[Damien]

Russian weapon upgrades.

But the fall of the United States would prevent such future invasions and wars as Iraq, Kosovo, Bosnia, Somalia, Kurdistan, Haiti, Angola, etc.. Even true capitalists such as George Soros are now against what the likes of Bush Junior and Rumsfeld are now doing around the world! Doesn't that at all suggest or say something to you?

George Soros a true capitalist? Only libertarians advocate the true free market, the capitalist ideal. America is not even close to this ideal, and is in fact moving more towards socialism every day. Libertarians advocate a capitalist revolution, but a revolution through peaceful means. True liberty is great and all, but things haven't gotten so bad in America where we'd be willing to violently overthrow the government to achieve it.

Have you ever read Foundations of the Ideal State by Joel Skousen, by any chance?:eek: He says things like this, and in fact he also believes that "there are no right-wing governments in the world today, only varieties of leftists". ("Classic" Left=tendencies towards greater government control, "Classic" Right=more individual freedom - "free enterprise".)

And you assume that because I am pro-capitalist I am pro-war. Not so. The warfare state and liberty are at odds with each other. After every war in US history, government power has expanded and liberty has decreased. I believe that war is only justified in self defence or when facing an imminent threat. Just who is the imperialist here? You seem to advocate militaristic domination of the world in the name of communism. I am opposed to imperialism in all forms, whether its conquering countries in the name of "democracy," "communism," or whatever.

I personally would be more-or-less fine with this - because it would be entirely in the benefit of the World Revolution.

Even the looming prospect of Russia having full total military hegemony over the world - which is what the United States openly has today - would be fine once again for me as it would ensure the success of world communism ultimately.

Besides, Stalin personally ordained this political goal.

Nuking America is surely an evil way to stop American imperialism. You'd be killing millions of innocents to stop the actions of a few guilty in our government.

Why would an "innocent" person be working within a United States capitalist American military institution then?

Even so, I have already said and made clear that civilian casualties will be - sadly - unavoidable during this coming period.

My brother is a Royal Air Force man - so he knows the risks full well. I did not agree from day one with what he was doing, as is the case with many of my other military friends. These things will just become absolutely unavoidable in this continuing strategy.

He who pays your money controls your life.

No, he who controls your money controls your life. And in a socialist government, you do not control your own money. The "people" or the government control it. So you've either got tyranny of the majority or tyranny of the government.

Quite true. That is why we need a Khmer Rouge-type system - the complete abolishment of all of the money in the world!:eek:

What is the point of us even having money?:?: It only creates classes, tensions, and crime in society. Only Americans, capitalists, Jewish and Saudi Arab oligarchs have any real use for "money" and the World Bank institution.

(My liberal days are suddenly all coming back to me. )

In a true capitalist country, no one controls your money but you. You earn in in whatever way possible. If you don't want to work under a boss, you are free to start your own business. There would be no restrictive regulations, zoning laws, licensing, or taxes that make it much harder to start your own business. If you don't want to start your own business and you don't like your boss, you can look for another job. There are tons of options, and those who are treated poorly in low paying jobs are either unaware of those options, choose not to take them, or are hindered from taking them by restrictive laws.

It just pisses me off when all of these capitalist right-wing radio presenters and disc-jockeys say repeatedly that they have "no sympathy" for the homeless and that they should just go and "get a job". Who on Earth would employ a homeless person?!>:

This is just yet another obvious reason why the United States and Prince William both must go for good!>:

Yes, life in a truly capitalist country would be hard, especially if you start at the bottom. Being responsible for your own well being and the well being of your dependents is hard. But freedom and responsibility go hand in hand. It is not worth it to give up responsibility for your well being to the government or to "the people." Giving up responsibility is giving up freedom, and allows others to control you.

I don't see why Princes William and Harry should have palaces while people die in small near-claustrophobic council house rooms. Everyone having the same - bar the old capitalists + aliens - sounds completely good to me.

Of-course, just by getting up and overthrowing your boss, you can actually help to prevent the Nuclear Holocaust.

Well its not gonna happen, so thats a moot point.

But the Russians frequently test and in fact continue to prepare for it under the ever-American Government-believing unquestionably cover of "civil defence drills" against the Chechen terrorists and whatnot.

But if you really want to prevent nuclear holocaust, it would help if you didn't advocate a nuclear first strike on another country.

I only want to save all leftists and Slavs, actually.

And again you are blaming the (hypothetical) victim. What if I advocated a nuclear first strike on Great Britain (where I assume you live right?), and then said its your fault for not being true capitalists?

Well the United States is planning this on Russia and several other nations around the world, such as North Korea and Belarus.

And it's all being done in the "great" names of securing an enduring "freedom" and "democracy" around the world.

If the American people were serious about socialism they would have killed the forefathers and the ascendents of George W. Bush and others years ago.

We're serious about socialism. We're seriously against it. Why don't you mind your own business instead of trying to tell other countries what kind of system they should have?

Because America has always and will always stand vehemently opposing in the way of world socialism!:eek:

Why didn't then America just leave the Vietcong to it? Why on Earth didn't they just leave the Soviet Union to it in Afghanistan? Why don't they just leave Cuba and North Korea alone? El Salvador and Angola? Mozambique and - now - Venezuela?!>:

Just like it is today under President Putin then?:eek: And what happened to Hitler again, please do remind us?

The Russian winter defeated them, because Hitler was a tactical moron.

But his generals were not. And they soon met stunned with the clenched fist Sun Tzu and Carl von Clausewitz first-hand, just as Napoleon and his top generals did before then in the old Tsarist Imperial times.

Ask any Russian: they had some level of militaristic respect for the Nazis - even during the "Great Patriotic War"(!) - because they were a very well-trained, fit, determined, if a very much malign, fighting force. They have no respect for the Americans because they are just all greedy, lazy slobs!:eek:

And Russia could never win a conventional war against the US now. It's hopeless.

In three years time we shall see....

....pure fantasy...

You have seen surely now more than enough evidence of the frequent Russian military exercises, I would imagine.

Delude yourself then!:eek:

The US keeps on updating it's military (new weapons are now starting to replace the M16, which still outclasses everything the Russians can produce), and it keeps on growing bigger.

On the contrary, the United States is disarming at an absolutely alarming - if not a record - rate, while the Russians are arming - not to mention secretly developing brand new weapons up in the Ural Mountains.:eek:

False. Russia is not arming, because it does not have the money to.

No, it doesn't!:eek: It has the American money to!:eek:

Still it continues to flow in....

And the US is arming its troops. It's not downsizing at any means.

I wonder why...?

It'll take more than Russia and China to beat the US (which are both outdated in their armies and only have numbers to defend them).

Every word of this no less than a lie.

Remember what both Napoleon and also Hitler once thought?:eek:

...so that explains why the Russian army only won a battle after the Russian winter has set in, never before...

Because:
1. That was years ago,
2. They did not have nuclear weapons en masse back then.

And I don't think Russia can attack after 5 years. It's too little time to upgrade a 1970s technological army to a 2004 technological army.

They have doing just that near-all the way through the 1990s!:eek: It is already more than done, trust me!:eek:

Triggerhappy Nun wrote:
It'll take more than Russia and China to beat the US (which are both outdated in their armies and only have numbers to defend them).

Every word of this no less than a lie.

Remember what both Napoleon and also Hitler once thought?

Except supposedly the Russians would invade the USA and also they would send nukes.... Why would, Russia want to send nukes to kill a large portion of the people when the USA isn't the only capitalist nation

Because:

(It may be the biggest and most brutal imperialist one though

Plus, would you not agree that, when the Soviet Union theatrically collapsed, it made the rest of the communist world appear weak by comparison with the newfound capitalism? (Something like 25% of the world in fact became "democratic" after that - the so-called "Third Way".) This time, imagine - well, you soon just won't have to do that at all - that the communist Soviet Union and all of its aligned satellite Eastern European states and other individally-storng socialist countries around the world - such as North Korea - suddenly all near-simultaneously reappeared just as the United States was to either collapse, be completely destroyed in a sudden surprise nuclear attack, or was all but broken up in a massive civil war.

Revolution can't come if there are no revolutionaries alive....

"And the revolutionaries will fight their flaming fires" - Michel de Nostradame.

But there are genuine revolutionaries who are alive today!:eek: They mostly live in Moscow, Beijing, Minsk, Caracus, Ho Chi Minh City, Astana, and in many other places!

The idea of a nuclear attack doesn't seem practical at all.

Practiced regularly by Russia as it may be.

So how would the USSR invade the USA after destroying it's land for 2 thousand years?

They can invade within just two days of the surprise Russian nuclear attack, largely via Mexico, but also via Cuba and via Canada. There is also talk of a later Russo-Chinese invasion through Alaska. Expect Moscow-ally countries such as France to be allowed in for "looting rights" after all of this has occurred. I could speculate, but expect Russia to reclaim all of Alaska - eight western islands of which they recently secretly invaded as a direct response to a deliberately and an appallingly pro-China United States policy:eek: - and now also perhaps Canada pending their unpredictable state after all this, Mexico and the other northern Hispanic nations to claim Texas - definitely the south - or a large part of it, Cuba to call Havana rule over southern - or all of - Florida, and China to take the bulk of the mainland United States. Russia will go into Europe - and in fact I have yet another a hugely important update on this coming at the end of this week.

By the way, arguement aside, I don't think anyone should support this "war" if it happens.

That's up to the individual.

It is quite apparent that the Cold War is over, and I think that people want to get on with their lives on both sides. No reason to try to reverse history.

And doesn't it show?:eek:

That, and nuclear war isn't the answer.

Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, and Mao all thought that it was in fact very much the answer though.

Marxists, communists, even, should not support this. A nuclear holocaust is not the way to get your world government going. It's stupid, and it's crazy. Fanaticisim is never a good thing, and I think that's what's driving this. Are some communist really crazy enough to kill millions, if not billions, for their cause?

Millions/billions of "capitalists" though?:eek:

Refer back to my comments on the sheer unavoidability of civilian casualties during this attack earlier on in this post.

By the way, arguement aside, I don't think anyone should support this "war" if it happens. It is quite apparent that the Cold War is over, and I think that people want to get on with their lives on both sides. No reason to try to reverse history.

That, and nuclear war isn't the answer. Marxists, communists, even, should not support this. A nuclear holocaust is not the way to get your world government going. It's stupid, and it's crazy. Fanaticisim is never a good thing, and I think that's what's driving this. Are some communist really crazy enough to kill millions, if not billions, for their cause?

And I suppose you have some peaceful indealistic solution to this? That's just the garbage peddled to keep you in line. I think that the US has itself done many atrocities and I believe the US manipulates and exploits much of the world for its own interests. So for this very reason, I believe a lot of people outside the US, "fanatics", would in fact support this war.

And we're actually talking France, Germany, Poland, and others here this time, not just Palestine or al-Qaeda.

People coming out of bomb shelter: "Excellent, this war has killed almost all of the American population, but unfortunately most of our people are dead, civilization as we know it is gone, the whole world is fucked...and so are we."

I'd rather get 'taken out' in the first strike then live out some misserable existance on a destroyed earth. The survivors are going to need world socialism? No, they are going to a need a earth that is possible to live on and it won't be after a nuclear holocaust.

Fine, write to President Putin, and tell him that.

Yes, world socialism would be enforced after this event.

We not crazy, this why Khruschev never even considered launching nukes. Khruschev saw war he saw men die in his hands as my father generation did. He saw screaming women of his country covered in their children's blood. He saw mother's bury their chidlren.

But Khrushchev knew that the United States would then in fact retaliate in order to get the attacking Soviet state back for it, or vice versa for that matter. Nowadays, Putin knows that the United States can't and won't retaliate. This all goes back to PDD-60, which warrants no further discussion on this particular thread as it has had enough. (It's just like Lenin's life - "all that's need to be said or written about it has been said or written about it".)

Mothers should never have to bury their own babies who they cradled in their arms.

I have witnessed with my own eyes parents having to bury a child of theirs before, so hence I have some idea of what this is like!:eek:

This truth. We will all die in nuclear war, bunker or not. No one will be left standing.

But both Russia and it's people will most likely mostly survive this due to the United States being unable to retaliate through PDD-60. Britain likewise.

"I not know what weapons world war III will be fought with but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.

Once said Albert Einstein, only the greatest scientist who has ever lived!:eek:

Good quote - and an important one in relation to this, says I.

And where do you think it would get them? A "peaceful idealistic solution" is better then going to war over something that will lead to the inevitable destruction of the human race don't you think? Even if all the people in the world rallied against the US and completely destroyed it in a huge ass "war to end all wars" nuclear exchange do you honestly think the world would be better off? I can see it all now:

People coming out of bomb shelter: "Excellent, this war has killed almost all of the American population, but unfortunately most of our people are dead, civilization as we know it is gone, the whole world is fucked...and so are we."

My assumption is that installations of military significance would be targets, not civilians. Even though I despise the predominant American culture, I am not one to want to commit atrocities to innocent people. I can begin to emphasize what it would be like only because I've lost my father.

It is my understanding that given this immense preparation supposedly taken by Russia, they would understand the costs involved and would have made sure that a war of this magnitude would not "lead to the inevitable destruction of the human race."

Both of your above statements are in fact entirely correct. This is the central issue that we're just not grasping here - and why this event did not in fact occur under Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, or Kosygin - even though is very nearly did in the late Brezhnev-era and again in the very early 1980s period!:eek:

It is my understanding that given this immense preparation supposedly taken by Russia, they would understand the costs involved and would have made sure that a war of this magnitude would not "lead to the inevitable destruction of the human race."

Look the point is the US has second strike capability and a quite powerful one at that.

Not if their military - which is already more than 50% stretched around the world - is going to be targeted - all of their known nuclear bases included.

Not targetting innocent people? What the hell would the survivors do?

Build socialism with Soviet and Chinese help. Though if Golitsyn's predictions are to be believed, class-based "concentration camps" will appear in the United States. In fact, one of his more - now-obviously - failed predictions was that these "concentration camps" would appear in the Western Europe in the mid-late 1990s.

Hitler lost but his reich has had a long lasting effect , the ideal of the new world order still exists today , lucky anarchy( chaos ) still exists in the universe to keep us goin .

As does Nazism and his ideologies.

Damien! Am I safe from this war if I live in a small town in Finland?

If you're either on or near the Russian border, then likely no. Think WWII. Only really the far north of Finland will truly be safe - if a very chilly hiding place while all of this is going on. (It's still snowing up there in Norway!:eek:)

Will you stay around on this forum Damien and let everyone laugh at you when nothing happens this year?

No because I don't think that it is going to happen in this specific year!:eek: I only said that it would in fact be a slight possibility because of the most sudden - and in fact very much heightened - continuing military activity that began just after my return to the forum. Joel Skousen has personally said that June 2004 in fact carries onky a "slight possibility of that extreme case" occurring, but that "something big" will likely be pulled off in or against the United States of America is in fact a very real possibility. I agree with this.

That said, he has recently advised in his weekly World Affairs Brief publication that people should in fact prepare to flee all metro areas in both America and Britain.

As I am writing this I have just read some even more concerning and worryingly very much related news which I will report later. (And just when I first thought that today was looking just that little bit more quieter than yesterday too!:eek:)

No he will probably be waiting for end in small bunker in his home not able to be getting on comuter.

If - when - this happens, then the first above-air EMP strike will likely blow-out all plugged-in computer equipment for, at the very least, more than a few months!:eek: So if ever I, glinert, or any other American, British, or Russian posters suddenly stop posting this month - or ever for that particular matter - then I would just get the hell out of any residential areas west of Grenwich and above the Equator!:eek:

[Spin]

Damien when will these attacks happen? If they dont will you and all your final phase friends remove yourselves from message boards in shame?

[Damien]

Damien when will these attacks happen? If they dont will you and all your final phase friends remove yourselves from message boards in shame?

If you mean the Final Phase, then I truthfully don't know. All I can say is that I am personally expecting this attack to occur sometime before 2008, as, based on the sources that I have, a date as far out as that of Titor's proposed infamous 2015 is just too inconceivable, if his ultimate Russian victory scenario is much pleasing.

If I felt that this would occur before September 2004 then I would now be making serious plans for escape. (We still should be doing this anyway as it may be a matter of months and not in fact years left before this.) But remember, "Russia might find it useful to have a serious army in 2005-2006".:eek:

But this summer should be fun though.

[Hamilcar]

Boy, you'll look even dumber in your bunker with 500 crates of spam than those Y2K retards. Hope you didn't waste all your money on escaping 'Ze Russians'.

[Damien]

Boy, you'll look even dumber in your bunker with 500 crates of spam than those Y2K retards. Hope you didn't waste all your money on escaping 'Ze Russians'.

The Y2K bug didn't hold test attacks though, did it?

(In fact the only event that occurred that was even remotely linked to it was a probably computer-controlled dam that burst in Japan, that was purely it.)

You know Jeff Nyquist said in his then-WorldNet Daily column that Y2K would in fact be the cover for a surprise joint Russo-Chinese attack on the United States. Colonel Lunev in fact most embarrassingly backed him up on this.)

[Hamilcar]

The Y2K bug didn't hold test attacks though, did it?

Sure. Many banks, stock exchanges and militaries held practises to see if and how their hardware would be affected.

You know Jeff Nyquist said in his then-WorldNet Daily column that Y2K would in fact be the cover for a surprise joint Russo-Chinese attack on the United States. Colonel Lunev in fact most embarrassingly backed him up on this.)

'Joint Russo-Chinese attack'? Sounds about as likely as the Babylonians and Tamerlane allying to attack the U.S...

WorldNet Daily is not exactly amongst the most balanced news sources. In fact, their opinion pieces are mostly a little ... detached ... from reality. Like you, actually.

[Spin]

If you mean the Final Phase, then I truthfully don't know. All I can say is that I am personally expecting this attack to occur sometime before 2008, as, based on the sources that I have, a date as far out as that of Titor's proposed infamous 2015 is just too inconceivable, if his ultimate Russian victory scenario is much pleasing.

If I felt that this would occur before September 2004 then I would now be making serious plans for escape. (We still should be doing this anyway as it may be a matter of months and not in fact years left before this.) But remember, "Russia might find it useful to have a serious army in 2005-2006".

Bugger. SO we wont be rid of all this stuff until 2008 at the minimum and maybe even 2015.

[Damien]

Joint Russo-Chinese attack on the West.

The Y2K bug didn't hold test attacks though, did it?

Sure. Many banks, stock exchanges and militaries held practises to see if and how their hardware would be affected.

No - not the people of the Earth to protect themselves against the Y2K threat - but the Y2K bug in the attacks on the world's computer and information systems. (Then again, there was the 9/9/99 scare, wasn't there?:eek:)

You know Jeff Nyquist said in his then-WorldNet Daily column that Y2K would in fact be the cover for a surprise joint Russo-Chinese attack on the United States. Colonel Lunev in fact most embarrassingly backed him up on this.)

'Joint Russo-Chinese attack'? Sounds about as likely as the Babylonians and Tamerlane allying to attack the U.S...

Well, they are preparing for it, and, by working together, they could certainly both bring the United States down.

Castro certainly thinks so.

WorldNet Daily is not exactly amongst the most balanced news sources. In fact, their opinion pieces are mostly a little ... detached ... from reality. Like you, actually.

Quite true. But not the great J. R. Nyquist column.

You oughta read through some of those actually.

If you mean the Final Phase, then I truthfully don't know. All I can say is that I am personally expecting this attack to occur sometime before 2008, as, based on the sources that I have, a date as far out as that of Titor's proposed infamous 2015 is just too inconceivable, if his ultimate Russian victory scenario is much pleasing.

If I felt that this would occur before September 2004 then I would now be making serious plans for escape. (We still should be doing this anyway as it may be a matter of months and not in fact years left before this.) But remember, "Russia might find it useful to have a serious army in 2005-2006".

Bugger. SO we wont be rid of all this stuff until 2008 at the minimum and maybe even 2015.

Trust me though, when this happens you will all have more than plenty to talk about amongst yourselves on this forum, leaving me and all of my near-daily contributions about this just no longer needed.

[Hamilcar]

Well, they are preparing for it, and, by working together, they could certainly both bring the United States down.

A bunch of rusty Sovremennys and MIGs aren't going to even scratch the U.S. military.

[Damien]

Well, they are preparing for it, and, by working together, they could certainly both bring the United States down.

A bunch of rusty Sovremennys and MIGs aren't going to even scratch the U.S. military.

Of-course it won't.:eek: But the largely brand new, never-before-seen by the world aerial technology that is hidden way up in the Ural Mountains will not even be defeated with nuclear EMP weapon strikes in the air.

The older models have long been discarded, or sold off to foreign international clients such as North Korea and pre-March 2003 Iraq.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Yay. What can we expect the invading force to look like?

[Attila The Nun]

It just pisses me off when all of these capitalist right-wing radio presenters and disc-jockeys say repeatedly that they have "no sympathy" for the homeless and that they should just go and "get a job". Who on Earth would employ a homeless person?!>:

This is just yet another obvious reason why the United States and Prince William both must go for good!>:

We have Social Security, unemployment checks ete. to help the homeless (and I am against making a limit on when you can recieve it)

And I think you forget that in communism everyone shares the misery of being poor.

I only want to save all leftists and Slavs, actually.

...don't we have our "master race" set up quite nicely?

Because America has always and will always stand vehemently opposing in the way of world socialism!:eek:

Exactly the point I were trying to make. You always have to force socialsm on people for it to work.

Why didn't then America just leave the Vietcong to it? Why on Earth didn't they just leave the Soviet Union to it in Afghanistan? Why don't they just leave Cuba and North Korea alone? El Salvador and Angola? Mozambique and - now - Venezuela?!>:

I didn't support US actuion in any of those. Funny thing in America, people actually have different opinions about wars.

Just like it is today under President Putin then?:eek: And what happened to Hitler again, please do remind us?

The Russian winter defeated them, because Hitler was a tactical moron.

But his generals were not. And they soon met stunned with the clenched fist Sun Tzu and Carl von Clausewitz first-hand, just as Napoleon and his top generals did before then in the old Tsarist Imperial times.

Ask any Russian: they had some level of militaristic respect for the Nazis - even during the "Great Patriotic War"(!) - because they were a very well-trained, fit, determined, if a very much malign, fighting force. They have no respect for the Americans because they are just all greedy, lazy slobs!:eek:

...funny. I remember the US giving a lot during WWI, WWII ete. to other countries. We also never agreed on signing the Treaty of Versailles. We supported the United Nations, and also work ourselves on charity work around the world.

You have seen surely now more than enough evidence of the frequent Russian military exercises, I would imagine.

Delude yourself then!:eek:

I'll believe it when I see it. Some military runs don't prove anything. The Russians are probably training for an emergency terrorist threat.

False. Russia is not arming, because it does not have the money to.

No, it doesn't!:eek: It has the American money to!:eek: [/quote]

So money's good when it's going towards your little socialist dream? I could have sworn you said you didn't want any money in this very post...

I wonder why...?

Iraq? Afghanistan? Korea?

1. That was years ago,
2. They did not have nuclear weapons en masse back then.

By the way, that reminds me. I bet the UN won't be too happy

They have doing just that near-all the way through the 1990s!:eek: It is already more than done, trust me!:eek:

And I had this whole thing abot Russia being piss poor during the 90s. I guess all the lost money was just in the cushions of Yealtson's couch.

That's up to the individual.

Yeah, the fanatics.

And doesn't it show?:eek:

That's your big thing? A communist propoganda newspaper? Try something reputable. Maybe something on the BBC, or CNN?

Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, and Mao all thought that it was in fact very much the answer though.

And they were all insane, now weren't they?

Millions/billions of "capitalists" though?:eek:

Don't forget those communists. There'll be billions of them blown away too by US nukes.

Refer back to my comments on the sheer unavoidability of civilian casualties during this attack earlier on in this post.

It won't be a little bit of civilian casualties, it will be mainly civilian casualties. It would be a nuclear holocaust that would literally destroy the world, if not most of mankind.

]And I suppose you have some peaceful indealistic solution to this?

Yeah, no "revolution" to begin with

That's just the garbage peddled to keep you in line. I think that the US has itself done many atrocities

And Russia hasn't? Please, whatever the US did, it has nothing on Russia.

And we're actually talking France, Germany, Poland, and others here this time, not just Palestine or al-Qaeda.

I'm sorry, what was that? Captalist countries supporting a communist revolution? I might believe Poland, since they were part of the Warsaw Pact, but no other. Germany hated Soviet rule. That's how the whole "Berlin Wall" thing started.

Fine, write to President Putin, and tell him that.

Yes, world socialism would be enforced after this event.

Funny, socialism with 5 people. I guess it could work.

This truth. We will all die in nuclear war, bunker or not. No one will be left standing.

Exactly. Who said Russians didn't make sense?

But both Russia and it's people will most likely mostly survive this due to the United States being unable to retaliate through PDD-60. Britain likewise.

The US can still launch nukes. If a war starts up, we always have our nuclear bombers, submarines, missles ete.

Not if their military - which is already more than 50% stretched around the world - is going to be targeted - all of their known nuclear bases included.

Which is maybe 15% of all the nuclear targets. It's basically the ame thing as throwing a dart at the US and nuking wherever the dart lands.

Build socialism with Soviet and Chinese help.

Nuclear war would mean the end of China and Russia, along wqith any other countries.

[Spin]

Cyborgs. He said something about the USSR having cybonrg like things before.

Of-course it won't. But the largely brand new, never-before-seen by the world aerial technology that is hidden way up in the Ural Mountains will not even be defeated with nuclear EMP weapon strikes in the air.

Wow never before seen and never before test technology.

[Hamilcar]

Wow never before seen and never before test technology.

Powered by phlogistons, no doubt.

[Spin]

Maybe I was right that the USSR was creating Borg cubes.

Hmmm.

[Damien]

Soliders, cyborgs, and phlogiston power.

Yay. What can we expect the invading force to look like?

You know what soldiers look like.

Something like this:







Yes, I am fully aware that these marching Russian troops are in fact bearing the Tsarist military standard and uniform. That is all part of the deception. Besides, just exactly what music does Putin's clearly overtly Stakhanovite army march too?

Cyborgs. He said something about the USSR having cybonrg like things before.

I never said that at all!>:

Show me where I say that!:eek:

Of-course it won't. But the largely brand new, never-before-seen by the world aerial technology that is hidden way up in the Ural Mountains will not even be defeated with nuclear EMP weapon strikes in the air.

Wow never before seen and never before test technology.

Yep. That's why their were riots on the streets of Moscow in August 1998 in spite literally billions in Western aid pouring into the country.

It poured in fact into Yamantau....

Wow never before seen and never before test technology.

Powered by phlogistons, no doubt.

No. Well, I don't think so anyway.

Maybe I was right that the USSR was creating Borg cubes.

I wouldn't know.

[Spin]

I dunno you said something about the "uSSR" having battle suits or something way back on this thread.

[Hamilcar]

Powered by phlogistons, no doubt.

No. Well, I don't think so anyway.

Yo bro, go read up on what the phlogiston is.

[Damien]

I dunno you said something about the "uSSR" having battle suits or something way back on this thread.

Yes. According to one of my secret sources: "two-metre-high" "insectoid" robots, I think kind of like a giant preying mantis. But not cyborgs!


Above: A typical preying mantis.


Above: How the Soviet prototype preying mantis might possibly look like.

Powered by phlogistons, no doubt.

No. Well, I don't think so anyway.

Yo bro, go read up on what the phlogiston is.

I did actually have to check first for your information, and it's very "hypothetical" nature would make it a very unlikely source of power for the Russians, unless, of-course, the secret Russian scientists had managed to uncover its secrets - which is actually a very real possibility, of-course. But I truthfully don't know again.

[Hamilcar]

I did actually have to check first for your information, and it's very "hypothetical" nature would make it a very unlikely source of power for the Russians, unless, of-course, the secret Russian scientists had managed to uncover its secrets - which is actually a very real possibility, of-course. But I truthfully don't know again.

There *is* no phlogiston.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston