And how is that directly opposite? Rulers generally want a quick and decisive military conflict, but wars usually aren't, especially with both sides of the conflict being similar in equipment and manpower. Austria-Hungary really wanted a war with Serbia to lessen the inner conflicts. Russia really wanted a war with Austria-Hungary to have more influence in South Slavic countries and to help the czar to save the face after the Russo-Japanese war embarrassment a decade earlier. Germany really wanted a war with Russia because they wanted to destabilise Russia for good. France really wanted to get Alsace back. Britain really wanted to destroy the German industry and smother some local problems like the Irish in the process.
Seriously, in the beginning, the war was welcomed by most of the participating sides. Only after the horror of it was clearly visible, the war has become unpopular.
There are more than enough huge technological companies in Europe, but their focus aren't consumer products or websites for hipsters. More like mechanical and chemical engineering.
Overstepping the NATO mandate, obviously. Would not be the first time, though. The whole reason for the bloody mess there is because several parties have grossly overstepped their mandates. Continuing to do so will make it even worse.
I just knew you are from the 101st chairborne division. 1) Russians have a lot of things that can kill an Apache. Tunguska for example. And fixed wing aircraft. 2) Aircraft carriers can be destroyed by supersonic anti ship missiles - something Russians can and do build very well, making the carriers just huge targets. Even the Brits during the cold war were aware of this kind of an asymmetrical answer. 3) USA does not use stealth aircraft before achieving air superiority anymore because they are too afraid to lose one of the very expensive birds because they aren't that stealthy - even Serbians have managed to shoot down an F-117 with a bloody Mig-21 - and you can only optimise the stealth capabilities against certain radar frequencies. L and S band radars can see stealth aircraft well enough and as for the ability of USA to fight this kind of war - American army was already overstretched fighting under-equipped savages in two countries, staying in Afghanistan for a decade and still losing that war.
But I can see you have read too much Tom Clancy for your own good.
Oh, there are real separatists there. Ukraine has been running on separatism for centuries.
You can say that the conflict is between western and eastern Ukraine, but this oversimplifies things too much. Historically western Ukraine belonged to Poland, thus many in the west are catholic and speak a language that is more Polish than Ukrainian. Moreso, parts of western Ukraine used to belong to Poland before WW2. Then there is central Ukraine which is Ukraine proper and where people speak actual Ukrainian. Eastern Ukraine is more or less an artificial construct. Parts of it were transferred from Russia to Ukraine in the early 1920ies, Crimea was given to Ukraine in 1954. People on Crimea mostly consider themselves Russian, many of them hate Ukrainians. Other eastern Ukrainians have obvious Russian roots, most of them speak Russian in their daily lives but it is not nearly as clear cut as in Crimea. They are also mostly orthodox, not catholic. Then there is southern Ukraine, which is like a different country altogether and Transnistria, which de-jure belongs to Moldavia, but has been a part of Ukraine once and is de-facto independent.
Anyway, a huge problem is that despite this inner conflict Ukraine is not a federation, but a centralist state and when nationalists push west Ukrainian values to east Ukrainians, they are understandably unhappy and vice versa. After the previous president - from east Ukraine - was removed by a mob, the provisional government grossly overstepped their mandate by trying to introduce language laws, coercing members of parliament and banning the largest oppositional party. Several prominent neo-Nazi party members rose to power then and this, obviously, pissed off enough people in Donbass to start a civil war. By bombing civilians, Ukrainian government has helped the separatists recruiting more people. Unfortunately, people weren't enough and as soon as separatists were starting to lose the civil war, Russia stepped in with their military aid. Mind you, there are still real honest-to-god separatists, but by now there are probably just as many Russian soldiers there.
Funny thing is, while you are completely right with what you write, these comments have indeed some truth in them.
There have been more than enough fake reports from Ukrainian government. For fuck's sake, they've once even claimed that they were attacked by Russian tactical nukes, which lead to facepalms even in their own parliament. I've been to Ukraine two months ago, their mass media really is crazy hysterical and lying. I thought that German mass media here is bad, but it is like BBC compared to Fox News.
And there are indeed neo-Nazis in Ukrainian national guard. I've seen them, too. Scary stuff. They are not a majority anymore, not since the draft has begun. But the volunteers in the beginning of the conflict were mostly the militant arm of Maidan - neo-Nazis.
It is also true that Ukraine is a failed state. Has been a failed state for 20 years.
Even so, it is not an excuse to send troops there to kill people and destabilise the situation even further.
The problem with uninformed people is that they usually shout the loudest, especially chickenhawks like you.
First, Ukraine is not a part of NATO. Never has been. Second, it is very much a civil war where both sides get help from foreign powers. Except that the separatist side also gets heavy weapon support, but this is also not something that hasn't happened before. Here is a funny historical fact for you: during the American civil war, Russian Far East fleet was stationed in San Francisco and Russian Baltic fleet was staying in New York to prevent the British to help the Confederacy. Yes, Russians have helped you during your civil war. And Americans were close to helping Russians during the Crimean war.
Third, so far nobody has ever been charged for war crimes after shooting down a civilian airplane. Your people have actually received a medal for that. And Crimean annexation was probably the only understandable thing Russia has done in that conflict.
And last, don't be so cocksure about Apaches. Russians have long been prepared for them and the last time USA has been fighting in a war without any kind of air superiority is very long ago.
There was no signed agreement, just a memorandum, which is neither binding nor really applicable in this case (it is about Ukraine being attacked with nuclear weapons).
The actual treaty that has been broken by the presence of Russian troops there is the Belavezha accord, which opens another can of worms entirely, but, frankly, American involvement in that matter is, indeed, very much questionable, as would be the involvement of the rest of NATO.
And as for your "as they so frequently have been" - so far a NATO country hasn't ever been under attack (except for that short skirmish between Turkey and Greece, which, incidentally, are both NATO countries). There was zero reason for NATO being involved in anything whatsoever but unfortunately Americans don't know the difference between defense and offense.
Putin will still keep insisting that the soldiers are on their vacation or have been honourably discharged shortly before.
It is seriously not news, not since the photos of a disabled T72B3 have been published. Russia actively helps separatists in the region and will continue doing so in the foreseeable future.
He is not. cayenne8 has mentioned several times that he is a borderline alcoholic, has a definitive lack of empathy and is proud of both. Psychopaths aren't normal people, and that is a good thing.
Have you read this text? It even explained in the text that the way these statistics are counted are flawed. They are even more flawed because they don't take dangers of uranium mining into account. There is a reason why uranium mining used to be a forced labour kind of job. Besides, how many reactors have you personally designed to judge how safe they are? We have a very nice idiom here in Germany: gefaehrliches Halbwissen. It translates to "dangerous superficial knowledge", something akin to dangerous half-truth, but not quite the same. And this is what most of atomic fanbois have.
And no, GMO has not been practiced for thousands of years. Selective breeding is not the same as genetic modification - it selects for a certain phenotype. Even making hybrids isn't, because hybrids can only be achieved across closely related species (which, therefore, were a single species recently enough and share the same genes).
Genetic engineering, on the other hand, inserts completely foreign genes or completely removes genes from a genome.
There was an old (I think from the 1950ies) short story by the late Robert Sheckley, called "Watchbird" which describes exactly what you have written about.
So you basically say that a person responsible for a design of several nuclear reactors, working for AEG, former director of nuclear department of AEG, General Dynamics and Siemens, knows less about them than a random nuclear wanker on Slashdot? That is Dunning-Kruger at its best.
And this is what the problem with you people is. You believe. No matter, what facts are. You kidnap, torture and indefinitely hold people because you believe. Breaking laws? Bugger it, we believe. Who needs knowledge when you have religion, right? And even after getting actual information and even after it showed that 99% of all Guantanamo prisoners were innocent, who cares, you still believe. You even start wars because you believe god told you so.
And you personally are also a true believer in Amerika ueber alles and won't let puny facts stand in the way of your beliefs. That's why I say fuck you, your beliefs and your taliban buddies. Beliefs belong to the church, not in military, not in politics, not in science.
I agree, BUT "the law in individual [EU member] countries" is the European Union's law!
No, it is most certainly not. National laws are national laws and are only valid in a particular nation. There are also EU directives that are supposed to be valid EU-wide, but the actual implementation is a national responsibility so it can and will vary between the member states.
But since you are a Greek, it is understandable, that you don't have a clue about laws.
Slashdot Mirror
A million would be not nearly enough to be legal insurance in several European countries.
Technically it was USSR.
Americans were the first humans.
And how is that directly opposite?
Rulers generally want a quick and decisive military conflict, but wars usually aren't, especially with both sides of the conflict being similar in equipment and manpower.
Austria-Hungary really wanted a war with Serbia to lessen the inner conflicts.
Russia really wanted a war with Austria-Hungary to have more influence in South Slavic countries and to help the czar to save the face after the Russo-Japanese war embarrassment a decade earlier.
Germany really wanted a war with Russia because they wanted to destabilise Russia for good.
France really wanted to get Alsace back.
Britain really wanted to destroy the German industry and smother some local problems like the Irish in the process.
Seriously, in the beginning, the war was welcomed by most of the participating sides. Only after the horror of it was clearly visible, the war has become unpopular.
No it would not. First world war happened not because of misjudging, but because several rulers were really eager for a war.
I shit you not.
In fact, it was the first game that was banned for minors. Not anymore, though.
To be fair? Russia hasn't executed anybody for 20 years or so.
There are more than enough huge technological companies in Europe, but their focus aren't consumer products or websites for hipsters. More like mechanical and chemical engineering.
Only if you are a hipster. Berlin seems to be hipster capital of the world.
Actually, Boeing only does the final assembly of the 787.
Overstepping the NATO mandate, obviously. Would not be the first time, though. The whole reason for the bloody mess there is because several parties have grossly overstepped their mandates. Continuing to do so will make it even worse.
I just knew you are from the 101st chairborne division.
1) Russians have a lot of things that can kill an Apache. Tunguska for example. And fixed wing aircraft.
2) Aircraft carriers can be destroyed by supersonic anti ship missiles - something Russians can and do build very well, making the carriers just huge targets. Even the Brits during the cold war were aware of this kind of an asymmetrical answer.
3) USA does not use stealth aircraft before achieving air superiority anymore because they are too afraid to lose one of the very expensive birds because they aren't that stealthy - even Serbians have managed to shoot down an F-117 with a bloody Mig-21 - and you can only optimise the stealth capabilities against certain radar frequencies. L and S band radars can see stealth aircraft well enough and as for the ability of USA to fight this kind of war - American army was already overstretched fighting under-equipped savages in two countries, staying in Afghanistan for a decade and still losing that war.
But I can see you have read too much Tom Clancy for your own good.
Oh, there are real separatists there. Ukraine has been running on separatism for centuries.
You can say that the conflict is between western and eastern Ukraine, but this oversimplifies things too much. Historically western Ukraine belonged to Poland, thus many in the west are catholic and speak a language that is more Polish than Ukrainian. Moreso, parts of western Ukraine used to belong to Poland before WW2. Then there is central Ukraine which is Ukraine proper and where people speak actual Ukrainian. Eastern Ukraine is more or less an artificial construct. Parts of it were transferred from Russia to Ukraine in the early 1920ies, Crimea was given to Ukraine in 1954. People on Crimea mostly consider themselves Russian, many of them hate Ukrainians. Other eastern Ukrainians have obvious Russian roots, most of them speak Russian in their daily lives but it is not nearly as clear cut as in Crimea. They are also mostly orthodox, not catholic. Then there is southern Ukraine, which is like a different country altogether and Transnistria, which de-jure belongs to Moldavia, but has been a part of Ukraine once and is de-facto independent.
Anyway, a huge problem is that despite this inner conflict Ukraine is not a federation, but a centralist state and when nationalists push west Ukrainian values to east Ukrainians, they are understandably unhappy and vice versa. After the previous president - from east Ukraine - was removed by a mob, the provisional government grossly overstepped their mandate by trying to introduce language laws, coercing members of parliament and banning the largest oppositional party. Several prominent neo-Nazi party members rose to power then and this, obviously, pissed off enough people in Donbass to start a civil war. By bombing civilians, Ukrainian government has helped the separatists recruiting more people. Unfortunately, people weren't enough and as soon as separatists were starting to lose the civil war, Russia stepped in with their military aid. Mind you, there are still real honest-to-god separatists, but by now there are probably just as many Russian soldiers there.
Funny thing is, while you are completely right with what you write, these comments have indeed some truth in them.
There have been more than enough fake reports from Ukrainian government. For fuck's sake, they've once even claimed that they were attacked by Russian tactical nukes, which lead to facepalms even in their own parliament. I've been to Ukraine two months ago, their mass media really is crazy hysterical and lying. I thought that German mass media here is bad, but it is like BBC compared to Fox News.
And there are indeed neo-Nazis in Ukrainian national guard. I've seen them, too. Scary stuff. They are not a majority anymore, not since the draft has begun. But the volunteers in the beginning of the conflict were mostly the militant arm of Maidan - neo-Nazis.
It is also true that Ukraine is a failed state. Has been a failed state for 20 years.
Even so, it is not an excuse to send troops there to kill people and destabilise the situation even further.
The problem with uninformed people is that they usually shout the loudest, especially chickenhawks like you.
First, Ukraine is not a part of NATO. Never has been. Second, it is very much a civil war where both sides get help from foreign powers. Except that the separatist side also gets heavy weapon support, but this is also not something that hasn't happened before. Here is a funny historical fact for you: during the American civil war, Russian Far East fleet was stationed in San Francisco and Russian Baltic fleet was staying in New York to prevent the British to help the Confederacy. Yes, Russians have helped you during your civil war. And Americans were close to helping Russians during the Crimean war.
Third, so far nobody has ever been charged for war crimes after shooting down a civilian airplane. Your people have actually received a medal for that. And Crimean annexation was probably the only understandable thing Russia has done in that conflict.
And last, don't be so cocksure about Apaches. Russians have long been prepared for them and the last time USA has been fighting in a war without any kind of air superiority is very long ago.
There was no signed agreement, just a memorandum, which is neither binding nor really applicable in this case (it is about Ukraine being attacked with nuclear weapons).
The actual treaty that has been broken by the presence of Russian troops there is the Belavezha accord, which opens another can of worms entirely, but, frankly, American involvement in that matter is, indeed, very much questionable, as would be the involvement of the rest of NATO.
And as for your "as they so frequently have been" - so far a NATO country hasn't ever been under attack (except for that short skirmish between Turkey and Greece, which, incidentally, are both NATO countries). There was zero reason for NATO being involved in anything whatsoever but unfortunately Americans don't know the difference between defense and offense.
Putin will still keep insisting that the soldiers are on their vacation or have been honourably discharged shortly before.
It is seriously not news, not since the photos of a disabled T72B3 have been published. Russia actively helps separatists in the region and will continue doing so in the foreseeable future.
He is not. cayenne8 has mentioned several times that he is
a borderline alcoholic, has a definitive lack of empathy and is proud of both. Psychopaths aren't normal people, and that is a good thing.
Have you read this text? It even explained in the text that the way these statistics are counted are flawed. They are even more flawed because they don't take dangers of uranium mining into account. There is a reason why uranium mining used to be a forced labour kind of job. Besides, how many reactors have you personally designed to judge how safe they are? We have a very nice idiom here in Germany: gefaehrliches Halbwissen. It translates to "dangerous superficial knowledge", something akin to dangerous half-truth, but not quite the same. And this is what most of atomic fanbois have.
And no, GMO has not been practiced for thousands of years. Selective breeding is not the same as genetic modification - it selects for a certain phenotype. Even making hybrids isn't, because hybrids can only be achieved across closely related species (which, therefore, were a single species recently enough and share the same genes).
Genetic engineering, on the other hand, inserts completely foreign genes or completely removes genes from a genome.
There was an old (I think from the 1950ies) short story by the late Robert Sheckley, called "Watchbird" which describes exactly what you have written about.
Can you give me an example? Because right now this ability looks like the tiger-repellent rock to me.
So you basically say that a person responsible for a design of several nuclear reactors, working for AEG, former director of nuclear department of AEG, General Dynamics and Siemens, knows less about them than a random nuclear wanker on Slashdot? That is Dunning-Kruger at its best.
And this is what the problem with you people is. You believe. No matter, what facts are.
You kidnap, torture and indefinitely hold people because you believe. Breaking laws? Bugger it, we believe. Who needs knowledge when you have religion, right? And even after getting actual information and even after it showed that 99% of all Guantanamo prisoners were innocent, who cares, you still believe. You even start wars because you believe god told you so.
And you personally are also a true believer in Amerika ueber alles and won't let puny facts stand in the way of your beliefs. That's why I say fuck you, your beliefs and your taliban buddies. Beliefs belong to the church, not in military, not in politics, not in science.
No, it is most certainly not. National laws are national laws and are only valid in a particular nation. There are also EU directives that are supposed to be valid EU-wide, but the actual implementation is a national responsibility so it can and will vary between the member states.
But since you are a Greek, it is understandable, that you don't have a clue about laws.
And a small fusion reactor would make an RTG moot.
In other words, they actually know what they are talking about and you are too full of yourself to see that?