New Mars Forums

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

For the Mars Society, the important issue is getting to Mars. When Dr. Robert Zubrin wrote his book "The Case for Mars" in the 1990s, one chapter said if a business wanted to do it, then it wouldn't build an American launch vehicle at all. Instead buy services of the Russian launch vehicle Energia. Boris Yeltsin was president; relations with the US were much better. I hadn't heard of Energia before reading that book, but thought it was a great idea. Others in the Mars Society did too, in fact one artist painted an image.

That book quoted a Standford University study to estimate the cost of Energia. But when I asked if anyone in the Mars Society actually talked to the Russians, I didn't get an answer. So I did. I got an answer. It was available, for anyone willing to pay for restoration of certain elements of infrastructure, plus per-launch cost. I found out NASA had contacted them in 1994 for a human mission to the Moon: between US$60 million and US$100 million to restore infrastructure, plus US$120 million per launch including the Energia Upper Stage. However, that was 1994. The response I got in February 2001 did not confirm the cost. And there's been degredation of infrastructure since. American aerospace companies I talked to claim that Energia couldn't be restored, it was lost in 1987, but I confirmed the Buran space shuttle orbiter and Energia stages to launch it were maintained in launch ready status until January 1, year 2000. But the roof of the vehicle assembly building collapsed on April 25, 2002. Building #112 at Baikonur. One of the high bays has a patched roof, the section used to stage modules for ISS, but the roof over the two bays for Energia have never been repaired.

The thing that makes this appropriate for this discussion is the boosters. Energia has 4 strap-on boosters: two on the left, two on the right. These are the first stage of a Zenit launch vehicle. The only difference is a simpler gymbal (one dimension instead of two), fairing, and parachutes and air bags for recovery. These boosters were manufactured in Yuzhmash, in east Ukraine. So Energia is not possible as long as there's conflict in east Ukraine.

How do we get Russia and Ukraine to "play nice"?

martienne

Member

From: EU

Registered: 2014-03-29

Posts: 146

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Boris Yeltsin was president; relations with the US were much better. I

How do we get Russia and Ukraine to "play nice"?

Yeltsin was an alcoholic who sold out Russia and allowed gangsters to rule the country for a decade. Most people in Russia consider him a traitor, along with Gorbachev for destroying the USSR.

Of course the USA likes him! The USA only likes Russians who are defectors, hate their country or actively destroy it. The US thinks Russia was at its best in the 1990s when people were on their knees, literally not knowing if they'd last until the end of the month.
A strong Russia whether under Putin or in the USSR is a provocation for some reason.

And neither Russia, nor Ukraine is a child that can be told to "play nice".
The US has done enough damage by spurring on Euromaidan, and with all the propaganda. Without the US the coup d'etat probably wouldn't have happened.
Look what the meddling lead to - it was peaceful before, now it's practically civil war.
Hands off USA.

Last edited by martienne (2014-06-09 19:37:03)

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

"All we are saying is give peace a chance."

This is one of the things I love about Canada. We can be proud, without being condescending. We can be strong, without bullying anyone.

One of the things that put my teeth on edge has been when Americans talked as if Russia was a "has been" superpower. I pointed out the American economy collapsed in 2008. And for the same reason. If Europe and China hadn't bailed them out, they would be as much a basket case as the Soviet Union. And considering the political turmoil that was brewing, that would have caused major rifts within the US. And if the US doesn't smarten up, learn to constrain spending within their means, then that could still happen. The rate the US federal debt is growing, looks like another economic collapse as bad as 2008 is coming. And this time Europe won't be able to bail out the US, and China just won't. But the US economy dominates the world so much that if they go down, the entire world will go into a depression as bad as the 1930s. That's why they were bailed out in 2008, but the US is continuing to drive toward that cliff.

Meanwhile major American military contractors want the multi-billion contracts that they had during Ronald Regan's time. Even Ronald Regan knew the US couldn't sustain that, but he felt they could longer than the Soviet Union. It worked better than anyone could have expected. But when George W. Bush became president, the contractors whined and complained, so he gave in, dramatically increased military spending. He pushed America into the same trap that destroyed the Soviet Union. And in 2008, it blew. They were bailed out, America has a second chance, but they appear determined to spoil it.

And America should make friends with Russia. A country that wanted to be friends, at least during Mr. Yeltsin's time. A country with vast petroleum reserves, just as America is trying to free itself from the Middle East. And a country with vast industrial capacity. Russia could be great friends.

You don't like it when I use cute terms like "play nice"? Please don't get defensive; you see I lecture our American friends even more. Of course the Canadian economy is direct affected by the US, and my personal employment has shit since 2007. Yes, we all want the US to knock off the imperialistic crap. Yes, they're still doing it. That doesn't excuse Russia invading. I still claim Regan should never have invaded Granada. That was extreme meddling, that was an invasion. In fact, the US strongly pressured Canada to participate, but Canada refused. When the US demanded as part of our alliance, we agreed to send RCMP (Canadian federal police) to clean up the mess after the US invasion was over. That's the most we would agree to. We refused to invade. After all, in 1972 Granada asked to join Canada, and Canada said no. Why would we invade a country that we rejected? If we wanted control over how they run their internal affairs, we would have accepted their offer to join. The reason I raise this is to say again: two wrongs do not make a right. Invading Ukraine to annex portions is not right.

The international mission that I talked about will require the Energia rocket from Russia, plus boosters from East Ukraine, plus the launch site a Baikonur in Kazakhstan. I proposed Canada lead. It would start by using Russian space shuttle Ptichka to lift to ISS the Centrifuge Accommodation Module that Italy paid for and Japan Built. We would need Australia's deep space station for communication with Mars. And the European Space Agency to deliver a robotic Mars sample return mission, which would demonstrate In-Situ Propellant Production. We would also require ESA to deliver a satellite into Mars orbit using aerocapture. So this would include Canada, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Italy, Japan, Australia, France, Germany, UK, and all the other members of the European Space Agency. One goal is for countries to work together for a common purpose, something constructive. None of us can do it alone, but together we can.

By the way, Canada was as strongly supportive of NASA's space effort in the 1960s as Ukraine was of Russia's. With Russia, Ukraine, and Canada working together, don't you think we could achieve great things?

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Boris Yeltsin was president; relations with the US were much better. I

How do we get Russia and Ukraine to "play nice"?

Yeltsin was an alcoholic who sold out Russia and allowed gangsters to rule the country for a decade. Most people in Russia consider him a traitor, along with Gorbachev for destroying the USSR.

Of course the USA likes him! The USA only likes Russians who are defectors, hate their country or actively destroy it. The US thinks Russia was at its best in the 1990s when people were on their knees, literally not knowing if they'd last until the end of the month.
A strong Russia whether under Putin or in the USSR is a provocation for some reason.

And neither Russia, nor Ukraine is a child that can be told to "play nice".
The US has done enough damage by spurring on Euromaidan, and with all the propaganda. Without the US the coup d'etat probably wouldn't have happened.
Look what the meddling lead to - it was peaceful before, now it's practically civil war.
Hands off USA.

Yeltsin ended the Cold War, do you have something against that? Would you like your French Cities to be under threat of nuclear destruction by the Soviets? So lets rewind you rather wish Leonid Brezhnev was immortal and was still the leader of Soviet Russia, and that there were no START or SALT talks, you just wish both sides to keep on adding more and more nuclear missiles to their arsenals and that would make you happy, have I got that right? So basically you are a Cold Warrior who is against Peace!

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-06-10 08:05:15)

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

"All we are saying is give peace a chance."

This is one of the things I love about Canada. We can be proud, without being condescending. We can be strong, without bullying anyone.

Boris Yeltsin gave Peace a chance and Vladimir Putin took it away again!

One of the things that put my teeth on edge has been when Americans talked as if Russia was a "has been" superpower. I pointed out the American economy collapsed in 2008. And for the same reason.

Actually not, we didn't try communism and 72 years of central planning and Soviet Style top down management of the entire economy, that is what did in the Soviet Economy, the 2008 recession was a minor correction by comparison, and was only made worse by the Obama Administration making the wrong policy moves, raising taxes, increasing regulation, basically moving in the same direction that the Soviet Union was in. The Result is the Soviet Economy is around $2 trillion and the United States is still around $16 trillion.

If Europe and China hadn't bailed them out, they would be as much a basket case as the Soviet Union.

Recessions are a natural thing and they happen every so often, the only difference is that this one got Obama elected and all he's done since was to prolong it and blame George Bush for its length, it is otherwise no worse than the Great Depression, and that did not cause the collapse or break up of the United States. When the Soviet Union collapsed there was no recession, it collapsed of its own internal caused due to 72 years of central planning!

And considering the political turmoil that was brewing, that would have caused major rifts within the US. And if the US doesn't smarten up, learn to constrain spending within their means, then that could still happen. The rate the US federal debt is growing, looks like another economic collapse as bad as 2008 is coming. And this time Europe won't be able to bail out the US, and China just won't. But the US economy dominates the world so much that if they go down, the entire world will go into a depression as bad as the 1930s. That's why they were bailed out in 2008, but the US is continuing to drive toward that cliff.

Meanwhile major American military contractors want the multi-billion contracts that they had during Ronald Regan's time. Even Ronald Regan knew the US couldn't sustain that, but he felt they could longer than the Soviet Union. It worked better than anyone could have expected. But when George W. Bush became president, the contractors whined and complained, so he gave in, dramatically increased military spending. He pushed America into the same trap that destroyed the Soviet Union. And in 2008, it blew. They were bailed out, America has a second chance, but they appear determined to spoil it.

I don't remember the whining and complaining, I do remember the attack on 9/11! the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941 also precipitated a lot of military spending, you tell me wasn't the Japanese that started it or all those military contractors whining on FDR's doorstep. So how was FDR different from George W. Bush, they were both responding to an external threat, what was Canada doing during World War II, I think it was spending more on the military too. One has to ask was FDR trying to make military contractors rich or was he trying to win World War II? Also was George W. Bush trying to make military contractors rich or was he trying to win the war on terrorism?

And America should make friends with Russia. A country that wanted to be friends, at least during Mr. Yeltsin's time. A country with vast petroleum reserves, just as America is trying to free itself from the Middle East. And a country with vast industrial capacity. Russia could be great friends.

You don't like it when I use cute terms like "play nice"? Please don't get defensive; you see I lecture our American friends even more. Of course the Canadian economy is direct affected by the US, and my personal employment has shit since 2007. Yes, we all want the US to knock off the imperialistic crap. Yes, they're still doing it. That doesn't excuse Russia invading. I still claim Regan should never have invaded Granada. That was extreme meddling, that was an invasion. In fact, the US strongly pressured Canada to participate, but Canada refused. When the US demanded as part of our alliance, we agreed to send RCMP (Canadian federal police) to clean up the mess after the US invasion was over. That's the most we would agree to. We refused to invade. After all, in 1972 Granada asked to join Canada, and Canada said no. Why would we invade a country that we rejected? If we wanted control over how they run their internal affairs, we would have accepted their offer to join. The reason I raise this is to say again: two wrongs do not make a right. Invading Ukraine to annex portions is not right.

So should Grenadans be allowed to do anything they want without threat of a US invasion? What if they are brewing biological warfare and allowing Soviets to base 100,000 ICBMs on their territory? What if they were testing nuclear warheads in their territorial waters and training terrorists to use back pack nukes to blow up cities with? What is the threshold for an invasion, what is your criterion? Anyway Grenada has nothingto do with the attack on 9/11 that is apples and oranges.

The international mission that I talked about will require the Energia rocket from Russia, plus boosters from East Ukraine, plus the launch site a Baikonur in Kazakhstan. I proposed Canada lead. It would start by using Russian space shuttle Ptichka to lift to ISS the Centrifuge Accommodation Module that Italy paid for and Japan Built. We would need Australia's deep space station for communication with Mars. And the European Space Agency to deliver a robotic Mars sample return mission, which would demonstrate In-Situ Propellant Production. We would also require ESA to deliver a satellite into Mars orbit using aerocapture. So this would include Canada, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Italy, Japan, Australia, France, Germany, UK, and all the other members of the European Space Agency. One goal is for countries to work together for a common purpose, something constructive. None of us can do it alone, but together we can.

Would you like to move Canada to north of Russia if it were Possible?

By the way, Canada was as strongly supportive of NASA's space effort in the 1960s as Ukraine was of Russia's. With Russia, Ukraine, and Canada working together, don't you think we could achieve great things?

With the United States, Ukraine and Canada working together, don't you think we could achieve great things?

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-06-10 12:03:32)

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Tom, you're a member of the Tea Party. The main good thing about that party was their obsession to eliminate the deficit. Why don't you focus on that.

2008 was not just a minor correction, it started cascade failure of the major banks in America. The government nationallized US banks in order to prevent that. That's the only thing that prevented complete collapse of the banking system. And yes, if the collapse was allowed to continue, it would have been a Great Depression. The US government still controls banks, which is why they can get away with continuing to increase the federal debt. Yes, ironically, they are moving in the same direction as the Soviet Union. Banks can't be deregulated right now. The US federal government debt would have to be drastically reduced, and no deficit, before that could happen. Any attempt to deregulate banks now would result in banking system failure.

JoshNH4H

Member

From: Pullman, WA

Registered: 2007-07-15

Posts: 2,564

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

RobertDyck, what is the source of your claim that Europe and China bailed out the United States during the recession?

---

-Josh

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Tom, you're a member of the Tea Party. The main good thing about that party was their obsession to eliminate the deficit. Why don't you focus on that.

2008 was not just a minor correction, it started cascade failure of the major banks in America. The government nationallized US banks in order to prevent that. That's the only thing that prevented complete collapse of the banking system. And yes, if the collapse was allowed to continue, it would have been a Great Depression. The US government still controls banks, which is why they can get away with continuing to increase the federal debt. Yes, ironically, they are moving in the same direction as the Soviet Union. Banks can't be deregulated right now. The US federal government debt would have to be drastically reduced, and no deficit, before that could happen. Any attempt to deregulate banks now would result in banking system failure.

Actually what it is obsessed with is reducing the size of government so the economy can recover. Balancing the budget isn't the be all and end all. What we want is to get the debt small in comparison to the economy, it doesn't have to be perfectly balanced. There is two ways to do this, one way is to increase taxes and try to pay it off, the other way is to grow the economy faster than the debt accumulates, and that seems to be the easier way, after all the main goal is having a strong growing economy, not a perfect balance sheet. The Budget could after all be balanced in the middle of recession, if I had a choice between a vigorously growing economy or a balanced budget, I'd choose the growing economy. Generally the economy grows when it is easier to do business and make a profit, so high taxes are an obstacle to economic growth. Also economic growth increases revenues to the government, since they are proportional to income. So which would you rather have, from your personal point of view: would you like your income to be growing and because of that you pay more and more taxes to the government as a fixed proportion of your income, or would you like your income to be fixed or static and the government constantly raising the percentage of your income you pay as taxes in order to generate greater revenue and balance the budget? I really don't care about the debt holders as much as I care about the American people. If some Chinese buy some Obama Bonds an Obama is doing something stupid with the money, they should think twice before buying those bonds in the future. One has to compare the pluses and minuses. What is the cost of balancing the budget and paying off the debt vs. the cost o balancing the budget and no paying it off? Credit rating is only a concern if we plan in borrowing more money than we plan to take in as revenue. So if the price of paying off the debt is a prolonged recession, then I say no thank you, we can balance the budget and concentrate on growing the economy.

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

RobertDyck, what is the source of your claim that Europe and China bailed out the United States during the recession?

They didn't buy US Treasury bonds out of the goodness of their hearts, they bought them because they felt it was a safe place to put their investments compared to other countries, and they may be correct in doing so. the US has a history of getting out of similar scrapes in the past, like the Great Depression for instance. People who bought US bonds did quite well, those who bought German bonds denominated in Reichmarks not so much!

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Multiple sources. CNN for one. Europe and China loaned billions to the US, in exchange for treasury bonds. Europe believed that the US economy so dominated the world that failure would cause a world wide depression as deep as the Great Depression. China had a growing economy, based on massive trade with the US, so for them to continue the US economy had to remain strong. But after the bail-out Congress seriously discussed helping average Americans and simply not repaying loans to China. That was not passed, but China has been slowly dumping their treasury bonds ever since. If they dump too quickly it would depress prices, so they wouldn't recover their money.

But Europe's economy is so devastated that they won't be able to do it again. Banks have been intertwined worldwide for years, so the US banking crisis devestated their banks too. They had to bailout their own banking system. They could have kicked the US Federal Reserve out of the OECD, and cut off the US banking system, limiting damage, and there was discussion of that at the time, but they chose not to. The bailout of their own banking systems had to be much larger because they didn't. In the process pulling up the US banking system. Again, protectionism was seen as one of the factors that led to the Great Depression, so Europe chose to bailout their own banking systems in such a way that it supported the US, even though doing so cost them a lot more. Their support was through the worldwide banking system rather than direct loans. But make no mistake, that cost them trillions of dollars.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-06-10 12:32:03)

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Is this what they mean by "Freakonomics"?

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Multiple sources. CNN for one. Europe and China loaned billions to the US, in exchange for treasury bonds. Europe believed that the US economy so dominated the world that failure would cause a world wide depression as deep as the Great Depression. China had a growing economy, based on massive trade with the US, so for them to continue the US economy had to remain strong. But after the bail-out Congress seriously discussed helping average Americans and simply not repaying loans to China. That was not passed, but China has been slowly dumping their treasury bonds ever since. If they dump too quickly it would depress prices, so they wouldn't recover their money.

But Europe's economy is so devastated that they won't be able to do it again. Banks have been intertwined worldwide for years, so the US banking crisis devestated their banks too. They had to bailout their own banking system. They could have kicked the US Federal Reserve out of the OECD, and cut off the US banking system, limiting damage, and there was discussion of that at the time, but they chose not to. The bailout of their own banking systems had to be much larger because they didn't. In the process pulling up the US banking system. Again, protectionism was seen as one of the factors that led to the Great Depression, so Europe chose to bailout their own banking systems in such a way that it supported the US, even though doing so cost them a lot more. Their support was through the worldwide banking system rather than direct loans. But make no mistake, that cost them trillions of dollars.

CNN is called the "Clinton News Network" for a reason. if the World got destroyed if the United States went down, they might as well hold US treasuries and collect the interest as they would take the risk whether they held them or not. If its the end of the World if the US did not repay its debt, it makes sense to hold those treasury bonds. This is kind of similar to betting that a "Dinosaur Killer" asteroid is not going to hit the Earth, because if your wrong, no ones going to be around to collect! What happens to Europe if the United States gets destroyed, you think maybe the Russians will invade, or the Chinese or Muslims will invade? Europeans aren't used to defending themselves after all, they call on the United States whenever they get in trouble!

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Is this what they mean by "Freakonomics"?

Liberals use names when they don't have a good argument, anything that doesn't involve government totally in control of every aspect of the economy is called Freakonomics. What people making their own decisions, people working for someone else other than the government, that gets called Freakonomics, does it make you feel better to say that?

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Europeans aren't used to defending themselves after all, they call on the United States whenever they get in trouble!

Europe built the Eurofighter Typhoon, and both France and UK have nuclear weapons. Including ballistic missiles. Allies are good, but don't treat Europe as a vassal.

CNN is called the "Clinton News Network" for a reason.
...
Liberals use names when they don't have a good argument

Who is using names?

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Europe has many times the GDP of Russia, why can't they stand up to them? Why aren't they a superpower, why do they let a $2 trillion wimp push them around and steal lad from Europe. Without the United States, the Continent would have been renamed "Russia".

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Would you please knock off the American imperialistic rhetoric. It's really tiresome. Perhaps we should send you to East Ukraine.

With the United States, Ukraine and Canada working together, don't you think we could achieve great things?

Two points: first we of the Mars Society have tried. But currently Congress/NASA have absolutely no serious plans to get humans to Mars. They keep talking about continuing George W.'s "Constellation" plan to redo Apollo to the Moon. That would give us SLS, but nothing else. Dr. Robert Zubrin and the Mars Society have tried, Dr. Zubrin since 1989, and the rest of the Mars Society since its founding in 1998. We have succeeded it keeping Hubble, and restoring funding for robotic explorers, but no serious plans to get to Mars. A few years ago I came to the conclusion we have to by-pass Congress. An international mission that isn't led by the US appears to be the only option.

The second point: one goal of an international mission is peace and cooperation. Perhaps you didn't live through the Cold War. At least when I went to school they didn't have drills for nuclear attack. I saw video from the 1950s: students would hide under their desk, covering their face from the flash of a nuclear bomb. Hoping they would survive. In the 1960s we didn't have that. But routes in my city are intended to convert from two-way to one-way out of the city; specifically to evacuate in case of a nuclear attack. In grade 10, I spoke with a Canadian forces lieutenant. I was worried a big Soviet nuclear bomb was aimed at us, she said probably not a big one, rather 3 smaller ones, only 1 megaton each. And in the 1970s the US built anti-ballistic missiles, deployed at the North Dakota ICBM fields. They're designed to detonate over Canada, just 30 miles outside my city. They won't protect my city. And one of the Soviet missiles is aimed at the Canadian Air Force base, because Russian Bear bombers have to fly over or near my city to get to North Dakota. I literally live in the cross-fire.

Peace protestors lobbied government for decades to end the Cold War. It finally did end. We the citizens won, because no nuclear war means we all get to live. But many of us who lived through the Cold War have been frustrated by certain individuals like you trying to rub in Russia's face that they "lost". No, they didn't lose, rather everyone won. But Russia suffered major economic problems as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Anyone with half a brain knows you don't kick a man when he's down, instead be friends and help him up. But America was stupid, let military contractors control government, ran the US economy into the ground until the US banking system damn near collapsed. That would have plunged the whole world into another Great Depression. Europe still hasn't recovered from that. The US and Canada haven't recovered either. More imperialistic rhetoric will only cause more trouble. The US needs to drastically reduce military spending. Starting another war is not the way to do that.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-06-10 22:28:40)

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Would you please knock off the American imperialistic rhetoric. It's really tiresome. Perhaps we should send you to East Ukraine.

With the United States, Ukraine and Canada working together, don't you think we could achieve great things?

Two points: first we of the Mars Society have tried. But currently Congress/NASA have absolutely no serious plans to get humans to Mars. They keep talking about continuing George W.'s "Constellation" plan to redo Apollo to the Moon. That would give us SLS, but nothing else. Dr. Robert Zubrin and the Mars Society have tried, Dr. Zubrin since 1989, and the rest of the Mars Society since its founding in 1998. We have succeeded it keeping Hubble, and restoring funding for robotic explorers, but no serious plans to get to Mars. A few years ago I came to the conclusion we have to by-pass Congress. An international mission that isn't led by the US appears to be the only option.

The second point: one goal of an international mission is peace and cooperation. Perhaps you didn't live through the Cold War. At least when I went to school they didn't have drills for nuclear attack. I saw video, students would hide under their desk, covering their face from the flash of a nuclear bomb. Hoping they would survive. In the 1960s we did have that. But routes in my city are intended to convert from two-way to one-way out of the city; specifically to evacuate in case of a nuclear attack. In grade 10, I spoke with a Canadian forces lieutenant. I was worried a big Soviet nuclear bomb was aimed at us, she said probably not a big one, rather 3 smaller ones, only 1 megaton each. And in the 1970s the US built anti-ballistic missiles, deployed at the North Dakota ICBM fields. They're designed to detonate over Canada, just 30 miles outside my city. They won't protect my city. And one of the Soviet missiles is aimed at the Canadian Air Force base, because Russian Bear bombers have to fly over or near my city to get to North Dakota. I literally live in the cross-fire.

Peace protestors lobbied government for decades to end the Cold War. It finally did end. We the citizens won, because no nuclear war means we all get to live. But many of us who lived through the Cold War have been frustrated by certain individuals like you trying to rub in Russia's face that they "lost". No, they didn't lose, rather everyone won. But Russia suffered major economic problems as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Anyone with half a brain knows you don't kick a man when he's down, instead be friends and help him up. But America was stupid, let military contractors control government, ran the US economy into the ground until the US banking system damn near collapsed. That would have plunged the whole world into another Great Depression. Europe still hasn't recovered from that. The US and Canada haven't recovered either. More imperialistic rhetoric will only cause more trouble. The US needs to drastically reduce military spending. Starting another war is not the way to do that.

What did the United States do in the Early to mid 1930s while Hitler rose to power?
We drastically reduced our military spending, it was drastically reduced after World War I, did that result in Peace or another World War? Nazi Germany was surrounded by countries that drastically reduced their military spending to show how peaceful they were, why do you suppose Hitler attacked anyway? Was he afraid, or did he instead see an opportunity?

Anyway the Soviet Union lost, it fell apart remember, and besides what did we do with Germany after it lost? We reminded them that they lost and helped them get back on their feet, even though the Soviet Union refused to hand back East Germany so that we could make it a part of the new Federal Republic of Germany. So Germany lost a World War and its Third Reich was broken apart by the victors, many of the pieces became independent countries again or they were made into Soviet satellites. So what happened when the Soviet Union broke apart? None of those pieces actually became American satellites. Why can't the Russians simply learn the lessons Germany did after their defeat in World War II, why does Russia have a chip on its shoulder and Germany does not? you think the Russians could learn something from the Post War Germans and how they conducted themselves as a nation afterwards?

I have to ask this question as well:
What would be the equivalent of a German "Putin"? You know a German Politician that thought the destruction of the Third Reich was such a tragedy, and who wanted to restore Germany to its former glory, what would you think of him? What if he thought some part of France rightfully belonged to Germany, what if he looked to Austria and tried to destabilize that country by supporting a pro-German minority and sent in the German Army to protect those ethnic Germans. What would you do or say, if it was a German leader who was doing the things Putin is now doing, would that get a different treatment from you? Just wondering?

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-06-10 22:32:17)

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Stop trying to win. You can't win. America can't win either. The world will not tolerate just one superpower. I was worried when this rhetoric started "they lost, we won", certain individuals in the United States strutting around as if they won the world. I knew something would give. I didn't expect what happened next: a non-government organization rose to stop US domination in their part of the world. That was al-Qaeda. I was afraid something would happen; never would have guessed that. But after escalating actions between the US and al-Qaeda, I predicted that al-Qaeda would try something on US soil. They did: truck bomb in the World Trade Center. It didn't cause much damage, just to other vehicles in the garage, but that told us their target. Anyone could guess they would try again. But try to learn the lesson here: no one can be emperor of the world. Not the Soviet Union, not the United States, not the British Empire, not anyone else. The world will not tolerate domination. The only way the world tolerated two superpowers was when they could play one against the other, effectively ensuring neither had any real power.

Every time you say "they lost, we won", you are poking the Russian Bear with a stick. Don't do that! You'll get mauled. Or worse, if you poke the Bear then run away, then innocent bystanders will get mauled. Like Ukraine.

You want to use World Wars as a historical example? Fine, let's do that. After World War 1, France insisted that Germany be blamed. The Treaty of Versailles demanded war reparations. World War 1 caused more damage than any war before. War reparations were massive. Collecting that from post-WW1 Germany caused their economy to collapse. Before WW1, Germany had the largest economy in the world. Not the US, not before WW1. Causing the most powerful economy in the world to completely collapse, caused a massive world-wide recession, teetering on the bring of Depression. The US stock market crash was just the straw that broke the camel's back, the straw the pushed the world into Depression. In fact, many economists believe the Recession caused the economic problems that caused the stock market crash, so that was just a symptom. The real cause was what was done to Germany. But after World War 2, Japan and Germany were not devastated. In fact, the Marshal Plan rebuilt Europe, including West Germany. America also helped Japan; they're now great friends/allies. After World War 1, Germany managed to get back on its feet and fight back. The result was WW2! After WW2 and the Marshal Plan, Germany became a friend/ally. What you are trying to do to Russia is what was done to Germany after WW1. Are you trying to create another Hitler?

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

What's wrong with saying we won they lost, it is the truth after all, their economic system failed, Soviet management techniques is no substitute for market incentives. Think of the Wright Brothers for instance and imagine their compeditors trying to build a steam-powered orithnicopter, They stoke the furnace with coal and build up a head of steam, making sure all the feathers are properly glued to the wings, and they push it down a track towards a cliff with the steam orithnicopter chuffing away, flapping its wings, and over the cliff it goes plummeting to the bottom of the Grand Canyon, is Orville Wright allowed to say, "we won you lost?"

If the World wants another Superpower, what's wrong with it being the EU? Why does it have to be Russia? Russia's economy does not work, the fact that they have to rely on oil and gas exports is evidence that it doesn't work, so basically you are telling us that we are not allowed to say "the Emperor has no clothes"! I wish the Europeans would display more European Nationalism when Russia attacks their continent, How much of Europe are they prepared to allow Russia to have?

When I was growing up, I was taught how important it was to be honest.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-06-11 07:11:48)

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Interesting side note, well, interesting to me. MAD doctrine and the Cold Wars serve as macro level template for understanding complex human behavior on the micro scale. Applying the same guiding principals developed under game theory and extrapolating individual human aberration, when assessed against a the contextual framework of a mars or space based society, we can assume societal structures and governing practices dictated by the practical necessity of living in an environment where everyone can cause grave harm to everyone else.

Fundamental choices will be made resulting in what many might characterize as backward steps in social evolution. Lack of, or restricted personal freedom. Strong regulatory bodies and oversight of mundane activities. Overarching command and control logistic structures that curtail free consumption. Pervasive surveillance. Limited or controlled competition. Limited personal property. Think about it, living in a thin metal box surrounded by vacuum, where anyone can push a button and you are all effectively dead? Sound familiar? Look what the United States has done with guarding planes, now imagine every aspect of your life was on a plane.

Ukraine & Crimea, the original purpose of this thread, is the result of an environmental condition, victim of history and geography. The environment influences so much, which is why I find so interesting, and which I generally see lacking in any real discussion regarding Mars. Well, at least what i see lacking in any real and meaningful way.

But I digress, carry on with the rest of this misguided re-interpretation of history. It's amusing.

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

the problem was Putin, if Putin left them alone, there would be no problems. RobertDyck wants to divert to discussing America as the lone Superpower and how that's a bad thing. Well if Europe doesn't like that they could form a stronger Union with the EU, but they let a weaker power, Russia, walk all over them, the West is all too willing to sell out the East just to preserve good relations with the Russian tyrant, what does this sound like? How about Africans who sold other Africans to the Europeans as slaves! So are Western Europeans acting as slave traders for by selling Eastern Europe into bondage by the Russians for natural gas?

Void

Member

Registered: 2011-12-29

Posts: 7,820

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Clark; I put this forward as my theory only, and do not assert it as a statement of fact that must be obeyed.

The vision you have put forward where authority owns everything is a pressure, but the Universe is a vacuum to our pressurized condition.

In my opinion people of great tallent, their character and abilities having be crafted by the struggle to master a generalist position in the web of life, were intellegent enough and generalized enough to build civilizations.

What followed was a spiral into specilization, where the gene and meme pools separated into rulers and servants.  The rulers specilizing in manipulation of other people to take their assets from them, and the servants specilizing in not being killed for their assets.  The middle was exterminated.  This ends in specilists who cannot understand the whole nature of being human.

You can see the results in the Middle East as perhaps among the most extreem.

North America however is the latest place of refuge from such actions.  Although we are under pressure from the predators, they have not yet taken us fully captive.

Space will be a future refuge for such types.

The Earth?  Does the human race continue to follow the path of specilization and the loss of mental capacity?  A verbal oriented ecosystem?  Will the extreamists be followed by even sillier sets of specialists until the human race looses conciouness and becomes animals in their capability to comprehend?

Anyway I do not think that as a whole, authority will prevail in the average location habitated by humans.  Just here and there.

---

End

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Honest? Try humility. Try respecting others.

Besides, pure capitalism doesn't work. Even the United States has social aspects: trade unions, social security, etc. Pure capitalism doesn't work. Pure communism doesn't work. A working economy requires a blend of many things.

All countries need to be proud of themselves. All. If you try to disgrace anyone, you create an enemy. Do not try to convert everyone to your way of thinking or your culture. Respect others, and celebrate diversity of culture. Everyone needs a good paying job, everyone needs a descent standard of living, everyone needs security in the sense that theives will not steal from your home. Russia has struggled with this. Many Americans struggle today. But when Germany was humiliated and destroyed, that created a need for a leader to get them out of it. Hitler failed the Bavarian uprising, and failed to win the German federal election. He bullied and manipulated. The only reason he got as much support as he did, was he was able to lift his country out of poverty, out of the humiliation they were in, to once again be proud. Russia went directly from Tsars, their version of kings, to communism. That was actually a major improvement. Yeltsin brought them into modern society with democracy and free market economy. Remember, a pure free market economy doesn't work, but a pure centrally controlled economy doesn't either. The US has anti-trust legislation and various regulations to prevent the free market economy from failing. The world as a whole is developing a hybrid that works. It isn't the east or the west, it's everyone learning from everyone. The people of Russia need to be proud of their country, and they need to stamp out crime, and they need descent jobs and descent income. Without that, you create the opportunity for another Hitler.

Superpower? The world doesn't want any superpowers. What I said is the Cold War was a problem. The world had two superpowers vying for control. Some countries allied themselves to one or the other, but much of the world played off one against the other to ensure neither had any authority. That's the point: to ensure neither has any authority. You can be a "power", but stop trying to be a "superpower".

Russia is worried that America is taking everything away from them. NATO has taken all Warsaw pact countries other than Soviet Union. And Baltic states as well. Recently NATO tried to take George and Ukraine. Russia has been nice, but as they see it, this is going too far. Ukraine is a very big part of the Russian economy. Without that, Russia would get much poorer. And that's not just military industry, that's also civilian goods. The Russian economy is recovering, but still struggling since collapse of the Soviet Union. They can't afford to lose more. Putin would lose political support if the Russian economy tanked. If you threaten Putin's authority as President of Russia, he'll send the military to do whatever it takes.

RobertDyck

Moderator

From: Winnipeg, Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 7,934

Website

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

The people of western Ukraine want to be part of Europe. As such they want to join the EU. They're almost desperate. In Poroshenko's inauguration speech, he promised to negotiate entry into EU. But the people of east Ukraine want to continue to do business with Russia. They want to keep their jobs. And Russia wants them to continue to be part of the Russia economy. Ok, so Poroshenko has to find a way to do all that.

Tom Kalbfus

Banned

Registered: 2006-08-16

Posts: 4,401

Re: Ukraine & Crimea

Honest? Try humility. Try respecting others.

Besides, pure capitalism doesn't work. Even the United States has social aspects: trade unions, social security, etc. Pure capitalism doesn't work. Pure communism doesn't work. A working economy requires a blend of many things.

You need government to enforce laws and legal contracts, and keep people honest and law abiding so they don't steal from each other, in that respect the government is like the referee in a ball game, but the referee doesn't get in the game and start playing ball, when he does that, that is socialism.

All countries need to be proud of themselves. All. If you try to disgrace anyone, you create an enemy.

Do you think Germany needs to be proud for starting World War II and killing 6 million Jews, likewise the Russians had a Revolution and Cold War, these are not things they ought to be proud of. The only way one learns from their mistakes is to realize that they were mistakes. I think Russia can learn from Germany's mistakes and try not to repeat them. Putin seems to know who Hitler was and does not like being compared with him, so why can't he learn from him. When Hitler tried to conquer Europe it did not end so well for him, so why can't Putin and Russia learn from that? Why do they have to be like the Germans between the Two World Wars, a truculent European Empire, instead of like the other Europeans nations that want peace? What has Russia ever done for peace? They keep trying to upset the established status quo, they are disturbers of the peace!

Do not try to convert everyone to your way of thinking or your culture. Respect others, and celebrate diversity of culture. Everyone needs a good paying job, everyone needs a descent standard of living, everyone needs security in the sense that theives will not steal from your home. Russia has struggled with this. Many Americans struggle today. But when Germany was humiliated and destroyed, that created a need for a leader to get them out of it. Hitler failed the Bavarian uprising, and failed to win the German federal election. He bullied and manipulated. The only reason he got as much support as he did, was he was able to lift his country out of poverty, out of the humiliation they were in, to once again be proud.

And what did they do to Poland? How did Poland humiliate them, how did it deserve what it got from Germany? All Poland did was exist, because about over 100 years Earlier the Prussians, the Russians, and the Austrians partitioned Poland between themselves and according to them Poland was not supposed to exist, it was an attempted eradication of their culture. The Germans between the World Wars didn't like the fact that Poland came back into existence and that the Polish culture and language survived.

Russia went directly from Tsars, their version of kings, to communism. That was actually a major improvement.

There was an attempt by Tsar Alexander to become a Constitutional Monarch, but an Anarchist shot him because he wanted Anarchy! I think the Tsars would have managed the economy better that the Communists have, there was a reason why the Kaiser was afraid of his cousin in Saint Petersburg. Communism was not an improvement, because the communists had even fewer morals than the Tsars did. Tsar Alexander tried to the right thing and for hat he was assassinated, that means he had a conscious, he had morals, and a monarch he inherited his position, he was raised as a Christian, Lenin and Stalin they seized power for themselves, they were ruthless and blood thirsty and had no morals, and in many respects were worse than Genghis Khan, the Soviets did kill more people than the Mongols did after all!

Yeltsin brought them into modern society with democracy and free market economy. Remember, a pure free market economy doesn't work, but a pure centrally controlled economy doesn't either. The US has anti-trust legislation and various regulations to prevent the free market economy from failing. The world as a whole is developing a hybrid that works. It isn't the east or the west, it's everyone learning from everyone. The people of Russia need to be proud of their country, and they need to stamp out crime, and they need descent jobs and descent income. Without that, you create the opportunity for another Hitler.

But they have not done  good job, ask yourself this, when you go to a Walmart store are there many products there that were made in Russia? You find all sorts of things that were made in China and Japan, but where do you go to find something made in Russia? I'll tell you, you go to the sportsman department where they sell guns, there you can buy an AK47.

Superpower? The world doesn't want any superpowers. What I said is the Cold War was a problem. The world had two superpowers vying for control. Some countries allied themselves to one or the other, but much of the world played off one against the other to ensure neither had any authority. That's the point: to ensure neither has any authority. You can be a "power", but stop trying to be a "superpower".

Russia is worried that America is taking everything away from them. NATO has taken all Warsaw pact countries other than Soviet Union. And Baltic states as well. Recently NATO tried to take George and Ukraine. Russia has been nice, but as they see it, this is going too far. Ukraine is a very big part of the Russian economy. Without that, Russia would get much poorer. And that's not just military industry, that's also civilian goods. The Russian economy is recovering, but still struggling since collapse of the Soviet Union. They can't afford to lose more. Putin would lose political support if the Russian economy tanked. If you threaten Putin's authority as President of Russia, he'll send the military to do whatever it takes.