USA vs Russia - START

[Kuya]

It is not in the US's interest for those Georgian territories to leave Georgia, so i find UN action doubtful on their behalf.

[Rigor]

Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong, but now we will never get to give the world a chance to decide for themselves.

I have faith that in light of the use of such force against their own people the U.N. would have done something.

[Beckwin]

Dear West,

I have an even better plan to protect Europe from theoretical "rogue missiles" launched from Iran/the Middle East, and it won't piss off Russia: stop propping up Israel, don't set up more military bases in the region, and get the fuck off of oil.

Love,

Beckwin

[guartz]

Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong, but now we will never get to give the world a chance to decide for themselves.

I have faith that in light of the use of such force against their own people the U.N. would have done something.

Like they stopped U.S from Iraq invasion?

U.N is in America's hands, and even though Russia is somewhat a part of it, they still see it as a hostile alliance.

Secondly, you need to understand that Mekhail literary became president because he stormed Georgian parliament with troops and forced the sitting president to resign, some way with CIA help.

Thirdly, your lack of contempt towards the reporting that's happening is somewhat disturbing. This operation was probably encouraged, if not planned, by Washington, giving the relationship and dependence Mekhail has with U.S, that's not a far stretch at all. Not to mention all the arms sales and training months before. But of course, every corporate media outlet is reporting Russia as the aggressor, but nevermind WHY Russia and the West are tensions, or the military buildup and declaration by Mekhail to take S.ossetia by force, and consequently the first strike. And you're buying into it.

I can't decide what's more ridiculous now, the reporting of Iraq and Georgia, or the public acceptance of these views.

And it's getting worse. Just look at iraq reporting today, how the democrats are hushed by the success of the surge. As if the fucking success of iraq invasion has any relevance towards it's legality. Nevermind how the war started or for what reasons, the surge is working! Just how easily the people of America are confused by simple twists of words is astounding to me, and by what single minded assurance they hold on to their views will make any suicide bomber jealous.

ok /rant off

[Beckwin]

no really fucking seriously why the hell would Iran want to nuke Poland? jesus h christ. Poland wants it as defense from Russia and the overall increase in military supplies from the US that would come with it.

[Rigor]

If the U.S. controls the U.N. how come we can't get what we want from Iran and N Korea? Oh yeah, because of China and Russia. Therefore China and Russia must be controlling the U.N.!!!

Where are you getting your information about the Rose Revolution? Because every report I've read states that through peaceful protest the people of Georgia were able to force a resignation from a President.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4532539.stm

Not one person was injured, not a drop of blood was spilled.

Tens of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets to protest against the flawed results of a parliamentary election.

The demonstrators demanded the resignation of Eduard Shevardnadze, a man who had ruled Georgia for more than 30 years in total, as its Soviet-era Communist Party boss and its longest-serving post-independence president.

Mr Shevardnadze told protesters they risked causing a civil war and he deployed hundreds of soldiers on the streets of Tbilisi.

At that point, student demonstrators decided to give red roses to the soldiers.

Many soldiers laid down their guns.

That is a stark fucking contrast to your claims. In fact the one who send out the soldiers, was the president in power, and they sided with Mekhail. That's not to say he turned sour later, but you just claimed the exact opposite of what happened in the Rose Revolution. Please, if you have another source that refutes BBC's report or ANY other article I have linked, please share it. Your excessive contempt of any Western news source is ground in paranoia and conspiracy theories. Maybe you just stopped reading them because they don't agree with your views.

I'm keeping an open mind on this situation, and am willing to listen to any statement that can be backed up by a LEGITIMATE SOURCE, which you have yet to provide and have continued to cry foul on the sources I have linked. Only your word against a credible world renown media source. Churchill provided me with a site to go to that would supposedly shed a different light on the matters yet the same western media came back.

Seriously though Guartz keep that tin foil hat with the sickle and hammer close, comrade!!!

Also, you came to America to enjoy freedoms that RUSSIA would not give you? Yet you continue to talk shit about everything about America. Double fucking standards much?

[Churchill]

I provided a site that may, I haven't actually checked it for this matter. It was a site I used to find reporting on operations we had conducted so I could send to my dad. I started using it for other issues to because it generally draws from every newspaper you can imagine so had a broad list of articles.

[Rigor]

I provided a site that may, I haven't actually checked it for this matter. It was a site I used to find reporting on operations we had conducted so I could send to my dad. I started using it for other issues to because it generally draws from every newspaper you can imagine so had a broad list of articles.

Okay, but you offered another means of gathering information at which I jumped at the opportunity to look somewhere that I previously had not. Which shows that I am willing to listen to other sides of the story if they can provide legitimate sources.

Is it really so far fetched that if Iran, N Korea, or some other rogue state wanted to harm America they might aim for American interests? Poland and the other countries to be protected under this missle defense are American allies that are only hundreds of miles away which is easily reached by many missles or rockets Iran has. As opposed to American soil which is thousands and with a big ass body of water in between.

If this missle defense in any way threatened Russia, then why didn't Russia take America's offer to help oversee the missle bases along with America and numerous other NATO nations?

[guartz]

no really fucking seriously why the hell would Iran want to nuke Poland? jesus h christ. Poland wants it as defense from Russia and the overall increase in military supplies from the US that would come with it.

not to mention the irony of "missile defense" is actually that's it a first strike weapon.

oh, were you thinking it was missile counter-measures? nope... it's missiles.. for defense.. pointing at moscow. lol

[Atlasion]

not to mention the irony of "missile defense" is actually that's it a first strike weapon.

oh, were you thinking it was missile counter-measures? nope... it's missiles.. for defense.. pointing at moscow. lol

What are you talking about? They're building a facility to track and intercept missiles, not strike Russia. We have other ways of bombing Russia, don't need anymore.

Russia is angry because this can be used to undermine Russia's capability to fire missiles at people, which it will. Although they currently have enough missiles to overcome any such defense measure, if mroe of these facilities were created around the world it would greatly undermine their nuclear capability. Its a very similar situation with the US wanting to put one of these facilities in Taiwan. China simply threatened to point even more ballistic missiles at Taiwan to overwhelm it.

And no, its not just to defend Poland from ballistic missiles, its to defend Europe. The irony is that it makes Poland more of a target.

[guartz]

If the U.S. controls the U.N. how come we can't get what we want from Iran and N Korea? Oh yeah, because of China and Russia. Therefore China and Russia must be controlling the U.N.!!!

ooh right

"Seriously though Guartz keep that tin foil hat with the sickle and hammer close, comrade!!!"

Hmph, the article is worded as if force wasn't used.

Here is a good read. What did George Soros, Ambassador Miles and James Baker had to do with the rose revolution?

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/12/282519.html

[Xavier]

guartz interpretation of the rose revolution screams Russian propaganda.

Congratulations, you just linked to an article that openly admitted conditions in Georgia were ripe for a natural coup, and then wildly speculated that it wasn't impossible that the CIA might of been involved, while offering absolutely no concrete proof.

Its hard to have a legitimate discussion with someone who discredits the opposing view as a conspiracy.

[guartz]

Russia is angry because this can be used to undermine Russia's capability to fire missiles at people, which it will. Although they currently have enough missiles to overcome any such defense measure, if mroe of these facilities were created around the world it would greatly undermine their nuclear capability. Its a very similar situation with the US wanting to put one of these facilities in Taiwan. China simply threatened to point even more ballistic missiles at Taiwan to overwhelm it.

That's right.

But you gotta understand one important note, is that building the defense systems could be seen as a way to prevent retaliation as well. That's why russia considers these as first strike weapons. If they build enough of them, U.S can act without any threat of retaliation.
That's the irony I was talking about.

Plus U.S is drawing another arms race. Can you build nukes faster then we can build defense systems? Bwahah?

Combine that with the west breaking a treaty and expanding NATO further east, and you got one overly defensive nation that wants to undermine everything U.S does from hence forth.


Lastly, missile defense doesn't fire lasers, it fires missiles too. Which could easily be equipped with warheads and such. It's a missile battery platform.


Speaking of irony, what's up with georgia condemning Russia for not respecting it's independence and sovereignty, while at the same time, not respecting the independence and sovereignty of S.ossetia?

[guartz]

Congratulations, you just linked to an article that openly admitted conditions in Georgia were ripe for a natural coup, and then wildly speculated that it wasn't impossible that the CIA might of been involved, while offering absolutely no concrete proof.

Did you read the article, the guy mentioned why he thought CIA helped.

[Xavier]

Speaking of irony, what's up with georgia condemning Russia for not respecting it's independence and sovereignty, while at the same time, not respecting the independence and sovereignty of S.ossetia?

Because the internationally recognized borders of Georgia include the territory of South Ossetia. Whether or not they are independent in their own right and deserve to be recognized by the full international body is an important discussion, but as of now they have not been.

--------------------------------

Yes, I read the full article, and while it had information that was certainly factual, its conclusion of possible CIA involvement was speculative.

I started reading more articles posted on that site as well, and the articles definitely have an anti-western bias. I'm going to keep reading the site as well, just to see the opposing viewpoint, but I'd never trust a single point of view as my only source of information.

[Atlasion]

That's right.

But you gotta understand one important note, is that building the defense systems could be seen as a way to prevent retaliation as well. That's why russia considers these as first strike weapons. If they build enough of them, U.S can act without any threat of retaliation.
That's the irony I was talking about.

Plus U.S is drawing another arms race. Can you build nukes faster then we can build defense systems? Bwahah?

Combine that with the west breaking a treaty and expanding NATO further east, and you got one overly defensive nation that wants to undermine everything U.S does from hence forth.


Lastly, missile defense doesn't fire lasers, it fires missiles too. Which could easily be equipped with warheads and such. It's a missile battery platform.


Speaking of irony, what's up with georgia condemning Russia for not respecting it's independence and sovereignty, while at the same time, not respecting the independence and sovereignty of S.ossetia?

Like Xavier said, South Ossetia isn't an internationally reconised country. Georgia never granted it independance. I'm pretty sure this was covered pretty well in the other thread.

When did lasers come into this?

[Brill Weave]

The one thing that I do notice in quite a few of Guartz's political/world events posts/threads is that he's always mentioning the reporting on said events. I look at it this way. What Russia did was blatantly wrong. Defending South Ossetians does not equal digging foxholes 30 miles from the Georgian capital or destroying targets that undermine Georgia's infrastructure. Should Georgia have launched an assault on South Ossetia? No. But Russia's response was absolutely ridiculous and all it does now is put the entire world on edge because they felt it's ok to invade a neighboring country.

Nevermind the fact that it's a pro-western country.

[Churchill]

I don't see Iran provoking the US directly.

[Rigor]

Ok, quoting this article yet again, maybe you wanna tilt your tin foil hat back a bit so you can see it clearly.

At the White House, the press secretary, Dana Perino, confirmed that senior officials had initialed the agreement. "In no way is the president's plan for missile defense aimed at Russia," she said. "In fact, it's just not even logically possible for it to be aimed at Russia, given how Russia could overwhelm it. The purpose of missile defense is to protect our European allies from any rogue threats, such as a missile from Iran."

Since when has America ever openly admitted that Russia could easily destroy any of our military installations?

The Bush administration, in an attempt to prove its sincerity and transparency, had invited Moscow to join as a partner in a continentwide missile defense system, sharing information and technology with NATO allies.

While Russian and American experts have discussed cooperation, senior officials in Moscow have kept up a nonstop stream of complaints about the system.

[Kuya]

At the White House, the press secretary, Dana Perino, confirmed that senior officials had initialed the agreement. "In no way is the president's plan for missile defense aimed at Russia," she said. "In fact, it's just not even logically possible for it to be aimed at Russia, given how Russia could overwhelm it. The purpose of missile defense is to protect our European allies from any rogue threats, such as a missile from Russia."

Fixed.