8 ms·

Is there seriously some new cold war going on? I read in other media how some new American weapons can fight certain Russian tanks etc, and now I read about Pu

by s3nnyy 9y ago

Is there seriously some new cold war going on? I read in other media how some new American weapons can fight certain Russian tanks etc, and now I read about Putin bragging about his new weapons. My prediction for the post-Sovjet area was that the US and Russia would just leave each other in peace.

aluhut 9y ago
Remember Bushs Missile Defense Shield in East Europe? Either the cold war never ended or it's not the cold war anymore. I'd say it's the second. The superpower game never ended but even with the sanctions, trade, travel and politics are not that locked. On the other hand there are those 2.0 war technologies like drones, trolls, cyber warfare...
- bitL 9y ago
  I think he wanted to use time when Russia was weak and disorganized to contain it. I was thinking that better would have been incorporating Russia to EU back then, but that's not something strong EU countries wanted (being outnumbered by Russians in EU governance) - historically Russia was always trying to become a part of Europe and Europe was always looking at those attempts nervously. I guess now that game is over, Russia seems to have decided it is no longer meaningful to aspire becoming a part of Europe and they will rather go with China, even if they really don't like each other that much. I don't think this is going to end well and we will see some major conflicts.
  - aluhut 9y ago
    I never thought anyone wanted to have Russia seriously in the EU. I don't think the EU (or anyone) would be able to handle Russia. NATO however was another topic.
sexydefinesher 9y ago
Russias ruling elite need external threats to keep their reign secure, otherwise russians would start looking inwards rather than outwards.
- s3nnyy 9y ago
  I understand the negative media coverage in Russia about threats from outside (US, Europe) but not the Russia coverage in the American media. I think there was less Russia coverage about in American news some years ago but it seems to increase.
- primitur 9y ago
  The same is true of Americas' ruling elite, yo. Stop blaming Russia - start blaming Lockheed Martin ($29.4 billion), Boeing ($14.6 billion), Raytheon ($12.3 billion), General Dynamics ($11.8 billion), Northrup Grumman ($9.5 billion), and so on .. ($number in brackets represents value of war-related contracts awarded and currently under obligation...) These companies need the Russian threat to justify their existence.
  - aerostable_slug 9y ago
    >These companies need the Russian threat to justify their existence. Not really. China works just as well. Fun fact: the US Navy response to Russia's unilateral abrogation of the INF treaty (IMHO one of the greatest achievements in modern diplomacy & arms control) is to build INF-range missiles - to counter the Chinese. There's a reason there's an SS-20 and Pershing II next to each other at the NASM. INF was a really big deal. It should be worrying to more people that it is being abandoned with such haste.
  - ende 9y ago
    The military-industrial complex will certainly leverage any international conflict it can in order to expand its existence - and I wouldn’t put it past nefarious activities - but some underlying geopolitical conditions must exist to exasperate conflict and in the case of Russia that its natural aggressive and expansionary nature towards its neighbors. There countries naturally turn to defensive collectives such as NATO to protect their sovereignty from Russian aggression.
    - primitur 9y ago
      Honestly, I find the American propensity to blame Russia for its actions in Crimea to be of the most blatant hypocrisy one can imagine. Russia has better arguments for defending its naval bases in Crimea from Ukraine hostility, than America has for .. Iraq .. Afghanistan .. Libya .. and so on. Do Americans just not see their own hypocrisy on this issue? Russia didn't invade and destroy entire nation(s) (PLURAL) in order to exercise global military power - it invaded Crimea to secure its own resources in the region. Ukraine did not fall, it has not been utterly destroyed, its infrastructure not-related to offensive actions against the Russian naval bases in Crimea is still intact. But we cannot say that about America's actions in the forementioned countries, nor can we say that Russian interference in the American 'election' is anywhere near the same order of magnitude as American interference in .. 20+ different democracies around the world. I shan't make a list - this is an exercise for the average American reader to demonstrate for themselves that there is no hypocrisy here. And .. NATO. The military organization currently doing its best to ensure Russia is encircled by heavy military assets. Tell me again: when was the last time Russia established full operational, offensive bases within 30 km's of the borders of the USA with any of its clients and their military? Please, do not play this game. It makes no sense and it just makes you sound utterly ill-informed. Russia is in no way on par with the USA when it comes to military aggression. Not even close.
primitur 9y ago
I've always considered the idea that the Cold War was "over" to be nothing but propaganda designed to prevent people from wondering why their nation is spending $Trillion on their military. Of course the Cold War is still happening: America has been exporting war wholesale for decades. Just because Russia hasn't been doing it at the same scale as well, doesn't mean squat. The US and Russia have had plenty of opportunities to leave each other in peace over the last 30 years. The trouble is, they're not the only parties to this farce. Incredibly powerful, massively entrenched super-power-like military industrial multinational corporations are involved as well, and there is no way in HELL they are going to let their number one revenue source dry up just because we all want peace. Its quite simple: stop assuming that its sovereign nation states doing all the fire-lighting. We are way, way beyond that point now. If you want to get a grip on war economy you have to stop allowing your politicians to push you - the people - into more and more heinous debt, for more and more heinous reasons (imperialist warfare against innocents), without repercussion. This is going to be a tough sell. Pretty much everyone using computers to establish themselves in the technology markets today is going to have to deal with a multinational, war-mongering, mega-corporate military-industrial giant. We're well and truly being dominated by those who are quite happy having us all in the abyss, trembling in fear at what would happen if we stopped buying from General Electric, Samsung and co.
- s3nnyy 9y ago
  Don't you think rather than an invisible, evil hand, it's all just a big ouhpsi (see Hanlon's razor: "Never assume/attribute the intention to do evil that which is adequately explained by stupidity.") or just deterrence theory-based? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_theory)
  - primitur 9y ago
    No, I truly think we are beyond that at this point: it is pure, profit-driven, hatred-based evil. In fact I am positive that the culture of war-mongering is SO entrenched that it has reached a pitch akin to religious fervor among America's (and Russias) elite, who utterly worship death, its instruments, and its application in driving us all into fear. The reason I think that is because there is so much GOOD technology out there that would solve our crises of cultures in a heartbeat; we are being prevented from applying this, with every $billion-dollar bomber we build in the heartland, instead of schools, hospitals, universities, infrastructure. EDIT: btw, I don't think its a "big invisible hand", but that's because I pay attention. I think its more of a "the people are cowards and cannot face up to the facts of their own complicity in the death cult".
mtgx 9y ago
> My prediction for the post-Sovjet area was that the US and Russia would just leave each other in peace. But they didn't. Or at least the U.S. didn't. Russia has warned for years that the US shouldn't be installing rocket shields so close to its borders. So the US has continued to antagonize Russia pretty much since the cold war was "over". Now, Russia has started to interfere in US politics, possibly as a consequence of that, and it has also started showing its "might" in Europe. This won't end well, if the two countries continue to antagonize each other.
Animats 9y ago
Is there seriously some new cold war going on? Yes. Russia wants their empire back. They've already taken back a piece of Georgia, Crimea, and a piece of Ukraine.
- rdiddly 9y ago
  What a tidy explanation. It might surprise you to learn the US destabilized Ukraine in the first place, when the Ukrainian president put the brakes on their joining NATO and it looked as though they might instead join CSTO, the Russian version. This is all documented. Also Crimea IS the piece of Ukraine.
  - fuckyouzilla 9y ago
    > Also Crimea IS the piece of Ukraine. Was.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - woodandsteel 9y ago
    Putin has been perfectly clear about this, at least when he is talking to his own public. He says the collapse of the USSR and the Soviet block was one of the great tragedies of the 20th century, and he says that Russia will be under grave threat of being invaded and occupied by the US until it gets back its old territory. He also says that Russia has a right to intervene in any country that has a substantial number of citizens of Russian decent that he believes are being ill-treated.
  - Animats 9y ago
    Crimea was the first piece. Much more than that now. See [1]. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_war_in_Donbass.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_war_in_Do...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Is there seriously some new cold war going on? Yes, since the late 90s. Hillary Clinton's whole “reset button” thing in 2009 was about reversing the escalation in that cold war associated with the Russian invasion of Georgia. > My prediction for the post-Sovjet area was that the US and Russia would just leave each other in peace. That prediction was proven wrong less than a decade into the post-Soviet era.
- dqpb 9y ago
  This is where everything went wrong - they incorrectly labeled the button. The English text said "reset" but the Russian text said "overload" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset
torstenvl 9y ago
So long as Russia has territory it doesn't control inside what it views to be its natural geological boundaries, there will always be Russian aggression. Russia very much wants to "never get involved in a land war in Asia." To that end, it wants a solid mountain boundary from the Carpathians to the Tien Shan, and the Gobi desert from there to the Pacific. Until then, you can expect continued encroachments on Ukraine, the Caucuses, and steppe Central Asia, and continued buildup of its military capabilities. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5497331ae4b0148a6141bd47/t/58b90e18a5790aeaef8f8c91/1488522788730/ https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5497331ae4b0148a6141b...
- rocqua 9y ago
  How does Ukraine ensure there will not be a war in asia? Ukraine is firmly the border between Russia and Europe. Due to the black sea, Ukraine means nothing for the border between Asia and Russia. Similarly the Russian border already runs through the Caucuses. That border is already secured by that mountain range. Meanwhile, to get decent natural borders around Kazakhstan you need to either see that expanse as a natural border, or take over the entirety of Khazakstan. Further east than that, and Russia's borders again seem to follow natural obstacles.
  - woodandsteel 9y ago
    Part of the problem is that Russia's total territory is way too large for its population and economic strength to adequately defend militarily. That didn't matter so much during the two centuries when China was flat on its back, but now it is back to its normal superpower status.
- woodandsteel 9y ago
  >So long as Russia has territory it doesn't control inside what it views to be its natural geological boundaries, there will always be Russian aggression. Quite true. The problem is that in order to gain the territory, it takes aggressive actions that provoke the very hostility it fears. Russia's basic problem is it thinks we are still in the pre-nuclear era where great powers regularly invaded each other, and the pre-industrial era where that was the main road to economic wealth.
jwtadvice 9y ago
The post-Soviet era is and was not the end of history. Geopolitical competition exists as a human condition. Much of the "communist versus capitalist" competition that "justified" the Cold War, was actually just a result of two powers that were going to compete anyway pushing competing views of global economic-political organization. The competition was not itself about economic philosophies. Rather competition of economic philosophies was the result of conflict. The United States today is a waning power relative to the rest of the world. However, it's still the de facto superpower. The American strategy is to keep its foot on Russia's neck and while containing the possible rise of China's power (seeking to keep it to a regional, rather than global setting). Yes, the Cold War is still going. There's less of a chance of an immediate nuclear exchange, but the US and Russia continue proxy warfare (e.g. Syria, Ukraine, Iran) and propaganda warfare (e.g. US and Russia's interference in one another's elections)
cynusx 9y ago
There are elections on March 18 in russia, this is just Putin rallying his base.

by s3nnyy 9y ago

aluhut 9y ago

Remember Bushs Missile Defense Shield in East Europe? Either the cold war never ended or it's not the cold war anymore. I'd say it's the second. The superpower game never ended but even with the sanctions, trade, travel and politics are not that locked. On the other hand there are those 2.0 war technologies like drones, trolls, cyber warfare...

bitL 9y ago
I think he wanted to use time when Russia was weak and disorganized to contain it. I was thinking that better would have been incorporating Russia to EU back then, but that's not something strong EU countries wanted (being outnumbered by Russians in EU governance) - historically Russia was always trying to become a part of Europe and Europe was always looking at those attempts nervously. I guess now that game is over, Russia seems to have decided it is no longer meaningful to aspire becoming a part of Europe and they will rather go with China, even if they really don't like each other that much. I don't think this is going to end well and we will see some major conflicts.
- aluhut 9y ago
  I never thought anyone wanted to have Russia seriously in the EU. I don't think the EU (or anyone) would be able to handle Russia. NATO however was another topic.

sexydefinesher 9y ago

Russias ruling elite need external threats to keep their reign secure, otherwise russians would start looking inwards rather than outwards.

s3nnyy 9y ago
I understand the negative media coverage in Russia about threats from outside (US, Europe) but not the Russia coverage in the American media. I think there was less Russia coverage about in American news some years ago but it seems to increase.
primitur 9y ago
The same is true of Americas' ruling elite, yo. Stop blaming Russia - start blaming Lockheed Martin ($29.4 billion), Boeing ($14.6 billion), Raytheon ($12.3 billion), General Dynamics ($11.8 billion), Northrup Grumman ($9.5 billion), and so on .. ($number in brackets represents value of war-related contracts awarded and currently under obligation...) These companies need the Russian threat to justify their existence.
- aerostable_slug 9y ago
  >These companies need the Russian threat to justify their existence. Not really. China works just as well. Fun fact: the US Navy response to Russia's unilateral abrogation of the INF treaty (IMHO one of the greatest achievements in modern diplomacy & arms control) is to build INF-range missiles - to counter the Chinese. There's a reason there's an SS-20 and Pershing II next to each other at the NASM. INF was a really big deal. It should be worrying to more people that it is being abandoned with such haste.
- ende 9y ago
  The military-industrial complex will certainly leverage any international conflict it can in order to expand its existence - and I wouldn’t put it past nefarious activities - but some underlying geopolitical conditions must exist to exasperate conflict and in the case of Russia that its natural aggressive and expansionary nature towards its neighbors. There countries naturally turn to defensive collectives such as NATO to protect their sovereignty from Russian aggression.
  - primitur 9y ago
    Honestly, I find the American propensity to blame Russia for its actions in Crimea to be of the most blatant hypocrisy one can imagine. Russia has better arguments for defending its naval bases in Crimea from Ukraine hostility, than America has for .. Iraq .. Afghanistan .. Libya .. and so on. Do Americans just not see their own hypocrisy on this issue? Russia didn't invade and destroy entire nation(s) (PLURAL) in order to exercise global military power - it invaded Crimea to secure its own resources in the region. Ukraine did not fall, it has not been utterly destroyed, its infrastructure not-related to offensive actions against the Russian naval bases in Crimea is still intact. But we cannot say that about America's actions in the forementioned countries, nor can we say that Russian interference in the American 'election' is anywhere near the same order of magnitude as American interference in .. 20+ different democracies around the world. I shan't make a list - this is an exercise for the average American reader to demonstrate for themselves that there is no hypocrisy here. And .. NATO. The military organization currently doing its best to ensure Russia is encircled by heavy military assets. Tell me again: when was the last time Russia established full operational, offensive bases within 30 km's of the borders of the USA with any of its clients and their military? Please, do not play this game. It makes no sense and it just makes you sound utterly ill-informed. Russia is in no way on par with the USA when it comes to military aggression. Not even close.

primitur 9y ago

I've always considered the idea that the Cold War was "over" to be nothing but propaganda designed to prevent people from wondering why their nation is spending $Trillion on their military. Of course the Cold War is still happening: America has been exporting war wholesale for decades. Just because Russia hasn't been doing it at the same scale as well, doesn't mean squat. The US and Russia have had plenty of opportunities to leave each other in peace over the last 30 years. The trouble is, they're not the only parties to this farce. Incredibly powerful, massively entrenched super-power-like military industrial multinational corporations are involved as well, and there is no way in HELL they are going to let their number one revenue source dry up just because we all want peace. Its quite simple: stop assuming that its sovereign nation states doing all the fire-lighting. We are way, way beyond that point now. If you want to get a grip on war economy you have to stop allowing your politicians to push you - the people - into more and more heinous debt, for more and more heinous reasons (imperialist warfare against innocents), without repercussion. This is going to be a tough sell. Pretty much everyone using computers to establish themselves in the technology markets today is going to have to deal with a multinational, war-mongering, mega-corporate military-industrial giant. We're well and truly being dominated by those who are quite happy having us all in the abyss, trembling in fear at what would happen if we stopped buying from General Electric, Samsung and co.

s3nnyy 9y ago
Don't you think rather than an invisible, evil hand, it's all just a big ouhpsi (see Hanlon's razor: "Never assume/attribute the intention to do evil that which is adequately explained by stupidity.") or just deterrence theory-based? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_theory)
- primitur 9y ago
  No, I truly think we are beyond that at this point: it is pure, profit-driven, hatred-based evil. In fact I am positive that the culture of war-mongering is SO entrenched that it has reached a pitch akin to religious fervor among America's (and Russias) elite, who utterly worship death, its instruments, and its application in driving us all into fear. The reason I think that is because there is so much GOOD technology out there that would solve our crises of cultures in a heartbeat; we are being prevented from applying this, with every $billion-dollar bomber we build in the heartland, instead of schools, hospitals, universities, infrastructure. EDIT: btw, I don't think its a "big invisible hand", but that's because I pay attention. I think its more of a "the people are cowards and cannot face up to the facts of their own complicity in the death cult".

mtgx 9y ago

> My prediction for the post-Sovjet area was that the US and Russia would just leave each other in peace. But they didn't. Or at least the U.S. didn't. Russia has warned for years that the US shouldn't be installing rocket shields so close to its borders. So the US has continued to antagonize Russia pretty much since the cold war was "over". Now, Russia has started to interfere in US politics, possibly as a consequence of that, and it has also started showing its "might" in Europe. This won't end well, if the two countries continue to antagonize each other.

Animats 9y ago

Is there seriously some new cold war going on? Yes. Russia wants their empire back. They've already taken back a piece of Georgia, Crimea, and a piece of Ukraine.

rdiddly 9y ago
What a tidy explanation. It might surprise you to learn the US destabilized Ukraine in the first place, when the Ukrainian president put the brakes on their joining NATO and it looked as though they might instead join CSTO, the Russian version. This is all documented. Also Crimea IS the piece of Ukraine.
- fuckyouzilla 9y ago
  > Also Crimea IS the piece of Ukraine. Was.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- woodandsteel 9y ago
  Putin has been perfectly clear about this, at least when he is talking to his own public. He says the collapse of the USSR and the Soviet block was one of the great tragedies of the 20th century, and he says that Russia will be under grave threat of being invaded and occupied by the US until it gets back its old territory. He also says that Russia has a right to intervene in any country that has a substantial number of citizens of Russian decent that he believes are being ill-treated.
- Animats 9y ago
  Crimea was the first piece. Much more than that now. See [1]. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_war_in_Donbass.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_war_in_Do...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

dragonwriter 9y ago

> Is there seriously some new cold war going on? Yes, since the late 90s. Hillary Clinton's whole “reset button” thing in 2009 was about reversing the escalation in that cold war associated with the Russian invasion of Georgia. > My prediction for the post-Sovjet area was that the US and Russia would just leave each other in peace. That prediction was proven wrong less than a decade into the post-Soviet era.

dqpb 9y ago
This is where everything went wrong - they incorrectly labeled the button. The English text said "reset" but the Russian text said "overload" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset

torstenvl 9y ago

So long as Russia has territory it doesn't control inside what it views to be its natural geological boundaries, there will always be Russian aggression. Russia very much wants to "never get involved in a land war in Asia." To that end, it wants a solid mountain boundary from the Carpathians to the Tien Shan, and the Gobi desert from there to the Pacific. Until then, you can expect continued encroachments on Ukraine, the Caucuses, and steppe Central Asia, and continued buildup of its military capabilities. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5497331ae4b0148a6141bd47/t/58b90e18a5790aeaef8f8c91/1488522788730/ https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5497331ae4b0148a6141b...

rocqua 9y ago
How does Ukraine ensure there will not be a war in asia? Ukraine is firmly the border between Russia and Europe. Due to the black sea, Ukraine means nothing for the border between Asia and Russia. Similarly the Russian border already runs through the Caucuses. That border is already secured by that mountain range. Meanwhile, to get decent natural borders around Kazakhstan you need to either see that expanse as a natural border, or take over the entirety of Khazakstan. Further east than that, and Russia's borders again seem to follow natural obstacles.
- woodandsteel 9y ago
  Part of the problem is that Russia's total territory is way too large for its population and economic strength to adequately defend militarily. That didn't matter so much during the two centuries when China was flat on its back, but now it is back to its normal superpower status.
woodandsteel 9y ago
>So long as Russia has territory it doesn't control inside what it views to be its natural geological boundaries, there will always be Russian aggression. Quite true. The problem is that in order to gain the territory, it takes aggressive actions that provoke the very hostility it fears. Russia's basic problem is it thinks we are still in the pre-nuclear era where great powers regularly invaded each other, and the pre-industrial era where that was the main road to economic wealth.

jwtadvice 9y ago

The post-Soviet era is and was not the end of history. Geopolitical competition exists as a human condition. Much of the "communist versus capitalist" competition that "justified" the Cold War, was actually just a result of two powers that were going to compete anyway pushing competing views of global economic-political organization. The competition was not itself about economic philosophies. Rather competition of economic philosophies was the result of conflict. The United States today is a waning power relative to the rest of the world. However, it's still the de facto superpower. The American strategy is to keep its foot on Russia's neck and while containing the possible rise of China's power (seeking to keep it to a regional, rather than global setting). Yes, the Cold War is still going. There's less of a chance of an immediate nuclear exchange, but the US and Russia continue proxy warfare (e.g. Syria, Ukraine, Iran) and propaganda warfare (e.g. US and Russia's interference in one another's elections)

cynusx 9y ago

There are elections on March 18 in russia, this is just Putin rallying his base.