You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] Joe_McCarthy [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

You prevented yourselves from being dominated by Nazis. Talk of post-WW2 side effects off of that is fairly puerile - it also overstates the effects of WW2 as opposed to, say, population explosion. In the Russian case I was referring to Tsarist Russia. Britain prevented Russia from dominating Europe by blocking its attempt to acquire resource rich Manchuria thus upsetting the European balance of power by making Russia much stronger.

And you're going to be dealing with far more than LATVIA. What happens to European stability as all of these anti-Russian states are left with no viable defense except nuclear weapons? Are we all going to invade them with Russia to deprive them of a right to self-defense? One notices that your assumption is always that everyone must make way for Russia - and usually involving the most comically unreasonable outcomes. Here's an idea: why can't the Russkies just get over it and reckon with the fact that countries they've brutalized don't want to be left naked to further Russian aggression? Maybe, just maybe, Russia is the unreasonable one in being butthurt over NATO expansion?

I don't tend to concern myself with trying to disarm nuclear states like Pakistan. It ain't going to happen.

Be glad foreigners even expect Sherlock Holmes. That seems a nice enough problem. You could be some Pole cleaning toilets in a foreign country because his own is so poor... whilst the natives are telling dumb Polack jokes behind his back.

And lastly, I tend to discuss issues where I think people are deluded and where there can even be conversation. What good would it do to rail against Muslim immigrants for example? Everyone agrees on that kind of stuff.

I will acknowledge often tiring having the same bullshit conversations though. That's probably why I don't discuss them more.