×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Russian State TV Anchor: Russia Could Turn US To "Radioactive Ash"

samzenpus posted about 8 months ago | from the lighten-up-francis dept.

The Military 878

An anonymous reader writes with a Ukraine news roundup. "'Russia is the only country in the world realistically capable of turning the United States into radioactive ash,' anchor Dmitry Kiselyov said on his weekly news show on state-controlled Rossiya 1 television. ... His programme was broadcast as the first exit polls were being published showing an overwhelming majority of Crimeans voting to leave Ukraine and join Russia. He stood in his studio in front of a gigantic image of a mushroom cloud produced after a nuclear attack, with the words 'into radioactive ash.' ... Kiselyov has earned a reputation as one of Russia's most provocative television news hosts, in particularly with his often blatantly homophobic remarks. But he is also hugely influential with his weekly news show broadcast at Sunday evening prime time. Putin last year appointed Kiselyov head of the new Russia Today news agency that is to replace the soon to be liquidated RIA Novosti news agency with the aim of better promoting Russia's official position. — Russia has threatened to stop nuclear disarmament treaty inspections and cooperation. Russian troops are reported to have seized a natural gas terminal in Ukraine outside of Crimea. There are reported to be 60,000 Russian troops massing on Russia's border with Ukraine."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | about 8 months ago | (#46506475)

I see the Putin Propaganda Machine is in full-Stalin mode.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506537)

Certainly I'd be more worried about their intentions to sink the US dollar by selling all their reserves held in that currency. A lot cheaper than firing several ICMBs, and much more effective...Regarding the economic warfront, I don't see any tactical advantages for the US here. Imagine the Russians selling all their US dollars, China following them, and bringing the value of a dollar bill cheaper than paper toilet...

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46506635)

Well, considering that conventional warfare is a nono, and nuclear warfare is a BIG NONO, but economic warfare is fair game, I'd say you have a point.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Interesting)

mikael (484) | about 8 months ago | (#46506665)

But once you have done that once, that's it, the economic weapon has been used, and you've got nothing left. Of course, there's always the threat of using it, or selling off a few million dollars of shares every now and again just to prove the point.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506771)

Have you thought of the actual consequences of a massive US dollars sale? The global economy would certainly suffer, but the US would actually suffer even more. With the actual amount of the US state debt, and how much is held by private hands, I'd say US would be facing a crack even bigger than the one at '29...

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Insightful)

Rob Riggs (6418) | about 8 months ago | (#46506845)

It's very easy for the U.S. to pay off the U.S. debt. It is denominated in U.S. dollars.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Interesting)

borcharc (56372) | about 8 months ago | (#46506915)

This risk is outdated. With the amount of bond buying that the US Federal Reserve has engaged in over the past few years buying all of the debt held by Russia and China combined would not even make a dent should they desire to sell it all, the FED and other nations (Japan) will happily buy. Russia's $100 billion and even China's $1.2T are small potatoes compared to the $16T+ the fed and friends have printed with little consequence as of yet.

Russia relies on Europe energy sales for 25% of its GDP, Europe relies on Russia to provide 6% of its energy. Sanctions targeting this will hurt Russia very badly and they know it. They have been strong arming Europe for years on energy, delaying their economic recovery. Its time the tables were turned.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506697)

this is not possible,i am from east . if they do this , their own economy will fall

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Interesting)

Chrisq (894406) | about 8 months ago | (#46506731)

this is not possible,i am from east . if they do this , their own economy will fall

It would certainly hurt both countries. But arguably Russia could survive in "economic lockdown" easier than the West, it would be like going back to just before glasnost. For the West it would be something unprecedented.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Informative)

Ottawakismet (2798639) | about 8 months ago | (#46506735)

Dont be stupid. Russia holds a mere $200b in treasury bills. Selling them would destabilize Russia more than the US. The US would buy that amount up in a few months. You have to understand the scale of debt - trillions in US debt exist, and 200$b is more like a little wave in a lake. China is opposed to Russia about the intervention, but they will not act on their opposition. The American economy is much larger than the Russian, and many other central banks hold way more US debt then the US.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Informative)

gtall (79522) | about 8 months ago | (#46506889)

Really? As of last year, Russia held $225 billion in U.S. dollars. So, you think Russia will tank a $17 Trillion dollar economy with $225 billion. I find it helpful to have a sense of perspective when dealing with numbers.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506625)

Not yet.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (2, Interesting)

kheldan (1460303) | about 8 months ago | (#46506633)

I'm fairly sure that Obama wouldn't have the balls to push the Red Button regardless of Putin wanting to, apparently, bring back the Soviet Union, and perhaps wanting to bomb the U.S. back into the stone age, however..

..yes, the U.S. could still, so far as I know, nuke Russia just as much as Russia could nuke the U.S.. However it would still be the End Of Life On Earth As We Know It, and anyone who doesn't get that is deeply and dangerously in denial. Furthermore don't forget that China (and maybe India, too) would be sitting there munching on popcorn the entire time, waiting for the show to be over so they could pick up the pieces, and I don't think anyone has forgotten that.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506749)

>wouldn't have the balls

Most of us would say "isn't insane," rather than "doesn't have the balls." Do you self-identify as a violent wacko?

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (0, Flamebait)

kheldan (1460303) | about 8 months ago | (#46506919)

What I'm saying is, I don't think that even if the missiles were headed this way, Obama still wouldn't have the guts to give the order for a counter-strike. I'm saying I have no confidence in him if that situation arose. He'd probably try to talk his way out of the whole thing right up to getting vaporized. In other words: I think Obama is weak. I'd take back my vote for numerous reasons if I could.

Well.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506705)

He's not Stalin at all, he's Putin it into top gear!

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506769)

Starting a nuclear war is never a good idea.

Bragging about the arsenal size is just idiotic. A single nuke from any country would most likely escalate into multiple nuke exchanges from other countries which would no doubt escalate into full blown nuclear nuclear destruction of the planet. Those pesky things called treaties and such would pretty much assure some ally has more nukes in the waiting.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (2)

JockTroll (996521) | about 8 months ago | (#46506811)

Big difference: the main counterforce targets in the US are uncomfortably close to inhabited areas, while a counterforce strike against Russia wouldn't affect the population and the rest of the infrastructure to the same extent. Unless the US chooses a countervalue strategy, of course. And it only takes one nuke to completely destroy the EU, economically as the panicked population goes into survival mode and politically as each member state scrambles for separate peace negotiation. Do not underestimate Russia: its citizens can withstand difficulties, while we Westerners would probably commit mass suicide after one day without Fecesbook.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506869)

I see the Putin Propaganda Machine is in full-Stalin mode.

And Secretary of State John Kerry is absolutely convinced that a sternly-worded letter putting Putin in time-out will correct the situation.

So..... (4, Funny)

segedunum (883035) | about 8 months ago | (#46506483)

Kind of like a Russian Sarah Palin then?

Re:So..... (2, Funny)

Virtucon (127420) | about 8 months ago | (#46506517)

Can he see Alaska from his house?

Re:So..... (2, Insightful)

Mashiki (184564) | about 8 months ago | (#46506587)

No, but both Palin and Romney could tell several years ago that Russia was an actual problem. Unlike Obama and his red line fickleness. Well that's alright, he's off to his what? 197th round of golf, and later today he'll be flying out to Hollywood for his 290th fundraising event. Pressing issues you know.

Re:So..... (3, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | about 8 months ago | (#46506607)

Palin could tell because she can see them from her house.

Re:So..... (4, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46506721)

Relax. Russia is no problem. That's more for internal use than external use. I mean, ponder what it would be like if the US were in Russia's boots.

The country "lost" the cold war, depression sets in, crime lords get rich and take over economy and partly politics, the general population is doing worse and worse... I think it's not hard to see how a lot of people are yearning for the "good ol' times" where Russia was some big shot country.

Now ponder what it would be like if this was the US, and how a president could score with the lowbrow rednecks and of course the military with some speeches about greatness and how we can snuff out that big bad enemy of the days of yore.

Saber rattling with respect to what's going on on the Crimea peninsula, but little substance.

Re:So..... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506763)

No, but both Palin and Romney could tell several years ago that Russia was an actual problem. Unlike Obama and his red line fickleness. Well that's alright, he's off to his what? 197th round of golf, and later today he'll be flying out to Hollywood for his 290th fundraising event. Pressing issues you know.

Sorry, all I heard was, "Blah blah blah... I'm butt hurt cause Obama won... Blah blah bah, i like what-if scenarios... Whine whine whine, completely ignoring previous President's massive vacation history... I can't pull this tea party dildo out of my bum, bitch bitch bitch."

Re:So..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506781)

Likewise, Palin was way ahead of the curve with those dangerous South Koreans!

But seriously. I think she might be moderately entertaining to drink a beer with, but putting her in charge of any kind of significant foreign diplomacy outfit will get you guys in deep shit right quick.

Re:So..... (1)

AnontheDestroyer (3500983) | about 8 months ago | (#46506853)

In what respect, Charlie?

Re:So..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506675)

Can he see Alaska from his house?

Nah, he can see all 57 states.

Tell me again why Obumbles gets more RSPECT than Palin?

Re:So..... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506785)

Probably has something to do with him having an IQ larger than his shoe size, and not being a bloody psycho nut-job.

Re:So..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506725)

i remember debate , when Obama said to Romney " i am glad mr. governor admit Russia is not main problem" but seems Romney was right !!

Re:So..... (2)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 8 months ago | (#46506543)

Kind of like a Russian Sarah Palin then?

Exactly. Idiot says somthing stupid. State-controlled news at eleven.

Re:So..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506557)

HERP!!!

What does this have to do with tech news? (-1, Flamebait)

assemblerex (1275164) | about 8 months ago | (#46506487)

Get this shit off of slashdot!!

Re: What does this have to do with tech news? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506555)

For the last time: Slashdot is not a technology news website. It is a news site for nerds. There is a difference.

And There WIll Be Wars & Rumors of War (1)

zenlessyank (748553) | about 8 months ago | (#46506507)

Let's get this show on the road.

Have we said the same thing? (5, Insightful)

ranton (36917) | about 8 months ago | (#46506521)

I would be surprised if someone like Rush Limbaugh hasn't said something similar about Russia on their US based cable/radio news programs in the past few weeks. I'm sure both of our nations have their own crackpot news agencies.

Re:Have we said the same thing? (5, Insightful)

Dan East (318230) | about 8 months ago | (#46506559)

The difference is that Limbaugh doesn't speak for a state-controlled news agency, and thus Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single man with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

Re:Have we said the same thing? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506605)

Do you really think there is no state control involved american media? Ha hahahahah! Hehehheheheh!

Re:Have we said the same thing? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506695)

CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, NPR, CNN and especially MSNBC are all part of the state-controlled news media.

Re:Have we said the same thing? (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 8 months ago | (#46506757)

And are they talking like kids in the school playground?

Re:Have we said the same thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506609)

Well, to be fair he speaks in the name of one of the biggest economic pools, defending the wallets of several big fishes out there. Are you still believing the dual party mockup crap? I tell you what, Santa Claus doesn't exist, just in case you are willing to believe in childish things...

Re:Have we said the same thing? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 8 months ago | (#46506621)

Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single manatee with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

FTFY

Re:Have we said the same thing? (5, Insightful)

supersat (639745) | about 8 months ago | (#46506691)

In Capitalist America, news agencies control the state!

Re:Have we said the same thing? (2)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 8 months ago | (#46506707)

The difference is that Limbaugh doesn't speak for a state-controlled news agency, and thus Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single man with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

I would say that one of the major problems of having state-controlled media is having too few people determining the content. In that sense, at least, shows like Limbaugh's suffer from the same problem.

Of course the main problem is that in places with strong state-media there is typically no mainstream alternative, which makes dissent or even mild criticism of the regime very difficult to get across.

But actually, in that sense, most media outlets that are more or less partisan have a similar problem -- as long as their guys are in office, they seem typically incapable of criticism, and while the other guys' guys are in office their attacks are so obviously conditioned / reflexive that it renders them rather unconvincing and insincere.

Re:Have we said the same thing? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506837)

Neither his opinions nor what he says represent the government's true intentions. It's just propaganda, probably to show their people that the US wouldn't attack them as that'd be suicidal. Russia wouldn't attack the US for the same reasons.

Interfering West Again (0, Troll)

segedunum (883035) | about 8 months ago | (#46506527)

But this is the kind of thing that tends to happen when the west deliberately destabilises a country for its own ends to try and keep the ponzi scheme going.

Re:Interfering West Again (4, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46506681)

Yes, because everything wrong on Earth is the West's fault, and Russia is a perfectly little angel that produces nothing other than rainbows and unicorns.

In other news Kim Jong Un was re-elected with 100% of the popular vote for being such a glorious leader of the people.

Re:Interfering West Again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506871)

In other news Kim Jong Un was re-elected with 100% of the popular vote for being such a glorious leader of the people.

Someone is getting set to a death camp for that. It should be 110%.

Re:Interfering West Again (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46506739)

Hush! This is the Russia-bashing thread. The EU-bashing thread is next door.

that's nice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506529)

call me when you can turn us into cookie dough ice cream

Allow Russians to vote with their feet (5, Insightful)

bkmoore (1910118) | about 8 months ago | (#46506535)

For as long as Putin and his cronies are in power, the U.S. and the rest of the western world should offer any law-abiding Russian citizen who wants to leave an automatic green card, work permit, etc. We cannot realistically or morally change Russia from the outside. The most powerful weapon against fanaticism would be allowing regular law-abiding Russians to vote with their feet. We could always use some more scientists and engineers anyway...

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (5, Funny)

Erikderzweite (1146485) | about 8 months ago | (#46506649)

The Crimeans have just voted with their feet. A pity that they took the whole peninsula with them :-)

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (5, Insightful)

Ottawakismet (2798639) | about 8 months ago | (#46506779)

a fake vote where supposedly all the ukrainians and tatars also wanted to join Russia. Ya right. 97% approval is the kind of election result dictatorships produce, honest elections never get that result. Support for separation was 40%, so its a total lie that suddenly everyone wants separation.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (1)

gtall (79522) | about 8 months ago | (#46506907)

And we should trust this vote why? Putin is not above stuffing the ballot box or disregarding ballots he doesn't feel representative.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (2)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 8 months ago | (#46506651)

"Morally"? No dictatorship has any moral validity. It is no more self-determination than a stadium of people held hostage by terrorists are practicing self-determination.

Free people have every moral right to free people who are held hostage. Whether to do so is a practical problem, not a moral one.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (1)

JustNiz (692889) | about 8 months ago | (#46506791)

>> It is no more self-determination than a stadium of people held hostage by terrorists are practicing self-determination.

Well they actually are practicisng self-determination, given that a whole stadium full of unarmed people could (admittedly with high losses) still overwhelm a bunch of armed guys.
It all comes down to perceived vs. actual risk/reward and the innate nature of people to prefer to act like sheep rather than do anything in the event of a threat.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506667)

I'm no immigration expert, but I'm not sure we'd deny their request for asylum right now. What level of unrest do we need to ensure that?

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (1, Flamebait)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46506711)

The problem then is that all that's left in Russia are the idiots, it's chilling enough knowing that Russia is about 70% full of idiots with it's thousands of nukes, letting that stretch to 100% is probably not a good idea.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (3, Insightful)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 8 months ago | (#46506835)

Plenty of Russians came out to protest Putin's actions. He appeals to their ignorant social conservatives, and sadly also appeals to the worst of our Republican types.

Stupid people love violence and superstition, and Putin exploits that just like American Republicans do.

There are plenty of sane Russians, just like there are plenty of sane Americans. We just both suck at marginalizing our wackos.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (0)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46506777)

And Russia offers Green Cards to all the refugees from NSA and their cronies, and we'll see who ends ups with more people?

Not quite my ideal solution for my "freedom to travel" dream, but it would be a start.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (1)

CryptDemon (1772622) | about 8 months ago | (#46506841)

Snowden has found his way back in.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet (1)

hodet (620484) | about 8 months ago | (#46506911)

Wouldn't you just be keeping out the low level dumb criminals?

America's fault (1, Troll)

Tailhook (98486) | about 8 months ago | (#46506541)

If only the US hadn't antagonized Stalin the Soviets wouldn't have built nukes and the world would be at peace. Shame on us.

Also, the US Military Industrial Complex is using Putin to scare the US into a defense build-up; the Russians are innocent pawns of US capitalists and none of this is their fault.

That should about cover it. Please forgo repeating the above in 80% of the threads that follow. Thanks.

Re:America's fault (1)

cephus440 (828210) | about 8 months ago | (#46506637)

If only there was a motive for the US to build up or increase the defense budget - or not reduce the defense budget. If there were only something happening which would make some people in the US want to validate their existence.... http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02... [nytimes.com]

Re:America's fault (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46506803)

Erh... no. Stalin would have been Stalin, no matter what. He was a megalomaniac madman long before WW2

So Russia needs some what? Lebensraum? (1, Insightful)

JudgeFurious (455868) | about 8 months ago | (#46506553)

And the United States is the only country in the world realistically capable of turning the USSR....err "Russia" into radioactive ash. For crying out loud are we really going to do all of this again? Why?

Re:So Russia needs some what? Lebensraum? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506617)

population. Russia has had many years of low birth rates and Ukraine has 50 million people (to Russia's 170 million).

Re:So Russia needs some what? Lebensraum? (2, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46506825)

Because nobody buys the terrorist gambit anymore and we need a reason to keep the military complex funded.

Re:So Russia needs some what? Lebensraum? (3, Insightful)

gtall (79522) | about 8 months ago | (#46506921)

Well, nukes are only about 5-10% of the U.S. defense budget. Now are there any more strawmen you are hiding in your closet?

Re:So Russia needs some what? Lebensraum? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506867)

are we really

What is this WE white man? Cite for me one federal official spouting off about how much glass we could make out off Russia. Find a single instance of government controlled media in any western nation with commentators reciting irresponsible shit like this on behalf of their masters.

Did you think we had somehow evolved beyond violence? Perhaps cushy office jobs where you post on Slashdot all day convinced you that militaries are vestigial boondoggles robbing the good and the great of their ability to "help" whomever?

How long have you been indulging these delusions and what parts of your naive worldview will you be correcting given this inevitable dose of reality?

Celebrity Death Match (5, Funny)

zerosomething (1353609) | about 8 months ago | (#46506563)

In this corner Bill O'Reilly for the U.S of A and in the other corner Dmitry Kiselyov for the Russian Federation. In a match to see who can talk their own country into radioactive ash first!

READY, FIGHT!!!

Re: Celebrity Death Match (1)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about 8 months ago | (#46506765)

I doubt the U.S. would be goaded into a nuclear war. When pitting dead-hand versus a nuclear MIRV arsenal at sea, everybody loses.

Unconfirmed weaponized H1N1 (bird flu) with 80% mortality rate, undetectable delivery, an easy/excusable way to prevent collateral damage (closing borders, which is already the plan if a non-weaponized strain is detected), and an extreme difficulty in tracing the aggressor (missiles can be tracked by RADAR, viruses can't) make nuclear war a non-option.

I the U.S. wanted to destroy Russia, the first and final attack would be a tourist (or cell) wiping their gloves on a railing at a national monument at lunch time.

Re: Celebrity Death Match (1)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about 8 months ago | (#46506891)

*Swine flu, mixed the two up.

Re:Celebrity Death Match (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46506839)

Could they just turn each other into radioactive ash instead?

Whoever loses
We win

60,000 Russian troops OUTSIDE Ukraine? Big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506589)

Obama: I'm not beaten yet. I still have armies in the Ukraine.

This comment perks up the ears of what appears to be a Russian immigrant.

Putin: Ha ha, Ukraine. Do you know what Ukraine is? It is sitting duck. A road apple, Obama. Ukraine is weak. It's feeble. I think it's time to put hurt on Ukraine.

Ukrainian: I come from Ukraine. You not say Ukraine weak.

Putin: Yeah, well we're playing a game here, pal.

Ukrainian: Ukraine is game to you?! Howbout I take your little board and smash it!!

The Ukrainian pounds the game board, destroying it and sending army pieces flying.

Re: 60,000 Russian troops OUTSIDE Ukraine? Big dea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506737)

The represent any of russia ,Ukraine and USA should meet in the ring. With one of the Klitschko's as a president this should be easy for Ukraine. I only hope that this hipocryte Obama gets bloody nose too.

Re:60,000 Russian troops OUTSIDE Ukraine? Big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506743)

No worries. Everyone knows the key to winning is in Kamchatka.

And Japan... ... /me sips his rum.

They're scared they won't be able to. (1)

JavaLord (680960) | about 8 months ago | (#46506619)

If the US gets missile defense systems into the Ukraine they could theoretically win a nuclear war with a first strike. This is what has Putin's panties in a bunch. This is also why Russia was so upset with the US considering putting their missile defense systems in Poland.

It would still be a crazy gambit, as Russia still has nuclear subs, and who the heck would want to take the risk? Is Putin just paranoid [telegraph.co.uk] , or would the US really try to win a nuclear war? There are some crazy motherfuckers [wikipedia.org] in positions of power in the US.

Re:They're scared they won't be able to. (3, Interesting)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46506759)

"This is also why Russia was so upset with the US considering putting their missile defense systems in Poland."

Well the US actually negotiated with Putin and pulled back from doing this to allay his concerns.

Now he starts invading neighbours who gave up their nuclear weapons, annexing their territory and talking about nuclear war.

Sounds like maybe the Ukraine should've kept their nukes, and the US kept their interceptor program - the more Putin has been appeased, the more dangerous he has gotten.

This isn't the 1980s anymore! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506631)

Using nukes is soooo 1980's. You gotta change with the times, Pooty-poot. Are you then going to shower us with acid rain from the 1990s? Huh?

You must instead use the threat of Global Warming to destroy the United States. Yes, you will increase the temperature of the United States by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit and cook us to death.

Russia has been turning into a fascist state (4, Insightful)

Maimun (631984) | about 8 months ago | (#46506657)

for many years. The writing has been on the wall all the time. Those idiotic threats are just the tip of the iceberg. It would be wrong to downplay them with the arguments like "some idiot lost his nerves". The bellicosity has been on the rise in Russia for many years and no, the reason is not that they were unjustly insulted by the West. The fascist-like regime wants to expand and dominate. It is that simple. The fascizoids can never be stopped by appeasement. The appeasement did not work before WWII and will not work now. The only argument they understand is raw power. For them, politeness and tolerance are signs of weakness and met with derision. Maybe, I hope, one day the Russian people will kick the fascists out of power but for the forseeable future this is wishful thinking.

Well, international relations are heating up again, coffee-break is over and the West should better wake up and start doing something. If raw power is the only thing that can stop the bad guys, raw power we must accumulate.

if... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506663)

if Russia managed to put its agent as the President in The United States, in what way would he be different from Obama?

Re:if... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 8 months ago | (#46506747)

He'd have actually pushed for a real socialised healthcare system, rather than throwing money at the insurance companies and hoping they lower prices.

Re: if... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506799)

Not to mention unlimited vodka for everyone!

Re:if... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506887)

how you figure? you pay for every part of the medical treatment in russia... including bandages for a surgery.

Mr Obama (0, Troll)

MouseTheLuckyDog (2752443) | about 8 months ago | (#46506679)

The 80's are calling. They would like to know if you need a foreign poilicy.

Re:Mr Obama (3, Insightful)

thrich81 (1357561) | about 8 months ago | (#46506877)

As someone who lived through the '80s with a couple of close calls of mutual annihilation, I'd rather not have those foreign policies back.

Re:Mr Obama (1)

wiredog (43288) | about 8 months ago | (#46506895)

That seems to be the foreign policy he's following, actually.

Meanwhile, US stock markets... (1)

jeffb (2.718) (1189693) | about 8 months ago | (#46506723)

...are singing and dancing. If the Invisible Hand isn't sweating, why should I?

The problem with Radioactive Ash is.. (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 8 months ago | (#46506733)

In mother Russia, radioactivity finds you.

It might be half a world away, but it WILL find you. Not to mention that there would likely be retaliation in kind.

This is just Putin Fist Pumping national pride. Putin is poking the US in the eye with the Ukraine thing and they are upping the rhetoric while they can, just in case the US actually manages to do something with teeth. If they can isolate Russia some, it might cause a public relations problem for Putin so he just getting as far ahead as he can.

To answer a question from a past movie... Let's play Tic Tac Toe and skip that Thermo-Nuclear war thing...

Re:The problem with Radioactive Ash is.. (1)

cephus440 (828210) | about 8 months ago | (#46506913)

This isn't the first. Syria, Iran, and even during Iraq, the Russians have been undermining US efforts. This one is just catching the news because of its absurdity. Plus, IMHO, the US was poking Russia in the eye by supporting the removal of the Pro-Russian Ukrainian leadership - which apparently has backfired.

Just and FYI concerning Iraq: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... [wikipedia.org]

Why "Father of all bombs"? Because it @#$@ your mother - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... [wikipedia.org]

Ain't giving up nuclear weapons great? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506761)

Think Ukraine would like to redo that decision, given how useless US "guarantees" of territorial integrity have proven to be?

And to think there were those that said there'd be no consequences from US blithering after Syria ignored the US's "red line" and used chemical weapons?

Along the same lines as Russia dismembering Ukraine, how's the Syrian government doing in giving up those chemical weapons? Oh, yeah, they're presenting a new plan [reuters.com] , after failing to meet the deadlines in the first three or four plans....

ISS (3, Interesting)

tekrat (242117) | about 8 months ago | (#46506817)

Next up: Russians "deport" American astronauts from ISS, as they are the only country with a manned space flight program. How ironic; we spend many billions to build it, and then scrap our only way of getting to it. Nice plan. No wonder USA is number 37.

Someday USA might be a great country, but this decade and the next is not that day.

USA is now filled with religious, science-denying blowhards that will turn this country into a backwater 3rd world with nuclear weapons and offshore billionaires that own the government. Just look at Greenspan's comments. We'll all be shooting each other for food in a few years, while CEOs sit on piles of cash that guarantee they are comfortable for 6 or 7 generations.

Re:ISS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46506833)

USA is now filled with religious, science-denying blowhards that will turn this country into a backwater 3rd world with nuclear weapons and offshore billionaires that own the government.

So the US will turn into Russia?

Re:ISS (2)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 8 months ago | (#46506935)

Open the airlock HAL...

In Soviet ISS airlock deports you!

The Russian Embassador (3, Funny)

Lucas123 (935744) | about 8 months ago | (#46506829)

There were those of us who fought against this. But in the end, we could not keep up with the expense involved in the arms race, the space race, and the peace race. And at the same time, our people grumbled for more nylons and washing machines. Our Doomsday scheme cost us just a small fraction of what we'd been spending on defense in a single year. But the deciding factor was when we learned that your country was working along similar lines, and we were afraid of a Doomsday gap.

Dear Kiselyov, (1)

DiscountBorg(TM) (1262102) | about 8 months ago | (#46506843)

You do realize if the US burns, you'll freeze, starve, and wind up with cataracts in the inevitable nuclear winter right?

Sorry - Has to be posted (2, Insightful)

bjdevil66 (583941) | about 8 months ago | (#46506873)

This CANNOT be posted enough. [youtube.com] Obama was 100% wrong, and Romney was 100% right.

Call it sour grapes for the 2012 election, but the guy that lost saw the potential problems coming - and our current administration mocked him for it. And Romney haters mocked him online and in the media.

Bottom line: As of today, when it comes to international relations, the executive branch looks like it's being run today by an amateur - supported by amateurs, all living in the same intellectual bubble full of yes men.

Fox News Moscow (1)

ToasterTester (95180) | about 8 months ago | (#46506875)

From the people who mentor Karl Rove, Fox News, and Clear Channel. History our way.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?