Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do you support giving Ukraine F-16s
Yes 209 40.04%
No 263 50.38%
Unsure 50 9.58%
Voters: 522. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-05-2022, 08:46 PM
 
Location: On the Great South Bay
9,255 posts, read 13,396,888 times
Reputation: 10301

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
China used to own the northern part of Manchuria, which now is inside Russia, forming the Khabarovsk and Maritime Districts, which include Vladivostok. There are still Manchu-speaking tribes living along the Amur River in Khabarovsk District, and in the mountains outside of Vladivostok.
Exactly, and there are Chinese immigrants moving into parts of Russia as well.

So what would happen if the Chinese government was to use the same tactics that the Russians used in Donbas and Luhansk? Claiming that the local Russian governments were run by Nazis and China needed to protect ethnic Chinese people? And before anyone says it - China unlike Ukraine has nuclear weapons.

And it may not even be a deliberate Chinese government policy but ethnic fighting or tension between native Russians and Chinese immigrants. Then the Chinese government might be drawn in even if it did not want to.

That is why it is foolish for Russia to undermine the post-war order. When you have the most to lose, don't start a fight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2022, 08:49 PM
 
79,383 posts, read 61,515,362 times
Reputation: 50655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
It's not such a simple thing. You can't just flush the environment with a hose. The radiation didn't just travel in a straight line east. It spread to the arctic, from where it circled the arctic globally. It contaminated the ground, and the lichens reindeer feed on, from northern Scandinavia through Yakutia, and beyond. The UN has been monitoring the radioactivity of the ground and plant growth in arctic and sub-arctic areas ever since, for safety.
If a moose poops, it will eventually permeate the entire planet at an atomic level. There are no doubt billions if not trillions and trillions of atoms in there after all.

The question of radioactivity is thus "to what material effect".

So, comparing the impact of a moose pooping on someones front door step to a moose pooping 300 miles away upwind strays into the area of "noticeable".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2022, 08:50 PM
 
79,383 posts, read 61,515,362 times
Reputation: 50655
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
Exactly, and there are Chinese immigrants moving into parts of Russia as well.

So what would happen if the Chinese government was to use the same tactics that the Russians used in Donbas and Luhansk? Claiming that the local Russian governments were run by Nazis and China needed to protect ethnic Chinese people? And before anyone says it - China unlike Ukraine has nuclear weapons.

And it may not even be a deliberate Chinese government policy but ethnic fighting or tension between native Russians and Chinese immigrants. Then the Chinese government might be drawn in even if it did not want to.

That is why it is foolish for Russia to undermine the post-war order. When you have the most to lose, don't start a fight.
I already Annexed Russia way earlier in the thread so tough luck China.

P.S. Anybody want to make me an offer for Alaska?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2022, 09:12 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,515 posts, read 109,122,598 times
Reputation: 116651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
If a moose poops, it will eventually permeate the entire planet at an atomic level. There are no doubt billions if not trillions and trillions of atoms in there after all.

The question of radioactivity is thus "to what material effect".

So, comparing the impact of a moose pooping on someones front door step to a moose pooping 300 miles away upwind strays into the area of "noticeable".
The point is, food sources in the arctic and sub-arctic have been contaminated since the Chernobyl disaster. People live there. The USSR, in fact, made a point of populating the arctic. But the radiation has affected the food chain in northern Scandinavia as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2022, 09:43 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,720 posts, read 9,399,053 times
Reputation: 20625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Good video.
One of the previous posters pointed out that one of the things Putin has done is create a much more heavily armed Ukrainian border. No matter where it ends up drawn on the map, the new (or the old) border will be heavily defended by Ukraine with advanced weapons of all sorts.
Crimea, because it must get its water and electrical power from Ukraine, will have to be part of Ukraine. The Crimea Bridge, therefore, will be useless to a future army who tries to cross. What are now Russian bases in Crimea, will, in the future, be Ukrainian bases. Hostilities would be pointless, since the Sea of Azov and Kurch Strait can be targeted by Ukrainian weapons.
Bottom line is, Russia better damn well behave itself in the future.
Where did you get that from? Ukraine hasn't supplied electric power to Crimea since November of 2014 when the power lines between Crimea and Ukraine were blown up. Crimea has their own water and electricity. If they need more they could just as easily get it from Russia.

Quote:
Crimea without power from Ukraine after electricity pylons 'blown up'

MOSCOW/KIEV (Reuters) - Crimea was left without electricity supplies from Ukraine on Sunday after pylons carrying power lines to the Russia-annexed peninsula were blown up overnight.

It was not immediately clear who had damaged the pylons, but a Russian senator described the move as an “act of terrorism” and implied that Ukrainian nationalists were to blame.

Crimea receives the bulk of its electricity from the Ukrainian mainland and its seizure by Russia last year prompted fury in Kiev and the West, which then imposed economic sanctions on Russian companies and individuals.

Russia’s Energy Ministry said emergency electricity supplies had been turned on for critical needs in Crimea and that mobile gas turbine generators were being used, adding that around 1.6 million people out of a population of roughly 2 million remained without power as of 1000 GMT.
Crimea without power from Ukraine after electricity pylons 'blown up' _ Reuters
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2022, 09:54 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
25,860 posts, read 17,633,452 times
Reputation: 37804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
Where did you get that from? Ukraine hasn't supplied electric power to Crimea since November of 2014 when the power lines between Crimea and Ukraine were blown up. Crimea has their own water and electricity. If they need more they could just as easily get it from Russia........
Yup.
I meant to say water - Crimea must get water from Ukraine - and forgot the electrical grid had been replaced.
To this day Crimea depends on the 400-kilometer-long North Crimean Canal (NCC) to carry water from Ukraine’s biggest river, Dnipro, to the peninsula. Before the occupation, the canal provided 85% of drinkable water to Crimea. Today, the water crisis affects all facets of life on the peninsula. It has become a source of tension not only between Moscow and Kyiv but also within the Ukrainian government itself. The crisis has gradually transformed the peninsula, creating challenges to the eventual reintegration of Crimea back into Ukraine.


Here's where I got it from, dated Jun 2020:

https://www.eurasiareview.com/160420...imea-analysis/


Crimea cannot thrive without Ukrainian water. And it hasn't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzO7gIT5GYU&t=23s
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2022, 09:57 PM
bu2
 
24,314 posts, read 15,150,265 times
Reputation: 13178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
China used to own the northern part of Manchuria, which now is inside Russia, forming the Khabarovsk and Maritime Districts, which include Vladivostok. There are still Manchu-speaking tribes living along the Amur River in Khabarovsk District, and in the mountains outside of Vladivostok. Russia wouldn't be able to handle a second front, if China decided to take advantage of Russia being distracted far to the West. But China has wisely told Putin to find a negotiated solution.


Instead, Russia has started using drones to bomb infrastructure deep inside Ukraine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/05/w...ussia-war.html
Russia has shown in the past, that it doesn't need forces on the ground to wage this war. When the threat of NATO creating no-fly zones over Ukraine arose, Russia ceased its air force activity, and switched to submarine-launched missiles from the sea. Now they've returned to air strikes, but with a twist; using drones to take out infrastructure, while waiting for fresh troops to arrive.
They had to buy them from Iran. Their ships were getting sunk by the Ukrainians, so they had to find a new method. They are running short on smart missiles that their planes can deliver from hundreds of miles away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2022, 10:34 PM
 
13,605 posts, read 7,619,658 times
Reputation: 10333
Drones combined with Lockheed Martin Himar system is what wreaking havoc on Russians. Himar (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) accuracy is high combined with a drone Russians are sitting ducks. Ukraine only has a small number of 50 mile range systems Biden is sending more now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2022, 11:07 PM
 
Location: Ridgeland, MS
632 posts, read 300,941 times
Reputation: 2027
Quote:
Originally Posted by HodgePodge View Post
The threat of nuclear weapons never made sense to me. Why would you nuke an area that you want to annex / take over and make it uninhabitable for decades / centuries?

Is there such a thing as nuking a small contained area without it spreading?

I see it more as a desperate threat to scare the Ukrainians into surrendering or "coming to the table".

Also it's to show the West that he is mister "don't mess with me I don't bluff" barechested man.

I do love hearing that the Russians are losing more and more daily, not just in the stupid "special military" operation, but also to the common Russian population who are leaving in droves from the insanity that Putin has created.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Someone on another thread said hey, it worked! — when I objected that I still can’t fathom a rational reason why two civilian targets were chosen (over military ones) as a ‘demonstration.’ So: to this day we have patriotic Americans endorsing what I still consider to be a depraved choice.

However, their point remains. It worked. I don’t see why patriotic Russian sentiments would run any differently. They’re the same species, after all.

Back when I was in high school, at the height of the Cold War, I had a classmate assure us, at the ripe old age of fifteen, and with a notable smirk on her face, too, that nuclear war, specifically MAD, was never going to happen. She gave all the usual reasons that continue to be offered, including on c-d, why it was a slam dunk no-go. I stared at her in amazement of both her self-assurance and her blind trust. Really, I must have had my bottom jaw visibly dropping. I was so astounded that I still remember the moment, thirty eight years later. And guess what. She was right. Up to now.

What Laurel did not know and did not figure into her predictive calculus is that our leaders and military have always been planning for the possibility and even the eventuality of war involving nuclear weapons. Whole military careers have been spent solely planning for nuclear war, however contained or widespread it may potentially become. It is always a realistic option, as far as the DoD is concerned. There are decades’ worth of defense planning around every nuclear exchange contingency, right down to the nitty gritty details of how to dispose of thousands of radioactive corpses safely.

In those plans, we, the little peons, are truly just collateral damage should we become a radioactive hunk of decaying flesh. Nevertheless, a million such hunks is considered mathematically and methodically in the predictive actuarial tables of the nuclear possibilities.

My longish point is that, while a nuclear exchange doesn’t make sense to you, or to me, or to many, many people — so much so that, like in the case of my high school classmate, it causes them to dismiss the possibility altogether — it does make sense to those in charge of our lives. They have dropped the bombs before, and, as my previous patriotic responder commented, they believe it works. It did work, didn’t it? Did Hiroshima and Nagasaki make Japan uninhabitable? No. The bombs dropped on those cities were low yield, so the fallout dissipated fairly quickly, while demonstrating that their power could obliterate cities and kill hundreds of thousands in a virtual flash.

So yes, using nuclear bombs makes sense to many. And it even worked, as one time in history showed. Those for whom it makes sense (I.e., the ones in charge of our lives) have built the ultimate prepper bunkers, to which they will be whisked off at a moment’s notice should the need arise. There’s a plan in place for the transport there as well. The rest of us peons will have to make do with duck-and-cover, our own stashes of Spam and canned peaches squirreled away in basements and amateur bunkers, and murder, mayhem, and cannibalism. The DoD has accounted for all that, too.

(And to any who may wonder or are confused about where I stand on all of this, I personally believe it a brand of human madness, pure and simple).

Last edited by Timaea; 10-05-2022 at 11:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2022, 02:03 AM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,720 posts, read 9,399,053 times
Reputation: 20625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Yup.
I meant to say water - Crimea must get water from Ukraine - and forgot the electrical grid had been replaced.
To this day Crimea depends on the 400-kilometer-long North Crimean Canal (NCC) to carry water from Ukraine’s biggest river, Dnipro, to the peninsula. Before the occupation, the canal provided 85% of drinkable water to Crimea. Today, the water crisis affects all facets of life on the peninsula. It has become a source of tension not only between Moscow and Kyiv but also within the Ukrainian government itself. The crisis has gradually transformed the peninsula, creating challenges to the eventual reintegration of Crimea back into Ukraine.


Here's where I got it from, dated Jun 2020:

https://www.eurasiareview.com/160420...imea-analysis/


Crimea cannot thrive without Ukrainian water. And it hasn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzO7gIT5GYU&t=23s
Well they cut of water in 2014 too. That problem has only recently been resolved with the invasion, when the Russians blow up the dam that was blocking the water. Chimera can get water and power from Russia. But I'm sure that probably played a roll in Putin's decision to invade the Ukraine and create a land bridge.

Quote:
Russia has achieved at least 1 of its war goals: return Ukraine's water to Crimea

Two days into Russia's invasion of Ukraine in late February, Russian military forces blew up a dam that Ukraine had built to cut off Crimea's primary water supply. Ukraine barricaded the North Crimean Canal in retaliation for Russia seizing the Crimean Peninsula in 2014.

The Kremlin had been fuming about the dam ever since.

Anna Olenenko, an agriculture historian from the Khortytsia National Academy in Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine, points out that blowing up the dam and restarting the flow of water toward Crimea was one of Russia's first acts of the war.

"I think that this shows us the importance of that issue [to Russia]," she says. There were multiple reasons why Russia invaded Ukraine, Olenenko says, and restoring the flow of water to Crimea was one of them. "Putin and the [Russian] government promised to the Crimean people that they would solve the water problem in Crimea," she says.
Russia has achieved at least 1 of its war goals: return Ukraine's water to Crimea
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top