US Elections

[Puffwagon]

 

 

I'm on the outside looking in. 

Edited 11/11/16 11:22 AM by Puffwagon
Spelling of course.

[hpfmnst]

So much to say but this isnt the place or is it really appropriate on a ford forum and we are going way off topic from my original point. 
 
I for one dont care so much about the islands but they have no right to build nuclear bases in international waters 3000km away from their own territory/boarder/eez. that's the law! Not to mention threatening civillian aircraft...some trade hey?
 
But in saying that you are obviously unaware of the threats that have been made to australia in the last 10 months and I certainly wont post them here, but that is one reason why usa flew 2 b1 bombers here.
 
Differnece between you and I is im on the inside and your on the outside looking in. Ill let you work that one out..

haha you made me laugh now with you secretive response..
I tried to be as simple as possible in my brief explanation how international system of deterrence works between rival countries so you can understand. Did I ever mentioned in my post that China will deploy nuclear weapons to those bases? You might wanna read my post again slowly.
But than again you never know...
US is deploying nuclear weapons to greater distances then you mentioned all around the world (read about europe and asia) and pointing them to populations of countries they disagree with.
Since US are exceptional, no one is allowed to do what they do. That is the law isn't it?
About certain threats to Australia you mentioned, those threats are so secretive that us uninformed outsiders do not have right to know about them. Only chosen ones know about this and you appear to be one of those. I and the rest of us will be forever in your debt if you tell us that secret. We need time to prepare and stock up, so little sharing would be greatly appreciated

[Puffwagon]

26 minutes ago, JETURBO said:

Reminds of when it was just before my teens when my biggest problem was trying not waking up my dad in the morning with my rm80.

[MBAF]

39 minutes ago, hpfmnst said:

haha you made me laugh now with you secretive response..
I tried to be as simple as possible in my brief explanation how international system of deterrence works between rival countries so you can understand. Did I ever mentioned in my post that China will deploy nuclear weapons to those bases? You might wanna read my post again slowly.
But than again you never know...
US is deploying nuclear weapons to greater distances then you mentioned all around the world (read about europe and asia) and pointing them to populations of countries they disagree with.
Since US are exceptional, no one is allowed to do what they do. That is the law isn't it?
About certain threats to Australia you mentioned, those threats are so secretive that us uninformed outsiders do not have right to know about them. Only chosen ones know about this and you appear to be one of those. I and the rest of us will be forever in your debt if you tell us that secret. We need time to prepare and stock up, so little sharing would be greatly appreciated

 

This is going around in circles. 

 

The law to build nuclear bases in international waters is a little different to having rotational fly in fly outs with all your allies, when doing so unarmed.

 

Further to this it was an australian ship in the china sea that was threatened before the usa joined in on the whole debacle that's currently under discussion here more than 2 years ago..

 

 

I wont discuss this anymore as my point was never to have a e-argument with someone over china and more to do with russian/us relations and what the whole picture COULD look like when both russia and china have ulterior motives. 

 

Feel free to pm if you want to discuss further

Edited 11/11/16 12:02 PM by MBAF

[hpfmnst]

ok here's a heand shake
people just need to understand that china and russia have their interests, just like US has theirs. As long as those interests can be understood by the other side all is good. It is when one side does not want to respect other side that conflicts arise. Russia has been almost begging NATO not to put those missile interceptors on their borders in Eastern Europe . NATO was lying through their teeth saying it is against Iran for years...
They could not at least think of any better excuse. They took Russians for retards. As you know ICBMs are most woulnerable in the lower atmosphere. Once they reach stratosphere, nothing currently can stop them.
That is why NATO started positioning them there. Currently any Russian ICBM launched within Russia during retaliatory strike within 1000 km from those interceptors could theoreticaly be neutralised. As we know majority of Russian ICBMs are stationed on the western side of that country, it presents real threat to Russia as MAD would become unachievable by Russians.
So Russia decided to abandon treaty with US partially because of those interceptors, partially because of breakdown talk about syria with US.
So as a consequence of not respecting someone's interests we are living in the world with ever-increasing volumes of thermonuclear weapons.
If we as humanity deploy only limited number of those weapons in an unlikely event of nuclear conflikt, humanity will have no chance of surviving...

[Rab]

 

[MBAF]

[Rab]

 

[MBAF]

This thread is getting a bit fishy....

[Rab]

excelsior