1. 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is an arms race between US and Russia necessary?

Discussion in 'The Political World' started by danieldemol, Feb 2, 2019.

  1. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    4,735
    Ratings:
    +4,275
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
  2. Sunstone

    Sunstone De Diablo Del Fora
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    76,157
    Ratings:
    +37,804
    Religion:
    Non-Theistic Mysticism
    No, it's not necessary, but that seems to be where we're headed now.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. youknowme

    youknowme Whatever you want me to be.

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    1,468
    Ratings:
    +628
    If we make a bomb big enough we can just blow up the Earth and kill all our enemies in one shot!
     
    #3 youknowme, Feb 2, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2019
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Twilight Hue

    Twilight Hue The gentle embrace of twilight has become my guide

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    34,326
    Ratings:
    +14,407
    Religion:
    Philosophical Buddhism
    We had that in the NATO Warsaw Pact years.

    But it does raise a valid question as to where the limit lays once you have enough munitions in your own stockpile to blow the world ten times over.
     
  5. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    8,594
    Ratings:
    +2,552
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    No sane person will engage in an arms race with the US.
    It's more a power race - a show of power, in a world where one nation wants to be supreme in everything, and control.
    Some just flex their muscles, and say, "Bring it on."
    ...and the super power is lust itching to do so.
    IMO.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,532
    Ratings:
    +2,816
    Omg the cynicism! Luv it.
     
  7. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Rival's Wife

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    73,176
    Ratings:
    +28,831
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain

    I think Putin is still pretty Soviet minded. He's not afraid of an arms race against America, because he's been there before. It's doubtful restoring the Soviet Union as the Soviet Union is the goal, but annexing former Soviet Union members, political detractors meeting an uncertain fate, and now this arms race does seem to suggest building up Russia is a goal. He may be ex-KGB, but he's still hardcore messing with the kingpin Capitalist country.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    8,594
    Ratings:
    +2,552
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    My apologies. You are right. I made a mistake of comparing the expenditure.
    [​IMG]

    However I just looked at the weapons stockpile.
    USA vs Russia | Comparison military strength

    So mankind will continue to build more junk to pile on the earth and send into space, and for what? Power and military war games, while the poor struggle to eat bread.
    Well, I guess that's what world power means to a humans.
    What's the good in that?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Rival's Wife

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    73,176
    Ratings:
    +28,831
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    It's definitely also a power race, but I also very much doubt Putin is afraid to stand toe-to-toe against the US again in an arms race. No matter what, mutually assured destruction will still dominate relations because it is beyond redundant for either side to add more nuclear weaponry to their already exceedingly powerful nuclear arsenal. Either side has enough to destroy the world. so continued displays are definitely acts of grandstanding. It's totally unnecessary, but it's same "biggest dick" contest we saw during the war.
     
  10. loverofhumanity

    loverofhumanity Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    8,304
    Ratings:
    +4,153
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Yet there is not enough money for education or Medicare or for the poor?

    True democracy doesn’t exist. If the people really had a say wouldn’t we insist that the $trillions poured into weapons was instead channeled into universal free Medicare, universal free education and universal employment? Wouldn’t then poverty would be a thing of the past as would the millions of child deaths from preventative diseases?

    So where is the will of the people here when so much money is wasted on destruction and death instead of investing it in life using our taxes?

    People have handed over their souls to leaders who have betrayed our interests for their own. People need to take our world back from these maniacs who are not using our taxes for us citizens.

    It’s our fault for allowing ourselves to become so attached to worldly things like alcohol, drugs, gambling and materialism which these people promote so we will be distracted by pleasures and let them do what they want.

    This is why I am building a new world and why I believe we need to all join to getter and take back our world from those who are raping our resources and using our taxes to invest in death and destruction instead of improving the quality of humanity’s lives.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. sun rise

    sun rise "This is the Hour of God"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    57,795
    Ratings:
    +26,745
    Religion:
    Love
    I think we get a terrible return on our defense spending for starters. What we're doing is shoveling money to defense contractors who are getting rich on our taxes. We should be able to spend $100 billion less on defense and get an equally good or better result.

    Then we could take $50 billion and put it to helping the poor, improving health care, fixing our infrastructure etc. The other $50 billion should go to reducing the deficit.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,582
    Ratings:
    +601
    Religion:
    None
    That's like saying Britain was in a power race with Germany in the
    1930's. That's a shallow assessment.
    Currently America is in a new race against China. Until recently
    the world welcomed the new and open China of Chairman Deng
    for instance. Now we know there's something more sinister going
    on with espionage, creating fake islands, repressing overseas
    dissidents, clamping down on domestic opposition, teaching the
    "thoughts of Xi" etc.. So we challenge China, and it's not about
    flexing muscles and bringing it on. There's a lot more at stake.
     
  13. Jumi

    Jumi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2014
    Messages:
    9,881
    Ratings:
    +5,459
    Religion:
    Secular theist (none)
    Of course there is, but that would mean a couple of less state of the art missiles, bombers, maybe even a carrier. Dark humor aside, the US is spending more money on healthcare than European countries, but it's just not used efficiently. Price gouging doesn't seem to be seen as an issue, but think about this:

    Someone's making a killing.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. ajay0

    ajay0 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Messages:
    2,170
    Ratings:
    +1,474
    I consider it a great failure of the UN and other institutions working for international harmony.

    It shows that we still have not learned from the lessons of the past two world wars. There has been occasions in the cold war when we missed nuclear holocausts by mere chance.The real war ought to be against illiteracy, poverty, disharmony and conflict, global warming ...

    The quality of leadership in the U.S and Russia is also poor, and there are no good international leaders or leadership at the moment to bring forth a space of international harmony and dialogue.

    The psychological reality of national boundaries seems more important to these myopic leaders than the existential reality around them.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,356
    Ratings:
    +8,184
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    Arms races are a great way of funneling huge amounts of tax money to the wealthy capitalists invested in producing them. That's why we keep having wars and threats of wars, especially when the republicans are in charge. Also, the republicans can't win elections based on their record for peace and prosperity. They need threats of external attack to win elections because the public seems to imagine that they are better suited to fend off such an attack. Or perhaps, it's just an effective way of distracting the public around election time, from all the damage the republicans have done to them in every other way.

    An election is coming in a year and a half and there's no way the republicans can win it given their current policies, behavior, and candidates, so look for another war for oil, or for "democracy", or for whatever other reason the greed-mongers can manage to float past the public. Because it's their only hope for getting people to be stupid enough to vote for them, once again.
     
  16. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    10,648
    Ratings:
    +8,450
    Religion:
    Catholic
    makes perfect sense... until the Russian idealogues say "well no sane person will engage in an arms race with Russia..."

    For future reference, only Americans believe in American exceptionalism. If you base international policy on the idea that other countries are going to believe the US is anything unique or inherently special, you're going to have some rude surprises.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,582
    Ratings:
    +601
    Religion:
    None
    If you go to diving places like Truk in the Pacific you can see
    lots of WWII stuff just rusting away. Same in the Guadalcanal.
    It's scandalous that America manufactured and threw such
    armaments at the Japanese when they could have spent that
    money on their own poor.
    Same with the D-day landing in Normandy. And for what? Power
    and military war games, while the poor struggle to eat bread.

    Get my point? Putting everyone in the same category when it
    comes to war misses important points.
     
  18. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,582
    Ratings:
    +601
    Religion:
    None
    Oh sorry, I thought the current defense issue was Russia violating
    missile treaties, menacing its neighbors and threatening to swamp
    the east coast of the USA with a mega nuclear tsunami.
    And I thought the defense issue with China was its ongoing espionage,
    island building, threats to its neighbors and provoking marine and air
    incidents.
    Turns out it's all to do with the Capitalism and the Republicans.

    Looks like we have yet another Marxist assessment of a successful
    nation that few want to leave, and many want to join - including refugees
    from Russia, China, Vietnam, Venezuela, Cuba, Cambodia, North Korea
    and Nicaragua.
     
    #18 PruePhillip, Feb 3, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2019
  19. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    18,816
    Ratings:
    +11,213
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I don't think it's really necessary for the US and Russia to have an arms race. But then again, I never thought it was necessary during the Cold War.

    What we really need is a more coherent, consistent, transparent, and honorable foreign policy. Instead, we mistakenly aligned U.S. interests with that of other governments and political systems whose policies and interests are incongruous with our own.

    Also, we've never been all that honest about why we have all these entangling alliances and strange bedfellows when it comes to our foreign policy and national security objectives.

    Our leaders claim that it's all about "democracy" and "freedom," but that's always been a bald-faced lie.

    Others might take a more cynical view and argue that it's more about "national interests" and global economics, although if that's the case, then we undermine our own position by propping up puppet governments in order to maintain a certain false image that these governments are "independent" and "sovereign."

    If it's all about economics, then we'd be far better off simply annexing these territories and making them into colonies. Our failures have occurred due to wanting to eat our cake and have it, too. From Iran to Cuba to Vietnam, we've been wanting to pass off this image of "defending freedom" while still pursuing our own "national interests," but such duplicity hasn't worked all that well for us in the long run.

    Nowadays, since Russia is no longer communist, there is no obvious "ideological" barrier here. The only reason other countries would align themselves with Russia might be to employ a counterweight to US military adventurism around the world. If we stopped engaging in that kind of foreign policy, then no country would have any real reason for aligning with Russia, and Russia would have no reason to align with them.

    It seems that Russia's main national security goal at this point would be to shore up their own defenses and improve their strategic/geopolitical situation around their own borders. On their western frontiers they have NATO and the US nipping away. To the east, they have China and the rest of East Asia as a potential rival (although Russia and China seem to be getting closer these days). To the south, they have the Middle East and all of its current turmoil.

    In contrast, the US is nowhere near in any kind of precarious situation like that, so the US has far less of a justification for saber-rattling or arms races at this point.
     
  20. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest I have the kavorka
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    185,602
    Ratings:
    +63,317
    Religion:
    Atheist
    "Necessary" suggests it's optional but compelling. Instead, I'd call it "inevitable".
    All nations tend to seek military parity at least to an extent which which lessens
    risk of attack & defeat. It would go against human nature for us to suspend this
    race.
    But there is a useful mitigating approach available to us...better relations.
    This is more important than before, since technology appears to amplify
    the risk of greater horrors of war.
     
Loading...