YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I understand, hence I said, "you can say..."Putin is not exactly dictator. Over 60% voted for him. He is basically liked over there.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I understand, hence I said, "you can say..."Putin is not exactly dictator. Over 60% voted for him. He is basically liked over there.
Who disputes this: Vasili Arkhipov - Wikipedia
That is absolute rubbish. Khrushchev was far and away the worse of the two.
To the OP, there is absolutely no similarity between the events unfolding in Syria and the Cuban missile crisis (other than America and Russia are at odds). Putin is far, far less reactionary than Khrushchev (who was absolute dictator) of a system that was destroying his country. You can say that Putin is also a dictator but not to any degree that former heads of the Soviet Union were.
LOL, 75% voted for him in that pure, honest Russian election, where his political opposition winds up in jail.Putin is not exactly dictator. Over 60% voted for him. He is basically liked over there.
Wiki articles are not written by historians, but volunteers. Anything found there should be thoroughly verified. I think the story is hyped in a number of ways. Even if it did happen, the use of a tactical nuclear weapon is not the same as using a strategic one. A ship or ships would have been destroyed. Would that inevitably resulted in a strategic nuclear strike ? I don't think by us. It would have been up to the Russians as to whether to escalate the issue beyond a conventional weapons conflict that could be controlled. Most likely our subs would have begun sinking their cargo ships and protective destroyer cover. Another use of nukes by the Russians would have resulted in those of us alive having to kiss our asses goodbye as MAD kicked in.It seems the Wiki article has changed since I last looked. I do believe there was a note to the effect that it wasn't that close. But, as with yourself and most others, to me it did appear that Arkhipov was the saviour of the moment - and all this says is that we were really close to a serious confrontation and which might repeat itself - with worse consequences this time.
Wiki articles are not written by historians, but volunteers. Anything found there should be thoroughly verified. I think the story is hyped in a number of ways. Even if it did happen, the use of a tactical nuclear weapon is not the same as using a strategic one. A ship or ships would have been destroyed. Would that inevitably resulted in a strategic nuclear strike ? I don't think by us. It would have been up to the Russians as to whether to escalate the issue beyond a conventional weapons conflict that could be controlled. Most likely our subs would have begun sinking their cargo ships and protective destroyer cover. Another use of nukes by the Russians would have resulted in those of us alive having to kiss our asses goodbye as MAD kicked in.
why would he need to put them in jail? they had no chance anyway?LOL, 75% voted for him in that pure, honest Russian election, where his political opposition winds up in jail.
Putin is not exactly dictator. Over 60% voted for him. He is basically liked over there.
As opposed to what? The USA election where 55% voted against Trump?LOL, 75% voted for him in that pure, honest Russian election, where his political opposition winds up in jail.
I do not believe that election was rigged at all, he did a lot of good for commoners their living levels rose dramatically, much more order and less corruption. he suits the current Russian sentiment.His popularity levels have gone down a lot. He is probably still in power due to rigged elections and electoral fraud.
As opposed to what? The USA election where 55% voted against Trump?
Tom[/QUOTE
Your point being what ? Constitutionally this nation is not a democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic. The states elect the President, it is not based upon popular vote.
If you don't like the way elections work, and you want to eliminate any voice most of the states have, and give a relatively small number of large urban population centers control, fine.
Constitutionally you may seek a convention of the states, or amend the Constitution. The first has never occurred, the second requires two thirds approval of the congress, two thirds approval of the congresses of two thirds of the states. ( perhaps the last number may be wrong ) Without the change, popular vote is irrelevant, and so is any argument based upon complaining about it.
The STATES elect the President, only their votes count, just as the Founders wanted it.
The Russians always have had governments where power is centered in the hands of of usually one all powerful dictator usually despotic, the tzars, the USSR leaders, putin, all the same power, the people expect nothing else. Once in place no election could ever displace them. The last Russian election was as crooked as a dogs hind leg.I do not believe that election was rigged at all, he did a lot of good for commoners their living levels rose dramatically, much more order and less corruption. he suits the current Russian sentiment.
A tactical nuclear weapon is small, has limited effect, and is designed for a limited purpose. A strategic nuclear weapon is designed for killing masses of people in a world wide world.Not sure about any of that - it was a nuclear weapon that would have been used by the Soviets apparently and that would have crossed the line surely? I can't see the Americans letting that go. As now - if any do so. Perhaps it might not have escalated beyond the region but who knows? This kind of brinkmanship is just so fragile often - Putin or Trump, which one of these would make a really bad decision?
A tactical nuclear weapon is small, has limited effect, and is designed for a limited purpose. A strategic nuclear weapon is designed for killing masses of people in a world wide world.
Loss of a ship to a tactical torpedo is not the same as losing a large city to a strategic missile with multiple war heads.
I do not believe that election was rigged at all, he did a lot of good for commoners their living levels rose dramatically, much more order and less corruption. he suits the current Russian sentiment.
free speech is not really censored in Russia to any significant degree. nothing like it was in the USSR. They learned their lesson to do like they do here - ignore unpleasant free speech.If you consider the anti-putin sentiment, censoring, curtailment of free speech and media freedom over there, you would think twice about it.
free speech is not really censored in Russia to any significant degree. nothing like it was in the USSR. They learned their lesson to do like they do here - ignore unpleasant free speech.
free speech is not really censored in Russia to any significant degree. nothing like it was in the USSR. They learned their lesson to do like they do here - ignore unpleasant free speech.