NationStates Jolt Archive

So a hospital is a military target, as is an apartment block? Also, Gori was made a war zone by Russia.

The aparment was not hit by a bomb or whatever. It was near the target and had damged done to it.

Russian troops should be the ones to protected Russian citizens.

Only when Russian citizens are within Russia. There is no international precedent for invading another country to "protect your citizens". It's recognized nowhere in international law.

I am sorry but I don't know what you mean in the 2nd part.

You keep saying Saakashvili is guilty of ethnic cleansing. I don't think you understand what the word guilty means.

Only when Russian citizens are within Russia. There is no international precedent for invading another country to "protect your citizens". It's recognized nowhere in international law.



You keep saying Saakashvili is guilty of ethnic cleansing. I don't think you understand what the word guilty means.

Is that not the right word in english that means he is at fault?

I would not trust all the news reports your getting from Gori. Most if not all are Pro-Georgian or pro-western media.

How is reporting on the withdrawal of Georgian forces from Gori "pro-Georgian"?

Is that not the right word in english that means he is at fault?

Guilty is an explicitly legal term. It means he has been tried and found guilty, by the evidence.

Of which we have seen precisely...-0-

How is reporting on the withdrawal of Georgian forces from Gori "pro-Georgian"?

Not that. How they balme us for starting this conflict, when he only used military action after Georgia went in South Ossetia with military action killing their people and ours. Many Peacekeepers were also killed.

I would not trust all the news reports your getting from Gori. Most if not all are Pro-Georgian or pro-western media.

I've seen the footage of burning buildings and the bodies. I also saw Russian shells aiming for BBC reporters.

How is reporting on the withdrawal of Georgian forces from Gori "pro-Georgian"?

Guilty is an explicitly legal term. It means he has been tried and found guilty, by the evidence.

Of which we have seen precisely...-0-

He is guilty of these crimes, the evidence is overwhelming and our goverment as already looked into it and he is found at fault.

He is guilty of these crimes, the evidence is overwhelming and our goverment as already looked into it and he is found at fault.

I wouldn't trust the Russian government, how about we set up an independent tribunal?

I've seen the footage of burning buildings and the bodies. I also saw Russian shells aiming for BBC reporters.

You should see the footage of South Ossetia after Georgia came in. Russia would never aim on BBC reporters, if they were in a military war zone than of course they would be under fire by mistake!

I wouldn't trust the Russian government, how about we set up an independent tribunal?

I trust my country and it's goverment with my life and it has proof.

independent tribunal?

More like pro-Georgian independent tribunal that has it out for my people.

So Russia Wants An Empire. So What, Let them take it peacefully to save lives.

He is guilty of these crimes, the evidence is overwhelming and our goverment as already looked into it and he is found at fault.

Any evidence? Or do you expect that we merely take your governments word for it without further proof?

I trust my country and it's goverment with my life and it has proof.

Fundamental mistake.

independent tribunal?

More like pro-Georgian independent tribunal that has it out for my people.

Kennan would be pleased to see you vindicate his analysis of the common Russian viewpoint.

Any evidence? Or do you expect that we merely take your governments word for it without further proof?

All the evidence will be given when the UN lets us put Mikheil Saakashvili to trail for the enthic cleasing and the deaths of our peacekeeprs.

Fundamental mistake.



Kennan would be pleased to see you vindicate his analysis of the common Russian viewpoint.

Worng.

Who is this Kennan? What is his full name?

All the evidence will be given when the UN lets us put Mikheil Saakashvili to trail for the enthic cleasing and the deaths of our peacekeeprs.

Why can't we see it now? Or should we just take your government's word for it?

We Americans learned the mistake of "taking the government's word for it" in 2003, and the west is duly skeptical of any state that demands that we do so.

Worng.

Who is this Kennan? What is his full name?

George F. Kennan.

If you do not even know the name of the single most important Russianist in American diplomatic history, the author of the X Telegram, the architect of containment, you are quite sheltered.

Read. "Improve zee MIND::

http://www.historyguide.org/Europe/kennan.html

Why can't we see it now? Or should we just take your government's word for it?

We Americans learned the mistake of "taking the government's word for it" in 2003, and the west is duly skeptical of any state that demands that we do so.

It is fact he started this conflict. It was fact that Russian peacekeepers were killed before Russia even entered this conflict. He also tried to kill of the people of South Ossetia.

The UN must let us bring him in and put him to trail or we should use military force to.

You should see the footage of South Ossetia after Georgia came in. Russia would never aim on BBC reporters, if they were in a military war zone than of course they would be under fire by mistake!

You have come far, my Son.

It is fact he started this conflict. It was fact that Russian peacekeepers were killed before Russia even entered this conflict. He also tried to kill of the people of South Ossetia.

The UN must let us bring him in and put him to trail or we should use military force to.

Once again, making a bid to retake a separatist region does not ethnic cleansing make. As to killing the people of South Ossetia, I daresay we are still suffering from a startling lack of evidence.

George F. Kennan.

If you do not even know the name of the single most important Russianist in American diplomatic history, the author of the X Telegram, the architect of containment, you are quite sheltered.

Read. "Improve zee MIND::

http://www.historyguide.org/Europe/kennan.html

''George Kennan had been a American diplomat on the Soviet front, beginning his career as an observer of the aftermath of the Russian Civil War. He witnessed collectivization and the terror from close range and sent his telegram after another two years' service in Moscow from 1944 to 1946 as chief of mission and Ambassador Averell Harriman's consultant. In 1946, Kennan was 44 years old, fluent in the Russian language and its affairs, and decidedly anti-communist.''

I did my self a favor and stoped reading before reading more lies from an American who knows nouthing about our country.

I am sure this is how it would read:

George Kennan: Russia bad! The people of Russia are monsters and are evil like their country!
Russian people: W.....
George Kennan: Shut up! You bad, we Amercains know what is better for you and the world. The Soviet Union must be brought to an end! Kill the reds!
Russian people:.......

You have come far, my Son.

I don't think he gets it *snickers*

I don't think he gets it *snickers*

No I don't. What dose he mean?

All the evidence will be given when the UN lets us put Mikheil Saakashvili to trail for the enthic cleasing and the deaths of our peacekeeprs.

It's quite funny how you invade South Ossetia, which, no matter what you say, is internationally recognised as being Georgia, bomb the place and Georgia proper, then claim you're peacekeepers.

It's quite funny how you invade South Ossetia, which, no matter what you say, is internationally recognised as being Georgia, bomb the place and Georgia proper, then claim you're peacekeepers.

No South Ossetia is more Russian and shjould be.

We had peacekeepers there LONG beofre this conflict.

No I don't. What dose he mean?

Ignore that cynical man. The world is your oyster now.

''George Kennan had been a American diplomat on the Soviet front, beginning his career as an observer of the aftermath of the Russian Civil War. He witnessed collectivization and the terror from close range and sent his telegram after another two years' service in Moscow from 1944 to 1946 as chief of mission and Ambassador Averell Harriman's consultant. In 1946, Kennan was 44 years old, fluent in the Russian language and its affairs, and decidedly anti-communist.''

I did my self a favor and stoped reading before reading more lies from an American who knows nouthing about our country.

I am sure this is how it would read:

George Kennan: Russia bad! The people of Russia are monsters and are evil like their country!
Russian people: W.....
George Kennan: Shut up! You bad, we Amercains know what is better for you and the world. The Soviet Union must be brought to an end! Kill the reds!
Russian people:.......

Actually, he wrote that the aggressive attitude of the Soviet Union was fundamentally rooted in a deep-seated Russian insecurity about its political and military relations with the West, and that these concerns are founded in the repeated invasions Russia has suffered at the hands of western powers.

He also wrote that the contradictions of the Soviet system would eventually destroy it on its own, without the need for aggressive military action against the USSR. All the US had to do was reconstruct the countries that were devastated by World War II and wait.

Turns out he was right.

No South Ossetia is more Russian and shjould be.

We had peacekeepers there LONG beofre this conflict.

Then why does the Russian government, and all international bodies, recognize South Ossetia as part of Georgia? Hmmmmmmmmmmm?

No South Ossetia is more Russian and shjould be.


No matter what it "should" be, it's internationally recognised as being part of Georgia.

Ignore that cynical man. The world is your oyster now.

What the hell dose that mean?

What the hell dose that mean?

Listen to Nodinia :)

What the hell dose that mean?

The world is your oyster means the world is in your hands.

Edit: Andaluciae, please stop posting like 2 secs before me.

No matter what it "should" be, it's internationally recognised as being part of Georgia.

Now the South Ossetia people and the people of Abkhazian will be free and Georgia can do no harm to the free loving people of these repulics.

Now the South Ossetia people and the people of Abkhazian will be free and Georgia can do no harm to the free loving people of these repulics.

I hear the people of Chechnya and Dagestan would like to be free sometime.

I hear the people of Chechnya and Dagestan would like to be free sometime.

They used terrosim to try to break away from us. That is worng and they killed many many Russians.

As to killing the people of South Ossetia, I daresay we are still suffering from a startling lack of evidence.

Well, Russia Today has showed footage of the hospital in Tskhinval, which was forced to go into basement. Apparently it was blocked for about three days because of intensive shelling that destroyed the hospital's building. The images were very graphic. Some wounds were even infested with maggots and nurses did their best to disinfect them because they ran out of medicine.

Ossetian refugees that fled north speak of quite terrible things. Of Georgians pounding villages without any care for civilian lives, setting fire to houses with incendiary ammunition. Other refugees fled in night gowns and slippers and say it was a "stay and die" situation as Georgian tanks rolled in. They are extremely distraught and extremely angry. The overwhelming majority are women, children and old people. I guess the men remained behind to fight the Georgians.

There are bits and pieces of such reports on the BBC World News service, especially on the website. It is unfortunate, however, that the media is so polarised on both sides. So far, the only news broadcaster that I can say is impartial and balanced is Euronews. BBC is doing a good job at trying to keep it balanced, but I personally have not seen the graphic footage from Tskhinval, whilst the images of the wounded Georgian woman following the Russian blunder in Gori has made the headlines.

As such, I'd suggest you Youtube for Russia Today or see if you have sattelite TV and try to find the channel there. RT is, by far, not impartial, it is as pro-Russian as CNN is pro-Georgian. But hey, watching both sides of the story does help to get a broader picture. AND Russia Today is in English, so it helps when one does not speak Russian.

An earlier comment about targetting journalists: that has happened on both sides. A Russian jet nearly killed an entire BBC team and in a separate incident a Dutch journalist was killed. However, Russian journalists also came under fire. Some Russian media outlets report that they still can't contact their journalists that operated in Tskhinval before the war. Unfortunately, reporters always die in conflict zones, just as civilians and soldiers do.

They used terrosim to try to break away from us. That is worng and they killed many many Russians.

Because Russians never kill anybody else, or threaten to wipe out an ENTIRE TOWN in Chechnya.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fuzp6r3tRmo and here's the footage of that plane that shelled the BBC team like I was saying.

Well, Russia Today has showed footage of the hospital in Tskhinval, which was forced to go into basement. Apparently it was blocked for about three days because of intensive shelling that destroyed the hospital's building. The images were very graphic. Some wounds were even infested with maggots and nurses did their best to disinfect them because they ran out of medicine.

Ossetian refugees that fled north speak of quite terrible things. Of Georgians pounding villages without any care for civilian lives, setting fire to houses with incendiary ammunition. Other refugees fled in night gowns and slippers and say it was a "stay and die" situation as Georgian tanks rolled in. They are extremely distraught and extremely angry. The overwhelming majority are women, children and old people. I guess the men remained behind to fight the Georgians.

Just as easily describes Georgian refugees fleeing South.

Still only sounds like a war zone. How about some of the classic signs of ethnic cleansing: Militia death squads, mass graves, etc. So far, all you've referenced, (you haven't even provided links) is what one expects in a standard conflict zone.

I made a mistake, there is precedent in international relations for invading a territory to protect your citizens.

Linktasticness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudetenland#Sudeten_Crisis_and_German_annexation)

It's really the only one I could come across, I'm not just Godwinning here. This is the primary example of the argument you are using in practice.

Just as easily describes Georgian refugees fleeing South.

Still only sounds like a war zone. How about some of the classic signs of ethnic cleansing: Militia death squads, mass graves, etc. So far, all you've referenced, (you haven't even provided links) is what one expects in a standard conflict zone.

The Georgia leader says we are the ones who are doing ethnic cleansing, howver those are lies and it will be proven when the world looks into. All they will find is how Georgia started this war to kill all the poeple in South Ossetia who wanted freedom. But we put a stop to that and yet much of the world looks at us like we are at fault. All I have see on Western media is- Russia Invades Georgia or Russia attacks Georgia. They don't bother to report how this all started.

The Georgia leader says he are the ones who are doing ethnic cleansing, howver those are lies and it will be proven when the world looks into. All they will find is how Georgia started this war to kill all the poeple in South Ossetia who wanted freedom. But we put a stop to that and yet much of the world looks at us like we are at fault. All I have see on Western media is- Russia Invades Georgia or Russia attacks Georgia. They don't bother to report how this all started.

The headlines didn't become "Russia Invades Georgia" until Russia actually crossed the boundaries of South Ossetia, and initiated hostilities in Abkhazia, and then proceeded to cut the country in two. That's when the West perceived Russia's actions as threatening.

The headlines didn't become "Russia Invades Georgia" until Russia actually crossed the boundaries of South Ossetia, and initiated hostilities in Abkhazia, and then proceeded to cut the country in two. That's when the West perceived Russia's actions as threatening.

We were taking out Georgian military targets, we had to go into Georgia to do that.

The Georgia leader says we are the ones who are doing ethnic cleansing, howver those are lies and it will be proven when the world looks into. All they will find is how Georgia started this war to kill all the poeple in South Ossetia who wanted freedom. But we put a stop to that and yet much of the world looks at us like we are at fault. All I have see on Western media is- Russia Invades Georgia or Russia attacks Georgia. They don't bother to report how this all started.

Its almost like the media, the UN and the Red Cross is full of Anti-Russianites, isn't it?

We were taking out Georgian military targets, we had to go into Georgia to do that.

Once again, by the time Russian forces had penetrated that deep inside Georgian territory, the bulk of the Georgian army had been withdrawn to Tbilisi to form a defensive cordon around the capital. It was and is unnecessary to deploy ground forces dozens of miles inside Georgia, when the military presence was well since gone even from the border regions.

Beyond that, what importance does Senaki bear for the South Ossetian conflict? It's well over 150 kilometers away from South Ossetia, and thus outside of Georgian artillery range, and wasn't being used for strategic purposes by the Georgian army. The only strategic value seems to be that it cuts Tbilisi off from the port at Poti, which the Black Sea Fleet had already destroyed.

It looks more like the Russian army was seeking to dissect Georgia, to devastate its economy and its military, and to drive the people to desperation.

Beyond that, having Russia occupy Abkhazia and South Ossetia removes the primary strategic natural barrier between Georgia and Russia: The Caucasus Mountains. Russia could basically take its leisure, and launch a massive armored thrust through the Georgian lowlands, right into Tbilisi with the sorts of military installations it wants in the rebel regions. That is a strategic threat to Georgia, akin to the threat that a Czechoslovakia shorn of the Sudetenland felt from Germany.

Once again, by the time Russian forces had penetrated that deep inside Georgian territory, the bulk of the Georgian army had been withdrawn to Tbilisi to form a defensive cordon around the capital. It was and is unnecessary to deploy ground forces dozens of miles inside Georgia, when the military presence was well since gone even from the border regions.

Beyond that, what importance does Senaki bear for the South Ossetian conflict? It's well over 150 kilometers away from South Ossetia, and thus outside of Georgian artillery range, and wasn't being used for strategic purposes by the Georgian army. The only strategic value seems to be that it cuts Tbilisi off from the port at Poti, which the Black Sea Fleet had already destroyed.

It looks more like the Russian army was seeking to dissect Georgia, to devastate its economy and its military, and to drive the people to desperation.

Georgia would not agree to stay out of South Ossetia and Abkhazia with it's troops. So we must take out the Georgian military to ensure the protection of their people.

Well, poo.

The Czech Republic isn't any easier. :p

Czech Republic, Shit was SO cashed.

Georgia would not agree to stay out of South Ossetia and Abkhazia with it's troops. So we must take out the Georgian military to ensure the protection of their people.

But the Georgian Army was not in Senaki, the troops has been withdrawn to Tbilisi, which is why the Russian Army took the city without opposition. How is that destroying Georgian military capability?

But the Georgian Army was not in Senaki, the troops has been withdrawn to Tbilisi, which is why the Russian Army took the city without opposition. How is that destroying Georgian military capability?

There was military base there and Georgian troops could use it to lunch an attack on us.

There was military base there and Georgian troops could use it to lunch an attack on us.

but if the Georgian Army had left the town,how it could they use it to attack?

but if the Georgian Army had left the town,how it could they use it to attack?

They could regroup and start shelling us besides there were military targets to take or take out, like the Georgian base.

but if the Georgian Army had left the town,how it could they use it to attack?

Cavalry riding Invisible Pink Unicorns, duh.

Cavalry riding Invisible Pink Unicorns, duh.

yeah,how could i forget those?http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/jolt/smilies/rolleyes.gif

They could regroup and start shelling us besides there were military targets to take or take out, like the Georgian base.

The Base was abandoned, and hostilities were not initiated with Abkhazia by Georgian forces, rather they were initiated by Russian backed Abkhazian forces. Beyond that, it would be impossible to shell Abkhazia or South Ossetia from Senaki, it's just too far from either of them.

As for the Georgian Army regrouping, they had already done that around Tbilisi. The forces had been withdrawn from Senaki, leaving an abandoned base facility. It would have been far easier to just hit the base facility from the air, maybe use an Air Mobile unit, and then fall back to Abkhazian territory. Instead, the Russian army sent an armored force, and occupied the city.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/12/georgia.russia.war/index.html

Sarkozy has worked out a cease-fire deal with the Russian government, eight points, and it leaves room for further future discussions. It also dictates that the Russian military withdraw to restore the status quo ante bellum.

Go-go Sarko!

We were taking out Georgian military targets, we had to go into Georgia to do that.

You also had to attack civilians, occupy towns and attack foreign reporters did you?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/12/georgia.russia.war/index.html

Sarkozy has worked out a cease-fire deal with the Russian government, eight points, and it leaves room for further future discussions. It also dictates that the Russian military withdraw to restore the status quo ante bellum.

Go-go Sarko!

The Georgia govemrnt should now step down and make South Ossetia and Abkhazia free form Georgia. We should not accpet a peace treaty until this is met.

You also had to attack civilians, occupy towns and attack foreign reporters did you?

We did not target them.

Georgia did in South Ossetia.

I see this is still carrying on. Soviet KLM Empire will never be convinced of anything. Russia can do no wrong in his eyes.

The Georgia govemrnt should now step down and make South Ossetia and Abkhazia free form Georgia. We should not accpet a peace treaty until this is met.

Well he can step down then.

And stand for re-election in a few years time. How will you feel if he gets back in? Will you invade again because the people of a country democratically elected him?

Talking about war crimes, I believe your country got off Scott free after WWII. So kindly shut up. You're in no position to dictate who should be tried for war crimes and such.

We did not target them.

Georgia did in South Ossetia.

Oddly enough, Russian forces have hit a significant number of "unintentional targets".

The Georgia govemrnt should now step down and make South Ossetia and Abkhazia free form Georgia. We should not accpet a peace treaty until this is met.

Should they also give up their attempts to join NATO?

Well he can step down then.

And stand for re-election in a few years time. How will you feel if he gets back in? Will you invade again because the people of a country democratically elected him?

Talking about war crimes, I believe your country got off Scott free after WWII. So kindly shut up. You're in no position to dictate who should be tried for war crimes and such.

It was Germany who killed millions of Russians, we did not do any war crimes. Your the one who is in no postion to say Georgia's goverment is the victom, wehn they killed Russians and tried to enthic cleasning the area of South Ossetia.

Well he can step down then.

And stand for re-election in a few years time. How will you feel if he gets back in? Will you invade again because the people of a country democratically elected him?

Talking about war crimes, I believe your country got off Scott free after WWII. So kindly shut up. You're in no position to dictate who should be tried for war crimes and such.

Could be worse they could have a leader who grabbed power against the will of the people.

Japan and the allies also got away with War Crimes so don't go there.

Russia is trying to Control its former Colonies. Good for Them! They actually care for their former Colonies, if only Britain and the other colonial powers could do the same (think Iraq, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Burma, Congo...).

Yes, the Killing is Horrific and Evil. But the people of S.Ossetia don't want to be Georgian. They never did. They were ignored, and now the consequences are showing themselves. If those people had been listened to before this wouldn't have happened.

And The Oil is the fault of the EU that put the pipe there.

Should they also give up their attempts to join NATO?

Yes they should.

I was convinced to stay away from Acid the moment I watched the guy tripping on acid wander around Ohio State's campus with no pants on.

...or underpants.

I know it was acid, given that the cops who picked the guy up asked us in as witnesses, and told us the result of the drug test.

Oddly enough, Russian forces have hit a significant number of "unintentional targets".

You wanna talk "unintentional targets"? Ever heard of Friendly Fire, the USA's favourite weapon?

It was Germany who killed millions of Russians, we did not do any war crimes. Your the one who is in no postion to say Georgia's goverment is the victom, wehn they killed Russians and tried to enthic cleasning the area of South Ossetia.
Russia did no war crimes in WWII. Really. Ever hear 'bout the Gulag? Hmm?

It was Germany who killed millions of Russians, we did not do any war crimes. Your the one who is in no postion to say Georgia's goverment is the victom, wehn they killed Russians and tried to enthic cleasning the area of South Ossetia.
Again you've brought up ethnic cleansing with absolutely no proof.

Yes they should.

Why? The referendum on the issue turned in an overwheleming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian_NATO_membership_referendum,_2008) level of support for joining NATO. After all, you said that the South Ossetian referendum for independence should count, so why not this referendum?

Again you've brought up ethnic cleansing with absolutely no proof.

With the world lets my govemrent put them to trial, it would be proven. Gerogia forces kill many Ossetians and Russians so that they could take over their people.

Yes they should.

Wait a minute. Why should Georgia give up their NATO ambitions? It seems that, if Georgia had been a member of NATO, Russia wouldn't have dared intervene on behalf of the South Ossetians. So, wouldn't it be in the best interests of Georgia to join a military alliance that will protect them from Russia?

Why? The referendum on the issue turned in an overwheleming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian_NATO_membership_referendum,_2008) level of support for joining NATO. After all, you said that the South Ossetian referendum for independence should count, so why not this referendum?

This is anther way for the west to trap us into a corner and use us for it's own needs. There should be buffer zones from us and NATO.

With the world lets my govemrent put them to trial, it would be proven. Gerogia forces kill many Ossetians and Russians so that they could take over their people.

That's not how law works. Once you produce the evidence, THEN you get to arrest and try people. Not before. So, produce the evidence, then they go on trial.

This is anther way for the west to trap us into a corner and use us for it's own needs. There should be buffer zones from us and NATO.

The biggest country in the world wants buffer zones? You have the room to make them within your borders easily!

Wait a minute. Why should Georgia give up their NATO ambitions? It seems that, if Georgia had been a member of NATO, Russia wouldn't have dared intervene on behalf of the South Ossetians. So, wouldn't it be in the best interests of Georgia to join a military alliance that will protect them from Russia?

Georgia started this war, therefore NATO would not intervene.

It was Germany who killed millions of Russians, we did not do any war crimes.

While it is true that German killed many millions of Russians, Russia has more than enough blood on its hands. Molotov-Ribbentrop, the invasion of Finland, the occupation of the Baltics, the massive trail of rape that crossed Eastern Europe (see: Prussian Nights, by Solzhenitsyn), wherever the Red Army went, the expulsion and murder of millions of ethnic Germans residing outside of Germany

It was Germany who killed millions of Russians, we did not do any war crimes. Your the one who is in no postion to say Georgia's goverment is the victom, wehn they killed Russians and tried to enthic cleasning the area of South Ossetia.

Germany certainly did sink to the deeper depths then Russia but let's not forget that Russia wasn't without it's fair share of "blood on the hands" moments. Before and after WWII:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes

Oh I know what you're going to say. It's all Western lies :rolleyes:

Hitler & Stalin were possibly the two most vile and corrupt human beings to have ever graced the Earth. It's a pity they didn't destroy each other.

Yes they should.

Why?

Are you afraid of the big bad Capitalists?

Georgia started this war, therefore NATO would not intervene.

Of course, of course, Georgia BRIBED those Russian soldiers to come over and start shooting at them,. in an effort to gain support in a huge anti-Russian conspiracy! You're a genius!

While it is true that German killed many millions of Russians, Russia has more than enough blood on its hands. Molotov-Ribbentrop, the invasion of Finland, the occupation of the Baltics, the massive trail of rape that crossed Eastern Europe (see: Prussian Nights, by Solzhenitsyn), wherever the Red Army went, the expulsion and murder of millions of ethnic Germans residing outside of Germany

We freed those nations from Nazi Germany, they should be greatful. We did not kill Germans unless with they were nazis killing Russians.

Georgia started this war, therefore NATO would not intervene.

If Georgia was a member of NATO, NATO would have reacted when Russian troops invaded Georgian territory.

This is anther way for the west to trap us into a corner and use us for it's own needs. There should be buffer zones from us and NATO.

Ah, the classic Russian mindset, according to Kennan :)

Seriously though, why on Earth does Russia get a say over what organizations its neighbors join or refrain from joining? What makes Russia so special?

Of course, of course, Georgia BRIBED those Russian soldiers to come over and start shooting at them,. in an effort to gain support in a huge anti-Russian conspiracy! You're a genius!

Russian peacekeepers were killed unprovked. Are you saying the Peacekeepers are at fault?

OK, Stop Referencing WWII!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It Happened 60 Years Ago. It Is Nothing To DO With The Present War.

We Need To Ask How To Stop The War Not "Who Killed More 60 Years Ago?"!!!!

Russian peacekeepers were killed unprovked. Are you saying the Peacekeepers are at fault?

Yes, I am saying that the Russian peacekeepers killed unprovoked, and that they were at fault.

Ah, the classic Russian mindset, according to Kennan :)

Seriously though, why on Earth does Russia get a say over what organizations its neighbors join or refrain from joining? What makes Russia so special?

Why Does America Get To Impose Democracy On Everyone?

OK, Stop Referencing WWII!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It Happened 60 Years Ago. It Is Nothing To DO With The Present War.

We Need To Ask How To Stop The War Not "Who Killed More 60 Years Ago?"!!!!

Oh really? I want you to construct me an alternate timeline of what would've happened had Russia not committed any war crimes in WWII.

So Georgia should just let them leave?

What if the United States did that in the Civil War?

Yes, I am saying that the Russian peacekeepers killed unprovoked, and that they were at fault.

Of course they are at fault, the west will always say we are at fault. So than by your the forces in Iraq are at fault for their deaths for bringing the war to that country.

It isnt their fault, they were doing their job and were trying to keep the peace .

Why Does America Get To Impose Democracy On Everyone?
Because as soon as you enter the White House, you must leave your brain with the security guard?

Yes, I am saying that the Russian peacekeepers killed unprovoked, and that they were at fault.

Please! Please! This is supposed to be a happy occasion! Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who.

We freed those nations from Nazi Germany, they should be greatful. We did not kill Germans unless with they were nazis killing Russians.

The Nazis were never in the Baltics or Finland. Why should they be grateful?
Why should the women of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Eastern Germany, Bulgaria or anywhere else be grateful they were raped by Soviet troops?
Why should Poland be grateful for being permanently cut in half by the Soviets, in accordance with borders initially devised in Molotov-Ribbentrop?

Of course they are at fault, the west will always say we are at fault. So than by your the forces in Iraq are at fault for their deaths for bringing the war to that country.

It isnt their fault, they were doing their job and were trying to keep the peace .

Actually, yeah. We (The USA) are partially at fault for what's happening right now.

So Georgia should just let them leave?

What if the United States did that in the Civil War?

South Ossetia and Abkhazia should not be part of Georgia in the first palce.

Oh really? I want you to construct me an alternate timeline of what would've happened had Russia not committed any war crimes in WWII.

The Same. East Prussia would still have split between Poland And Russia, the USA would stll have murdered thousands of Japanese with 2 bombs, The Cold War Would Still have happened, the USA would still be evil.

All Russia did was what the Germans did on a bigger scale. And the Yanks only opposed t when Russia wasn't on their side!

Please! Please! This is supposed to be a happy occasion! Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who.

I lol'd.

Why Does America Get To Impose Democracy On Everyone?

Tu quoque, dearest. American policy elsewhere doesn't have a place in this discussion. It doesn't make the Russian rape of Georgia acceptable.

Tu quoque, dearest. American policy elsewhere doesn't have a place in this discussion. It doesn't make the Russian rape of Georgia acceptable.

Georgia started this war.

It dosent make it right a Pro-West goverment has attemted genocide.

The Same. East Prussia would still have split between Poland And Russia, the USA would stll have murdered thousands of Japanese with 2 bombs, The Cold War Would Still have happened, the USA would still be evil.

All Russia did was what the Germans did on a bigger scale. And the Yanks only opposed t when Russia wasn't on their side!

You aren't considering the major reputation of Stalin, the larger workforce, more men, with experience,etc. How can you say that crazy Stalin wouldn't have tried to invade the USA? Sure, Nuclear winter might've set in, but that's not the point. The point is that the world would be different.

Georgia started this war.

It dosent make it right a Pro-West goverment has attemted genocide.

You haven't shown us any proof of genocide yet.

Found this:
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/6619/russiayy0.png

Because as soon as you enter the White House, you must leave your brain with the security guard?

Votes Do Not buy Bread!

Andaluciae, my point is this is a war in Old Russia, And the USA should let them get on with it.

All Russia did was what the Germans did on a bigger scale. And the Yanks only opposed t when Russia wasn't on their side!

Uh, yeah. That's how global geopolitics works. International 'law' is what the other fellow breaks when he is doing something you don't like.

The reality is that no government really gives two shits about people outside it's own boarders - and little more about the people inside. Calls for human rights and stuff like that is just things they say to keep the people at home quite without having to crack down hard.

You should stop enabling them by pretending to care yourself.

Uh, yeah. That's how global geopolitics works. International 'law' is what the other fellow breaks when he is doing something you don't like.

The reality is that no government really gives two shits about people outside it's own boarders - and little more about the people inside. Calls for human rights and stuff like that is just things they say to keep the people at home quite without having to crack down hard.

You should stop enabling them by pretending to care yourself.

Lacadaemon, the only other poster on NSG who understands the world.

You aren't considering the major reputation of Stalin, the larger workforce, more men, with experience,etc. How can you say that crazy Stalin wouldn't have tried to invade the USA? Sure, Nuclear winter might've set in, but that's not the point. The point is that the world would be different.

No It Wouldn't. Stalin would much rather started a Communist Revolution in the USA than attack it.

No It Wouldn't. Stalin would much rather started a Communist Revolution in the USA than attack it.

Stalin was a traitor.

The world including Russia would of been better off without him.

Votes Do Not buy Bread!

Andaluciae, my point is this is a war in Old Russia, And the USA should let them get on with it.
Votes don't buy bread? I'm not familiar with that one....

And no. There is not a war in Old Russia, there is a war between two independent states. If we don't intervene, we're hypocrites. If we do intervene, we're acting like the World's police. (Which we shouldn't be doing)

Uh, yeah. That's how global geopolitics works. International 'law' is what the other fellow breaks when he is doing something you don't like.

The reality is that no government really gives two shits about people outside it's own boarders - and little more about the people inside. Calls for human rights and stuff like that is just things they say to keep the people at home quite without having to crack down hard.

You should stop enabling them by pretending to care yourself.

I care that Poor Georgians, fellow Christians, are dying, that Russia can't build its Empire again and that Yankees as usual are huffing and puffing outside the Brick house!

Stalin was a traitor.

The world including Russia would of been better off without him.

And just *how* was Stalin a traitor?

Lacadaemon, the only other poster on NSG who understands the world.
Oh! Oh! Am I the other one?:p
No It Wouldn't. Stalin would much rather started a Communist Revolution in the USA than attack it.
He was crazy. He did things that made no sense. K?:wink:

And just *how* was Stalin a traitor?

By sending thousands to the Gulag and "Purging" the army?

Georgia started this war.

It dosent make it right a Pro-West goverment has attemted genocide.

GENOCIDE? WHAT? There is no way in hell Georgia could ever mount an offensive that would do more than scratch your beloved Soviet empire. It is Russia that considers to fight even in the wake of a Georgian cease-fire, it is Russia that has used a sledgehammer to kill a fly. You want to talk about genocide?

And for the record, I don't really see what Georgia being "pro-West" has to do with your claim of genocide - asides from the fact that in your mind, Western civilization will be the death of us all. I bet you miss the Cold War.

And just *how* was Stalin a traitor?

By killing millions of his own people.

Not many Russians look at him in a good veiw just like you in the west do.

Votes don't buy bread? I'm not familiar with that one....

And no. There is not a war in Old Russia, there is a war between two independent states. If we don't intervene, we're hypocrites. If we do intervene, we're acting like the World's police. (Which we shouldn't be doing)

A Starving man cannot care for higher things when his basic needs are not satisfied.

The Land was once the Soviet Union and before that Tsarist Russia. Only thing to do is to let this run its course and try to get the red cross in fast.

Oh! Oh! Am I the other one?:p

Close. But you're not darkly cynical enough. Lacadaemon has that in spades.

By killing millions of his own people.

Not many Russians look at him in a good veiw just like you in the west do.

Actually, in the West, we have a dimmer view of him than you think.

It's just those copies of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia you guys kept sending over that make me think that you all believe he was the greatest leader on Earth.

GENOCIDE? WHAT? There is no way in hell Georgia could ever mount an offensive that would do more than scratch your beloved Soviet empire. It is Russia that considers to fight even in the wake of a Georgian cease-fire, it is Russia that has used a sledgehammer to kill a fly. You want to talk about genocide?

And for the record, I don't really see what Georgia being "pro-West" has to do with your claim of genocide - asides from the fact that in your mind, Western civilization will be the death of us all. I bet you miss the Cold War.

Georgia was trying to kill of the Ossetians and Russians inculding our peacekeepers.

A Starving man cannot care for higher things when his basic needs are not satisfied.

The Land was once the Soviet Union and before that Tsarist Russia. Only thing to do is to let this run its course and try to get the red cross in fast.
Mmm.
Close. But you're not darkly cynical enough. Lacadaemon has that in spades.

*Goes to "Optimists Anonymous"*;)

The only Russian leaders I'd want to associate with would be Gorbachov & Yeltsin. Not quite as insane as their other club members.

Well, maybe I'd like to meet Lenin and tell him his ideas were all crackpot.

Georgia was trying to kill of the Ossetians and Russians inculding our peacekeepers.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/itn/20080812/twl-villages-bombed-despite-ceasefire-or-41f21e0.html Which is why Russia invaded Georgia and is still bombing villages even though there's a ceasefire?

Actually, in the West, we have a dimmer view of him than you think.

It's just those copies of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia you guys kept sending over that make me think that you all believe he was the greatest leader on Earth.

How can we love a leader who kills his own people? Worst leader in the world.

Georgia was trying to kill of the Ossetians and Russians inculding our peacekeepers.

They have no reason to do that. Kinda like you.

Actually, in the West, we have a dimmer view of him than you think.

It's just those copies of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia you guys kept sending over that make me think that you all believe he was the greatest leader on Earth.

Be fair, Stalin's Tactics were similar to those of the Tsars. Remember though, he was able to charm and fool millions.

How can we love a leader who kills his own people? Worst leader in the world.
Then why do you love Putin?

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/itn/20080812/twl-villages-bombed-despite-ceasefire-or-41f21e0.html Which is why Russia invaded Georgia and is still bombing villages even though there's a ceasefire?

False. Dmitry Medvedev, himself has ordered the cease-frie. However if Georgian forces are breaking the cease-frie, than our Military would have to defend itsself.

Then why do you love Putin?

Putin is a great man and has done a ton of good for us. We are living better lifes because of him.And he dosent kill his own people!

Andaluciae, my point is this is a war in Old Russia, And the USA should let them get on with it.

That somehow makes the Russian assault on Georgian independence o-k?

I thought the age of Imperialism came to an end after World War II.

That somehow makes the Russian assault on Georgian independence o-k?

I thought the age of Imperialism came to an end after World War II.

This was started by the Georgians who assaulted the people of South Ossetia and killed Russian peacekeepers.

Georgia started this war.

It dosent make it right a Pro-West goverment has attemted genocide.

Wrong, South Ossetia started this war by trying to illegally secede from Georgia.

That somehow makes the Russian assault on Georgian independence o-k?

I thought the age of Imperialism came to an end after World War II.

The Russians shouldn't have done it. But they have and we need to make the best of it. So lets let them get on with it.

As opposed to Georgian assaults on Abakhazia & South Ossetia's independence?

Imperialism is alive and well, but now has willing volunteers to join again.

This was started by the Georgians who assaulted the people of South Ossetia and killed Russian peacekeepers.

Georgia was seeking to restore its duly constituted authority over a province that was in a state of active rebellion, that is well within the rights of a sovereign state.

Wrong, South Ossetia started this war by trying to illegally secede from Georgia.

They have seceded since 1992. They should not be part of Georgia. Besides dose that give them the right to kill the poeple of South Ossetia or our peacekeepers?

Wrong, South Ossetia started this war by trying to illegally secede from Georgia.
How do you define "legal secession" then?

The Russians shouldn't have done it. But they have and we need to make the best of it. So lets let them get on with it.

That's the attitude of Munich.

As opposed to Georgian assaults on Abakhazia & South Ossetia's independence?

Imperialism is alive and well, but now has willing volunteers to join again.

Georgia was seeking to restore its duly constituted authority over a province that was in a state of active rebellion, that is well within the rights of a sovereign state. There's a difference between what Georgia sought to do, and what Russia is trying to do.

They have seceded since 1992. They should not be part of Georgia. Besides dose that give them the right to kill the poeple of South Ossetia or our peacekeepers?

Were the peacekeepers bearing arms?

That would mean Russia was antagonising.

I hope not.

Russia will be a useful ally in the future.

We have made sure that Georgia's aggressive military can no longer harm the people of South Ossetia or Abkhazian. We have also put an end to the enthic cleasning.

And you're doing that by making sure there's no one left for them to kill, are you?

I trust my country and it's goverment with my life and it has proof.

independent tribunal?

More like pro-Georgian independent tribunal that has it out for my people.

Kind of funny, since any trial you guys have would be an anti-Georgian trial that had it out for their people. If you really believe for one second that your courts will be impartial, assuming you even have a trial and that he doesn't just "disappear", then you're not paying attention.

The UN must let us bring him in and put him to trail or we should use military force to.

You're going to bully the UN into handing him over? I can't speak for most of the countries, but I think Bush may actually take that threat as a personal challenge. So... please don't. Not just for your sake, or ours, but for everyone.

You wanna talk "unintentional targets"? Ever heard of Friendly Fire, the USA's favourite weapon?

But... I like friends....

How can we love a leader who kills his own people? Worst leader in the world.

This, at least, is something we can agree on.

Georgia should let the two reigons go and blockade them with giant walls. Screw what the Russians say.

If Ossetia & Azhabahuabjabjjjab want to be free, fine. Just stop the people being allowed to go into Georgia. Shoot them on site if they do. Problem solved.

That's the attitude of Munich.



Georgia was seeking to restore its duly constituted authority over a province that was in a state of active rebellion, that is well within the rights of a sovereign state. There's a difference between what Georgia sought to do, and what Russia is trying to do.

And that attitude meant we won WWII!

The Territory was Rusian before that though, so the point applies again!

They have seceded since 1992. They should not be part of Georgia. Besides dose that give them the right to kill the poeple of South Ossetia or our peacekeepers?

A secession that no one has recognized as legal, and whose de facto independence has only been able to be sustained by direct foreign intervention by Russia.

Georgia has a right to determine its own internal affairs, not Russia.

Russia will be a useful ally in the future.

Ally for what? Voting in the Eurovision?

Once commodities shit the bed Russia will go back to being an also ran.

Georgia should let the two reigons go and blockade them with giant walls. Screw what the Russians say.

If Ossetia & Azhabahuabjabjjjab want to be free, fine. Just stop the people being allowed to go into Georgia. Shoot them on site if they do. Problem solved.

Not true, they would not do this. I can say stop Gerogia from killing their people.

Georgia was seeking to restore its duly constituted authority over a province that was in a state of active rebellion, that is well within the rights of a sovereign state.

So what the hell was Kosovo then? A bunch of Albanians move into Kosovo and declare its independance, Serbia tries to restore its authority over the province, and the US bombs the whole country.

Now, you're going to say "Well Kosovo was internationally recognized!!11!" well gee, I wonder why.

And that attitude meant we won WWII!

No, that attitude failed to prevent World War II.

And, no, the attitude of Churchill, not Chamberlain, won World War II.

The Territory was Rusian before that though, so the point applies again!

No, no it doesn't. Georgia has been recognized as legally independent from Russia for years. Past dependence does not authority make.

Ally for what? Voting in the Eurovision?

Once commodities shit the bed Russia will go back to being an also ran.

Other than their nuclear missiles, their military is an also-ran.

Sure, they can beat up Georgia, but they have tanks that are worthless against Western weapons, and far fewer of those than they used to have. Their military has shrunk enormously over the past 18 years.

Far fewer planes, ships, subs, tanks, personnel...

No real ability to project power further than a nearby independent state that they view as still being theirs.

Other than their nuclear missiles, their military is an also-ran.

Sure, they can beat up Georgia, but they have tanks that are worthless against Western weapons, and far fewer of those than they used to have. Their military has shrunk enormously over the past 18 years.

Far fewer planes, ships, subs, tanks, personnel...

No real ability to project power further than a nearby independent state that they view as still being theirs.

You seem to lack knoweldge on how well our military has been rebuilt over the lastt 8 years. We are once again a superpower and have the most advance military. I would be happy to post links to show you just how powerful our military is.

So what the hell was Kosovo then? A bunch of Albanians move into Kosovo and declare its independance, Serbia tries to restore its authority over the province, and the US bombs the whole country.

Now, you're going to say "Well Kosovo was internationally recognized!!11!" well gee, I wonder why.

Kosovo is far more complex than merely that. The misdeeds of the campaigns of the JNA, later the Serbian Army, and its proxies against former members of Yugoslavia, as well as what was happening on the ground in Kosovo militated for NATO to intervene, and then for a decade long process to eventually result in independence.

The Russian Army is amusing. It's still lead by fat drunkards who can't even salute properly :D

Did you see it when Putin got off the plane? That was sad. Tsar Pyotr Velikiy is turning in his grave at how pathetic the great Russian army has become :(

The Russian Army is amusing. It's still lead by fat drunkards who can't even salute properly :D

That's the German army, actually. Apparently as of this time last year, they were more overweight on average than the citizens.

You seem to lack knoweldge on how well our military has been rebuilt over the best 8 years. We are once again a superpower and have the most advance military. I would be happy to post links to show you just how powerful our military is.

Bullshit.

I don't lack any knowledge about how you're still flying 1950s vintage Bear bombers that wouldn't survive to reach their targets.

I don't lack any knowledge about your tanks, none of which could survive against an M-1. Or against the BLU-108.

You have no ability to defend against the B-2. Your missiles that you gave to Iraq were worthless against any of our aircraft.

You don't have any stealth aircraft.

Your Navy (what it once was) is largely rusting in huge heaps. You sold an aircraft carrier to China because you couldn't afford to maintain it, and sold another one to become a gambling casino in Macao.

I see from the videos of Russian aircraft in action over Georgia that you still aren't using precision guided munitions - great job on hitting that apartment block by accident.

The Russian Army is amusing. It's still lead by fat drunkards who can't even salute properly :D

Did you see it when Putin got off the plane? That was sad. Tsar Pyotr Velikiy is turning in his grave at how pathetic the great Russian army has become :(

Those fat durnkards can take on any military in the world. I would like to see the guy from our military to respound to this post.

Isn't the French Foreign legion supposed to be the best military in the world?

OMG KOSOVO WAS A DIFFERENT SITUATION!!!

Thanks for proving my point.

Fact of the matter is, Serbia re-invaded Kosovo, USA brought the banhammer, and destroyed Serbia.

Georgia invades South Ossetia, Russia brings banhammer, world yells at Russia.

You need to ask yourself, what would your impression of these events be if Russia was the superpower in the world and not the US. If Russia was the one that controlled news flow.

Background to this movie:

This movie was made in 1983 and is called "The Day After." Its pretty tacky and has bad graffics but is kind of relevant. Basically what has happened is Soviet-US relation deteriorate and the Soviets blockade West Berlin. NATO launches a conventional attack to liberate West Berlin, but can't stop the Soviet counter-attack. Shortly their after several nuclear bombs explode over the advancing Soviet lines and a nuke takes out NATO head quarters. And thus the end of the world begins. This scene shows Air Force bomber and missile crews respond and the reaction of the general US population.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7vKF0V-A9Y

Thanks for proving my point.

Fact of the matter is, Serbia re-invaded Kosovo, USA brought the banhammer, and destroyed Serbia.

Georgia invades South Ossetia, Russia brings banhammer, world yells at Russia.

You need to ask yourself, what would your impression of these events be if Russia was the superpower in the world and not the US. If Russia was the one that controlled news flow.

South Ossetia is still technically part of Georgia though, so it's not the same thing.

All the evidence will be given when the UN lets us put Mikheil Saakashvili to trail for the enthic cleasing and the deaths of our peacekeeprs.

It is fact he started this conflict. It was fact that Russian peacekeepers were killed before Russia even entered this conflict. He also tried to kill of the people of South Ossetia.

The UN must let us bring him in and put him to trail or we should use military force to.

Would you be satisfied with a trial for war crimes, before the International Criminal Court in the Hague?

Or are they US stooges too?

You seem to lack knoweldge on how well our military has been rebuilt over the lastt 8 years. We are once again a superpower and have the most advance military. I would be happy to post links to show you just how powerful our military is.

Yanno, Russia is a fundamentally poor country. It's only at the G8 because the eurotrash won't build nuclear power stations.

Really it's not a threat. I'd be more worried about the Japanese feeling their oats.

Putin is a great man and has done a ton of good for us. We are living better lifes because of him.And he dosent kill his own people!
You seem to lack knoweldge on how well our military has been rebuilt over the lastt 8 years. We are once again a superpower and have the most advance military. I would be happy to post links to show you just how powerful our military is.
Must...Keep...A...Straight...Face.... *Snicker, chortle*

Bullshit.

I don't lack any knowledge about how you're still flying 1950s vintage Bear bombers that wouldn't survive to reach their targets.

I don't lack any knowledge about your tanks, none of which could survive against an M-1. Or against the BLU-108.

You have no ability to defend against the B-2. Your missiles that you gave to Iraq were worthless against any of our aircraft.

You don't have any stealth aircraft.

Your Navy (what it once was) is largely rusting in huge heaps. You sold an aircraft carrier to China because you couldn't afford to maintain it, and sold another one to become a gambling casino in Macao.

I see from the videos of Russian aircraft in action over Georgia that you still aren't using precision guided munitions - great job on hitting that apartment block by accident.


Thank you for showing me you are turly an idoit.

stealth aircraft- This is the newest- http://www.rense.com/general68/newrussianstealth.htm
The best airforce in the world

We have missles can not be shot down by America.

Our tanks are some of the most advance such as the t-80 and the t-90

Our men are expericned and well trained.

Our navy is weak? I don't think so. Is it weaker than Americas? Yes. But not weak at all.

Isn't the French Foreign legion supposed to be the best military in the world?

As commandos and small-unit types, they could be called that.

As a whole military, no.

A military is only as good as its ability to control the land, sea, and air as one unit - and to gather knowledge and disseminate it in a timely manner in the battlespace.

The ability to do this quickly, and without the knowledge of the opponent, is a hallmark of modern US combat on large scales (which is why fighting insurgents required changes to adapt).

Unless Russia used nuclear weapons, any conventional contest with Russia would result in Russia being handed their own ass on a platter within a couple of weeks.

We're talking about a US military that excels at destroying conventional forces - one that in the most recent conflict flew two (just 2) bombers over an entire Iraqi division, and destroyed 80 percent of the vehicles in 30 seconds using the CBU-97 munition.

Since the Russians have no defense against the B-2, any exposed tank or mechanized divisions (and by default, they are always exposed unless they're under a mountain) would be wiped out by this sort of thing. It's hard to then fight when 80 percent of your vehicles are burning, half your men are dead or wounded, and you're cut off from supply and communication with all other units. It's the sort of thing that makes people run away.

Bullshit.

I don't lack any knowledge about how you're still flying 1950s vintage Bear bombers that wouldn't survive to reach their targets.

I don't lack any knowledge about your tanks, none of which could survive against an M-1. Or against the BLU-108.

You have no ability to defend against the B-2. Your missiles that you gave to Iraq were worthless against any of our aircraft.

You don't have any stealth aircraft.

Your Navy (what it once was) is largely rusting in huge heaps. You sold an aircraft carrier to China because you couldn't afford to maintain it, and sold another one to become a gambling casino in Macao.

I see from the videos of Russian aircraft in action over Georgia that you still aren't using precision guided munitions - great job on hitting that apartment block by accident.

Lets not lie, Stealth is expensive. For a country like Russia, its an unessesary expense. In regards to defending against stealth well... theres Bi-Static RADAR that will do the trick. Celldar works quite well too. Oh, um..who invented Stealth? (AMERICA.. FUCK YEA!!!.. well actually no.)

False. Dmitry Medvedev, himself has ordered the cease-frie. However if Georgian forces are breaking the cease-frie, than our Military would have to defend itsself.

Prove it's false. Until you do so, it's true. Also if Georgian forces are breaking the ceasefire why do you respond by bombing villages?

Lets not lie, Stealth is expensive. For a country like Russia, its an unessesary expense. In regards to defending against stealth well... theres Bi-Static RADAR that will do the trick. Celldar works quite well too. Oh, um..who invented Stealth? (AMERICA.. FUCK YEA!!!.. well actually no.)

Bistatic radar apparently doesn't work against the B-2.

Yanno, Russia is a fundamentally poor country. It's only at the G8 because the eurotrash won't build nuclear power stations.

Really it's not a threat. I'd be more worried about the Japanese feeling their oats.

Seeing how America has to broww money from us and China, Id have to say America is the poor one. If my country was poor than tell me how do I have a laptop?

Background to this movie:

This movie was made in 1983 and is called "The Day After." Its pretty tacky and has bad graffics but is kind of relevant. Basically what has happened is Soviet-US relation deteriorate and the Soviets blockade West Berlin. NATO launches a conventional attack to liberate West Berlin, but can't stop the Soviet counter-attack. Shortly their after several nuclear bombs explode over the advancing Soviet lines and a nuke takes out NATO head quarters. And thus the end of the world begins. This scene shows Air Force bomber and missile crews respond and the reaction of the general US population.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7vKF0V-A9Y

You're new here, right? :D

Look, posters aren't even reading relevant links to news stories when they're offered. And you are offering some fictional movie about WWW3? That is 24 years old?

Prove it's false. Until you do so, it's true. Also if Georgian forces are breaking the ceasefire why do you respond by bombing villages?

Until you prove to me Georgia is not leing you can shut up.

Thank you for showing me you are turly an idoit.

stealth aircraft- This is the newest- http://www.rense.com/general68/newrussianstealth.htm
The best airforce in the world

We have missles can not be shot down by America.

Our tanks are some of the most advance such as the t-80 and the t-90

Our men are expericned and well trained.

Our navy is weak? I don't think so. Is it weaker than Americas? Yes. But not weak at all.

Please stop, you aren't helping with your jingoism either.

South Ossetia is still technically part of Georgia though, so it's not the same thing.
Actually, Kosovo too has been a part of Serbia up until the Kosovo war, and not just technically.



Bistatic radar apparently doesn't work against the B-2.
Seriously, it would be a great idea to at least... Well, at least talk to people who know stuff. At least heard a bit. Do you even RP in the II? There are some people who design and so do some reading.

Seeing how America has to broww money from us and China, Id have to say America is the poor one. If my country was poor than tell me how do I have a laptop?

AHAHAHAHAHAHA. People in places as poor as fucking Angola have laptops, dipshit.

Vast oversimplifications

The Serbian government's record in the nineties was one of repeated violations through the Balkans. It utilized the JNA and private militias to attack and kill large numbers of Croatians, Bosnian muslims and Albanian Kosovars. NATO had been in the process of dealing with the many conflicts Milosevich was largely responsible for initiating, and launched a campaign to limit his actions. NATO then proceeded to launch an extremely limited air campaign to limit the function of the Serbian military in Kosovo.

Georgia has no such record.

It's a pretty stark difference.

Bistatic radar apparently doesn't work against the B-2.

Intreguing. I think with the B-2 we would have to wait and see what would happen. Russian S-300PMU's or S-400's are pretty nasty, but the B2 is also has an exceptionally small RCS. You would have to imagine that Russia is at least developing something to defeat it.

Until you prove to me Georgia is not leing you can shut up.

Sorry, what's leing?

Seeing how America has to broww money from us and China, Id have to say America is the poor one. If my country was poor than tell me how do I have a laptop?

Yeah, Russia isn't richer than the U.S. Not even close.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA. People in places as poor as fucking Angola have laptops, dipshit.

Ha ha I find it funny you think we are poor. The west needs our money and our oil, you guys need us.

Seeing how America has to broww money from us and China, Id have to say America is the poor one. If my country was poor than tell me how do I have a laptop?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44266000/jpg/_44266861_laptops_group.jpg

These Nigerian children must be incredibly wealthy.

Arrogent Americanism

Oh I forgot... theres always a reason why you Americans are always right in everything you do! Georgia is a saint and they have never done ANYTHING to South Ossetia or Abkhazia EVER in the past decade <insert google search here>

You're new here, right? :D

Look, posters aren't even reading relevant links to news stories when they're offered. And you are offering some fictional movie about WWW3? That is 24 years old?

To be honest, the BBC docu-dramas "Threads" and "The War Game" were more terrifying to me than "The Day After".

Intreguing. I think with the B-2 we would have to wait and see what would happen. Russian S-300PMU's or S-400's are pretty nasty, but the B2 is also has an exceptionally small RCS. You would have to imagine that Russia is at least developing something to defeat it.

Those missiles are only nasty if they can see something to hit.

Yes, they're trying to come up with something, but the countermeasure isn't available yet.

Russia relies on having strategic nuclear weapons (the US does as well - which is why we can invade some place far away, and keep the idea of attacking the US while we're out playing to a minimum).

If Russia ever thought they were losing a major conventional war, they would just fall back and punt a few nukes.

Sorry, what's leing?

in case you haven't notice my english is not good.

Lie + ing

there you should know what I mean.

Unless Russia used nuclear weapons, any conventional contest with Russia would result in Russia being handed their own ass on a platter within a couple of weeks.
Herr Adolf was a bit less self-confident, he planned on 3 months.


Since the Russians have no defense against the B-2,
Actually, B-2's purpose was to crawl in the gaps between SAM sites (because it's well detectable, just at 50-80km, and can well be engaged by modern SAM), in a secret mission (so that fighters don't spoil it), and deliver nuclear munitions.
In a conventional war, it's not very useful, just another bomber with a bit of extra survivability.

And most certainly it was never built to hunt tanks, especially as it lacks the ability.

Oh I forgot... theres always a reason why you Americans are always right in everything you do! Georgia is a saint and they have never done ANYTHING to South Ossetia or Abkhazia EVER in the past decade <insert google search here>

So, your claim is that Serbia's record of atrocities against Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo is similar to Georgia's actions against Abkhazia and South Ossetia?

Until you prove to me Georgia is not leing you can shut up.

You're the one making the claim, you back it up with proof. You can't throw the burden of proof on someone else.

Oh I forgot... theres always a reason why you Americans are always right in everything you do! Georgia is a saint and they have never done ANYTHING to South Ossetia or Abkhazia EVER in the past decade <insert google search here>

To start off with, a ceasefire has been in place between Georgia and South Ossetia and Abkhazia for the past decade, during which time period the Russian military and government have funneled equipment and funding to both separatist movements. The situation is entirely different, and no matter how hard you try, your excessive generalizations cannot be used to make them seem similar.

Those missiles are only nasty if they can see something to hit.

Yes, they're trying to come up with something, but the countermeasure isn't available yet.

Russia relies on having strategic nuclear weapons (the US does as well - which is why we can invade some place far away, and keep the idea of attacking the US while we're out playing to a minimum).

If Russia ever thought they were losing a major conventional war, they would just fall back and punt a few nukes.

You can't say that. Your not a Russian nor do you seem to know how our goverment work. Oh and we didnt in Afghanistan, ty for proving my point.

in case you haven't notice my english is not good.

Lie + ing

there you should know what I mean.

OK, thanks. Well in that case until you can prove to me Russia's not lying then you can shut up as well.

This is anther way for the west to trap us into a corner and use us for it's own needs. There should be buffer zones from us and NATO.

Indeed, perhaps a large wall.

You can't say that. Your not a Russian nor do you seem to know how our goverment work. Oh and we didnt in Afghanistan, ty for proving my point.

Afghanistan wasn't a major war for the Soviet Union. If you think it was, then the USSR was far weaker than I believe.

Afghanistan wasn't a major war for the Soviet Union. If you think it was, then the USSR was far weaker than I believe.

America is far weaker than I thought with Vietnam.

Ally for what? Voting in the Eurovision?

Once commodities shit the bed Russia will go back to being an also ran.

Ally in future wars related to Empires.

Russia needs to modernise and then it can kick China's ASS!

You can't say that. Your not a Russian nor do you seem to know how our goverment work. Oh and we didnt in Afghanistan, ty for proving my point.

I've put my hand directly on an S-300, the launcher, and been inside the control van. I can tell you first hand that it's crap compared to something like PAC-3. It looks like it was built very crudely.

It looks like your government sells them to Middle Eastern idiots who then get to try them out on US aircraft - and then find out that the stuff is complete crap. And then your government fields the same crap and tells the soldiers that it's the best.

If I was in a Russian armored column moving down the road, and saw any US aircraft overhead, I would jump from my vehicle and flee - taking my chances with being shot by Russian soldiers over being blown up by US aircraft in a single 30 second pass.

Indeed, perhaps a large wall.

Or a moat. Run by Germans.

Thank you for showing me you are turly an idoit.

stealth aircraft- This is the newest- http://www.rense.com/general68/newrussianstealth.htm
The best airforce in the world

We have missles can not be shot down by America.

Our tanks are some of the most advance such as the t-80 and the t-90

Our men are expericned and well trained.

Our navy is weak? I don't think so. Is it weaker than Americas? Yes. But not weak at all.

To quote the great Indiana Jones...

"What a vivid imagination!"

In regards to your article, you note that this is the "newest" (your words, not mine) stealth aircraft developed for the Russian military. I'd just like to point out that article is nearly three years old. Speaks volumes for your production capabilities, hmm? :)

Seeing how America has to broww money from us and China, Id have to say America is the poor one. If my country was poor than tell me how do I have a laptop?

The Russian GDP is tiny, and it has a minuscule manufacturing capacity compared to the US/EU. Without nuclear weapons Russia wouldn't pose a significant threat to nation of consequence. Beating up on Georgia is about the limit of Russian capabilities.

Who borrows money from whom is irrelevant for this purpose.

I don't know how you have a laptop. But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. There are plenty of laptops in countries far poorer than Russia.

I've put my hand directly on an S-300, the launcher, and been inside the control van. I can tell you first hand that it's crap compared to something like PAC-3. It looks like it was built very crudely.

It looks like your government sells them to Middle Eastern idiots who then get to try them out on US aircraft - and then find out that the stuff is complete crap. And then your government fields the same crap and tells the soldiers that it's the best.

If I was in a Russian armored column moving down the road, and saw any US aircraft overhead, I would jump from my vehicle and flee - taking my chances with being shot by Russian soldiers over being blown up by US aircraft in a single 30 second pass.

Our weapons are not crap. You seem to think we sell the world are best stuff.

Russians don't run form battles like you might, we stay and fight unlike cowards.

Ha ha I find it funny you think we are poor. The west needs our money and our oil, you guys need us.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html

Perhaps you could read this for me, and tell me how much and what percentage of US oil import comes from Russia?

I'll help you out. Year-to-date 2008, the United States has imported 86,000 barrels of crude oil per day from Russia. To compare, the United States has imported 1,889,000 barrels of crude per day from Canada. The United States currently gets more crude from twelve countries than Russia.

As far as refined petroleum, the United States has imported 417,000 barrels a day YTD 2008, the 9th largest supply. Again, for comparison purposes, the United States imports an average of 2,494,000 barrels of refined petroleum a day from Canada.

See, a little research can go a long way.

America is far weaker than I thought with Vietnam.

Vietnam was fought with the wrong tatics. it was also unpopular because people were being forced to go and fight.

Our weapons are not crap. You seem to think we sell the world are best stuff.

Russians don't run form battles like you might, we stay and fight unlike cowards.

Just like you stayed in Afghanistan, and the Eastern Bloc, and the Sakhalin islands.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html

Perhaps you could read this for me, and tell me how much and what percentage of US oil import comes from Russia?

I'll help you out. Year-to-date 2008, the United States has imported 86,000 barrels of crude oil per day from Russia. To compare, the United States has imported 1,889,000 barrels of crude per day from Canada. The United States currently gets more crude from twelve countries than Russia.

As far as refined petroleum, the United States has imported 417,000 barrels a day YTD 2008, the 9th largest supply. Again, for comparison purposes, the United States imports an average of 2,494,000 barrels of refined petroleum a day from Canada.

See, a little research can go a long way.

I am not talking about America only. The west (Western Europe) gets 40% of their oil form us and 50% of their N. Gas from us.

Thank you for showing me you are turly an idoit.

stealth aircraft- This is the newest- http://www.rense.com/general68/newrussianstealth.htm
The best airforce in the world

Is this operational yet? Furthermore is it operational on your intermediate or long range bombers? Current US bomber doctrine when fighting a nation of your air defense capabilities, which you do have an awesome air defense, calls for a multi-pronged attack like the following:

1. Taking out air defenses using cruise missile armed B-52s, B-1s, and B-2s in conjunction with sea launched cruise missiles.

2. Once a hole has been blown in you air defense, B-1s and B-52s carrying freefall and more cruise missiles slip through and hit targets, most likely air fields. With fighter cover, in this case most likely F-22s.

3. This would be followed by strikes using numerous types against any target considered valuable enough to blow up.

We have missles can not be shot down by America.

True. The current US ballistic missile defense systems are at best able to shoot down a rouge nations like Irans missiles. A full scale attack from Russia would be devastating and at best we could hope to stop a few. But remember we have ballistic missiles two and they can be launched in less then ten minutes. Our early warning radars see your missile 30 minutes out, giving us ample time. Not to mention, even if you did take out all of our land based bombers and missiles in a surprise attack, we still have sea-based Ohio Class submarines. Each carries 24 nuclear missiles, with 4-5 independent warheads, which means each submarine can hit atleast 96 targets with nuclear weapons. If we keep three submarines out to sea at one time, a drastic reduction since we used to keep 15-20 out at sea during the Cold War, thats 288 nuclear warheads you have to worry about still. Now of course the Russians have similar abilities and can respond, so generally both sides are fucked.

Our tanks are some of the most advance such as the t-80 and the t-90

I still think Abrams could give you a run for your money.

Our men are expericned and well trained.

America has the best trained military in the world and Israel has the most combat experienced. Russia has good equipment and good training but not the best.

Our navy is weak? I don't think so. Is it weaker than Americas? Yes. But not weak at all.

Your navy has actually been improving in the last few years. You launched the Borei class recently, which looks like a nice ballistic missile submarine. Your navy suffered in the 90s but give it 20 years and it will be powerful like it was once again. I really admire the Russian Navy actually and the men that serve in it. Compared to the luxury US Navy personnel live in, Russias Navy is pretty tough.

Our weapons are not crap. You seem to think we sell the world are best stuff.

Russians don't run form battles like you might, we stay and fight unlike cowards.

If you stay, and you're in the footprint of two bombloads of CBU-97 munitions, you're going to be dead no matter how brave you think you are. The Skeet munitions won't care - they are cluster munitions where each bomblet is individually guided to vehicles.

Without vehicles, an armored formation is likely to also be without most of its men (the brave ones who stayed in their vehicles).

You have zero defense against this sort of thing. It can also be delivered by ATACMS and JSOW - both of which are operational and have been used by the US in combat. You would not survive.

Vietnam was fought with the wrong tatics. it was also unpopular because people were being forced to go and fight.

Afghanistan was planned badly as well.

Iraq had some T-80s - they are craptastic. The 25mm from a Bradley will go through its armor. So it's not much of a tank.

Iraq had some T-80s - they are craptastic. The 25mm from a Bradley will go through its armor. So it's not much of a tank.

The people used them were poorly trained and weapons are upgraded through the years.

If you stay, and you're in the footprint of two bombloads of CBU-97 munitions, you're going to be dead no matter how brave you think you are. The Skeet munitions won't care - they are cluster munitions where each bomblet is individually guided to vehicles.

Without vehicles, an armored formation is likely to also be without most of its men (the brave ones who stayed in their vehicles).

You have zero defense against this sort of thing. It can also be delivered by ATACMS and JSOW - both of which are operational and have been used by the US in combat. You would not survive.

Ok, the USA is better armed than Russia. So What? Russia has culture, art and Empire. The USA has "Rock 'n' Roll", New Orleans and Guam.

The people used them were poorly trained and weapons are upgraded through the years.

The armor on the T-80 is effectively transparent. The T-90 is not really an improvement. Armor value has zero to do with the training of the crew.

Our weapons are not crap. You seem to think we sell the world are best stuff.

Russians don't run form battles like you might, we stay and fight unlike cowards.

Well in Lebanon in 1982 and in Libya in 1986 the Soviets set up the air defense with their best stuff and ran it for the Syrians in Lebanon and the Libyans. The Soviets actually operated the systems. Yet both got destroyed with minimal losses by Israel and the USA. in case you want to research this it was the Bekaa Valley Campaign in Lebanon, and Operation El Darado Canyon in Libya.

The US missile defence system is advanced enough to destroy weapons either at the launch stage, the flight stage as it gets into space and the stage where the warhead is on freefall. It won't stop them all, but enough to ensure a large proportion of the US wouldn't be instantly incinerated.

Allied subs would be tailing Russian ones anyway and would probably intercept and destroy them anyway.

But more than likely, we aren't going to see a nuclear war anytime soon. Be thankful that Putin does have some degree of common sense.

Well in Lebanon in 1982 and in Libya in 1986 the Soviets set up the air defense with their best stuff and ran it for the Syrians in Lebanon and the Libyans. The Soviets actually operated the systems. Yet both got destroyed with minimal losses by Israel and the USA. in case you want to research this it was the Bekaa Valley Campaign in Lebanon, and Operation El Darado Canyon in Libya.

That has nouthing to do with our military as of 2008

Ok, the USA is better armed than Russia. So What? Russia has culture, art and Empire. The USA has "Rock 'n' Roll", New Orleans and Guam.

http://www.strangepersons.com/images/content/8531.jpg

Oh, I'm sorry, we made our art and culture accessible to the masses, not just to the cloistered elites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)

Interwebs haz trollz and sockpuppetz.. da intawebz ownz your puny armiez!

:eek:

That has nouthing to do with our military as of 2008

No, but given that US military development has proceeded at a pace far greater than Russian military development since that point, it should only be an even easier process.

The US missile defence system is advanced enough to destroy weapons either at the launch stage, the flight stage as it gets into space and the stage where the warhead is on freefall. It won't stop them all, but enough to ensure a large proportion of the US wouldn't be instantly incinerated.

Allied subs would be tailing Russian ones anyway and would probably intercept and destroy them anyway.

But more than likely, we aren't going to see a nuclear war anytime soon. Be thankful that Putin does have some degree of common sense.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

OMG Thats funny!

The reason we won't have Nuclear War is that no one has the technology to make it profitable.

That has nouthing to do with our military as of 2008

Yes I recall this year Russia restarted flying its Bear bombers around the world.

1950s Bear bombers that haven't been updated. That couldn't make it through to a defended target. That would only be very large and slow practice targets in any conflict.

I'm so impressed.:p

Iraq had some T-80s - they are craptastic. The 25mm from a Bradley will go through its armor. So it's not much of a tank.
Go somewhere, anywhere, library or site, and finally READ a bit on the subject.

Not to say T-80 is a particularly good tank (it's a light tank among MBTs) - but please, the RHAe figures are well available, as are test results and photos.


Yes I recall this year Russia restarted flying its Bear bombers around the world.
You aware US is planning to keep B-52 until 2040?
Also, Tu-95 have been flying all that time.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

OMG Thats funny!

The reason we won't have Nuclear War is that no one has the technology to make it profitable.

Are you saying what I've read is bullshit?

http://www.strangepersons.com/images/content/8531.jpg

Oh, I'm sorry, we made our art and culture accessible to the masses, not just to the cloistered elites.

The masses produced art too. Look at village churches.

And giving art to the masses is fine, letting them set the tone is cultural suicide.

Ok, the USA is better armed than Russia. So What? Russia has culture, art and Empire. The USA has "Rock 'n' Roll", New Orleans and Guam.

How is that even remotely relevant to a discussion of respective military capabilities? So, because the United States has rock and roll, they're more apt to lose a war against Russia?

Are you saying what I've read is bullshit?

No the idea of Putin having commonsense just gave me hysterics.

How is that even remotely relevant to a discussion of respective military capabilities? So, because the United States has rock and roll, they're more apt to lose a war against Russia?

Im saying that just because a country has better weapons that does not mean it is a better country.

Anyway, the USA is easier to attack than Russia. A lot Easier.

How is that even remotely relevant to a discussion of respective military capabilities? So, because the United States has rock and roll, they're more apt to lose a war against Russia?

Heres who would win-

No one. We would all be dead.

Im saying that just because a country has better weapons that does not mean it is a better country.

Anyway, the USA is easier to attack than Russia. A lot Easier.

Elaborate. With proof.

And giving art to the masses is fine, letting them set the tone is cultural suicide.

That's right. Because when the ruling class sets the standards we get excellent stuff like constructivism and socialist realism. Both really excellent... oh wait.

Honestly, that type of snobbery might work out well if the Pope, or Louis XIV, is setting the tone; but go to the Tate modern and see for yourself what plutocrats usually come up with. It's a non-starter.

The masses produced art too. Look at village churches.

And giving art to the masses is fine, letting them set the tone is cultural suicide.

What, may I ask, is so wrong with American culture?

Elaborate. With proof.

Huge borders without proper defences. 49th Parallell?

Then there's the huge stretches of low lying coast line without any defences.

And the large cities designed for easy access.

That's right. Because when the ruling class sets the standards we get excellent stuff like constructivism and socialist realism. Both really excellent... oh wait.

Honestly, that type of snobbery might work out well if the Pope, or Louis XIV, is setting the tone; but go to the Tate modern and see for yourself what plutocrats usually come up with. It's a non-starter.

The Stuff in the tate is from wealthy people not aristocracy.

Huge borders without proper defences. 49th Parallell?

Then there's the huge stretches of low lying coast line without any defences.

And the large cities designed for easy access.

The primary defense of those long, undefended coasts is the US Navy, a fact that speaks for itself.

What, may I ask, is so wrong with American culture?

Apart from the swearing, rudeness, low tone and plebian nature, nothing.

The primary defense of those long, undefended coasts is the US Navy, a fact that speaks for itself.

Remind me again, which conflict last saw naval ships alone successfully defend anything?

Well in Lebanon in 1982 and in Libya in 1986 the Soviets set up the air defense with their best stuff and ran it for the Syrians in Lebanon and the Libyans. The Soviets actually operated the systems. Yet both got destroyed with minimal losses by Israel and the USA. in case you want to research this it was the Bekaa Valley Campaign in Lebanon, and Operation El Darado Canyon in Libya.

That has nouthing to do with our military as of 2008

Well actually it shows you have a poor record. Also in the first Iraq war in 1991 the Iraqis had a Soviet built air defense system. In the wars in the former Yugoslavia as well, they had Soviet style air defense systems. Both of which we destroyed.

Go somewhere, anywhere, library or site, and finally READ a bit on the subject.

Not to say T-80 is a particularly good tank (it's a light tank among MBTs) - but please, the RHAe figures are well available, as are test results and photos.



You aware US is planning to keep B-52 until 2040?
Also, Tu-95 have been flying all that time.

The B-52 is no longer used for free fall bomb missions unless your going against the Taliban. The B-52 can carry an array of up to 15 Air Launched Cruise Missiles, more specifically the AGM-129. Which has a range of 2000 nautical miles. We don't even have to get into your radar coverage. Can the TU-95 carry a similar payload. No it can't!

Remind me again, which conflict last saw naval ships alone successfully defend anything?

The trick is getting troops across the oceans to those long, unprotected shores. To do so, you would have to engage the US Navy. Good luck on that.

Huge borders without proper defences. 49th Parallell?

Then there's the huge stretches of low lying coast line without any defences.

And the large cities designed for easy access.

So your thesis is that Mexico and Canada are going to invade the United States?

Well actually it shows you have a poor record. Also in the first Iraq war in 1991 the Iraqis had a Soviet built air defense system. In the wars in the former Yugoslavia as well, they had Soviet style air defense systems. Both of which we destroyed.



The B-52 is no longer used for free fall bomb missions unless your going against the Taliban. The B-52 can carry an array of up to 15 Air Launched Cruise Missiles, more specifically the AGM-129. Which has a range of 2000 nautical miles. We don't even have to get into your radar coverage. Can the TU-95 carry a similar payload. No it can't!

TU-95?

We have better, like the TU-160

Apart from the swearing, rudeness, low tone and plebian nature, nothing.

So, it doesn't suit your tastes is your complaint? Remind me again, what's the value of the aristocracy? What good does a bunch of inbred professional snobs do a country?

TU-95?

We have better, like the TU-160

And how many of those as functional weapons delivery systems?

The trick is getting troops across the oceans to those long, unprotected shores. To do so, you would have to engage the US Navy. Good luck on that.

Dearie, Pearl Harbour.

I'll say no more.

Sdaeriji

So your thesis is that Mexico and Canada are going to invade the United States?

No. They Could however. Mexico could become a dictatorship under an evil leader, and Canada could grow estranged from the USA.

Go somewhere, anywhere, library or site, and finally READ a bit on the subject.

Not to say T-80 is a particularly good tank (it's a light tank among MBTs) - but please, the RHAe figures are well available, as are test results and photos.

You aware US is planning to keep B-52 until 2040?
Also, Tu-95 have been flying all that time.

I've seen the 25mm go through the T-80. Next!

The B-52 has been updated with electronics and weapons that the Bear has not. Additionally, it flies only in areas where we have air superiority.

The Bear, on the other hand, is deployed without any escorts or air superiority. It would only get shot down on the way to drop its bombs.

The Russians don't have weapons even remotely close to the CBU-97 (with the BLU-108 submunition). Like I said, we destroyed an entire Iraqi armored division in 30 seconds with the bomb load from two aircraft in a single pass.

And how many of those as functional weapons delivery systems?

All of the newer re-made ones.

The B-52 is no longer used for free fall bomb missions unless your going against the Taliban. The B-52 can carry an array of up to 15 Air Launched Cruise Missiles, more specifically the AGM-129. Which has a range of 2000 nautical miles. We don't even have to get into your radar coverage. Can the TU-95 carry a similar payload. No it can't!
In fact, Tu-95, as well as Tu-160, and in part Tu-22, have always been designed as strategic missile carriers. Most of them never carried freefall bombs in the first place.
These missiles range from oldest ones with 1500-2000 nmi range to the latest ones with expected range of 2500-3000 nmi.


I've seen the 25mm go through the T-80.
No, you haven't. Because it can't. Unless it was a mock-up, or one of the [nearly] unarmored elements.

So, it doesn't suit your tastes is your complaint? Remind me again, what's the value of the aristocracy? What good does a bunch of inbred professional snobs do a country?

The Aristocracy are there to help improve civilisation. The Renaissance could never have happened in the USA.

They have money, taste and no bias. After all, if you're already insanely rich why would you need to be corrupt?

TU-95?

We have better, like the TU-160

Yeah that monstorsity appears on a radar screen like a frieght train. Although an impressive aircraft with MACH 2 performance, long range, and a wide variety of weapons it can carry. It does not have the low leverl handleing capabilities of the B-1B which is much smaller and built to fly at a hundred feet from the ground. The B-1B can cut over mountain tops at 50ft and has the handleing to do so with ease. If we are talking about shear weapons carrying capability then the TU-160 has the B-1B beat. It we are talking about the ability to sneak in and out of target below the radar screen then the B-1B has the Tu-160 beat. Plus we have 20 B-2s and 60 B-1Bs in service, not counting B-52s and F-15Es, Russia has I think 30 Tu-160s tops.

They have money, taste and no bias. After all, if you're already insanely rich why would you need to be corrupt?

Comedy gold.

Iraq had some T-80s - they are craptastic. The 25mm from a Bradley will go through its armor. So it's not much of a tank.

They had no T-80's. Where do you pull this stuff out of?


The Iraqi army only had a number of export version T-72's, that were about a decade or two behind in updates, plus their domestic produced one that was made of tin. The bulk of their tanks were T-55's and the like.


And as for the armor, a test conducted by the Germans in the early '90s showed that their current tank ammunition, including the same kind fired from the M1A1 couldn't pierce the frontal armor of a [Czech]T-72M1 with Kontakt-1. While the Americans made a new ammunition, We also have newer ERA.

Dearie, Pearl Harbour.

I'll say no more.

Except the US fleet is no longer concentrated on one single point, it isn't populated by battleships, and it has a massive strategic reserve. The comparison is not apt.

The Stuff in the tate is from wealthy people not aristocracy.

Oh stop. Now you are just being silly. The people who run the Tate are as establishment as establishment can be.

Except the US fleet is no longer concentrated on one single point, it isn't populated by battleships, and it has a massive strategic reserve. The comparison is not apt.

How many aircraft carriers are there in the US Navy?

And anyway, If anyone wanted to invade the US they could but no one can be bothered to.

The Aristocracy are there to help improve civilisation. The Renaissance could never have happened in the USA.

They have money, taste and no bias. After all, if you're already insanely rich why would you need to be corrupt?

You have got to be a joke.

How many aircraft carriers are there in the US Navy?

And anyway, If anyone wanted to invade the US they could but no one can be bothered to.

Twelve supercarriers, plus eleven amphibious assault ships, comparable to the Illustrious Class.

You have got to be a joke.

I'm Not a Joke I'm Drunk Thank you Madam!

:tongue:

How many aircraft carriers are there in the US Navy?

And anyway, If anyone wanted to invade the US they could but no one can be bothered to.

The US Navy currently has 12 commissioned aircraft carriers and one more under construction.

And anyway, the United States is virtually inpenetrable, just like China or Russia or any other highly populated, highly armed nation with enormous land mass.