New cold war?

  • Guest, it's time once again for the hotly contested and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and fill out your bracket!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Once again, only you can decide!
Status
Not open for further replies.

yerm

Golden Baronet of the Realm
5,956
15,350
We've seen repeated examples in the past of big hacks conducted by swedes. I've not seen anything to suggest state sponsorship of it. The only hacking I expect from Sweden's government is hacking off the heads of those who criticism Islam; cyber attacks are assumed individuals. Likewise, when someone in the US hacks, is it state sponsored? Is a group like 4chan tied to the US government when they troll down sites? Is Tyen botting on behalf of the NSA?

It's fair to say this was a Russian group - evidence supports this. It's leaps and bounds of logic stretching to say it was state sponsored Putin involvement government hacking. I think it could be, and wouldn't be surprised if it is, but we DO NOT KNOW THAT yet and to just dump the blame on the easiest culprit isn't good, and what's worse, it's very obviously being done to downplay the actual content of what was hacked.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Titan_Atlas

Deus Vult
<Banned>
7,883
19,909
Some men just want to watch as it all burns. I didn't used to be one of these men. I am one now.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Strifen

Molten Core Raider
309
1,588
There always has to be a "boogey-man" out there to keep people controlled and to ensure the defense contractor dollars are flowing.

First it was the soviets, then it was the south American drug cartels, then it was Islamic terrorists. Now it looks like ISIS is being defeated and they aren't really going to be a huge threat so we've come full circle. Back to the Russians baby.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Regime

LOADING, PLEASE WAIT...
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
16,349
37,560
I mean if someone pushed a button to blast the whole damn planet with no plans afterwards set up do you think it possible they stick around or are they running to some shelter like fuck this place?
By setup I mean having military/supplies/vehicles in place for the domination afterwards of what is left.




enclave-overload-o.gif
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,854
6,812
USSR bankrupted themselves and fell apart trying to keep up with America's Military Complex. Reagan announcing the Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars) was basically the straw that broke their back. There was no way they could keep up with that kind of cost. Reagan knew that, so SDI might have been a bluff. But it didn't matter, it worked and the USSR collapsed.

Russia now is even less able to keep up. There is no way they can spend the kind of money to have a real cold war with us. That's just a fantasy. But they can bluff and bluster the Chicken Little's here (usually liberals) that are afraid of their own shadows. Russia is pretty good at mind games.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
74,089
145,442
USSR bankrupted themselves and fell apart trying to keep up with America's Military Complex. Reagan announcing the Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars) was basically the straw that broke their back. There was no way they could keep up with that kind of cost. Reagan knew that, so SDI might have been a bluff. But it didn't matter, it worked and the USSR collapsed.

people still believe this shit? jesus.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

bralkan

The old ways are still best
332
384
Gorbachev was far more critical to the end of the USSR.

But ok.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
74,089
145,442
Gorbachev was far more critical to the end of the USSR.

But ok.

USSR was already teetering in the 1970s - they couldnt feed their population through domestic agriculture and had to import grain from US to plug holes. it was hugely embarrassing for them. the death of Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko in 3 years shook up the politburo in early 80s and by that time, the younger generation like gorbachev were already contemplating total reform, unhappy with afghanistan initiated by their predecessors and seeing economic situation getting worse.

the reagan/sdi outspending narrative is a laughably contrived way for the GOP to attempt to credit Reagan for the collapse of USSR but he had nothing to do with it, he just happened to be in office when gorbachev decided to start implementing his reforms.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,854
6,812
The Soviets could have limped along for another 40 or 50 years. Reagan just shortened the inevitable endgame. If Carter had won, we would still be dealing with a very sick and pathetic USSR.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
74,089
145,442
The Soviets could have limped along for another 40 or 50 years. Reagan just shortened the inevitable endgame. If Carter had won, we would still be dealing with a very sick and pathetic USSR.

The soviet military spending did not change in the 80s at all until the very end in 1989.


your reagan narrative is not a supported by a single fact. it is completely made up in order to polish reagan's legacy because otherwise there isnt much of a legacy
 
  • 1Solidarity
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,854
6,812
So in your mind Carter and Reagan are exactly the same? Ok.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
74,089
145,442
So in your mind Carter and Reagan are exactly the same? Ok.

what does have to do with anything? the fact is that regardless of how different carters and reagans policies were they did not affect soviet military spending until the wall came down already. its pure reagan fan-fic
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,854
6,812
Reagan shortened the endgame (with a willing partner in Gorby). The fact that you think he was irrelevant to the process is mind numbingly obtuse and ignores basic facts. You are just pissed that somebody could push so easily and your favorite team fell like a stack of cards in the wind. Sorry buddy, life isn't fair.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
74,089
145,442
Reagan shortened the endgame. The fact that you think he was irrelevant to the process is mind numbingly obtuse and ignores basic facts. You are just pissed that somebody could push so easily and your favorite team fell like a stack of cards in the wind. Sorry buddy, life isn't fair.

the basic fact is that soviet military spending did not change at all from the time reagan came to office and by the time he was rolled out of it in 1989. im sorry that math is hard for you

Reagan and the Russians - 94.02

By the time Gorbachev became General Secretary, in March of 1985, he was deeply committed to domestic reform and fundamental changes in Soviet foreign policy. "I, like many others," he observed recently, "knew that the USSR needed radical change. If I had not understood this, I would never have accepted the position of General Secretary." Within a month of assuming office he attempted to signal his interest in arms control to the United States by announcing a unilateral freeze on the deployment of Soviet intermediate-range missiles in Europe. The deployment of the SS-20, Yakovlev explains, was a "stupid and strange policy" that defied logical explanation. Yakovlev considered the deployment illogical and self-defeating before President Reagan announced SDI and the buildup of American military forces. He and Gorbachev were "united" on this issue.

Gorbachev felt free to make a series of proposals for deep cuts in his country's nuclear arsenal because he was confident that the United States would not attack the Soviet Union. In conversation with his military advisers he rejected any plans that were premised on war with the West. Since he saw no threat of attack by the United States, Gorbachev was not intimidated by the military programs of the Reagan Administration. "These were unnecessary and wasteful expenditures that we were not going to match," he told us. If both superpowers were to avoid the growing risk of accidental war, they had to make deep cuts in their strategic forces. "This was an imperative of the nuclear age."
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,854
6,812
Lol, really? I never once said it did. It was the effect of that spending that caused the problem, it was unsustainable. Not any change in it. Get a grip.

You are arguing about the shiny distraction. Ick.

The Soviets couldn't grow their Military spending any more and then SDI forced the issue by upping the stakes in a game they had already lost. Of course spending didn't change. It couldn't by that time.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Borzak

Bronze Baron of the Realm
24,422
31,637
The argument wasn't that the Russians changed or didn't change their spending. It was that they couldn't keep up with the US. Pretty big jump there in the 80's.

csbachartmon.png
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
74,089
145,442
The argument wasn't that the Russians changed or didn't change their spending. It was that they couldn't keep up with the US. Pretty big jump there in the 80's.

View attachment 96776

if the Soviets didnt change their spending then clearly they didnt care about keeping up with US which effectively disproves that entire line of argument, gorbachev himself confirms that as a primary source.

anyone whos ever picked up a book knows that gorbachev's reforms spiraled out of control and thats what ended the USSR. glasnost and perestroika were supposed to reinvent the USSR, but instead they ended it
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Borzak

Bronze Baron of the Realm
24,422
31,637
Yeah...cause they were broke. Get back to planet earth.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,854
6,812
if the Soviets didnt change their spending then clearly they didnt care about keeping up with US which effectively disproves that entire line of argument, gorbachev himself confirms that as a primary source.

anyone whos ever picked up a book knows that gorbachev's reforms spiraled out of control and thats what ended the USSR. glasnost and perestroika were supposed to reinvent the USSR, but instead they ended it

Pathetic. As was stated before, they couldn't change their spending because it was already maxed. Your ability to grasp basic logic is zero.

It's no wonder you are always at a loss.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.