usmaandada121
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
with the recent tensions between russia and the usa i would just like to know everyones opinions about the 2 nations and if there is a very slim chance that a war may break out in the near future thank you and try to respect peoples opinions.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
No Man
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
I think Russia is better when it comes to foreign policy and a war won't happen (but another cold war is possible).
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
There is no chance of war, today's tensions are nothing compared to what they were during the Cold War. It could certainly develop into something worse though. I can understand why Russia is concerned about the US with NATO expansion and some of the US's recent actions round the world. But Putin's nationalism has the potential to be very dangerous, especially to those nations bordering Russia.
0
reply
Sir Fox
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
It's not even that complicated.

Russia's excuse that they are being threatened by NATO is preposterous. It's up to the respective countries to decide whether they want to join NATO or not and it's none of Russia's business - they have no right to tell neighbouring countries, independent, sovereign nations, what to do.

What happened is that Russia invaded part of a neighbouring country (Ukraine) without any kind of provocation. The excuse they made was that Russian citizens were in danger. However:

a) There was no major upheaval until Russia actually made the situation worse. No Russian had come to harm in Crimea and there was no reason to believe that it would happen.

b) Russia handed out passports like candy, the same they did in Georgia years ago. Creating Russian citizens, then having to protect them.

Throughout the conflict Russia has been lying over and over again. They claimed that the Russian forces (which had identified themselves to the BBC as regular Russian troops) were 'local self-defense forces' - only later did Lavrov openly admit that they had been Russian troops from the first minute.

There is no denying that a lot of people in Crimea were actually be happy about the intervention as they feel Russian in the first place, but no one has a clue whether it's actually the majority and the issue could have been resolved via a democratic, fair referendum. Instead, Russia just invaded the place.
3
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
(Original post by usmaandada121)
with the recent tensions between russia and the usa i would just like to know everyones opinions about the 2 nations and if there is a very slim chance that a war may break out in the near future thank you and try to respect peoples opinions.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Russia is not part of the west and opposes western values, therefore it is to be considered a potential enemy.

My loyalty is to the EU and Anglosphere.
1
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by No Man)
I think Russia is better when it comes to foreign policy and a war won't happen (but another cold war is possible).
You're a fan of communist imperialism, I take it?
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by Rakas21)
Russia is not part of the west and opposes western values, therefore it is to be considered a potential enemy.

My loyalty is to the EU and Anglosphere.
Do you think the EU has a future though? It seems to me that a federalist Europe would be a bad idea. I mean, who actually identifies as a European, rather than a French, Spanish, German or English person (say)? In the USA everybody identifies as an American, so it works (kinda - they still have the north-south divide). I think a union is a good thing but it should be limited to mundane things like free movement, trade and national cooperation (á la NATO, but on domestic issues like climate change, for instance).
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
I like Russia better atm. Don't really like how hypocritical USA are invading ****loads of countries and killing thousands of civilians. But then they make a big deal about Russia when their reasons are quite legitimate and they aren't killing civilians. Russia don't rain fire and death over densely populated urban areas lmao.

I have Russian friends as well who are cool people.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by felamaslen)
Do you think the EU has a future though? It seems to me that a federalist Europe would be a bad idea. I mean, who actually identifies as a European, rather than a French, Spanish, German or English person (say)? In the USA everybody identifies as an American, so it works (kinda - they still have the north-south divide). I think a union is a good thing but it should be limited to mundane things like free movement, trade and national cooperation (á la NATO, but on domestic issues like climate change, for instance).
Of course. I don't think all 28 current members will remain but i'm very certain that a core of at least a dozen countries (including Germany, Netherlands and Spain) will unify to the point that they become a singular federal state in the coming decades (Europe will also probably breach the Middle East and Northern Africa). I actually consider a federal Europe a good thing because not only is it an economic and military counter balance to the other massive future powers (US, China, India) but even if we're not part of it, it's advantageous to trade with states under 1 set of rules rather than 50.

In the UK, 60% of Scots are Scottish first and British second. There's a relatively good chance they'll still stay, And of course the US actually fought a civil war 90 years after it's creation and is still expanding now (Peurto Rico will be the 52nd state - they had a referendum). So long as a decent segment of the population and political class wishes it, there's still every chance it can pull through.

It's a slow process but if you assume that 10% of the EU population take advantage of free movement then instantly you've got a potential 10% who are x first, EU second.. and that's sufficient to get the ball rolling.
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by Rakas21)
Of course. I don't think all 28 current members will remain but i'm very certain that a core of at least a dozen countries (including Germany, Netherlands and Spain) will unify to the point that they become a singular federal state in the coming decades (Europe will also probably breach the Middle East and Northern Africa). I actually consider a federal Europe a good thing because not only is it an economic and military counter balance to the other massive future powers (US, China, India) but even if we're not part of it, it's advantageous to trade with states under 1 set of rules rather than 50.

In the UK, 60% of Scots are Scottish first and British second. There's a relatively good chance they'll still stay, And of course the US actually fought a civil war 90 years after it's creation and is still expanding now (Peurto Rico will be the 52nd state - they had a referendum). So long as a decent segment of the population and political class wishes it, there's still every chance it can pull through.

It's a slow process but if you assume that 10% of the EU population take advantage of free movement then instantly you've got a potential 10% who are x first, EU second.. and that's sufficient to get the ball rolling.
The only thing I'm wary of is a kind of forced nationalism. Scottish identity evolved parallel to British identity over hundreds of years, and American identity was created by the refugees who settled there for a new life. Europe on the other hand, has the baggage of history. Although, that being said, Germany is only as old as 1871 and has gone through some pretty radical transformations over the last century, so I suppose anything's possible. But I have more faith in NATO to keep the world in order than I do with the EU.
0
reply
gagaslilmonsteruk
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
TBH it's not Russia or the USA we should be wary of right now. Of course the issue in Ukraine is a problem, but when compared to the Iraq crisis or tensions in East Asia, I don't think it's as big.

I think if our eyes should be anywhere right now, it should be on the Iraq crisis; ISIS have bases near the Jordan and Syrian borders. Throw in the fact that Iraq has Iran and Saudi Arabia as neighbours, and Syria has Turkey, Lebanon and Israel, it could get messy, especially if ISIS go into Syria. That's not forgetting that Iraq is already pretty much divided into 3 separate nations, and that the Turks will retaliate to any aggression just like they did with Syria. And then you have Israel who will protect herself by any means. In fact I found this interesting article about it the other day; http://www.inquisitr.com/1303680/wor...y-flash-point/
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by felamaslen)
The only thing I'm wary of is a kind of forced nationalism. Scottish identity evolved parallel to British identity over hundreds of years, and American identity was created by the refugees who settled there for a new life. Europe on the other hand, has the baggage of history. Although, that being said, Germany is only as old as 1871 and has gone through some pretty radical transformations over the last century, so I suppose anything's possible. But I have more faith in NATO to keep the world in order than I do with the EU.
Right now the division in the European military makes the US action necessary, as an entity alone the EU would be more than powerful enough. Forced nationalism has occurred throughout the ages, there was substantial sectarian division between Scotland and England until Elizabeth 1 but the two were joined less than a century later by union. US identity was at the beginning very diverse with aspects of all the European powers being forced together.

In the modern world i think a lot of people are able to look beyond the simple notion of a national border and ask themselves 'what is in my self interest as a nation'. For many eastern european nations they are the strongest pro-ponents of a united europe because as individual countries they are small and unimportant. A Hungarian may well feel Hungarian but it's in their self interest to be as close to the core as they can be even if that involves less sovereignty.

It's big countries like the UK or even France who appear less inclined to come together for a collective good. In Britain's case that's because of the imperial overhang of the Anglo-sphere. I mean i'm here saying i support European federalism but i'd jump at the chance for Anglospheric integration.
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by Rakas21)
Right now the division in the European military makes the US action necessary, as an entity alone the EU would be more than powerful enough. Forced nationalism has occurred throughout the ages, there was substantial sectarian division between Scotland and England until Elizabeth 1 but the two were joined less than a century later by union. US identity was at the beginning very diverse with aspects of all the European powers being forced together.

In the modern world i think a lot of people are able to look beyond the simple notion of a national border and ask themselves 'what is in my self interest as a nation'. For many eastern european nations they are the strongest pro-ponents of a united europe because as individual countries they are small and unimportant. A Hungarian may well feel Hungarian but it's in their self interest to be as close to the core as they can be even if that involves less sovereignty.

It's big countries like the UK or even France who appear less inclined to come together for a collective good. In Britain's case that's because of the imperial overhang of the Anglo-sphere. I mean i'm here saying i support European federalism but i'd jump at the chance for Anglospheric integration.
I think the reason I don't feel so strongly about a European integration is because I don't view Europe as a historically benevolent entity. I view Britain and America as historically benevolent entities so I am much more interested in the alliance between those two. I worry that if Europe is given too much power, it will revert to its old ways of fascism and genocide (or anything except liberal democracy). After all, liberal democracy was imposed on Europe from outside.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by felamaslen)
I think the reason I don't feel so strongly about a European integration is because I don't view Europe as a historically benevolent entity. I view Britain and America as historically benevolent entities so I am much more interested in the alliance between those two. I worry that if Europe is given too much power, it will revert to its old ways of fascism and genocide (or anything except liberal democracy). After all, liberal democracy was imposed on Europe from outside.
Europe has always had two faces. On the one hand most traits of liberal democracy can be traced back to Europe and were exported by imperialism, on the other hand it's always had a somewhat fascist element too close.

I suppose European history in a world is.. radical.
0
reply
mazigh
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
US go to hell Russia number one death to the West
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by Rakas21)
Europe has always had two faces. On the one hand most traits of liberal democracy can be traced back to Europe and were exported by imperialism, on the other hand it's always had a somewhat fascist element too close.

I suppose European history in a world is.. radical.
Well I associate Europe with the Catholic church (which I despise), but then you are right I suppose - many of humanity's greatest achievements did come from the European continent originally, as well. But in terms of geopolitics, I would sooner trust a three year old to run the world than a united Europe.
0
reply
No Man
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by felamaslen)
You're a fan of communist imperialism, I take it?
I was referring to their stance with the Middle East.
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
(Original post by No Man)
I was referring to their stance with the Middle East.
Putin's stance is essentially to support Assad (although to be fair, the US hasn't been much better, supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt for example).
0
reply
No Man
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#19
Report 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by felamaslen)
Putin's stance is essentially to support Assad (although to be fair, the US hasn't been much better, supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt for example).
His stance is also to support Sisi.

I'd prefer Sisi and Assad in power over the ISIS and Muslim Brotherhood any day.
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
(Original post by No Man)
His stance is also to support Sisi.

I'd prefer Sisi and Assad in power over the ISIS and Muslim Brotherhood any day.
It's a choice between authoritarian (and in Assad's case, manically violent and sadistic) strongmen, and Islamist fanatics. Too close to call.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you get study leave?

Yes- I like it (431)
58.64%
Yes- I don't like it (40)
5.44%
No- I want it (214)
29.12%
No- I don't want it (50)
6.8%

Watched Threads

View All