Russia's population is falling and her territory is vast... her eastern frontier is weak and over time Russia is unlikely to be able to hold onto it without economic revival.

The US was trying to help Russia recover from decades of soviet mismanagement. We were trying to integrate them into the modern economy is more then a source of fuel and surplus military hardware. Russia could be a major industrial power. They stand at a crossroads between Europe and east Asia. We could run trains through Russia instead doing everything by containership. And Russia could get rich in the process.

But it won't happen because no one trusts Russia and no one likes Russia. And that is because they're belligerent, corrupt, unreasonable, deceitful, and absurdly arrogant to think they can get away with it. And as a result... they piss away everything.

Russia could have a bright future. They have vast natural resources, an educated population, they stand at a crossroads... but what do they do with it?

Imagine for a moment what Russia would look like if it were a western power. We'd have fixed the roads, built rail, brought in trade, brought in tourism, built up industry... And look at what the Russians have instead.

The Russians are destroying themselves. We need only help them undermine themselves until they're weak enough to be put back in their box.

Regardless, the good will the Russians had in the west... and the forgiveness for soviet past... its gone. Putin destroyed it.

Are you comparing the united states to iran because the US invaded Saddam's Iraq?

Can you please not be such a pathetic tool?... Please...

Not counting the huge amount of our food that comes from those places.

Contradict? Not so much. The atheist believes there is no god, the atheist clubs support its members and try to spread that belief.

The problem you face is that extremism has a long and fairly well known history among atheist regimes.

And who are the "anti-theists" if not atheists?

If you are asked the question, "Do you believe in god," there are basically three answers: yes, no, I don't know. Those answers map to: theist, atheist, and agnostic.

No, that isn't it. The common thread there is atheism, not "defending science." Besides, there are already science clubs in many schools. Why do something redundant? It's about atheism, supporting and spreading the atheist belief ... or should I say faith?

I don't see it as a "climate problem" any more than I see aging as a "chronology problem".

It's climate.
It changes.
Adapt or die.

Building a city on a coastline might be incredibly convenient, but it is exactly like building it on the edge of a volcano. The only difference is a matter of scale.

Yes and everyone always attacks MS over the stupid browser. how about if you shipped windows in china with a version of IE that was really limited. Basically a crap version of IE that was just good enough to go download something better but quite obviously not a viable mainline browser. And by all means, let them install IE if they CHOOSE to do so but make sure that they have to choose to make that happen.

Look, I know exactly what china is doing. Same thing Russia did when they shut McDonald's down for health violations. Its a pretext to do protectionism. Which is fine. All nations piss in each other's coffee like this... but MS should probably do something to make it harder to cite them for violations. The browser issue is absurd at this point. But the chinese are going to use anything they think is even halfway credible.

You're deluded. As to what putin wants... he wants to rebuild Russia's lost glory through intimidation and guile. We are now quite wise to him at this point.

We did hope Russia would accept peace... We have invested hundreds of billions in Russia in the hope that they would be peaceful allies. We even talked about inviting them to NATO if they rehabilitated. But they have spat in our faces.

We handed them an olive branch and they broke it over their knee. So be it. The old cold warriors are being brought back on line. The United States will start to do to Russian Federation what it did to the Soviets. We will squeeze and wait. And after 30 years of being squeezed... Russia will probably fracture again. Probably in the far east... and then humbled again... we will offer Russia peace, friendship, and a place at the table. We'll see how small Russia needs to get before it is willing to behave itself.

As to your comical conspiracy theories about John McCain... the man is a buffoon, sir. He's no master planner of anything. If you want to worry about conspiracies from the US, he is the least of your worries. We have far darker and nastier fellows in our ranks then the likes of him. We however suppress those people when they're not needed. They are given no authority... no standing... and so do nothing. Until some fool like Putin decides to start upsetting world peace with pathetic power games. Then we let them go do what they want to do...

Boast as you wish on the issue. The Soviets feared these men and it is the planning of such people that keeps the chinese up at night.

There was no conspiracy... but now there will be... there will be thousands of conspiracies. It will be war by conspiracy. With the goal of grinding a madman into the ground. The current US administration is ideologically opposed to the idea that any foreign power can be an enemy. So they're a bit dopey. But if you've read any US papers... their foreign policy strategy has been discredited. We're going back on a cold war footing.

Congratulations. Such is the fruits of Putin's hubris.

Actually no, you don't. You've just demonstrated that yet again.

I hate to burst your bubble but your "fan base" is hardly universal.

Disruption is harm. You don't have a right to disrupt other people's events.

You speak for yourself.

You must not have understood what he wrote, that isn't it at all.

You're replying to the wrong person. What I replied to is below, which also has nothing to do with the number of the beast. Why didn't you reply to that? Or was it your ox being gored?

----

Because they were left out of the initial statement, which was probably from an atheist.

You're a little late. The sub-thread was about slandering religion to start with.

In short, you don't accept the findings of the National Science Foundation. Fine.