered regional power (maximum) and not a serious army. I've asked from you to give me list of countries (with nukes) that someone tried to conquer. You failed to do so. That was just example of what I ve said. that is all.

Like everything said in your previous posts, this is also not true and it is twisting of real situation.

The NATO bombing campaign has remained controversial, as it did not gain the approval of the UN Security Council.[61]

Russia strongly condemned the campaign. The president Boris Yeltsin stated that, 'Russia is deeply upset by NATO's military action against sovereign Yugoslavia, which is nothing more than open aggression.'[197] They also condemned NATO at the United Nations saying that NATO air strikes on Serbia were 'an illegal action.'[203] Some Russians volunteered to go to Kosovo, not only to fight the KLA, but also to oppose NATO.[204]

So , this was NATO (western) idea of avoiding UN council. It was extreme mistake but it came from arrogance and western highhandedness. So Russians are threat while NATO put complete international law down. Because of this , now we have situations you are referring to (shady actions , hidden operations,etc...)

I would have placed the explosive to the left of the table leg and not the right

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/...27_634x498.jpg

What threat, not sure about what example you are talking about.
And what about questions I've gave to you in previous posts. You will just ignore them ?

It's my personal opinion (the war), so what? And why you keep talking about those nukes? To what does that relate? Do I start talking about salad dressings? And if no one tries to conquer nuke countries, why you are so concerned about NATO? You have nukes in Russia, right?

About the Yugoslavia bombings, as far it goes with Wikipedia, there even wasn't Germans much involved. Besides the bombing, the peace keeping operations had UN approval.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia

Oh, because of this? That's nice one.

well I would have some goons throw you in a trunk and quiz you on WW2 history. if you cant fire anything larger a slingshot I don't think you get a say.

Yep, I think i will start to ignore some more. I said many posts ago that this has gone pretty pointless.

Glad you agree but it is too late. Normal people knew immediately what will happen if UN is skipped. But one more NATO base had to be there to control region and go further toward East (read it,Russia): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Bondsteel

really im just seeing how much fun I could have with you. and how good of a sport you are capable of being. :0

We have a gun or two in the army, and my personal guns are enough big to kill large mammals, so smallers mammals like humans shouldn't be problem.

Also stockpiling guns doesn't do anything, except the stockpile. It is mostly US phenomenon to have bunch of big ass guns at home to feel safe. Outside US we have a thing called as community and we fight together as a united force.

Regardless Wikipedia, I guess you should know stuff like that if you are already talking about geopolitics and have such strong opinion. Anyway : " In 1999, the Federal Republic of Germany participated in NATO's air campaign Operation Allied Force against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. It was the first offensive combat mission in the history of the country"

If you think I am giving false info (like you did about or something like that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Air_Force and look under engagements. Nothing new for me so wikipedia is just for people like you.

Peace keeping operation? You are really missing some info,aren't you? Ok let me help you understand what peace was keeped there and what happened under UN mission : 230,000 Kosovo Serb, Romani and other non-Albanian civilians displaced,all under UN (NATO ,since Russians left years ago) care.

Aren't you being a bit sadistic now?

Oh here we ago again. They did it why can't we? If everyone in a country killed themselves would everyone there do it also?

Dude real shitty example being that Afghanistan was Russia's Viet Nam.

To use your own words Russia did it first. And you got your asses handed to you by people the US removed from power, what the fuck is up with that.

What does this matter unless you have a plan for world domination and expansionism.

Is Russia planning on annexing my territory?

I already corrected the thing about Germany, but nevertheless, it wasn't major involving party, besides the use of German airfields.

And peace keeping operation is peace keeping operation. I didn't say anything about results. Those operations were/ are called at that name.

Fucking georgians, we should sacage willy

http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/wp-con...ili-hungry.jpg

Well ,ignoring is only thing left once I showed you next :

1. that nukes are important factor to be safe and that you can't give me list of countries with nukes that were tried to be conquered.

2. after you failed to tell me how German was in jeopardy in 1999 so they had to protect Germany and attack country almost 1k km away.

3. once I've gave you official definition of war you insisted it is not good and that everything is said in first sentence ( and definition have few paragraphs)

4. after you failed to show me photos or videos of deaths, extreme violence or destruction in Crimea "war"

5. that Crimean crysis is official definition of events there and not war ,like you are insisting it is.

6. that Germany actually first attacked Poland while you were using fact that Russia attacked them as proof of Russian threat.

7. That Cuban Missle crysis was not military operation even if I showed you that US military put blocade and Russian military was trying to sneak nukes.

8. You failed to answer my question " where I said that Germany don't have right to defent itself"

9. To answer a question " How many NATO bases are worldwide and how many Russian?

10. That Russia didn't oppose attack on Yugoslavia (against UN rules) but I 've gave you their official statement condemning that "illegal action" and called it "open aggression" (read about Slatine airfield landing by Russian paratropers)

And much more that you can find if you read own posts.

Yeah, like bombing was "merciful" and peopole are "collateral damage" ...hypocrisy is terrible thing. It was not peace kepping but establishing ethnic smooth ethnic cleaning of not muslim citizens.

And you are talking about war and you can't handle ethnic cleaning? ( and now I am talking about that one back in 2004, almost 4 years after peace keeping mission was established):

http://www.pecat.co.rs/2010/03/17-ma...ckog-ciscenja/

The point I was making is how many scenarios went on like that everyday. respect and honor must be shown to those who suffered much more than they had coming. I was hoping you could relate how hard it would be to look the child you nurtured in the eyes and tell them we are lambs for slaughter. If I had to say that to the 4 people I would die for I cant say it would be easy. I don't want all that pain to be forgotten. It is our history and we should learn from this insanity. it is as relevant today as it was 65 years ago.

No, it was not the point, but I guess it is too complicated for you to follow.



You are missing it completely, those were his stupid examples for completely another thing. better first finish what you started here: https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1145598&page=9 instead of running away after getting last info that doesn't suit your views.



I wouldn't know but I guess Russia is so huge and they don't need rednecks at all.

It would be hard, but you missed my point too. I would be busy thinking how we all could get alive from that shit, instead of telling some result, that I am busy avoiding.

And if this were somekind of competition, we (undefined) got enough shit during WWII, both of my grandfathers fought, although either died and good that way (one wounded badly). And since I am soldier too (not profession), participating in a war is always a possibility. Even my grandmother participated in military duties, although not at frontline.

war is always worst thing to do.

You are so full of shit your eyes, ears, and hair must be brown.

Do you really believe the rest of the world is not intelligent enough to understand you or is it because what you say is bullshit. Because people do not agree with your position you claim they are stupid or do not understand, we understand and call you on the bullshit.

I used your own words and reasoning to your examples and because I am using them instead of you they are wrong, really?

You can try to say your gov't was run by Georgians or aliens for that matter, it was the govt of your territory at that time, that makes it your govt. You can not have it both ways to suit your needs or point.

Comrade I do not run from anything. I said what I needed to say in that thread and you tried to do the spin thing as usual. Most of us know whatever we say if it is not pro-Russian you and the rest of the PPP (Putin Propaganda Patrol) are going to try and spin it. Your Pal "Colonel Slanders" has me on ignore why don't you do the same if you do not like what I post.

Keep at it though, the more people see what you are and what you stand for the less welcome you and your ideas become.

You can try to justify or excuse things to yourself but I doubt you will convince many others. Your comrades were quick to claim responsibility when they thought it was a military plane and went into cover up and deflect blame mode when they realized it was a civilian plane. I suppose the pro-Russian rebels did not disturb the remains and rob the dead either, I am sure it was the Ukrainian citizens they were trying to liberate. Typical, never accepting responsibility and always deflecting.

Rednecks know what bullshit smells like that is why they avoid Russia, not because it is huge or great or any other glorification you want to try and use for it.

Now stop trying to derail this thread topic with your bullshit. Go tell your stories on a Russian board where they might believe them. I missed nothing, neither did anyone else with an opinion you do not share, you and your friends consistently try to make it any one else's responsibility because you refuse to take any yourselves.

Don't your models have handcuffs, ask them to use them so you can control yourself at the keyboard.

Don't know about the rest of the world but you seems like dumbest person here. Threatening, insulting and not even capable to understand that I am not Russian. If you do not understand that after all that effort you put here , how you can understand something more complicated like why I've used that example? I do not expect in a same way as I don't expect that you will get back on that topic there ,where from you run away,suddenly.

I'd say Germany. Instead of having a war on two fronts I'd team up with Soviet Union, easily finish metropolitan UK, then US, then we would've divide the world.