The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Russia to temporarily withdraw from Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe
Originally posted by Oerdin
This all has a lot to do with Russia's inferiority complex since the death of the USSR and Russia's desire to pretend it is still more then a regional power.
This all has a lot to do with US superiority complex of world's policeman and US's desire to pretend it is still a superpower (who don't have enough power to deal with a 3rd world countries like Iraq and Afghanistan).
Economically, politically, and militarially it is nothing more then a regional power which happens to have some aging ICBMs which they can't use due to MAD.
That's the point. The Cold is not over yet. Russia is the only country who can incinerate USA within 15 minutes.
That's your problem. That's the reason why you've been so hostile towards Russia since she abandoned Communism. You don't give a **** about political system of your rival. All you care is possible threat and Russian possibilties to harm you. This is where your missile shield originates from.
YOU, YOUR GOVERNMENT ARE STILL LIVING IN THE COLD WAR ERA. And they do not want to see in Russia anything, but the enemy.
The end of story.
They're not a major manufacturer and instead their economy is primarially based upon the export of raw materials so Russia's main leverage is to deny people raw materials but this only works in the short run because once Russia proves to be an unreliable supplier everyone looks for alternatives. There are always alternatives.
Nobody ever explained me why the hell anyone should susidize hostile regimes?
Imagine a country which byus 3 units of gas for a price of 1USD per unit, then re-export one unit of that purchased gas to its neighbour EU country for a market price of 3 USD per unit. That means it has 2 units of gas for free.
Why on Earth we should sell our gas for 1/3 of its price to a hostile regime?
Would you subsidize Canada if it expressed its desire to join the WP? Would you subsidize it regardless of circumstances?
I don't think so. You would make money. You would make profit. Don't expect from us something that you won't do at any circumstances, something stupid and illogical.
Well, if you put this that way, then sure - Afghanistan was The only time it's (NATO) collective defence provisions have been triggered has been to beat on Muslims.
But earlier, in 1999, there were also Serbia when NATO has revealed its true face of a bloody agressor, by attacking a sovereign, independent country to support the Muslims.
They're the only ****ers stupid enough to have attacked a NATO member and been proud of it, and have a state to take apart.
BS.
They denied 911 all the time, untill they've been crushed by the Northen Alliance with you air support. Only after the Taliban has lost control of the country, OBL admited he was behind the 911.
That doesn't mean NATO members have not acted together and through NATO before, but Afghanistan is the first example of NATO collective defence. Are you anxious for a second?
Serbia was the first example of NATO (defensive alliance, my ass) collective agression.
Congratulations. How many bombs dropped on those Muslim 'Russians' lately, anyway?
None.
Still I don't see why I should be happy as you suggested there: The only time it's collective defence provisions have been triggered has been to beat on Muslims. You should be in favour of that.
Why I should be in favour of that?
I indetify myself as an Orthodox Christian Russian. But I have a good friends and colleagues among Muslims.
On the other hand, I don't see why I should be happy when you are killing my Orthodox Slavic brothers.
Let us know when you are not going to shape your opinions based on religious and ethnic lines. You might then be ready to be considered for NATO association.
BS.
You won't let us in NATO, unless you would need us to fight someone else.
For now, we'll have to hold our noses and sit with you at the G8.
Sure, Russians are so stinky. They don't realise that internatinal laws and United Nations are just a joke. They don't bomb and invide independent, sovereign countries like we NATO members do. So, they are backward and we have to hold our noses when we sit with them at the G8.
Originally posted by notyoueither
Russia would have to accept that her borders are done. Fixed.
And currently Russia is denying that?
There's no going back to the Carpathians, or the Elbe...
Russia wants to return to the Elbe?
(And somebody recenty has said here that westerners have no delusions about Russia )
Oh, and you don't threaten allies, nor do you turn off the gas taps in the middle of winter (even if we would like to see people in Chicago freeze in the dark; what? we would like to do that to Ontario and say we would, but we don't actually do it).
1) We are not allied with Ukraine.
2) Nobody let them freeze at the middle of winter (they simply stole our gas (headed to EU) from their pipes).
3) We didn't sign an unconditional surrender capitulation wich dictates us to sell our gas for a 1/3 of its price to our neighbours. WE ARE NOT YOUR PUPPET, DAMMIT!
Remember that. It is we, as a seller, who will decide for what price we will sell our goods. NOT YOU.
We will decide whom we want to subsidize and whom we won't. If Ukraine or Georgia, etc wants Russian gas for a funny price - they SHOULD BE FRIENDLY TO RUSSIA, NOT HOSTILE.
When Putin is reacting to a missile base in Poland like Russia is threatened, and pointing missiles at any and everyone, the chances of Russia joining NATO any time soon are smaller than slim.
Russia's chanses to join NATO were non-existent from the beginning, regardles of Russian reaction to whatever.
You have encircled us with you bases. You're keep installing your military hardware near our borders, and all you suggest is just - shut the **** up, and perhaps one day, maybe, probably, if you will play nice and do all whatever we say, will act as a loyal puppet of us, then there is a chance, that one day you will be allowed in NATO. But untill then - do what we say or you'll be treated as a country which resurects its imperial ambitions...
FY, Misters.
This won't happen.
The sooner you will realise it is more profitable for you to treat Russia as a fiend than an enenmy, the better for you and the rest of the world.
Your "dictate our will" approach is just not acceptable.
Let's cooperate for mutual benefit. Russia is open for cooperation. But you should realise that when you want something, you should be ready to give something in return. Simple as that.
Those neocon morons in the White House simply don't understand that. They think they are ****ing supermens. Batmens, my ass.
Originally posted by notyoueither
I would say Russia would never be allowed in so long as her motivations could be correctly deduced as subversion from within.
Russians (not just their government) have a lot of miles to go before joining NATO or the EU could be beneficial to all concerned.
To begin with, they will have to learn that 'beneficial to all concerned' is a desirable goal in making alliances.
NATO and the de-facto leader of NATO - US of A, should learn that too.
So far (since the collapse of the USSR) they treat Russia as an enemy. So we have no reason to belive that one day we will be allowed in an alliance, whose entire purpose is to be a bunch of anti-Russian thugs.
Originally posted by notyoueither
Dictatorships backed by armies don't change because something might happen.
The PRC changed because they had the Soviet example to put the fear of ancestors into them.
A system like the Soviet or PRC does not reform without a major calamity to drive them. For the PRC, the Soviets were the calamity. The Soviets had no such example.
It's like asking the first victim of lung cancer to stop smoking because of the health effects. What effects?
Exactly.
Now you see what I mean by two different but interconnected diseases?
Had USSR have a calamity example and introduced reforms like PRC did, then it would be like modern China today.
Economy inmprovement could have been achived by Chinese-like reforms. PRC proves that collapse of the country is not necessary for transition from a planned economy to a market economy. The collapse of the USSR proves exactly the opposite, that collapse of the country cause a serious negative impact on the economy and living standards.
Bullsh!t.
We disbanded the Warsaw Pact. You didn't disband NATO.
We won Serb, winners don't disband. And the NATO alliance was not a mechanism for the oppression and control of its members a la the WP. Our members were voluntary as well. Do you think Russia disolved the WP, or it just imploded once the members had a choice to drop your bully ass? I imagine they weren't so happy to be your cannon fodder anymore once you became second class.
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.
Nothing nuclear about the system, if it doesn't involve nuclear warheads.
It was another act of good will from Russia. The unappreciated act though.
What good is a Russian base in Vietnam/Cuba when your ships couldn't even get underway for a decade, rusting at the piers. It was a favor to yourselves, do you think we cared if there were some unpaid starving abandoned Russian troops at ineffectual bases?
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.
In democracies, if a treaty is not ratified by whatever body their constitution requires, it is not law. So by what you have written above, no member of NATO has violated it. Though NATO is not a signatory, only individual countires. The fact that other nations joined NATO doesn't matter, the totals are not for NATO troops.
NATO is not a signatory, only individual countires. The US, Britain, and Germany have drastically decreased troop levels.
Russia has fully fulfiled its obligations by destroying heavy armament of its 14th Army.
Destoyed....or rather disbanded, deserted, disintegrated, rusted without maintinace money. Whatever, same effect.
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.
I know this must be frustrating when you come from a country where decisions are made instantly by one man, depending on how much vodka he had that day.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
So Ukraine and Georgia should play with Russia only, or Russia will punish them. Existance of foreign military infrastructure, not directed against Russia, or belonging to NATO or UE is not per se something directed against Russia, unlike raising oil prices by 200%, or making some country target for own military equipment.
1) If you love Ukraine so much why wouldn't you subsidize it with 3-5 biilon USD A YEAR to cover its gas expenses? This is what we did within a DECADE. We are talking about 30-50 billion USD here, and it's a serious money.
If Ukraine and Georgia want to maintain their blatant anti-Russian policy - FINE.
But do not expect us to subsidize those anti-Russian regimes.
In this case, they should be ready to pay a full price for our gas. I tell you more, if I were in charge, I would embargo any ****er who would spit on Russia (like Ukraine, Georgia or Estonia), sorta like US embargoing Cuba. I would freeze the bastards without any regret (and I suspect any other country would do the same).
We were too generous for too long.
2) Any European country which provides its territory for American bases that we consider as a threat to our national security, SHOULD realize that there will be a counter-measures. And such counter-measures are targeting of our missiles to the site of possible threat. So those countries should think twice before making a decision. They should compare benefits and risks. But if they will decide to do so, then DO NOT EXPECT FROM US TO BE SILENT.
As an independent and soverign country we'll make all the moves necessary to provide our security. Period.
Also, You did turn Georgia against You yourselves by supporting separatisms inside it.
How?
Explain, how Southern Osetia and Abkhazia are diffrent from Kosovo.
I really wish to see your lies about that.
You won't let us in NATO, unless you would need us to fight someone else.
Again, your illusions of graduer. Besides some 70 era tech cannon fodder, what do you have to offer? You couldn't even deploy to Serbia
they treated Russia as an enemy
Actually, for the most part we have ignored you, since most of our citizens don't think you are important in any category, let alone a military rival.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
If you love Ukraine so much why wouldn't you subsidize it with 3-5 biilon USD A YEAR to cover its gas expenses? This is what we did within a DECADE. We are talking about 30-50 billion USD here, and it's a serious money.
Honestly, I think it is the least you could do for ****ing them in the ass for the last 250+ years.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
Really? Then stop pretending that you don't consider Russia as an enemy anymore. You did't disband your anti-Russian military machine, even when we abandoned Communism. So it's not about about our political system, it's about your hatred towards Russia.
And the NATO alliance was not a mechanism for the oppression and control of its members a la the WP. Our members were voluntary as well. Do you think Russia disolved the WP, or it just imploded once the members had a choice to drop your bully ass? I imagine they weren't so happy to be your cannon fodder anymore once you became second class.
Those whores now happy to be your your cannon fodder. Nothing really changed for them.
Nothing nuclear about the system, if it doesn't involve nuclear warheads.
?
Are you prettending to be a clueless?
The missile launch warning system is the part of your nuclear potential, just like alike Russian system is the part of Russian nuclear potential. It's build to detect the missile launch of your enemy to let you immediately retaliate with your own nuclear weapons.
It is an integral part of the nuclear potential of the country.
What good is a Russian base in Vietnam/Cuba when your ships couldn't even get underway for a decade, rusting at the piers. It was a favor to yourselves, do you think we cared if there were some unpaid starving abandoned Russian troops at ineffectual bases?
IIRC, we shut-down a radar at Cuba, not a navy base.
As for our ships, see the bottom of my post.
In democracies, if a treaty is not ratified by whatever body their constitution requires, it is not law.
Exactly. Your democracies didn't make regulations of that treaty a LAW.
WHY SHOULD WE?
So by what you have written above, no member of NATO has violated it.
Did I say you violated it? I've said that NATO countries DO NOT FULFIL their obligations. I've said that they even didn't ratify the treaty within 8 years. So you have no right to complain about Russia withdrawing from the treaty, because nobody except Russia, Ukraine, Byelorussia and Kazkhstan never ratified it. And for 26 countries who signed it in 1999 (aside four countries mentioned above) such treaty simply DOESN'T EXIST.
The NATO countries don't give a **** about the treaty.
WHY SHOULD WE?
Though NATO is not a signatory, only individual countires. The fact that other nations joined NATO doesn't matter, the totals are not for NATO troops.
Doesn't matter, since no NATO country has ratified the treaty. Do not expect us to fulfil obligations of the treaty, if you don't fulfil yours. Period.
NATO is not a signatory, only individual countires. The US, Britain, and Germany have drastically decreased troop levels.
Doesn't matter.
The treaty is not ratified by parliaments of those countries. From legal point of view they can increase their military presence in Europe any time.
The Putin's message was very clear - either all countries who signed the treaty will ratify it, or we will quit. Simple as that. Eight years is more than enough to made that. If you won't do that now - that means the treaty doesn't exist.
Destoyed....or rather disbanded, deserted, disintegrated, rusted without maintinace money. Whatever, same effect.
The heavy armament of the 14th Army have been destroyed in presence of your military observers.
And Yeltsin is burning in hell only for that alone. The Russian tanks have been destroyed, we get nothing in return. So shut the **** up about us withdrawing from the treaty.
You have cheated us.
I know this must be frustrating when you come from a country where decisions are made instantly by one man, depending on how much vodka he had that day.
You know, sometimes, when I read Lonestar's posts I feel respect for the US Navy. Sometimes, when I read your farts (some people belive to be posts) I feel safe.
As long as such old farts are serving in US Navy - Russia is safe.
The force of such overwhelming in their ignorance morons will never beat us.
As you've said not so long ago - any time any place.
Again, your illusions of graduer. Besides some 70 era tech cannon fodder, what do you have to offer? You couldn't even deploy to Serbia
First of all, it was in 1999 and it was other Russia.
Secondly, please, remind me whose paratroopers captured the Prishtina airport?
BTW,
When we couldn't stop your agression towards Serbia you didn't question Russian democracy and human rights in Russia (though today Russia is much better democracy then under Yeltsin). Today, when I read your papers and see all that anti-Putin and anti-Russian baiting, I SMILE. When your media is barking so loud, that means we are doing OK.
Actually, for the most part we have ignored you, since most of our citizens don't think you are important in any category, let alone a military rival.
Who cares what your citizens think? The policy of your state that is what matter, not opinion of your citizens.
Yeah, I perfectly know that you are an andvanced US citizen. You posses a much greater knowledge about Russia, than any regular US citizen. That knowledge is - "they are redass mother****ers and I can point on the map where they are living in'.
Honestly, I think it is the least you could do for ****ing them in the ass for the last 250+ years.
I didn't expect a knowledge of Russian history and understanding of Russian-Ukranian relationships from such typical American as you, sir.
You didn't fall my expectations.
Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia are three branches of the same people. They had a common state at the beginning of their existense - the Kiev Rus, and were in fact the one people. It was hundreds and hundreds of years before the continent where your country is located, has been discovered by europeans.
And re-unification of Russia and Ukraine was in 1654.
Is your arithmetics is as good as your knowledge of Russian history? Or you are ably to calculate 1654+250 ?
And then explain what kind of significant even for Russian-Ukranian relationships had happened in 1904+?
Why not 1991?
Are you able to calculate 1991-1654?
Tweet
Comment