Vladimir Putin claimed that it was the USA's almost "uncontained" use of force in the world that was encouraging countries to pursue nuclear weapons. How does he know what their reasons are?
Maybe question number twelve on the enclosed customer service comment card is "Why did you purchase your Genuine Russian Nuclear Device™?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Tam, he's getting his data from the same place the 'Global Warming Inquisition' are getting theirs.
If you know anyone with a horse, drop by with a sack and a shovel. There will probably be a steaming pile of 'data' around somewhere...
"Customer service comment card..." I LOVE it.
I wonder who's filling out the warranty cards on those SA-7s, the Iranians or their agents in Iraq who are shooting down US choppers?
You get it, Russia is still our enemy, whether he's Pootie-Poot or not.
actually, he's getting it from living outside the USA and talking to a bunch of other people who do likewise.
seriously, it's not that damn hard to connect the dots. y'all invade any country you like, pretty much (so long as, interestingly enough, it does not possess nukes of its own), blatantly strong-arm even more countries than you outright invade (opinions are divided on whether or not you realize that it actually is blatant... but it is, hint hint), and generally behave like the modern-day diplomatic equivalent of the barbian hordes. even your allies you don't tend to treat very well, unless you're also deeply in debt to them, c.f. Japan. when you're not, your notion of "allies" seem to go down the lines of "you do what we tell you, and we ignore your interests", c.f. the UK.
but you're leaving North Korea alone. even though it's probably holding all three top spots on the list of countries which on no occasion ought to be left unmeddled with, at this point. and far as anybody can tell, it is only because kim jong crazyface has at least a couple of nukes. us furriners don't know what two and two may add up to in Washington, D.C., but in the rest of the world that makes four.
Nice troll, Anonymous.
But you talk like an American. An idiot, but an American nonetheless.
Putin WAS the head of the KGB once, wasn't he?
His data came from the same source.
Best not to cross him unless you have a nuke aimed at his Soviet Fannie. He's only reporting on what He would do if he were in Our position. Soviet meddling got the Afganistan mess started to begin with, anyway.
Well, at least that commie Komrad's turning a profit.
:^(
Anon,
Wouldn't be "meddling" if the kids would just learn to play nicely in the sandlot.
I'm sure you'll chalk up my attitude at being another "American asshole" or something like that.
Whatever.
Go away.
We're armed here.
Well, Anonymous is quite accurately describing what many people outside the US are thinking. I guess the majority here in Germany has an opinion similar to his. It's widespread even among the reservists I know (and usually they tend to be more on the conservative side, otherwise they wouldn'tve served).
But I ask myself, why is that their opinion?
Maybe because they are just jealous that _their_ country has no ability whatsoever to project any substantial power beyond they own border?
Had Al-Quaeda flown attacked key targets in Germany, France and the UK, (what they would have done, if they had read Sun-Tzu) what would WE have been able to do? Not much. All European aircraft carriers together have about as many planes as a single Nimitz-class. Except for British SSNs I'm not aware of any vessels carrying Tomahawks. Strategic airlift capacity is almost non-existant. There aren't even enough mobile forces to invade a country like Afghanistan. ...
Or is it because we Europeans lost our balls long ago?
Nuke Tehran.
The russians can occupy Iran to "protect" it afterwards, if they are insane enough to want to send live troops into that shia hellhole.
Ya know, if we had used some "uncontained" force, this war would have been over on Sept. 12th, 2001.
Post a Comment