Russia-Ukraine missile threat: Your reaction

[RSS News]

Russia has warned it may target its missiles at Ukraine if it joins Nato and accepts the deployment of the US missile defence shield. How serious is the threat?

(Feed provided by BBC News | Have your Say)

[Bright Banana Beard]

A good way to start a global tension that led into a war?

[ComradeR]

It's just nothing more then another small step towards an inter-imperialist cold war.

[careyprice31]

George W Bush broke the terms of the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty of 1972 by building that ballistic missile defence system. It should have been expected that Putin would have reacted in the way that he did. I feared Bush might do something like that. He has that kind of militaristic mentality.

(I am not defending Putin because I do not like him either. I am saying that I think that Bush is to blame for this and not Putin.)

I think it potentially could be very serious. It could lead into another arms race if people are not careful.

[Psy]

I wonder if any briefed Bush that both Russia and the USA both have their ICBMs on a hair trigger alert and Russia's computers can not tell the different of a missiles of a defence shield from a ICBM. So close to Russia means there would be very little time to make the decision for the Russian state to launch all their missiles at the US so they are not destroyed in their silos.

Meaning Bush is playing with fire as it increases the odds of Russia accidentally launching a full scale nuclear attack on US as the Russian military are very paranoid of a full scale US nuclear war and this would just make them even more paranoid.

[Sky]

There is no basis for Ukraine to be separate from Russia. "Ukraine" is an anachronism of feudalism. There is certainly more of a basis for Ukraine to be part of Russia than Chechnya. Many Ukrainians, such as those in the Donetsk and Crimea areas, don't even consider themselves "Ukrainian" but identify themselves as Russian. The unification of Ukraine and Russia would be an eminently progressive development. Remember that Comrade Luxemburg opposed the secession of Poland from Russia as this would harm the workers' movement.

[spartan]

When you play with fire, you are bound to get burned sooner or later.

And that is what we are seeing here with both the US and Russia playing stupid fucking games to see who can expand their "sphere of influence".

Lets just remember that no side in this inter-Imperialist struggle is "progressive" because both sides are as bad as each other, and, if given the opportunity, would resort to the same tactics as each other to gain an advantage in this stupid game that they keep on playing every decade.

Whats most laughable about this whole situation is the general ignorance of the majority of people on this issue, which is mostly due to the shockingly (Though admitedly unsurprising) shit and biased reporting of the mainstream media (On both sides mind you).

I think that the former British ambassador to the USSR summed it up best when he said that after the USSR collapsed, Russia and the west had a Christmas truce moment (1914 when British and German troops in the trenches in WW1 stopped fighting each other and celebrated Christmas together), where after half a century of the USSR and the west fighting each other, there was a period of a few months, weeks or even days, where both sides just came out and tried to understand each other, and when this failed, they went back to their trenches (So to speak) and started shooting at one another again (Which is exactly what we are seeing here).

I am not surprised that someone like Sky is using this arguement as an excuse to justify a hypothetical situation where Russia (Never mind it being Capitalist) would annex Ukraine because of some stupid shit over nationalities!

Here is some advice which is essential for any would be Communist: Workers have no country!

Hold true to this and you will find that stupid Nationalist issues like this wont affect you because, being a Communist, it really shouldnt be affecting you so much as this issue obviously is (Though yet again i am not surprised as you seem to have a love for Russia, as, in a previous thread, you went right back into Tsarist times to justify the unjustifiable Soviet invasion of Finland, and all for no apparent reason at all except that Finland used to be apart of the old Tsarist Russian Empire and should be forced back into a Russian dominated Union again).

[Psy]

When you play with fire, you are bound to get burned sooner or later.

And that is what we are seeing here with both the US and Russia playing stupid fucking games to see who can expand their "sphere of influence".

The big difference is both sides has enough ICBMs pointed each other to cause irreversible damage to Earth, with the possibility that Earth would no longer able to support life forms afterwards. Meaning it is not just them they would get burned if things gets out of hands and they start firing nukes at each other.

So basically it is the same old game of nuclear chicken, one side has to back down or nobody wins, and the side that blinks first "losses"

Also looking at US imperialism, the US installing missile defence system probably would result in the US actually using nuclear weapons. Remember the option to drop a nuclear bomb Iraq was on the table during the invasion if things went harry and the Bush admin already has plans for nuking Iran. Mostly what is stopping the Bush admin is the threat of Russia nuking the US in response yet if the Bush admin thinks a missile defence system will stop that (doesn't matter if it would or not) means the Bush admin probably be far more willing to simply drop nukes epically given how bad the occupation of Iraq went.