shuntmaster
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2010
- Messages
- 2,916
- Reaction score
- -26
- Country
- Location
Russia has heavy aircraft carrying missile cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
may be you have less units, but they become much more powerful, so that no reduction was not. If you were building a defense against the "aggressive" USSR - your military budget would not exceed the budgets of all other nations combined.
And even more, you would not attack Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and other countries.
But it is possible if you were a peaceful country concerned about self-protecting, not killing, robing and spying the whole world, including your own citizens.
Naaaah...He probably believes that the Soviet Union 'liberated' people from US 'capitalist running dogs'.As if the Russians never done something like that before. Especially spying on the world and on your own people.
Naaaah...He probably believes that the Soviet Union 'liberated' people from US 'capitalist running dogs'.
As if the Russians never done something like that before. Especially spying on the world and on your own people.
You know, with the military budget as the rest of the world, and ideas like "this is normal, because to us it's someone somewhere has already done" - you will go far. Prior to fascism, for example.
Naaaah...He probably believes that the Soviet Union 'liberated' people from US 'capitalist running dogs'.
In most cases, the Soviet Union helped people free themselves from British and French colonialism - Africa, Asia. But sometimes, from American capitalists, like Cuba.
It won't really matter since the U.S. has multiple warheads that can destroy cities and bunkers many times over. As well a deep underground bunkers. Even if any survived govt. collapse, destruction of food sources and transportation of food as well as radiation tends to mitigate survival. Imagine trying to feed more than a billion people if any survived.
the U.S. has multiple warheads that can destroy cities and bunkers many times over. As well a deep underground bunkers. Even if any survived govt. collapse, destruction of food sources and transportation of food as well as radiation tends to mitigate survival.
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...its-own-aircraft-carrier-3.html#ixzz2iQftDhAO
Imagine trying to feed more than a billion people if any survived.
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...its-own-aircraft-carrier-3.html#ixzz2iQg64ud6
Add Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the Baltic Republics(Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) etc etc etc....right?
really ?There are 12000 nuclear shelter bunkers in Moscow itself capable of holding 1500 people each.4873 in St.Petersburg.
Massive underground Food and grain storage facilities for feeding population for 3 years exist in Russia.
Russian population is 140 million. Plus they were believed to have an illegal nationwide ABM system armed with nuclear warheads.
Like the brahmins who imposed some of the most racial and sexually perverted laws on the lower castes?
Lets stick to Soviet Union, shall we?
Add Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the Baltic Republics(Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) etc etc etc....right?
Why ? Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones on others.
The Soviet Union helped the Communists come to power in these countries, but it would be hard to say that the Soviet Union liberated the countries from capitalism. While USSR supported the legitimate governments of these countries during the paid-West rebellion attempts.
That is not the point.
Open a separate thread, I can strip your argument piece by piece. But not here.