War !!

[SOD]

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj35/IastarothI/wwiicn1.gif

[anthonyvop]

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj35/IastarothI/wwiicn1.gif

Funny but they got the timeline wrong.

[TOgoFASTER]

Kind of McCainsque. :laugh:

[SOD]

Kind of McCainsque. :laugh:

Floyd R. W. McTurboesque ;)

[SOD]

Funny but they got the timeline wrong.

I guess should have said that the war started in 1942? :rolleyes:

[anthonyvop]

I guess should have said that the war started in 1942? :rolleyes:

Jeez. You are so jealous of the US you find everything a a chance to critisize.

Actually they had Germany invading the USSR after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
Something any educated person would know is incorrect.

[Roamy]

Jeez. You are so jealous of the US you find everything a a chance to critisize.

Actually they had Germany invading the USSR after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
Something any educated person would know is incorrect.

Tony,

I would probably use the word "envy"

[TOgoFASTER]

:s nore:

[SOD]

:s nore:

Just like McGramps when you'll need his finger on the button. ;)

[janvanvurpa]

Jeez. You are so jealous of the US you find everything a a chance to critisize.

Presuming that all people everywhere have the limited range of emotions as do right wing extremists and neocons such as yourself is silly.


Actually they had Germany invading the USSR after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
Something any educated person would know is incorrect.

Then how is it that you knew it?

Ah, probably remembered from posts here explaining how all of USA Allies bore the brunt and the bulk of the actual combat in all theatres of operations and fought far longer--and harder---than USA, must be it.

[Roamy]

Just like McGramps when you'll need his finger on the button. ;)
I am ready just say when - lets liberate the oil fields !!!

[Roamy]

Just like McGramps when you'll need his finger on the button. ;)
I am ready just say when - lets liberate the oil fields !!!

[TOgoFASTER]

Oh, I forgot thats what Iraq was all about. :laugh:
Nuked oil won't make for happy oil barons, it's their oil after all... :rolleyes: :laugh:

Got your popcorn and Faux News dailed in?

[Eki]

Jeez. You are so jealous of the US you find everything a a chance to critisize.

I think it has more to do with that the US behaves like a schoolyard bully. Of course other kids might envy a bully, but I don't think that's the only reason they don't like him.

[Roamy]

Hey EKI WTFO your boys have invaded a sovereign nation. Are you signing up to fight. WOW what a horrible nation Putin should be dragged to the Haug

[TOgoFASTER]

One crime doesn't justify another.

[Eki]

Hey EKI WTFO your boys have invaded a sovereign nation. Are you signing up to fight. WOW what a horrible nation Putin should be dragged to the Haug
They are not my boys. It's them Russians. I think they are trying to "liberate" South Ossetia the way the US "liberated" Iraq. "My boy", ie. the Foreign Minister of Finland will travel to Moscow and Georgia the next week and try to talk them some sense.

[Daniel]

They are not my boys. It's them Russians. I think they are trying to "liberate" South Ossetia the way the US "liberated" Iraq. "My boy", ie. the Foreign Minister of Finland will travel to Moscow and Georgia the next week and try to talk them some sense.

It's one of them "freedom invasions" :D

[A.F.F.]

They practice with South Ossetia. next stop, Finland.

Mind I add, Mr. Putin is jolly good fella :up:

[Drew]

I saw this and thought of Eki:

http://tjic.com/archive/finland.jpg

[Daniel]

They practice with South Ossetia. next stop, Finland.

Mind I add, Mr. Putin is jolly good fella :up:

Yes he is. Just watch out for when your neighbours start getting Russian passports. Vlad might move in to liberate them.....

[Tomi]

Maybe its time for Georgians to pull back their invading forces from Iraq to try to prevent an invation of their own country.

[Eki]

Maybe its time for Georgians to pull back their invading forces from Iraq to try to prevent an invation of their own country.
I hope George II the Dumber will stay out of this war and won't make it a World War.

[BDunnell]

Maybe its time for Georgians to pull back their invading forces from Iraq to try to prevent an invation of their own country.

They must have read your mind. It's happening.

[Daniel]

I saw this and thought of Eki:

http://tjic.com/archive/finland.jpg

That's excellent. I saw a programme about the war a few months ago and the Finns really did bend the Russians over and spanked them good.

[Tomi]

I hope George II the Dumber will stay out of this war and won't make it a World War.

Lol, no chance they will join, russian has an army.

[Garry Walker]

They are not my boys. It's them Russians. I think they are trying to "liberate" South Ossetia the way the US "liberated" Iraq. "My boy", ie. the Foreign Minister of Finland will travel to Moscow and Georgia the next week and try to talk them some sense.

Except the invasion of Iraq helped the country to get rid of a murdering dictator.


They practice with South Ossetia. next stop, Finland.

Mind I add, Mr. Putin is jolly good fella :up:

It is obvious to even the most stupid person where Russia has been heading the last years. The obvious goal is to build up an empire the size of USSR again. It is a sickening thought.
It says a lot about Russia that they claim red army in WW2 was a liberator of Europe, at the same time claiming things like Finland starting the Winter War.

Putin is the kind of guy, whom if I saw on the street being injured and needing ambulance, I would only laugh and walk on.


I hope George II the Dumber will stay out of this war and won't make it a World War.
Do you remember anything about history, let`s say about 70 years ago? When the world gave in to Hitlers demands and did nothing. Again and Again. It resulted in two evil empires, USSR and Nazi Germany starting the biggest war ever.
History would have been very different, if instead of applying soft and limp-wristed appeasement politics by idiots like neville Weakerlain, countries had acted at once and used force, if needed. It is not nice, but sometimes it is needed.


That's excellent. I saw a programme about the war a few months ago and the Finns really did bend the Russians over and spanked them good.
Whilst Finnish soldiers (and foreign soldiers helping them) have to be credited
for their skills and bravery, it has to be noted that Kliment Voroshilov was a marshal of extraordinary incompetence. Once Timoshenko took over, things changed dramatically.

[Drew]

Well anyway, should Russia invade / liberate South Ossetia they will soon regret it. South Ossetians will want to be reunited with their North Ossetian cousins and then will soon domand complete independence from Russia, as the North Ossetians already want out. Russia will look even more stupid and foolish to the world.

[BDunnell]

If the Ossetian conflict does degenerate into something more serious, it will be interesting to see how the Russian armed forces perform. Despite their recent 'shows of force', doubts remain about their actual state of combat readiness. They have at their disposal a lot of old, albeit tough, equipment.

[SOD]

Except the invasion of Iraq helped the country to get rid of a murdering dictator.



of course, the invasion killed more people than Saddam ever ordered dead. way to go!

[Eki]

of course, the invasion killed more people than Saddam ever ordered dead. way to go!

The disease was cured, but the patient died because of the medication.

[Hondo]

That's excellent. I saw a programme about the war a few months ago and the Finns really did bend the Russians over and spanked them good.

Don't forget to give the weather the lions share of the credit. For some reason, the Soviets didn't seem to grasp the fact that it was going to be very, very cold up there.

[Eki]

Don't forget to give the weather the lions share of the credit. For some reason, the Soviets didn't seem to grasp the fact that it was going to be very, very cold up there.

That's probably partly because they thought the mission would be accomplished in two weeks. Instead of winter gear they had brass bands for victory parades.

[A.F.F.]

Putin is the kind of guy, whom if I saw on the street being injured and needing ambulance, I would only laugh and walk on.



I'd probably stop for a minute...


... just to finish the job.

[BDunnell]

I'd probably stop for a minute...


... just to finish the job.

...saying 'This one's for Litvinenko', perhaps?

[A.F.F.]

...saying 'This one's for Litvinenko', perhaps?

...or Anna Politkovskaja.

[gadjo_dilo]

Putin is the kind of guy, whom if I saw on the street being injured and needing ambulance, I would only laugh and walk on.

Putin is the kind of guy who never seem to be in difficulty. He's a great politician and knows to play his card. At the latest NATO summit he was the one who stole the show. And USA and its allies danced to the music of the tzar. :laugh:

[Garry Walker]

of course, the invasion killed more people than Saddam ever ordered dead. way to go!

How many of these deaths have been due to suicide terrorists and other such people?


Putin is the kind of guy who never seem to be in difficulty. He's a great politician and knows to play his card. At the latest NATO summit he was the one who stole the show. And USA and its allies danced to the music of the tzar. :laugh:

The problem with western countries at the moment is that there in no strong leader to stand up to Sov.. russia. When the biggest leaders in world are weaklings like bush and brown (LOL!!!!!), I can see why Russia doesn`t fear the west.

But the only way to talk to russians is not by soft diplomacy, only threats followed by action works on russia and russians. Everyone who has had to deal with russians in life knows this.

[Tomi]

How many of these deaths have been due to suicide terrorists and other such people?



The problem with western countries at the moment is that there in no strong leader to stand up to Sov.. russia. When the biggest leaders in world are weaklings like bush and brown (LOL!!!!!), I can see why Russia doesn`t fear the west.

But the only way to talk to russians is not by soft diplomacy, only threats followed by action works on russia and russians. Everyone who has had to deal with russians in life knows this.

I never understand the need of some people to be lead somewhere.
Whatkind of threats and actin do you have in mind?

[jens]

IMO this conflict must show, how much has the modern world changed in resolving military conflicts if it has changed at all. Also in Estonia there have been a lot of talks like now we are in NATO and EU and we are safe and defended from threats against which we were forceless in the history (like WW2).

Well, has the world really changed and are we really in a safer position? Is the Western World going to anyhow impede Russia from occupying Georgia? We Estonians are watching those events very-very carefully, because we know fully well that our state is more or less in the list of Russia's next targets. I don't think belonging to NATO is really an important factor here - I guess there is not much difference to the West (especially USA) whether it is Georgia or Estonia, who is in trouble.

Anyway, I've to say that the future looks very "interesting" to put it mildly. The next days/weeks will give some answers. It's obvious that words or other non-militar "methods" won't distract Russia.

[Tomi]

I don't think belonging to NATO is really an important factor here - I guess there is not much difference to the West (especially USA) whether it is Georgia or Estonia, who is in trouble.

I agree, I follow this conflict from the same angle too, what is nato especially usa who has been georgias spokesman about joining nato doing, sofar nothing, and it is nothing it can do either.

[BDunnell]

IMO this conflict must show, how much has the modern world changed in resolving military conflicts if it has changed at all. Also in Estonia there have been a lot of talks like now we are in NATO and EU and we are safe and defended from threats against which we were forceless in the history (like WW2).

Well, has the world really changed and are we really in a safer position? Is the Western World going to anyhow impede Russia from occupying Georgia? We Estonians are watching those events very-very carefully, because we know fully well that our state is more or less in the list of Russia's next targets. I don't think belonging to NATO is really an important factor here - I guess there is not much difference to the West (especially USA) whether it is Georgia or Estonia, who is in trouble.

Anyway, I've to say that the future looks very "interesting" to put it mildly. The next days/weeks will give some answers. It's obvious that words or other non-militar "methods" won't distract Russia.

And it is also obvious that the other major powers aren't going to be dragged into a war with Russia, so nothing much will happen to change the status quo - there is no will on the part of the US, the EU or anyone else to confront Russia's misdeeds, and what on earth can be done? I think criticism of other countries for not taking action against Russia is unfair, because what form is that action supposed to take?

Unfortunately, large sections of the Russian public seem to want people like Putin and Medvedev as their leaders, probably out of some misguided view that they can help Russia regain its status as a major power, which to them largely means a major military power. At the moment, they are doing a convincing job of showing ordinary Russians that this is the case.

[jens]

I think criticism of other countries for not taking action against Russia is unfair, because what form is that action supposed to take?


This is true that it is hard to take a 'serious' action against Russia, but this also makes wondering that how far will "other countries" allow Russia to go? They just can't allow Russia to keep growing bigger endlessly until they become threatened themselves.

[Eki]

How many of these deaths have been due to suicide terrorists and other such people?


Why would that matter? Dead is dead no matter who killed him/her. Even if the killer was a suicide bomber or an American bomb/bullet, the reason is the same: American invasion to Iraq. Without it there wouldn't be suicide bombers in Iraq.

[Eki]

It's obvious that words or other non-militar "methods" won't distract Russia.
Do you think military methods would distract Russia? They took millions of casulties in WW2 and still didn't give up to Nazi-Germany.

[Roamy]

ah don't worry I figure the big one is 20 or 30 yrs off. The georgians will probably get taken over. As will any other country that Russia wants over there. The way the world is going you just get taken over and then fight from inside. Look at Mexico they can't even have a police force or a effective military. Sh!t if Russia needs the oil they will take over the middle east. you guys are probably ok because if they nuke you the cloud will come right to them. Look at africa they just chop off your wife's feet and throw her in the fire. I suspect we will be out of the war business for quite some time - probably another 20 years or so. We will be busy working on our own energy supplies and our trade deficit while building the great "fence" Good luck and God Bless the Georgians !!

[gadjo_dilo]

Well, has the world really changed and are we really in a safer position? Is the Western World going to anyhow impede Russia from occupying Georgia? We Estonians are watching those events very-very carefully, because we know fully well that our state is more or less in the list of Russia's next targets. .
Don't think so. Russia has special interest in the caucazian area because they want to control the "oil way".

[jens]

Do you think military methods would distract Russia? They took millions of casulties in WW2 and still didn't give up to Nazi-Germany.

Good question, although I suspect current Russia may not be ready to face a military combat with the 'west'. Besides this current Russia lacks of proper allies.

[Tomi]

Besides this current Russia lacks of proper allies.

So does the most of countries like you can see in this conflict, words and action is a different thing, the allies seems to be in hurry to evacuate. I belive that the nato 5 article works only 1 way.

[DonJippo]

Besides this current Russia lacks of proper allies.

When has former SU or Russia had proper allies? I think they have always been pretty much on their own without true allies.

[gadjo_dilo]

When has former SU or Russia had proper allies? I think they have always been pretty much on their own without true allies.
All political alliances are of conjuncture and everybody is looking only for its own interest.

[janneppi]

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2008/106049-russiasaviour-0

One of the funniest stories I've read in a while. :D

[Garry Walker]

I never understand the need of some people to be lead somewhere.
Whatkind of threats and actin do you have in mind?

Who needs to be lead somewhere? Just it is better to have a decisime leader with balls to make a decision, rather a weak one like Brown or Bush.

The last Great american president was Ronald Reagan and his policies towards USSR were in quite a good part responsible for the eventual collapse of USSR.

What kind of acts?
1) Freezing of all bank accounts to do with Russia.
2) Bring considerable NATO forces to Georgia and other NATO member states and bomb Russia forces in Georgia, if russia doesn`t at once withdraw all of its forces from Georgia.
3) Force Russia to pay reparations to Georgia.



Why would that matter? Dead is dead no matter who killed him/her. Even if the killer was a suicide bomber or an American bomb/bullet, the reason is the same: American invasion to Iraq. Without it there wouldn't be suicide bombers in Iraq.

So you are blaming USA for suicide bombers. Wonderful. Nice to see such hatred for USA.


Do you think military methods would distract Russia? They took millions of casulties in WW2 and still didn't give up to Nazi-Germany.

So what is your solution? Diplomacy? :rotflmao:


http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2008/106049-russiasaviour-0

One of the funniest stories I've read in a while. :D

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
Jesus christ!!!!!!!!!

[Tomi]

What kind of acts?

1) Freezing of all bank accounts to do with Russia.
2) Bring considerable NATO forces to Georgia and other NATO member states and bomb Russia forces in Georgia, if russia doesn`t at once withdraw all of its forces from Georgia.
3) Force Russia to pay reparations to Georgia.

LOL, even the drewling guy would have not have had the balls to start war with russia.
Diplomacy will be the only solution like you soon will find out.

[Eki]

So you are blaming USA for suicide bombers.
I'm not blaming anyone, just stating a fact. The US "brought them on".

[Garry Walker]

LOL, even the drewling guy would have not have had the balls to start war with russia.
Diplomacy will be the only solution like you soon will find out.
What is "drewling"

Diplomacy doesn`t work on Russia and the sooner you get your head around that fact, we can start progressing. Especially when Bush and Brown are seen by the whole world as weak leaders. Russia laughs at diplomacy.


Only threats and violence works with Russia and russians. If NATO forces were to go to Georgia and give Russia a 10 hour deadline to pull out or NATO will start a full-scale attack on russian forces, Russia would back down at once.

[Tomi]

If NATO forces were to go to Georgia and give Russia a 10 hour deadline to pull out or NATO will start a full-scale attack on russian forces, Russia would back down at once.

Well, nato = usa wont go to any conflict if there is a chance that they get a red nose, so i guess you have a long wait.
The only possibility for that is if there would be a about 20 years embargo, and UN would first check that there is no weapons left, then maybe.

[Garry Walker]

Well, nato = usa wont go to any conflict if there is a chance that they get a red nose, so i guess you have a long wait.
The only possibility for that is if there would be a about 20 years embargo, and UN would first check that there is no weapons left, then maybe.

Russia would never enter a war against NATO, they simply couldn`t afford it.
So it is a bluff, but a calculated one.

Now Russia has halted military actions and came off as the winner in this. And the west is looking stupid and weak.

[Tomi]

Russia would never enter a war against NATO, they simply couldn`t afford it.
So it is a bluff, but a calculated one.

Now Russia has halted military actions and came off as the winner in this. And the west is looking stupid and weak.

The one who has been given stupid promises look stupid, any idea who that might be??

[anthonyvop]

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2008/106049-russiasaviour-0

One of the funniest stories I've read in a while. :D
It isn't funny when you realize that some people will actually belive the article.

Am I the only one here who believed the Cold War never ended. the Names have changed but the game was still on.

[Eki]

It isn't funny when you realize that some people will actually belive the article.
.
Yes, the same as with the Fox News. The Fox News is funny, but at the same time worrying when you think that some people actually believe them.

[DonJippo]

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2008/106049-russiasaviour-0

One of the funniest stories I've read in a while. :D

What did you expect, it is Pravda :rolleyes:

[janneppi]

What did you expect, it is Pravda :rolleyes:
I bet that's not even an editorial, that's fair and balanced journalism right there. ;)

[BDunnell]

Russia would never enter a war against NATO, they simply couldn`t afford it.
So it is a bluff, but a calculated one.

Now Russia has halted military actions and came off as the winner in this. And the west is looking stupid and weak.

You are making a critically incorrect assumption here — that the Russian leadership would act rationally in such a situation.

I don't think the West looks any more or less weak than it did when it did nothing over Russia's treatment of the Chechens. I feel it has acted sensibly, because personally I'm not impressed by overt displays of military force in such situations and feel that they could have been deeply counterproductive.

[Eki]

I don't think the West looks any more or less weak than it did when it did nothing over Russia's treatment of the Chechens. I feel it has acted sensibly, because personally I'm not impressed by overt displays of military force in such situations and feel that they could have been deeply counterproductive.
True. Things seem to be calming down again. The West over-reacted after 9/11, and we can see the consequences in Iraq right now.

[Tomi]

True. Things seem to be calming down again. The West over-reacted after 9/11, and we can see the consequences in Iraq right now.

I would say used 9/11 as an excuse, if you talk about Iraq.

[Eki]

I would say used 9/11 as an excuse, if you talk about Iraq.
Little bit of both, I'd say. The US government may have used it as an excuse, but those who voted for the government probably just over-reacted.

[A.F.F.]

Well... I hate the fact Russia gets away with anything.

[Roamy]

It isn't funny when you realize that some people will actually belive the article.

Am I the only one here who believed the Cold War never ended. the Names have changed but the game was still on.

You are right on with this Tony. The sad thing is that Russia just played everyone for fools while the re-tooled to become the world's largest weapons vendor!!

[BDunnell]

Well... I hate the fact Russia gets away with anything.

It is dreadful how impotent the West is when it comes to Russia's misdeeds, but it is hard to see what other options there are. Military sabre-rattling isn't an option. Sadly, if the Russians are willing to tolerate having authoritarian autocrats like Putin and Medvedev in power on the grounds that they are seeking to give Russia back some of its prestige without there being much more to this than rhetoric, there's not a lot that the West can do.

[BDunnell]

You are right on with this Tony. The sad thing is that Russia just played everyone for fools while the re-tooled to become the world's largest weapons vendor!!

But many of the 'higher-end' weapons they supply are way inferior to those that can be obtained from the West, and Russian firms are highly unreliable suppliers. Take the example of the MiG-29s sold by the manufacturer to Algeria as new aircraft that were actually used ones that had barely been reconditioned. Can you imagine a Western firm doing that? No nation other than those that are in some way politically aligned with Russia, or those with no money, should by rights be buying anything much from the Russians.

[Tomi]

The sad thing is that Russia just played everyone for fools while the re-tooled to become the world's largest weapons vendor!!

Not everyone, only you, I belive the european nato countries did see what was coming, thats why they refused georgia nato membership even that usa strongly supported a membership.

[Tomi]

But many of the 'higher-end' weapons they supply are way inferior to those that can be obtained from the West, and Russian firms are highly unreliable suppliers. Take the example of the MiG-29s sold by the manufacturer to Algeria as new aircraft that were actually used ones that had barely been reconditioned. Can you imagine a Western firm doing that? No nation other than those that are in some way politically aligned with Russia, or those with no money, should by rights be buying anything much from the Russians.

That might change rapidly now when russia has a lot of oil money to spend on key industries, there is already signs that russia wont let foreign operators in on some branches that they find important, also there has been big increase in the military industry lately.

[Roamy]

Well the following statement from the kremlin should teach us a lesson.

"Kremlin orders halt to devastating assault declaring 'the aggressor has been punished'"

If we would have just went in and took out Saddam and family and declared punishment enough just think how many lives and money we would have saved. Just like the freeworld should do you Iran right now. Take out the nuke facility and old approp leaders and call it a holiday.

[ioan]

The problem with western countries at the moment is that there in no strong leader to stand up to Sov.. russia. When the biggest leaders in world are weaklings like bush and brown (LOL!!!!!), I can see why Russia doesn`t fear the west.

But the only way to talk to russians is not by soft diplomacy, only threats followed by action works on russia and russians. Everyone who has had to deal with russians in life knows this.

Agreed.

I'm expecting the day when the west will wake up and hit them hard, economically.
We need to break free of their oil and gas, and let them rot in Siberia.

[Tomi]

Agreed.

I'm expecting the day when the west will wake up and hit them hard, economically.
We need to break free of their oil and gas, and let them rot in Siberia.

it's a bit difficult to hit russia economically, and in many european countries the energy strategie is built on supplie from russia, so its just wish thinking.

[ioan]

And it is also obvious that the other major powers aren't going to be dragged into a war with Russia, so nothing much will happen to change the status quo - there is no will on the part of the US, the EU or anyone else to confront Russia's misdeeds, and what on earth can be done? I think criticism of other countries for not taking action against Russia is unfair, because what form is that action supposed to take?

Russia was on it's knees not so many years ago.
It's Europe's fault, and mainly Germany's, that Russia is against able to afford to have a war, even a small one.
We, Europeans, are paying for this war at this very moment by paying for Russian gas and oil!

Europe could easily bring Russia to it's knees again, but we care more about our own well being than about some poor Georgian's lives, and we accept to pay higher and higher fees for fossil energy, every day.

[ioan]

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2008/106049-russiasaviour-0

One of the funniest stories I've read in a while. :D

Why did you have to post that piece of Russian propaganda here? That article is an insult to any animal with the slightest cognitive process!

[Tomi]

Russia was on it's knees not so many years ago.
It's Europe's fault, and mainly Germany's, that Russia is against able to afford to have a war, even a small one.
We, Europeans, are paying for this war at this very moment by paying for Russian gas and oil!

Europe could easily bring Russia to it's knees again, but we care more about our own well being than about some poor Georgian's lives, and we accept to pay higher and higher fees for fossil energy, every day.

Maybe the biggest reason is high oil price after all, and the other reason maybe its that europe has problem to act united towards russia, France, Italy, and Germany often act bilateral way in issues that should be union issues.

[ioan]

Who needs to be lead somewhere? Just it is better to have a decisime leader with balls to make a decision, rather a weak one like Brown or Bush.

The last Great american president was Ronald Reagan and his policies towards USSR were in quite a good part responsible for the eventual collapse of USSR.

What kind of acts?
1) Freezing of all bank accounts to do with Russia.
2) Bring considerable NATO forces to Georgia and other NATO member states and bomb Russia forces in Georgia, if russia doesn`t at once withdraw all of its forces from Georgia.
3) Force Russia to pay reparations to Georgia.

So what is your solution? Diplomacy? :rotflmao:


Agreed! Diplomacy is something Russians laugh at, for them the only "diplomacy" that works is some muscle flexing, and they don't have the muscles, nor the courage to stand up against the rest of the world.

[ioan]

It is dreadful how impotent the West is when it comes to Russia's misdeeds, but it is hard to see what other options there are. Military sabre-rattling isn't an option.

Why not?!
When did the West (and I mainly talk about the EU) ever have the courage to try that? How do we know it wouldn't work?!

Tell you what, Russia wasn't able to beat Afghanistan, what would be it's chances when confronted to GB, France, Germany and so on you can add the rest of them, countries that count more than 500.000.000 people and an economy that Russia can only dream off.

The only advantage Russia has it's oil and gas, but it's only as long as we are willing to pay for it.

Either we hit them economically, or we go and plant our joined forces in Georgia and tell them that enough is enough, otherwise in a few years the Soviet Union will be a reality again.

Georgia is where the other (read non Russian) oil pipes are coming through from the Caspic region, it was Europe's aspiration to diminish it's energetic dependency to Russia. Well they cut it short with a military move, what are we doing? Kissing their backside! :(

[ioan]

Not everyone, only you, I belive the european nato countries did see what was coming, thats why they refused georgia nato membership even that usa strongly supported a membership.

And you find that this was a clever move?
I find it was the expression of the cowards we all become! Or do you think that Russia would have attacked Georgia if it was a NATO member country?!

Germany were against Georgia being included in the NATO because they are Russia's biatch. They are the only country in Europe that has it's own oil and gas pipes, that go straight from Russia to Germany without going through any other country.

I believe that having Georgia and Ukraine as NATO members would have been a step forward in reducing Russia's ambitions towards domination through the energetic weapon.

[ioan]

it's a bit difficult to hit russia economically, and in many european countries the energy strategie is built on supplie from russia, so its just wish thinking.

Well, it's either that or bend forward and let them give it to you. What do ya think smart one?!

[Tomi]

Or do you think that Russia would have attacked Georgia if it was a NATO member country?!

yes i do.

[Tomi]

Well, it's either that or bend forward and let them give it to you. What do ya think smart one?!

Smart would have been to do a better energy strategie, now many countries has painted them self in the corner.

[ioan]

France, Italy, and Germany often act bilateral way in issues that should be union issues.

Yep, because they never changed their hypocrite and selfish approach.
Still people go around saying how bad the US is, forgetting how the US fought a war that was not their to help us out of the sh!t where Germany, Italy and France get us in.

I do admire the Baltic countries and Poland, whom are not shy of publicly pointing the finger against Russia. They know what is coming, because they saw it once, and they are not willing to have it all over again.

[ioan]

yes i do.

Never.

They don't have a chance to win, and they wouldn't want the world to see them lose, it would mean the end for them.

[Tomi]

Yep, because they never changed their hypocrite and selfish approach.
Still people go around saying how bad the US is, forgetting how the US fought a war that was not their to help us out of the sh!t where Germany, Italy and France get us in.

I do admire the Baltic countries and Poland, whom are not shy of publicly pointing the finger against Russia. They know what is coming, because they saw it once, and they are not willing to have it all over again.

Many countries act bilateral towards usa also, thats equal wrong, for intance in the visa issue, some countries did bilateral agreements.

[ioan]

Smart would have been to do a better energy strategie, now many countries has painted them self in the corner.

Exactly!
But the US aren't in that situation.
And the French are pretty much free of it too, but they are not active in NATO anymore. Maybe Sarkozy sees this as his chance of getting what he has been dreaming of, the European army force.

[Tomi]

Never.

They don't have a chance to win, and they wouldn't want the world to see them lose, it would mean the end for them.

who would have defended them?

[ioan]

Many countries act bilateral towards usa also, thats equal wrong, for intance in the visa issue, some countries did bilateral agreements.

You are right, however lately there is movement from the European Comission, that might get things sorted out, or might not.
And I do have a problem with this stupid egoistic approach, towards Russia and equally towards the USA.
It's as if the European countries don't realize that together they would be an even stronger force that could easily be on equal footing with Russia, USA or China.

[ioan]

who would have defended them?

Defended whom?! The Russians?

[Tomi]

Defended whom?! The Russians?

no the georgians

[gadjo_dilo]

Why not?!
When did the West (and I mainly talk about the EU) ever have the courage to try that? How do we know it wouldn't work?!
Napoleon and Hitler tried. It didn't work.


Tell you what, Russia wasn't able to beat Afghanistan, what would be it's chances when confronted to GB, France, Germany and so on you can add the rest of them, countries that count more than 500.000.000 people and an economy that Russia can only dream off.
Your reasoning is a bit wrong. Neither USA wasn't able to beat in Vietnam, however nobody would dare to reunite forces and beat against them. The big military force you're talking about is still facing problems in places like Afghanistan or Iraq.
The number of people isn't important. Even if they say that if all chinese pee at the same time, Europe will be flooded. :laugh: Neither is an economy which depends on russian resources.


The only advantage Russia has it's oil and gas, but it's only as long as we are willing to pay for it..
You're talking as if you come from a tropical country with a flourishing economy not from one that is already trembling at the thought of winter problems.


Either we hit them economically, or we go and plant our joined forces in Georgia and tell them that enough is enough, otherwise in a few years the Soviet Union will be a reality again...
The "joined forces " seemed to have no problems with the reality of SU after WWII ,why should they have now?



Georgia is where the other (read non Russian) oil pipes are coming through from the Caspic region, it was Europe's aspiration to diminish it's energetic dependency to Russia. Well they cut it short with a military move, what are we doing? Kissing their backside! :(

We're doing exactly what we did when US army invaded Grenada in 1983 or Panama in 1989. Is "safeguarding the lives of U.S. citizens" more important than safeguarding the lives of other nations?

[Garry Walker]

You are making a critically incorrect assumption here — that the Russian leadership would act rationally in such a situation.

I don't think the West looks any more or less weak than it did when it did nothing over Russia's treatment of the Chechens. I feel it has acted sensibly, because personally I'm not impressed by overt displays of military force in such situations and feel that they could have been deeply counterproductive.

Russian leadership are very rational and think their moves through very deeply. They are not emotional idiots at all.

At the moment they are testing how far they can go and West has shown it lacks courage to make russia back down, which they easily could do if they had some balls.

Nato forces threatning to attack russia would make them back down at once, they know well that not backing down in such a place would be a complete disaster and would end with a collapse. I will outline the reasons.

1) Bank account freezing and embargo would cripple russian economy. Without oil money they will be on their knees. This is also part of the reason they attacked Georgia.
2) They would be against most of the world and without allies.
3) Their military is not the powerhouse it was in 1950, it is vulnerable. Dedovshchina is running wild and morale is low. Every year there are thousands of suicides.


True. Things seem to be calming down again. The West over-reacted after 9/11, and we can see the consequences in Iraq right now.

How dare USA protect themselves against terrorism.

Life must be wonderful in that I-Hate-Yankees-World.


it's a bit difficult to hit russia economically, and in many european countries the energy strategie is built on supplie from russia, so its just wish thinking.
It is quite possible to alter that course, but the pipeline that is in plan will make Europe Russias slave and it would hurt Europe no-end. Let`s hope Europe now realizes what kind of a fascist state Russia is and how they cannot be trusted.

Russia economy is actually very vulnerable, if you know where to hit it.


Napoleon and Hitler tried. It didn't work.

Napoleon was unlucky, and hitler was faced with the might of USA and undoable logistical challenges+spread army+lack of resources, especially oil.
No one is supporting a full-time attack on land, but rather a clear move to make Russia back down. Threat will be enough.

It is funny how people who have dealt with russians and russia (ioan and I ) laugh at the idiotic suggestions some naive people are pushing for, namely diplomatic discussions with Russia.
As Ioan said, the only diplomacy russians know is muscle flexing.

It cannot be reasoned with.

[Daniel]

It is funny how people who have dealt with russians and russia (ioan and I ) laugh at the idiotic suggestions some naive people are pushing for, namely diplomatic discussions with Russia.
As Ioan said, the only diplomacy russians know is muscle flexing.

It cannot be reasoned with.

I actually think you're right. The only problem is that Russia knows that a most if not all European countries need it for gas so at the moment they hold all the cards. If these countries in the EU were to become self sufficient in regards to energy then Russia would be screwed. Nicely screwed :cool:

I wonder how Russia is taking the news that it's old buddy China is going to start help European countries to wean themselves off Russia's oil/gas teet?
http://www.dailytech.com/China+Expanding+Nuclear+Power+Role+Outside+Borders/article12648.htm

I don't like China as a country but when they're doing something that lessens the stranglehold Russia has on energy in Europe they're alright by me!

[A.F.F.]

It is dreadful how impotent the West is when it comes to Russia's misdeeds, but it is hard to see what other options there are. Military sabre-rattling isn't an option. Sadly, if the Russians are willing to tolerate having authoritarian autocrats like Putin and Medvedev in power on the grounds that they are seeking to give Russia back some of its prestige without there being much more to this than rhetoric, there's not a lot that the West can do.


Firstly, my honest opinion is that Medvedev gets the higest level of consulting from certain Mr.Putin. One could even say Medvedev is just a puppet for time being when Putin gets re-elected for president.... heck, I just said it ;)

Secondly, you're totally right. Once a month Russian airplanes or helicopters fly inside Finish borderlines and what does Finland do ?? We disapprove it.

I can hear them knees shaking when Finland DISAPPROVES. Hell yeah, don't **** with us.

[BDunnell]

Russia was on it's knees not so many years ago.
It's Europe's fault, and mainly Germany's, that Russia is against able to afford to have a war, even a small one.
We, Europeans, are paying for this war at this very moment by paying for Russian gas and oil!

You are right there, but again, what else are we supposed to do for our energy supplies at the present time?

[SOD]

It is funny how people who have dealt with russians and russia (ioan and I ) laugh at the idiotic suggestions some naive people are pushing for, namely diplomatic discussions with Russia.
As Ioan said, the only diplomacy russians know is muscle flexing.

It cannot be reasoned with.

I very doubt that you'll be doing the muscle flexing, I'm sure that's for some of your compatriots to do.

wonder how many dollars you'll need to print to do that muscle flexing?

oil + collapse of the dollar = something hitting the fan.

[gadjo_dilo]

Russian leadership are very rational and think their moves through very deeply. They are not emotional idiots at all.
At the moment they are testing how far they can go and West has shown it lacks courage to make russia back down, which they easily could do if they had some balls.
Nato forces threatning to attack russia would make them back down at once, they know well that not backing down in such a place would be a complete disaster and would end with a collapse. I will outline the reasons..
Isn't it a contradiction? If they are so rational they probably know that NATO has no legal reason to attack them. Georgia is not a NATO member so why should NATO start a war violating international treaties?


1) Bank account freezing and embargo would cripple russian economy. Without oil money they will be on their knees. This is also part of the reason they attacked Georgia...
An embargo against Russia is a naive idea. I know for sure some countries that will be on their knees themselves without russian resources.

2) They would be against most of the world and without allies....
In politics alliances aren't dictated by justice or isympathy but by nterests. Iran for ex. doesn't have any interest to see Russia kneeled by western forces. Some of their neighbours still depend on russian economy. Etc. etc.
Just remember that in politics a global consense is practically impossible

3) Their military is not the powerhouse it was in 1950, it is vulnerable. Dedovshchina is running wild and morale is low. Every year there are thousands of suicides.....
Yeah, and they will give up from the first moment they'll see the enemy... :laugh:


It is quite possible to alter that course, but the pipeline that is in plan will make Europe Russias slave and it would hurt Europe no-end. Let`s hope Europe now realizes what kind of a fascist state Russia is and how they cannot be trusted......
Aren't you a bit too..."appocalyptical"?


Russia economy is actually very vulnerable, if you know where to hit it.......

It's available for any economy.


Napoleon was unlucky, and hitler was faced with the might of USA and undoable logistical challenges+spread army+lack of resources, especially oil.
No one is supporting a full-time attack on land, but rather a clear move to make Russia back down. Threat will be enough.
But at their time both seemed to be invincible. :laugh: Why should we start a bloody adventure now? What if we'll be again " unlucky " or missing the oil?
Can the russian rational leaders ( you said it ) be scared by your threats?



It is funny how people who have dealt with russians and russia (ioan and I ) laugh at the idiotic suggestions some naive people are pushing for, namely diplomatic discussions with Russia.
As Ioan said, the only diplomacy russians know is muscle flexing.
It cannot be reasoned with.

One of the 2 specialists on russian issues (Ioan ) is probably a nice guy but he was probably a little boy when he had to deal with Russia and russians and I remember I smiled when I read some of his imemories of the communist period in another thread. About the second one ( you ) I have no clue but I guess you have some military roots cos you think like a soldier.
Anyway , I can also use a tough language about those who are so naive to believe that Russia's panties will tremble at a simple threat.

[BDunnell]

Yep, because they never changed their hypocrite and selfish approach.
Still people go around saying how bad the US is, forgetting how the US fought a war that was not their to help us out of the sh!t where Germany, Italy and France get us in.

And what is the point of your making a comparison with World War Two over 60 years on? I'll give you the answer: none, except to make a cheap slight towards the countries concerned, one of which, if I recall, you live in.

[BDunnell]

And I do have a problem with this stupid egoistic approach, towards Russia and equally towards the USA.

In what way is it egotistic (note spelling), and on whose part?

[BDunnell]

I will outline the reasons.

1) Bank account freezing and embargo would cripple russian economy. Without oil money they will be on their knees. This is also part of the reason they attacked Georgia.
2) They would be against most of the world and without allies.
3) Their military is not the powerhouse it was in 1950, it is vulnerable. Dedovshchina is running wild and morale is low. Every year there are thousands of suicides.

I prefer your number one point to any threat of military action, because I still believe that even the threat could trigger something more worrying on the part of Russia and its allies. A financial Cold War is surely preferable to a military one.

And I agree about the Russian military. You will note, I hope, that I was critical earlier in the thread about its actual state of readiness, and the industrial base behind it is still in an awful state. New equipment programmes for the Russian military have progressed at an appallingly slow pace and continue to do so, despite Putin and Medvedev's posturing.


It is funny how people who have dealt with russians and russia (ioan and I ) laugh at the idiotic suggestions some naive people are pushing for, namely diplomatic discussions with Russia.
As Ioan said, the only diplomacy russians know is muscle flexing.

It cannot be reasoned with.

I too have dealt with some Russians, and recognise certain aspects of their character traits (not those of all Russians, though.)

However, do you have to be so vehement all the time - calling the views of others 'idiotic', for example? I think it's really unnecessary and doesn't contribute to a nice atmosphere on the forums.

[SOD]

. A financial Cold War is surely preferable to a military one.

You hit the nail on the head here, finacial cold war. look who has the largest foreign currency reserves.

The USA has $80bn worth of foreign currency. China has $1 Trillion.

[Eki]

It is funny how people who have dealt with russians and russia (ioan and I ) laugh at the idiotic suggestions some naive people are pushing for, namely diplomatic discussions with Russia.
As Ioan said, the only diplomacy russians know is muscle flexing.

It cannot be reasoned with.
I don't believe that. In WW2 Finland negotiated a peace with the Soviet Union not only once but twice. That's more than can be said about the US, who has never accepted anything other than total and unconditional surrender.

[BDunnell]

I don't believe that. In WW2 Finland negotiated a peace with the Soviet Union not only once but twice.

Again, I think the comparison with WW2 is irrelevant.

[Garry Walker]

Firstly, my honest opinion is that Medvedev gets the higest level of consulting from certain Mr.Putin. One could even say Medvedev is just a puppet for time being when Putin gets re-elected for president.... heck, I just said it ;)

Secondly, you're totally right. Once a month Russian airplanes or helicopters fly inside Finish borderlines and what does Finland do ?? We disapprove it.

I can hear them knees shaking when Finland DISAPPROVES. Hell yeah, don't **** with us.

You remember what Soviet Union did to a korean aeroplane that accidentally flew in their airspace?

Someone should return the favour for these obviously non-accidental incidents.

That medvedev is a puppet was obvious since before he was actually elected.


I very doubt that you'll be doing the muscle flexing, I'm sure that's for some of your compatriots to do.

wonder how many dollars you'll need to print to do that muscle flexing?

oil + collapse of the dollar = something hitting the fan.

Dollar is doing just fine, there will be no collapse.


Isn't it a contradiction? If they are so rational they probably know that NATO has no legal reason to attack them. Georgia is not a NATO member so why should NATO start a war violating international treaties?
Russia had no legal reason to attack georgia, yet they did.
NATO, with the aim of defending georgia, should attack all russian forces INSIDE georgia territories, if they don`t leave within a reasonably small amount of time given to them by NATO. The aim would be to force them to retreat, not to actually go into siberia to fight them or take the war to russian territories.



An embargo against Russia is a naive idea. I know for sure some countries that will be on their knees themselves without russian resources.

Name some, and I am sure there will be alternative sources for the resources they need.



Yeah, and they will give up from the first moment they'll see the enemy... :laugh: Russian forces would retreat at once if NATO gave a threat and was a serious force. The problem is that our current western leaders can give that threat at the moment and Putin will laugh in their faces, because he knows they will do nothing when the actual moment to launch an attack came. Bush and Brown are complete jokes. If West had leaders with backbone and balls, Putin would run like a pussycat and would probably never have attempted anything like this.



Aren't you a bit too..."appocalyptical"? The word you were looking for is "realistic."



It's available for any economy.
Yes, but Russia is especially vulnerable.



But at their time both seemed to be invincible. :laugh: Why should we start a bloody adventure now? What if we'll be again " unlucky " or missing the oil?[quote:2g31xjpc]
Hitlers campaign was doomed from the 1st day on, because USSR had all their important industrial strength far away in Siberia and logistically it would have been impossible for a country like Germany to undertake an operation to capture those areas, especially against a country with human resources like USSR had.

Napoleons problem was that he couldn`t give one decisive attack on russian forces and the winter wore his army out.

You will notice I never actively wanted an actual war against russia in their territory to capture russian territories. I wouldn`t want that at all, just to see russian forces retreat from Georgia. NATOs attack (or even a threat of it) on russian forces in Georgia would make that happen.

[quote:2g31xjpc]
Can the russian rational leaders ( you said it ) be scared by your threats?
As I said, not with our current leaders.
They would reconsider their stance if someone like me was the decision-maker instead of Bush :rotflmao:



One of the 2 specialists on russian issues (Ioan ) is probably a nice guy but he was probably a little boy when he had to deal with Russia and russians and I remember I smiled when I read some of his imemories of the communist period in another thread.What was so funny about what he said.



About the second one ( you ) I have no clue but I guess you have some military roots cos you think like a soldier. Unfortunately I only deal in real-estate, no military background here. :D



Anyway , I can also use a tough language about those who are so naive to believe that Russia's panties will tremble at a simple threat.
Go ahead.



I prefer your number one point to any threat of military action, because I still believe that even the threat could trigger something more worrying on the part of Russia and its allies. A financial Cold War is surely preferable to a military one.
Absolutely, I would hate to see an actual war take place. But I maintain, with proper leadership in West, russia would have been very unlikely to do something like this and they would retreat if NATO threatened with war.



And I agree about the Russian military. You will note, I hope, that I was critical earlier in the thread about its actual state of readiness, and the industrial base behind it is still in an awful state. New equipment programmes for the Russian military have progressed at an appallingly slow pace and continue to do so, despite Putin and Medvedev's posturing.
Yes, I did note it.



I too have dealt with some Russians, and recognise certain aspects of their character traits (not those of all Russians, though.)
Russians are very very interesting people I have to say. On one hand they can be very generous (some of them), but there are many very negative character traits in them.



However, do you have to be so vehement all the time - calling the views of others 'idiotic', for example? I think it's really unnecessary and doesn't contribute to a nice atmosphere on the forums.

I try my best to be nice, but I have little tolerance for things what I, in my heart, know to be absolutely wrong.


I don't believe that. In WW2 Finland negotiated a peace with the Soviet Union not only once but twice. That's more than can be said about the US, who has never accepted anything other than total and unconditional surrender.[/quote:2g31xjpc][/quote:2g31xjpc]

The winter-war treaty was signed because soviet forces had already lost a huge number of force and potential losses in capturing whole Finland would have been not worth it. USSR was not ready for war at that time at all.
The continuation war peace-treaty was signed only because USSR needed all the forces they could get against germany to advance in europe before allies got there. The end of the war was a battle between Allies and USSR, who can advance more and deeper in europe. Finland was irrelevant and only wasting the time of USSR.

[BDunnell]

Russia had no legal reason to attack georgia, yet they did.
NATO, with the aim of defending georgia, should attack all russian forces INSIDE georgia territories, if they don`t leave within a reasonably small amount of time given to them by NATO. The aim would be to force them to retreat, not to actually go into siberia to fight them or take the war to russian territories.

I would be interested to hear whether you think the West should have gone to war with the USSR over the construction of the Berlin Wall. Personally, I think there are certain similarities, in that the West's hands were tied then by the need to try and maintain peace on a local level, and they are tied now.



I try my best to be nice, but I have little tolerance for things what I, in my heart, know to be absolutely wrong.

So do I, but I don't go around telling other people that they are stupid as a first resort.

[ioan]

You remember what Soviet Union did to a korean aeroplane that accidentally flew in their airspace?

Someone should return the favour for these obviously non-accidental incidents.

That medvedev is a puppet was obvious since before he was actually elected.



Dollar is doing just fine, there will be no collapse.


Russia had no legal reason to attack georgia, yet they did.
NATO, with the aim of defending georgia, should attack all russian forces INSIDE georgia territories, if they don`t leave within a reasonably small amount of time given to them by NATO. The aim would be to force them to retreat, not to actually go into siberia to fight them or take the war to russian territories.



Name some, and I am sure there will be alternative sources for the resources they need.

Russian forces would retreat at once if NATO gave a threat and was a serious force. The problem is that our current western leaders can give that threat at the moment and Putin will laugh in their faces, because he knows they will do nothing when the actual moment to launch an attack came. Bush and Brown are complete jokes. If West had leaders with backbone and balls, Putin would run like a pussycat and would probably never have attempted anything like this.

The word you were looking for is "realistic."


Yes, but Russia is especially vulnerable.

Hitlers campaign was doomed from the 1st day on, because USSR had all their important industrial strength far away in Siberia and logistically it would have been impossible for a country like Germany to undertake an operation to capture those areas, especially against a country with human resources like USSR had.

Napoleons problem was that he couldn`t give one decisive attack on russian forces and the winter wore his army out.

You will notice I never actively wanted an actual war against russia in their territory to capture russian territories. I wouldn`t want that at all, just to see russian forces retreat from Georgia. NATOs attack (or even a threat of it) on russian forces in Georgia would make that happen.

As I said, not with our current leaders.
They would reconsider their stance if someone like me was the decision-maker instead of Bush :rotflmao:

What was so funny about what he said.

Unfortunately I only deal in real-estate, no military background here. :D


Go ahead.



Absolutely, I would hate to see an actual war take place. But I maintain, with proper leadership in West, russia would have been very unlikely to do something like this and they would retreat if NATO threatened with war.


Yes, I did note it.


Russians are very very interesting people I have to say. On one hand they can be very generous (some of them), but there are many very negative character traits in them.



I try my best to be nice, but I have little tolerance for things what I, in my heart, know to be absolutely wrong.



The winter-war treaty was signed because soviet forces had already lost a huge number of force and potential losses in capturing whole Finland would have been not worth it. USSR was not ready for war at that time at all.
The continuation war peace-treaty was signed only because USSR needed all the forces they could get against germany to advance in europe before allies got there. The end of the war was a battle between Allies and USSR, who can advance more and deeper in europe. Finland was irrelevant and only wasting the time of USSR.

Good post! :up:

I'm glad we agree on more important matters than F1, this way I don't have to post some replies myself!

Some people around here think that Russia is stronger than it really is just because the have nuclear weapons. Well they had nuclear weapons for a long time now, yet they lost a few wars during that period, simply because nuclear weapons are not to be used.

In reality Russia is weak and is only living from fossil fuel exports, and even then a huge part of the money goes straight into the pockets of the Russian billionaires.

[Tomi]

Good post! :up:

I'm glad we agree on more important matters than F1, this way I don't have to post some replies myself!

Some people around here think that Russia is stronger than it really is just because the have nuclear weapons. Well they had nuclear weapons for a long time now, yet they lost a few wars during that period, simply because nuclear weapons are not to be used.

In reality Russia is weak and is only living from fossil fuel exports, and even then a huge part of the money goes straight into the pockets of the Russian billionaires.

Im not s sure that someone want to try if they use nuclear weapons or not. Maybe they only live on fossil fuel export, but its a big demand on those now days, and im not so sure everyone who also live on the oil or make big profit, want to put the prices down.
Lol, it's true most of the oil money goes to the billionaires, maybe we soon see loads of beggers from there too, like we have seen lately from the other countries who lives on charity.

[TOgoFASTER]

Randy Scheunemann and McNukem will fix it all. Randy has enjoyed his time as a lobbyist (as well as many other interesting things)for and friendship of Georgia, and enjoys his new job as McNukem's foreign policy man.
McNukem sure does love those lobbyists.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/13/georgian-president-to-mccain-move-from-words-to-deeds/
Saakashvili learns what it is to be a single domino in a game that doesn't value the pawns in any way other than a means to an end.

I do not support any party in this pitiful loss of life for no reason but for the same old games with the same recent cast of incompetent intelligence, military and foreign policy jokers we have come to love. :rolleyes:
Much more to this picture than meets the blind neocon's eyes.
Seems some think the US is much stronger than it really is, as well.
It's very clear Russia knew well in advance what was coming.

[gadjo_dilo]

Russia had no legal reason to attack georgia, yet they did..
Its reason is as legal as the one that US&gang had to attack Iraq.


NATO, with the aim of defending georgia, should attack all russian forces INSIDE georgia territories, if they don`t leave within a reasonably small amount of time given to them by NATO. The aim would be to force them to retreat, not to actually go into siberia to fight them or take the war to russian territories...
For God's sake! You keep saying we're idiots, etc. but you don't know elementary things. How can NATO aim to defend Georgia when its role is to selfguard the freedom and security of the member countries by political and military means? It's commited to defending ITS MEMBERS against of aggression or the threat of aggression and to the principle that an attack against one or several MEMBERS would be considered an against all. Georgia is not a member.



Name some, and I am sure there will be alternative sources for the resources they need...
You named it yourself a few posts above: Germany. You with your own sweet little mouth said that (among other reasons ) Hitler failed to conquer Russia because "lack of resources, especially oil".



Russian forces would retreat at once if NATO gave a threat and was a serious force. The problem is that our current western leaders can give that threat at the moment and Putin will laugh in their faces, because he knows they will do nothing when the actual moment to launch an attack came. Bush and Brown are complete jokes. If West had leaders with backbone and balls, Putin would run like a pussycat and would probably never have attempted anything like this....
Sorry but you think either like an old retired man at the queue in the Matache Market or like a kid who's bullied in school and is secretly hoping that his dad's threats will scare his nasty colleagues.



Hitlers campaign was doomed from the 1st day on, because USSR had all their important industrial strength far away in Siberia and logistically it would have been impossible for a country like Germany to undertake an operation to capture those areas, especially against a country with human resources like USSR had.
Siberia is still there and human resources hasn't changed.

Napoleons problem was that he couldn`t give one decisive attack on russian forces and the winter wore his army out..
Despite global warmth russian winters are still tough.


You will notice I never actively wanted an actual war against russia in their territory to capture russian territories. I wouldn`t want that at all, just to see russian forces retreat from Georgia. NATOs attack (or even a threat of it) on russian forces in Georgia would make that happen...
And I suppose that when US invaded Iraq you were a militant for getting out their forces. :laugh:
I wonder what position would have you adopted if Serbia had attacked Kosovo and then western countries+US had joined forces and attacked Serbia.


As I said, not with our current leaders.
They would reconsider their stance if someone like me was the decision-maker instead of Bush :rotflmao: ...
They lead because they were elected. Looks like masses don't agree with your opinions. :laugh:
BTW, why Bush? is it normal that a single man should take decisions that imply all the world?


Unfortunately I only deal in real-estate, no military background here. :D :...
How pity....
You would have been a perfect good soldier Švejk.



Go ahead.:...
This was supposed to be an invitation to insult you. There's no need. I think the forum members are clever enough to read a post and to decide the "quality" of the author.


Russians are very very interesting people I have to say. On one hand they can be very generous (some of them), but there are many very negative character traits in them.
Dear Garry, that's too simplistic, every nation has good/bad parts but you should read the russian classics to understand the real "l'âme slave" : candid, violent, sweet, deep, dreamy, fugitive, naive and more than all, IMPENETRABLE but still charming. The russian is a constant fan of utopias, has the vocation of harassment, of a inner hurly burly, an attraction to a universe on fire. He's full of volcanic vitality and fiery decadence. He's the last primitive of Europe....


I try my best to be nice, but I have little tolerance for things what I, in my heart, know to be absolutely wrong..
See? There's a serious need of diplomacy even in your own life. :laugh:

[Roamy]

Well the way I see it you Euros are screwed. No one came and helped us with our fight so we are now getting out of the war business. You people are sitting right on the edge of Russia and China with your countries being overwhelmed by muslims. The way I see it is about 30 years and your gone. The cold war will return and Russia will pick you guys off one at a time to flex their power.
Our problem will be dealing with the new anti american movement led by Chavez.

We have learned we cannot fight high tech wars as they are too expensive. So that only leaves a few options. You Euros won't defend yourselves and we are not coming back. The UN and Nato are jokes. Sh!t in 10 years you are going to have to worry about Holland attacking you, fed by arms from the middle east. Hopefully we will team us with the Aussies so we can protect ourselves in both hemispheres.

[Drew]

This is just the start of the USA becoming the next France. As soon as China and then India become the superpowers, we'll see the USA struggling, whining and moaning for any kind of international power it can grasp hold of. So long, it's been nice seeing you!

[Tomi]

Well the way I see it you Euros are screwed. No one came and helped us with our fight so we are now getting out of the war business. You people are sitting right on the edge of Russia and China with your countries being overwhelmed by muslims. The way I see it is about 30 years and your gone. The cold war will return and Russia will pick you guys off one at a time to flex their power.
Our problem will be dealing with the new anti american movement led by Chavez.

We have learned we cannot fight high tech wars as they are too expensive. So that only leaves a few options. You Euros won't defend yourselves and we are not coming back. The UN and Nato are jokes. Sh!t in 10 years you are going to have to worry about Holland attacking you, fed by arms from the middle east. Hopefully we will team us with the Aussies so we can protect ourselves in both hemispheres.

Interesting visions, maybe you already should start to protect yourself from yourself.

[Woodeye]

Well the way I see it you Euros are screwed. No one came and helped us with our fight so we are now getting out of the war business.

Hehehe. We are screwed. You are right. We have been here what, about 2000 years and americans are the outcome of the europeans. We ought to be gone.

And you had at least Togo on your alliance against the "axis of evil" or something like that, so you weren't alone.

The whole american history is build on violence. And I see it continuing like that until the bitter end. I see America as the kid on the schoolyard that has all the toys but nobody likes to play with him since he beats and cheats all the time.

But then again, I'm screwed. :D

[BDunnell]

Well the way I see it you Euros are screwed. No one came and helped us with our fight so we are now getting out of the war business. You people are sitting right on the edge of Russia and China with your countries being overwhelmed by muslims. The way I see it is about 30 years and your gone. The cold war will return and Russia will pick you guys off one at a time to flex their power.
Our problem will be dealing with the new anti american movement led by Chavez.

We have learned we cannot fight high tech wars as they are too expensive. So that only leaves a few options. You Euros won't defend yourselves and we are not coming back. The UN and Nato are jokes. Sh!t in 10 years you are going to have to worry about Holland attacking you, fed by arms from the middle east. Hopefully we will team us with the Aussies so we can protect ourselves in both hemispheres.

That's the biggest load of tosh I've read on these forums for a long, long time. Well done.

[TOgoFASTER]

I keep wondering when he is going to explain who the 'we' are, that he keeps thinking he is speaking for. :)

[TOgoFASTER]

Maybe 'we' are learning the military as a centerpiece for foreign policy isn't such a good idea in which to bring about peace.

[SOD]

Hey foustard,

where was the USA BORROWING from to finance those wars of freedumb in the past 7 years?

[SOD]

Maybe 'we' are learning the military as a centerpiece for foreign policy isn't such a good idea in which to bring about peace.


Only works in theory if its assumed that the enemy wont fight back

For those with their eyes taped, see Iraq 2003- present and the 2nd Lebanon war in 2006 for details.

[A.F.F.]

As long as Holland keep their coffee houses, they're mellow and happy so I wouldn't worry about them.

[Rani]

Maybe 'we' are learning the military as a centerpiece for foreign policy isn't such a good idea in which to bring about peace.

Maybe so, but historically it's still the most effective way to change a status quo in order to lay the foundations for peace. At least in this neighborhood it is.

I oppose war very much, but you can't ignore the fact that people usually don't want to sign peace treaties unless they feel threatened by the other side (ie believing it would be in their best interest to have peace than to stay enemies). It's just the way it is.

[SOD]

Maybe so, but historically it's still the most effective way to change a status quo in order to lay the foundations for peace. At least in this neighborhood it is.

I oppose war very much, but you can't ignore the fact that people usually don't want to sign peace treaties unless they feel threatened by the other side (ie believing it would be in their best interest to have peace than to stay enemies). It's just the way it is.

keep FEARING the Arabs, I know you do.


You could have peace today if you wanted it, but keep voting for the retards who want to make a claim to fame by winning a war.

[TOgoFASTER]

Maybe so, but historically it's still the most effective way to change a status quo in order to lay the foundations for peace. At least in this neighborhood it is.

I oppose war very much, but you can't ignore the fact that people usually don't want to sign peace treaties unless they feel threatened by the other side (ie believing it would be in their best interest to have peace than to stay enemies). It's just the way it is.

That area of the world has been threatening, hating, fearing and killing since before man lived in caves. That is the long termed status quo it would seem. Built on a foundation of fanatical mutual destruction. It's just the way it is.
When you ,collectively, have had many a chance for change and make peace you ,collectively, prefer to find ways to stick with bashing each other with clubs.
Men walking toward peace are ridiculed, run out of leadership or assassinated by the fringes that stand to lose the most by peace.
People find a way to peace when they get sick of all the needless killing.
I hope one day you ,collectively, get to that point.

[Camelopard]

Hopefully we will team us with the Aussies so we can protect ourselves in both hemispheres.

Speak for yourself, that pretend sheriff 'little johnny' has gone if you didn't know. In our recent election John Howard was only the second sitting Prime Minister of Australia to lose his seat............ turfed out on his bum, thanks in part to him getting us involved in the mess that is the illegal war in iraq.
Got what he deserved.
So. Blair has gone, Howard has gone, only bush left and he'll be gone soon as well.

As for others taking over countries, how's your Spanish coming along? I sure hope you like mexican food!

[gadjo_dilo]

Well the way I see it you Euros are screwed. No one came and helped us with our fight so we are now getting out of the war business. You people are sitting right on the edge of Russia and China with your countries being overwhelmed by muslims. The way I see it is about 30 years and your gone. The cold war will return and Russia will pick you guys off one at a time to flex their power. .
Another prophet, another appocalyptical script..... :laugh:
Unfortunately you missed a little documentation. At least to understand that Russia and China aren't on the same boat. :laugh:

Our problem will be dealing with the new anti american movement led by Chavez. .
Nah...You can't escape so easy! After screwing Europe, Russia and China will set their eyes on you.


Sh!t in 10 years you are going to have to worry about Holland attacking you, fed by arms from the middle east. .
Can't wait for the day when Holland ( why Holland? is it a russian ally and I don't know? ) will attack us with arms from the middle east but which were made in Eastern Europe. A perfect practice of the saying " you were defeated by your own weapons ". :laugh:

[Rani]

keep FEARING the Arabs, I know you do.


You could have peace today if you wanted it, but keep voting for the retards who want to make a claim to fame by winning a war.

It is widely acknowledged that your (and mine) beloved Olmert is trying to make a claim for fame by making peace with Syria and the west bank in order to move the spotlight away from his corruption.

That post was pretty much inline with your signature, Sean.


That area of the world has been threatening, hating, fearing and killing since before man lived in caves. That is the long termed status quo it would seem. Built on a foundation of fanatical mutual destruction. It's just the way it is.
When you ,collectively, have had many a chance for change and make peace you ,collectively, prefer to find ways to stick with bashing each other with clubs.
Men walking toward peace are ridiculed, run out of leadership or assassinated by the fringes that stand to lose the most by peace.
People find a way to peace when they get sick of all the needless killing.
I hope one day you ,collectively, get to that point.

I try to look at the positive happenings in the last 60 years of this country's existence, and by that I mean the peace we have with Egypt and Jordan. Peace with Egypt was only possible after Egypt attacked in 1973 (along with almost every other arab nation) thinking they could take Israel, but instead got an Israeli boot up their backside. They would never have agreed to peace unless they got pummeled and lost Sinai like they did.

[Daniel]

As long as Holland keep their coffee houses, they're mellow and happy so I wouldn't worry about them.

You don't know those bloodthirty Dutch! I would tell you a story of a scary night spent in Helsinki airport but I'm scared Tjeerd will hunt me down and kill me :(

[TOgoFASTER]

I try to look at the positive happenings in the last 60 years of this country's existence, and by that I mean the peace we have with Egypt and Jordan. Peace with Egypt was only possible after Egypt attacked in 1973 (along with almost every other arab nation) thinking they could take Israel, but instead got an Israeli boot up their backside. They would never have agreed to peace unless they got pummeled and lost Sinai like they did.

The old might makes right, how good for you. Ugg.

[Roamy]

President Mikhail Saakashvili is on tv right now slamming you euros for being "Pussies" This guy is great and tells it like it is!! He should be running the EU !

[angie1313]

Can't we all just get along????? :D

[BDunnell]

President Mikhail Saakashvili is on tv right now slamming you euros for being "Pussies" This guy is great and tells it like it is!! He should be running the EU !

Thanks again for your input. We'll let you know.

[Tomi]

President Mikhail Saakashvili is on tv right now slamming you euros for being "Pussies" This guy is great and tells it like it is!! He should be running the EU !

Why, if cant even run his own country?

[Drew]

In reality the west should be ashamed. It goes throughout the world promoting its vision and then as soon as its threatened, it just kicks back with a few beers and tells Russia off. Maybe Georgia will offer the US a bit of land somewhere near the border for their missile defence shield, essentially forcing a responce just like the Russians did or waited until getting into NATO (should it have happened). Essentially Saakashvili hasn't thought this through.

[TOgoFASTER]

"Bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century," W

"In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations." McNuked

Interesting responses.

“We should realize what is at stake here for Americans,” he said. “America is losing the whole region.”

“What Americans should do now, first of all, clearly make known their intentions,” Saakashvili

[BDunnell]

In reality the west should be ashamed. It goes throughout the world promoting its vision and then as soon as its threatened, it just kicks back with a few beers and tells Russia off. Maybe Georgia will offer the US a bit of land somewhere near the border for their missile defence shield, essentially forcing a responce just like the Russians did or waited until getting into NATO (should it have happened). Essentially Saakashvili hasn't thought this through.

What this is is a demonstration of rank hypocrisy by those nations who were happy to take action over non-existent weapons and suddenly became concerned about human rights abuses in Iraq, but do not want to take action over the very real human rights abuses in Georgia. I still feel that there is no other course of action open to them, for some sort of international relations 'modus operandi' with Russia is surely worth aspiring to, as it is with any nation in the interests of harmony. However, this doesn't make the lack of action taken over Russia's actions (not just in Georgia) any more palatable.

[BDunnell]

"Bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century," W

"In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations." McNuked

Interesting responses.

“We should realize what is at stake here for Americans,” he said. “America is losing the whole region.”

“What Americans should do now, first of all, clearly make known their intentions,” Saakashvili

A nation it doesn't want to lose for reasons that are less than honourable — missile defence shields and extraordinary rendition. Hardly ideals worth fighting for, are they?

A plague on all their houses, I say.

[Roamy]

In reality the west should be ashamed. It goes throughout the world promoting its vision and then as soon as its threatened, it just kicks back with a few beers and tells Russia off. Maybe Georgia will offer the US a bit of land somewhere near the border for their missile defence shield, essentially forcing a responce just like the Russians did or waited until getting into NATO (should it have happened). Essentially Saakashvili hasn't thought this through.

Ha in reality the "Laydown" Union should be ashamed of how they reacted and the lack of helping these people but I guess what the hell can we expect from you all ---Reagan had to tear down the wall.

[Hondo]

It would be a shame to pass up a golden opportunity like this. The death tolls and destruction of World Wars 1 & 2 led to the greatest post-war economic boom the world has ever seen. The adults in industrial nations were able to double their standard of living within their own generation. Unfortunately, nuclear weapons have done their job of prevention too well and there hasn't been a major, global population thinning conflict since WWII. Since so many are convinced that human beings are responsible for the greenhouse gas output that is causing the climate to warm faster than they have decided it should be, the quickest cure would be to get rid of a bunch of humans quickly, while better technologies are developed for the long term. Fewer vehicals, industrial output could be scaled back due to fewer consumers, fewer homes using energy, etc.

Now we have a hell of a chance to start another global war, with sooooo much underlying intrigue, that either side could say the other side started it and keep a straight face while they say it. If we could get a nice, juicy war going, keep it conventional with no nukes, and wipe out about 500 million people, not only would we set a new worlds record for death tolls (book deals, movie rights, etc,), the survivors would have plenty of jobs available, especially in construction, lessened traffic congestion, fewer crowds in the city, more room in the suburbs and the need to breed like rabbits to start restoking the population. In addition, they should have much cheaper oil available because whoever wins this one isn't going to feel the need to act politely while making suggestions to the oil exporting countries that perhaps they should lower the prices a bit. This is our big chance to save the planet. How about it, any volunteers? Hell, I'll sign up as long as the war doesn't have a "no smoking" policy.

The polar bears will love us for this. C'mon, be a sport.

P.S. China, we're counting on you for at least 100 million so figure out a way to get into the fight and bring Japan with you. Canada can lay out of this one, you still haven't come close to filling up the land you have now. Finland, feel free to swap sides as you see the need to do so.

[Drew]

Ha in reality the "Laydown" Union should be ashamed of how they reacted and the lack of helping these people but I guess what the hell can we expect from you all ---Reagan had to tear down the wall.

You're writing all of this as if the USA has been into Georgia, kicked the Russian's ass and then came back home with planes full of vodka and then just poured it all out in the desert and sent them a video to rub it in :\

What exactly have you guys done, that the EU hasn't done?

[Tomi]

Ha in reality the "Laydown" Union should be ashamed of how they reacted and the lack of helping these people but I guess what the hell can we expect from you all ---Reagan had to tear down the wall.

It was your country that had military people in Georgia when this did happen, they was also among the first ones that was evacuated.

[DonJippo]

You're writing all of this as if the USA has been into Georgia, kicked the Russian's ass and then came back home with planes full of vodka and then just poured it all out in the desert and sent them a video to rub it in :\

What exactly have you guys done, that the EU hasn't done?

They have been in Georgia and kicked the only Russian's ass they were able to find in Atlanta...

[Tomi]

They have been in Georgia and kicked the only Russian's ass they were able to find in Atlanta...

LOL

[Eki]

Finland, feel free to swap sides as you see the need to do so.
It's always better to have options and an open mind than to fight to the bitter end.

[Hondo]

Thats why I gave you Fins the option contract. It worked so well for you before. Anyway, we've got to get this party started, the world can't pass this one up.

[A.F.F.]

It would be a shame to pass up a golden opportunity like this. The death tolls and destruction of World Wars 1 & 2 led to the greatest post-war economic boom the world has ever seen. The adults in industrial nations were able to double their standard of living within their own generation. Unfortunately, nuclear weapons have done their job of prevention too well and there hasn't been a major, global population thinning conflict since WWII. Since so many are convinced that human beings are responsible for the greenhouse gas output that is causing the climate to warm faster than they have decided it should be, the quickest cure would be to get rid of a bunch of humans quickly, while better technologies are developed for the long term. Fewer vehicals, industrial output could be scaled back due to fewer consumers, fewer homes using energy, etc.

Now we have a hell of a chance to start another global war, with sooooo much underlying intrigue, that either side could say the other side started it and keep a straight face while they say it. If we could get a nice, juicy war going, keep it conventional with no nukes, and wipe out about 500 million people, not only would we set a new worlds record for death tolls (book deals, movie rights, etc,), the survivors would have plenty of jobs available, especially in construction, lessened traffic congestion, fewer crowds in the city, more room in the suburbs and the need to breed like rabbits to start restoking the population. In addition, they should have much cheaper oil available because whoever wins this one isn't going to feel the need to act politely while making suggestions to the oil exporting countries that perhaps they should lower the prices a bit. This is our big chance to save the planet. How about it, any volunteers? Hell, I'll sign up as long as the war doesn't have a "no smoking" policy.

The polar bears will love us for this. C'mon, be a sport.

P.S. China, we're counting on you for at least 100 million so figure out a way to get into the fight and bring Japan with you. Canada can lay out of this one, you still haven't come close to filling up the land you have now. Finland, feel free to swap sides as you see the need to do so.


Eh.... what was the middle part again ?

[Drew]

They have been in Georgia and kicked the only Russian's ass they were able to find in Atlanta...

http://fumpr.com/images/ja9649gwx25j20sykl0q.png

Anyhow seriously, doesn't Estonia have a border dispute with Russia?

[Roamy]

It would be a shame to pass up a golden opportunity like this. The death tolls and destruction of World Wars 1 & 2 led to the greatest post-war economic boom the world has ever seen. The adults in industrial nations were able to double their standard of living within their own generation. Unfortunately, nuclear weapons have done their job of prevention too well and there hasn't been a major, global population thinning conflict since WWII. Since so many are convinced that human beings are responsible for the greenhouse gas output that is causing the climate to warm faster than they have decided it should be, the quickest cure would be to get rid of a bunch of humans quickly, while better technologies are developed for the long term. Fewer vehicals, industrial output could be scaled back due to fewer consumers, fewer homes using energy, etc.

Now we have a hell of a chance to start another global war, with sooooo much underlying intrigue, that either side could say the other side started it and keep a straight face while they say it. If we could get a nice, juicy war going, keep it conventional with no nukes, and wipe out about 500 million people, not only would we set a new worlds record for death tolls (book deals, movie rights, etc,), the survivors would have plenty of jobs available, especially in construction, lessened traffic congestion, fewer crowds in the city, more room in the suburbs and the need to breed like rabbits to start restoking the population. In addition, they should have much cheaper oil available because whoever wins this one isn't going to feel the need to act politely while making suggestions to the oil exporting countries that perhaps they should lower the prices a bit. This is our big chance to save the planet. How about it, any volunteers? Hell, I'll sign up as long as the war doesn't have a "no smoking" policy.

The polar bears will love us for this. C'mon, be a sport.

P.S. China, we're counting on you for at least 100 million so figure out a way to get into the fight and bring Japan with you. Canada can lay out of this one, you still haven't come close to filling up the land you have now. Finland, feel free to swap sides as you see the need to do so.


Brilliant - Lets getter done!!

[Garry Walker]

I would be interested to hear whether you think the West should have gone to war with the USSR over the construction of the Berlin Wall. Personally, I think there are certain similarities, in that the West's hands were tied then by the need to try and maintain peace on a local level, and they are tied now.

Different situation, but in short, no.

[Garry Walker]

Its reason is as legal as the one that US&gang had to attack Iraq.

Absolutely. Except that the Iraq dictator took great pleasure in murdering his own people, stalin-style. The world is a better place with Saddam executed.



For God's sake! You keep saying we're idiots, etc. but you don't know elementary things. How can NATO aim to defend Georgia when its role is to selfguard the freedom and security of the member countries by political and military means? It's commited to defending ITS MEMBERS against of aggression or the threat of aggression and to the principle that an attack against one or several MEMBERS would be considered an against all. Georgia is not a member.
I know Georgia is not a member and I know NATOs aims, the problem is Georgia should be a NATO member already by now, but as they aren`t, NATO should still provide defence to non-member countries in world. Otherwise it would seem that you can attack countries without any punishment, and as they aren`t members of NATO, it is ok to occupy them. In such a case, NATO is not as useful as it could and should be and will be a joke in the level of "league of nations" in 30s



You named it yourself a few posts above: Germany. You with your own sweet little mouth said that (among other reasons ) Hitler failed to conquer Russia because "lack of resources, especially oil". Your sweet little mouth seems not to understand what I said, again, unsurprisingly.
Anyway, in WW2, Germany did not have many allies to provide them with Oil. Something that no doubt at the moment is not true, as at the moment, most countries in world, to my knowledge, have not declared war on Germany.




Sorry but you think either like an old retired man at the queue in the Matache Market or like a kid who's bullied in school and is secretly hoping that his dad's threats will scare his nasty colleagues.
Yes, absolutely :rotflmao: . Please stop bullying me :( :D



Siberia is still there and human resources hasn't changed.
Seeing that you are STILL unable my points, I have never proposed an attack on siberia to conquer it.



Despite global warmth russian winters are still tough.
Read above and pay more attention.



And I suppose that when US invaded Iraq you were a militant for getting out their forces.At the beginning of that invasion I was against it for sure.



They lead because they were elected. Looks like masses don't agree with your opinions.Masses also elected Hitler :laugh: So I would say masses are gullible and easily led.



BTW, why Bush? is it normal that a single man should take decisions that imply all the world?Undoubtedly smaller countries revolve around bigger ones and are dependent on them.



How pity....
You would have been a perfect good soldier Švejk.
Awesome book, I read it when I was 14-15. It is a huge shame Hašek died before he was able to finish the book.
So I thank you for your compliment :D




This was supposed to be an invitation to insult you. There's no need. I think the forum members are clever enough to read a post and to decide the "quality" of the author. Indeed.



you should read the russian classics to understand the real "l'âme slave" : QUOTE]
War and Peace, Eugene Onegin, crime and punishment, The master and Margarita, the Idiot. Any more classics you want me to read?


Well the way I see it you Euros are screwed. No one came and helped us with our fight so we are now getting out of the war business. You people are sitting right on the edge of Russia and China with your countries being overwhelmed by muslims..

Whilst those problems are obvious for us euros, you yourselves don`t have it much better with the millions of mexican immigrants you are getting every year.


but do not want to take action over the very real human rights abuses in Georgia.

I agree, the human rights violations committed by russians in Georgia are despicable.

[BDunnell]

I agree, the human rights violations committed by russians in Georgia are despicable.

And in Russia itself, where basic freedoms — press, democratic voting — continue to be denied.

[Eki]

The world is a better place with Saddam executed.

How exctly is the world outside Iraq a better place now with Saddam executed? How is your personal life better?

Here in Finland I haven't noticed any other change than the animosity towards the US has grown and that gasoline is more expensive.

[BDunnell]

How exctly is the world outside Iraq a better place now with Saddam executed? How is your personal life better?

Here in Finland I haven't noticed any other change than the animosity towards the US has grown and that gasoline is more expensive.

:up:

And again I would say that a lot of people suddenly became concerned about human rights in Iraq for the first time when George Bush told them to be. But this is by the by.

[jens]

Anyhow seriously, doesn't Estonia have a border dispute with Russia?

Yes, we have. Current Estonia has lost a few Eastern areas we had during our first independence period in 1920-1940. At the moment we don't have a border treaty with Russia, although negotiations have been going on "forever". We were close to signing a treaty in 2004, but Russian government rejected the agreement.

[Camelopard]

:up:

And again I would say that a lot of people suddenly became concerned about human rights in Iraq for the first time when George Bush told them to be. But this is by the by.

Exactly, the west wasn't concerned about human rights issues in Iraq when Saddam started his war against the Iranians. At that time Saddam was the darling of the west for invading Iran.