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.

 

Russia considers nuclear missiles for Syria, Mediterranean, Baltic

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Tentickles
 


as a Japanese general said during WWII

"there would be a gun behind every blade of graass"




posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by SRTkid86
 



Russia, China and Iran have every right to defend themselves from terrorist regimes of the world.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Those who advocate a war with Russia are you recommending suicide ? Once the nukes are let loose no one is a winner . really the whole world losses regardless of who is the last nation standing .

Even if it never comes to the nukes Russia wont be a total push over it is one of the few countries who has trained and can mobilize all of its military in 2-5 hrs .

The gunboat diplomacy is not the answer . Diplomacy where give and take occurs. Compromise on both sides .

Every one who is advocating a war with Russia do you already have a bomb shelter built and stocked for several years with plenty of items for decontamination ?

If not better do so before advocating a war with Russia !



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by SRTkid86
reply to post by Tentickles
 


as a Japanese general said during WWII

"there would be a gun behind every blade of graass"


yes thats correct - as he was talking about invading japan and in fact there was which is why the USA nuked them



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by infinite


There is still only one country in the world - U.S. - that has the ability to project its power anywhere in the globe.

[edit on 8/18/2008 by centurion1211]


I doubt that it will even be able to project its power against Iran alone,But with russians and other ME countries involved will basically mean R.I.P US.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Anyone else a wee bit scared this might bring about the end?

Nukes????

Perfect!



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:45 PM
link   
I hope the nukes dont fly . but this is the worse the US / Russian relations have been since the cuban missile crisis . Then both Kennedy and Cruecheve (certain i miss spelled it ) had there footballs ready to push the button . I think the dooms day clock is 11:55 or later .

We need real Diplomacy not roosters puffing up and threatening every one .



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin

Originally posted by SRTkid86
reply to post by Tentickles
 


as a Japanese general said during WWII

"there would be a gun behind every blade of graass"


yes thats correct - as he was talking about invading japan and in fact there was which is why the USA nuked them


Harlequin, before you post in threads, you might want to do a little bit of homework. He was *not* talking about mainland Japan. Here is the actual quote


"You cannot invade the mainland United States.
There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." - - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto


Not as true today as it was back then, but there are still 80 or 90 million gun owners in the US. Alot of those are hunters that have long-range rifles, camouflage, and the skill to make long shots. Guess what else that sounds like?

Snipers.

Ground troops would not last long in the continental United States.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   
this is where democracy fails and the need for a one world government is at its highest, or to go to an extreme point of view this could be the seeds of the 2012 prophecy lol

[edit on 18-8-2008 by MKULKTRA121]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I was wondering.

Given that the key players here are effectively free to do whatever they want, like kings and queens, and granted that they have been doing whatever they want for at least decades, how do we know that this isn't some farcical charade, intended to frighten the rest of the world into coming to some kind of 'alignment?'

We know there are the capitalists (all of them), and the people (all of us). In what way would a world war involving toxic nuclear weapons serve them? You know that regardless of the outcome they, and their supporters or servants, will be spared any real suffering. Only the common people and the fighting forces will face any real danger.

So what is this all about really? To say oil, or money, is a short-cut answer, only focusing on the materialistic end of the equation. Let's face it, this is a game to them. And we are just game pieces, easily replaced, of relatively no value taken individually.

There is no right or wrong, moral or otherwise. This is just a contest of the leadership class, and whatever they are willing to sacrifice to get their way. What we as a population want is of no consequence, self-determinism is something they find 'quaint' and 'old-fashioned'. They rule, we're fools.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mindsmog

Originally posted by Bama camper
Russia and Iran may be planning to combine forces,maby US should take out both asap!


that quote made my day, sorry to inform you mate but the USA is not capable of taking out russia and Iran, its not as simple as that. dont underestimate the russian war machine and on that note dont underestimate Iran either , they are no pushovers, for once I would be on russias side sick of the western hypocritical culture of do gooders and pompous idiots.



Can I ask what country you are from that we "do gooders and pompous idiots" Americans are protecting from the rest of your neighbors?

You are naive.

Edit:

I realize "America" sometimes screws the pooch, but at least we do something.. the rest of the world seems to just let the chips fall where they may. It it wasn't for America (and it's sometimes reluctant allies) the world would have probably have had a few more Hitlers by now.

You'd probably be a proverbial "Nazi" if not for the US. (directly or indirectly)



[edit on 18-8-2008 by gormly]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:09 PM
link   
People tell me if somebody would just nuke Israel and USA out of this planet we would have peace for the next 1000 years. :/



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Vehemens
 


Can you really bring yourself to believe that killing the population of the nations in question would solve your problems?

I submit that makes you, and those who think like you, the functional part of the real problem.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lostinthedarkness

We need real Diplomacy not roosters puffing up and threatening every one .



Amen Brother, amen!

There seems to be an insanity gene that pops up every couple of generations. It is most certainly active right now. People suffering from it are everywhere and don't even know they are ill. Perhaps it is one natures methods of population control?

Why would anyone not want peace? Anyone who does not want peace is insane.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by netwarrior

Ground troops would not last long in the continental United States.


As much as I hate violence, that is true. I was raised on farms and ranches and have been a crack shot with a rifle since the age of nine. With a varmint rifle with a good scope, a 300 yard shot is not a big deal. That would be a hard thing to defend against. One man with a few boxes of shells could hold off a platoon from a good vantage point. Here where I now live, I'd imagine one in three men are competent with a hunting rifle. The same is true in other area's of the country. Imagine a hundred thousand of us, pockets full of ammo, in the woods and trying to defend against us. Nationwide there would be millions.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by netwarrior

Ground troops would not last long in the continental United States.


As much as I hate violence, that is true. I was raised on farms and ranches and have been a crack shot with a rifle since the age of nine. With a varmint rifle with a good scope, a 300 yard shot is not a big deal. That would be a hard thing to defend against. One man with a few boxes of shells could hold off a platoon from a good vantage point. Here where I now live, I'd imagine one in three men are competent with a hunting rifle. The same is true in other area's of the country. Imagine a hundred thousand of us, pockets full of ammo, in the woods and trying to defend against us. Nationwide there would be millions. [/quote

I really hope that post was a joke, because otherwise you've just made my day in the form of a laugh.

you really think a man with a few boxes of shells could hold off a platoon? oh my god..., the position where the man was held up would be bombed from the air.

a platoon is around 40-50 highly trained men, compared to a farmer with litte to zero training? your living a dream dude.

sure there are around 300 million people living in the United States right now..but 12% of that number are aged over 65, 27% are aged below 19 years of age,so that leaves around 89 million people between the ages of 20 and 64..how many of those do you really expect would put up a fight? about 30/40%? the rest would be hiding away in bomb shelders, or kissing the Russian boots.

[edit on 18-8-2008 by twisted_fate]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


wow, no it was the same Japanese general who advised againt attacking us at pearl harbor saying that it would "wake a sleeping giant."


please try to know what you are talking about before you put a rediculous spin on it.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by twisted_fate
 


so, if you are under 19 years old you won't be able to fight to defend your homeland? i think that is proven wrong on a daily basis when children take up arms to fight all around the world.

not only that, but you are severly mistaken to think that an invading force would somehow be able to bomb us... you do understand that the mainland US is pretty heavily covered by missles defense systems right? you do know what HAARP is right? (hint it's definately not a telescope)

i find it particularly funny that you think that the most armed country in the world would just fold up and take it... because that is what we have done in the past and all....



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


im not going to dignify your posts with anything more than to tell you that, you are severly dillusional and you REALLY need to seek medical help.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by infinite
I value my life. And, I do not think Americans wish to see a Russian invasion either.




The only way the russians could invade the U.S. would be by kayaks across the Bering Straights. There is still only one country in the world - U.S. - that has the ability to project its power anywhere in the globe.

Apparently, the rest of the world just needs to give russia a little pat on the . and tell them that they still matter, so they will go back to playing nice.



[edit on 8/18/2008 by centurion1211]


Perfect!Especially this part-
Apparently, the rest of the world just needs to give russia a little pat on the . and tell them that they still matter, so they will go back to playing nice.
LOL!




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join