It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: greencmp
From the link in the OP,
But in financial terms, the Stars and Stripes comes out on top — the peninsula is struggling after the United States, along with the EU and Ukraine, imposed sanctions against Crimea and businesses that work there.
Now, how hard is that to understand?
Take the blinkers off there...
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Unlike WWI and WWII, WWIII will almost certainly feature a conflict where the division of good vs evil will depend solely on propaganda and perception rather than anything remotely tangible. Issues like this: www.nbcnews.com... make that a near certainty.
Celebrations took place in Crimea on Monday to celebrate the one-year anniversary of a disputed referendum to join Russia after Moscow's military entered the Ukrainian peninsula. But the festivities in the peninsula's capital of Simferopol did little to hide the isolation that has resulted from the controversial annexation and international sanctions which followed.
McDonald's was not the only international company to withdraw from Crimea: many others followed, including PayPal, Amazon, and even Russian banks.
Once a thriving resort zone, Crimea now stands separated from the rest of the world: international cell phones do not work, and neither do credit cards.
Visa and MasterCard have both ceased operations in Crimea, essentially crippling the region's financial system: Paying by card is no longer possible, and businesses cannot wire or receive payments.
The sole land link to the Ukrainian mainland was closed off by Kiev, food prices have skyrocketed, tourist flows are down and 3G cellphone service is off. The peninsula is even lacking in fresh water and electricity, more than 80 percent of which came from Ukraine.
the peninsula is struggling after the United States, along with the EU and Ukraine, imposed sanctions against Crimea and businesses that work there.
Interesting that when a state-declared enemy of the US, EU, or their allies besieges an area it is a "HUMANITARIAN CRISIS" and the nation responsible is "VIOLATING INTERNATIONAL LAW", but when the US, EU, or their allies does exactly the same thing it is called "Sanctions" and presented as being an example of trying to get the target nation to change their course towards the light side.
This is exactly why the idea that the west represents some sort of good anymore is so easily rejectable. The US over the past couple of decades has become a Dr, Jeckle and Mr. Hyde bipolar paragon of confusing and conflicting messages. Syria, for instance, is in a heated battle against known terrorist organizations... organizations which framed Assad for the use of chemical weapons against civilians in Ghouta... 1,700 casualties, and the US did everything they could think of to use those deaths as an excuse to SIDE WITH TERRORISTS and force an armed regime change on Syria. Based on that level of reaction, you'd think the USA would have leapt into action over a million genocide deaths in Rwanda and the 5 million deaths in the Congo civil wars! *crickets chirping* Huh? What? Wait, wait, wait... they did nothing? Really? Not a damn thing? Um, well, this is awkward. Bashir Assad is accused of causing the deaths of 1,700 and America is ready to rush in all guns blazing without any evidence other than an accusation, buuuuut 3,500 times that many civilians are laying dead in central Africa and the same officials sit around with their thumbs up their ass? o_O
So back to Crimea. We have the majority of the Crimean population wanting to remain under Russia's care, we have a Russian nation trying desperately to get aid, food, and infrastructure to these suffering people, and we have an American government supporting a derelict Ukrainian government in blocking that aid and threatening military action against the country trying to get the aid to the people who need it (along with a US government spearheading other international sanctions which are causing the pain of those people...)
Who says bad guys always wear black?
It is conceptually impossible to be a bully that constantly throws the first punch in every fight and line up on the side of justice and propriety.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: crazyewok
The only major flaw in that plan depends entirely on the "Where?" question in regards to WWIII's theater. It's extremely easy (and arguably prudent) to remain entirely out of the fight if the war is raging on a different continent or even a different country. If you were a European in WWII, for example, it was fight or die. As integrated as Globalism has become, it's tough to imagine the next big war won't be very close to a global war... at the very least a Northern Hemisphere war.
originally posted by: crazyewok
But no one except the U.S. has the Capability to invade the UK.
The same with the USA, no one is going to be landing troops on the USA main land.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
originally posted by: crazyewok
But no one except the U.S. has the Capability to invade the UK.
The same with the USA, no one is going to be landing troops on the USA main land.
Some might argue both countries are already being invaded with the direct intention of activating sleeper cells from within each country when called upon. I'm not really prepared to refute that argument with anything other than hopefulness and crossed fingers.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Unlike WWI and WWII, WWIII will almost certainly feature a conflict where the division of good vs evil will depend solely on propaganda and perception rather than anything remotely tangible.
Who says bad guys always wear black?