It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by aussiedigger
Russia isn't as powerful as the former soviet union and would not be able to sustain major military operations outside its area of influence such as an invasion of western Europe. Nato has lost a lot military capabilities since the end of the cold war and without the backing of the US is in the same boat. Russia has around 6000 main battle tanks still in active service and around 10000 in storage. The bulk being T-72, T-80 and a few T-90, very capable tanks. The Russian air force/ air defence forces have the capability to defend Russia from any threat poised by NATO. Lets not forget about the 5000 nuclear weapons still aimed at the west, it would be a very foolish nation to pick a fight with Russia.
Originally posted by chiron613
I don't see any sort of conspiracy to depopulate the earth. Whatever elite there may be needs bodies to do the grunt work. The more people, the easier to replace them, the less they have to pay them or give them rights. In history, the notion of human rights and trade guilds and such began only after the Plague had reduced the population by about two thirds. Suddenly workers had choices they never had before. They were in demand. That gave them unprecedented power.
Same now. Many people = human life is worthless, human rights can be violated freely. Few people = can't get enough people to do the slave work, you have to pay them more, they get rights, all kinds of horrors (if you're the elite).
Originally posted by chiron613
I'm wondering how we know the Russians subs are near our coast. I can't imagine this would be something that either government would admit to.
I don't see us having a war with Russia. There simply is too much to lose, and not enough to gain. What I *could* see happening is that we'll sit back over Georgia, and Russia will sit back over Iran. I'm pretty sure we'll wind up going after Iran, because the idea of them having nukes is very unsettling.
I don't see any sort of conspiracy to depopulate the earth. Whatever elite there may be needs bodies to do the grunt work. The more people, the easier to replace them, the less they have to pay them or give them rights. In history, the notion of human rights and trade guilds and such began only after the Plague had reduced the population by about two thirds. Suddenly workers had choices they never had before. They were in demand. That gave them unprecedented power.
Same now. Many people = human life is worthless, human rights can be violated freely. Few people = can't get enough people to do the slave work, you have to pay them more, they get rights, all kinds of horrors (if you're the elite).
Originally posted by john124
Anyway who would risk MAD? The elites have to live on the same planet as us.
Originally posted by ItsTheQuestion
Originally posted by john124
Anyway who would risk MAD? The elites have to live on the same planet as us.
Naww...they can live underneath.
Originally posted by savetimerushonline
Originally posted by ItsTheQuestion
Originally posted by john124
Anyway who would risk MAD? The elites have to live on the same planet as us.
Naww...they can live underneath.
Very good point.. have you heard of the city located underground at Denver International Airport... I heard thats going to be the new HQ for the New World Order.
Originally posted by Maddogkull
Either way I still dont think a world war will happen for atleast another 5-10 years at the least. America is struggling right now since of the economic collapse. But who knows mabey Russia will surprise us
World War Definition: What constitutes a 'world war'? How many countries need to be involved? And who decides at which point a number of regional skirmishes can be grouped together and called a World War? At the time, who called the official start of World War 1 and World War 2? And have you noticed that although the term 'World War Three' is freely used in the alternative press and on the Internet, all the major news networks have stoically avoided using any phrase reminiscent of World War. Since it's difficult to find a definition for an event which has only happened twice in modern history, here's my attempt at an answer to the question 'what constitutes a world war'?
A World War is a military conflict spanning more than 2 continents, in which at least 20 major countries participate in an attack against a common enemy, and which has the attention of the man-in-the-street due to the significant loss of life. With that definition, we can agree that WW1 and WW2 were in fact World Wars (both wars involved some degree of participation from most of the world's then existing countries: Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United States and the Soviet Union). We can also agree that we are very close to achieving World War 3. The only requirement left to fulfill the start of WW3 is that of a military conflict spanning more than 2 continents.
Originally posted by breakingdradles
There were even US "advisors" helping the Georgians...
[edit on 18-8-2009 by breakingdradles]
Originally posted by wraith001
Originally posted by breakingdradles
There were even US "advisors" helping the Georgians...
[edit on 18-8-2009 by breakingdradles]
Yes and now there arming them to the teeth, and they wonder why Russia is getting it's knickers in a twist.
Originally posted by Syrus Magistus
The CIA originally planned to start a third world war in Georgia and the Russians stopped them. The Russians are the good guys. They've totally removed the Illuminati from their country, which is why our media dislikes them so much these days. Don't give in to this fear pornography. The Russians aren't the bad guys and we've already seen the worst of it. The drama is almost over. Keep it together, everybody. Remember, this is a frequency war. The real conflict is about whether the planet will be in fear or in love. Choose wisely.