Russia to temporarily withdraw from Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe

[Patroklos]

We left our base in Uzbekistan, cause the govt there was slaughtering its own people. You and your Chinese friends have welcomed them into your SCO. A superior democrat, my ass.

And what did we haver there in the first place? A couple hundred logistics types and a airfield?

If that really did scare Russia, then I can see why a battery of 20 defensive missiles several hundred miles from Russian territory might seem threatening.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Serb


I pointed that Saras is wrong. The end of story.

p.s. Give us time. We are recovering from the largest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century (c). It's something that Netherlands have not experienced.

The fact that after disaster of 1991 and a decade of Yeltsin's anarchy now we have a world's 9th largest economy which is growing 6-7% for seven years in a row, it's something that I am not ashamed of.

The Soviet economy of the 70s and 80s was stagnating, in a world in which Asian tigers were roaring past. It was the broad sense of the Communist Party leadership that the situation was not sustainable, which is why they were willing to go with a Gorbachev. However even Gorbys reforms began to face the weaknessess of legality that were a legacy of the Soviet system, and this led to failures that continued through the 90s.

It seems clear that Putin recognizes this, as he is NOT going back to the pre-Perestroika Soviet Economy. He is taking control of only those sectors that are of POLITICAL significance, that could be used as a base to challenge the security ministries' control of the state.

The attempt to blame the Russian decline of the 90s on the revolution of 1991, rather than on much more deeply rooted problems, is done for political convenience.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Serb

Sure It wasn't an actual combat, but a firepower and mobility demonstration at proving grounds (as part of large military exhibition we have here now) .

Sure thing killer.

If Russki tank fire control stuff is so ****-hot then why'd the Indians slap French sights on their T-90s?

Not only they were moving, they were flying!

Wat, like a Su-25 or a A-10 or something?

[Colon™]

Bush said Russia isn't a military threat. Is Russia relieved he isn't joining the "hysteria" or is Russia offended because he won't recognize their might? Or maybe a little of both?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Saras


No you didn't.

If you consider IMF and the World Bank to be incompetent enough for GDP comparison, GIVE ME YOUR sources!
Give me the source that proves your point.
Unless you do so, I will consider you were wrong.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Patroklos


As if those countries were not your sworn enemies any way. They were defacto NATO members the moment your thugs were overthrown and your military took off its thumb.

Bullsh!t.
We disbanded the Warsaw Pact. You didn't disband NATO.
Furthermore, you made former WP countries a NATO members. You promised that NATO will not expand when we disbanded the WP.
Friends and allies, my ass.

So? The only people who thought they were more worthless then us is probably you.

It was another act of good will from Russia. The unappreciated act though.

What part of our nuclear potential is next to your borders?

The radar in Czechia that will cover the Russian territory up to Ural. It will be an integral part of US missile launch warning system, which is a part of US nuclear potential.

What part of the treaty did we not fullfill?

The entire treaty.
Originally the treaty was signed in 1990 when USSR still existed. In 1999 (when SU no longer existed) 30 (THIRTY) countries signed the adaptation protocol.

Today is 2007 and the parliaments of only FOUR countries out of THIRTY countries (who signed new ver. of the treaty in 1999) have ratified this treaty.
Those countries are: Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus.
NO SINGLE NATO MEMBER.

Russia has fully fulfiled its obligations by destroying heavy armament of its 14th Army.

The other side did exactly the opposite - brought more members to NATO. So today, in fact NATO can have
as much conventional forces in Europe as it wish.
Nobody except Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan is fulfiling their obligations.

YOU DO NOT FULFIL YOUR OBLIGATIONS. AND IT IS YOUR FAULT THAT WE WITHDRAW.

EIGHT years is more than enough to ratify the treaty in parliaments. If you do not want to ratify it - fine. You cheated us again, so we quit.
Period.

[Serb]

Originally posted by PLATO
The whole argument that Serb is portraying is where the root of the problem is. Russia continues to be a state that sees itself dominating others.

Bullsh!t.
The whole argument is that US treated/treats/will treat in near future Russia as an enemy. The whole argument is US considers the whole planet as their own privately owned sand box, that US seriously believes that such country as Russia should not have its own national interests in any dispute with its neighbours and should always obey the US desicions. How close Ukraine, Georgia, the Caspian Sea, etc to US borders comparing to Russia? WhTF gave you right to consider territories around Russia as zone of US national interests? WhTF gave you right to think that your national interests at those territories should always prevail over Russian national interests?

As long as this trend continues then Russia will see other States moving to counter this. The bottom line is this: Russia can act like an allie or they can act like an advesary.

Bullsh!t.
IT IS YOU, USA, WHO ACTED AND STILL ACTS AS AN ENEMY, NOT RUSSIA.

It would be foolhardy of them to feel like they could win another cold war given the fact that they lost the last one so badly that even Serb recognizes that it was a disaster for them and given the fact that the Western democracies are economically much larger than they were 20 years ago.

Russia do not want another cold war. YOU WANT IT.
And yes, the collapse of the USSR was a disaster.

When we are even discussing the relative strength of Russia's economy compared to The Netherlands is pretty telling of the real story here.

Nope.
We were discussing Saras's bullsh!t claims about the Russian economy. You can compare it with Netherlands, hell, even with Zimbabwe. Why not? But Russia is the world's 9th largest economy. Netherlands and Zimbabwe are not. Russian GDP is pretty much comparable to the other members of G8 (except for the leaders like US, of course). Russia experienced stable and rapid 6-7% annual growth within last 7 years. And considering such dynamic many experts see the bright furure for the Russian economy.

So here's the message to Russia: If you want to be an allie, then act like it. If not, then you will head down the same path that lead to your last disaster...your choice.

Bullsh!t.
This is the sort of message you shall send to your conquered PUPPETS, not Russia.
Russia is not your puppet.
And it is YOU who were hostile to Russia since the fall of the USSR.
It is you who acts like an enemy, not us.
So, here is the message for you - if you will keep playing like this, then you will head down the path of MAD.
The end of story.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


We left our base in Uzbekistan, cause the govt there was slaughtering its own people. You and your Chinese friends have welcomed them into your SCO. A superior democrat, my ass.

You left Uzbekistan becuase you failed to attrat it in your sphere of influence. And all your media strories about cruel Asian dictatorship originate from that simple fact. Period.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Yes, recovering from the disaster of 1918 will take you some time.

1918?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Patroklos


And what did we haver there in the first place? A couple hundred logistics types and a airfield?

If that really did scare Russia, then I can see why a battery of 20 defensive missiles several hundred miles from Russian territory might seem threatening.

And what did we have at Cuba in 1963? A couple of dozens of belived to be crappy Soviet missiles?

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

It seems clear that Putin recognizes this, as he is NOT going back to the pre-Perestroika Soviet Economy. He is taking control of only those sectors that are of POLITICAL significance,

Such as?

The attempt to blame the Russian decline of the 90s on the revolution of 1991, rather than on much more deeply rooted problems, is done for political convenience.

1) Who done it?
2) Oh, really? I see you are an expert in Soviet economy. So you can surely prove how collapse of the country (and the Soviet economy was in fact a huge factory where different republics were responcible for their own sector of manufacture) and collapse of the economical ties due to new borders, had no effect on the Russian decline.

[Kuciwalker]

The whole argument is that US treated/treats/will treat in near future Russia as an enemy. The whole argument is US considers the whole planet as their own privately owned sand box, that US seriously believes that such country as Russia should not have its own national interests in any dispute with its neighbours and should always obey the US desicions.

Actually, we think you should accept the decisions of the independent, sovereign countries on your borders.

[Kuciwalker]

We were discussing Saras's bullsh!t claims about the Russian economy. You can compare it with Netherlands, hell, even with Zimbabwe. Why not? But Russia is the world's 9th largest economy. Netherlands and Zimbabwe are not. Russian GDP is pretty much comparable to the other members of G8 (except for the leaders like US, of course). Russia experienced stable and rapid 6-7% annual growth within last 7 years. And considering such dynamic many experts see the bright furure for the Russian economy.

PPP doesn't make sense when comparing the global economic influence of a country.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Serb
2) Oh, really? I see you are an expert in Soviet economy. So you can surely prove how collapse of the country (and the Soviet economy was in fact a huge factory where different republics were responcible for their own sector of manufacture) and collapse of the economical ties due to new borders, had no effect on the Russian decline.

I don't know about Russia itself but the economic collapse of the Soviet republics had its roots far beyond the collapse of the Soviet Empire itself. Unless you can explain why Poland (for example) suddenly became backward industrially and burdened with debt overnight as you suggest rather than over a period of years as claimed by many people.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Lonestar


Sure thing killer.

Absolutely.

If Russki tank fire control stuff is so ****-hot then why'd the Indians slap French sights on their T-90s?

1) Not fire control, but French night vision sights.

http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IEL20070603002448&Page=L&Title=B+R+E+A+K+I+N+G++++N+E+W+S&Topic=0&

(IIRC, the site is wrong here. The deal is about one billion USD for 350 tanks)

2) These days arms manufacture involves a good share of international cooperation. For example, your Abrams tank has a British Chobham armor and a German Rheinmetall gun (two obvious features, not to mention other things).

3) The export variants of our weapons are usually downgraded. And it's a widespread practice to keep the best for yourself.

4) If the customer wants a French nigh visions - fine. I can't see how it's different from buying a top-class Porshe, then installing a non-German stereo or mirrors. The customer is always right, afterall.

5) The fact that customer wants a French night visions, doesn't necessary means those sights are the best. It could be a matter of its own positive experience with use of such equipment in the past. It could be a matter of standartization of equipment, etc.

Wat, like a Su-25 or a A-10 or something?

No, like a REAL FLYING TANK!