3 ms·
You don't have to actively destroy things, with or without malicious intent, it's enough to just let them take their natural course. That is the great Russian
by Borrible 5y ago
You don't have to actively destroy things, with or without malicious intent, it's enough to just let them take their natural course.
That is the great Russian tragic, they never can be sure to be safe.
It ends in paranoia.
Paranoia with nukes.
- vbezhenar 5y agoWar bases around country is not paranoia. It’s a strangulation. US was not happy with nukes in Cuba. What would you say today if Russia put nukes to Cuba? Would you be paranoid ?
- Borrible 5y agoYes, but then again, no one took the opportunity to wipe you out in the 1990s, did they?
- vbezhenar 5y agoNukes were present in 1990, there was no opportunity. Just to clarify, I'm not from Russia, neither I support this war. But I don't think that West is innocent and wouldn't take a chance to destroy Russia at the first possibility. By destroying I don't necessary mean physical destruction. Disarming, separate regions into different countries (divide and conquer), convert those into little harmless countries depending on West with everything. That still destruction in my book.
- Borrible 5y ago>>Nukes were present in 1990, there was no opportunity. Yes, but doesn't that imply, today also nobody can 'strangulate' Russia? The Russians were weaker then, why would the West do it now, when the Russians are stronger and there are still the nukes that prevented it back then?