Russia Threatens to electronically hamper U.S. missile defense facilityies in Poland

[Andrew2382]

"they can't wrap their minds around why anyone would ever want to attack precious little America on 9/11. Why, America's perfect."


Saying why we can't imagine why anyone would want to attack "precious little america" on 9/11.

Go fuck yourself Dave, you're a piece of shit. Get out from your mom's basement in Sheepshead bay and get a fuckin life.

You're a fucking disgrace

 

[DavidS]

"they can't wrap their minds around why anyone would ever want to attack precious little America on 9/11. Why, America's perfect."


Saying why we can't imagine why anyone would want to attack "precious little america" on 9/11.

Go fuck yourself Dave, you're a piece of shit. Get out from your mom's basement in Sheepshead bay and get a fuckin life.

You're a fucking disgrace

You're so laughable - behind that computer all big and tough. Hahaha. I'm done with you.

 

[Andrew2382]

as opposed to you who isn't behind a computer?

Everyone on these boards know your're a fuckin box

 

[Coloradomtnman]

as opposed to you who isn't behind a computer?

Everyone on these boards know your're a fuckin box

But I know you're a little boy with a big pussy for a mouth, Andrew.

 

[Andrew2382]

But I know you're a little boy with a big pussy for a mouth, Andrew.

With a big pussy for a mouth?

WTF

that doesn't even make any sense you fucking idiot.

But hey at least pussy gets near my mouth, rather then the big fat cock that stuffs yours on a daily basis.

 

[Turboswede]

I'm not sure I see the wisdom in sacrificing the Ukrainians (or the Georgians really) to an expansionist Russia just because Russia feels the "near abroad" is theirs to do with what they please.

If the Ukrainian people wish to join NATO (as has been shown by overwhelming plebiscite, then what we're really saying is we shouldn't include them because we're pussies and we're afraid Russia won't be happy about it.

I mean really, the Ukrainian people are people too. We shouldn't just abandon them because it's too much trouble.

But as we have learned from both world wars, be very careful about who you allow into a defense pact. Both world wars were initiated due to strategic planning based on the network of alliances set in place prior to the war. I am all for supporting Georgia or the Ukraine, but when it comes down to it, my children’s future should not depend on decisions made in Kiev or Tbilisi.

 

[Ravi]

Has anyone checked on the latest news about the Georgia/Russian conflict? It sounds quite possible that Georgia was at fault. Not that I feel comfortable with Russia's actions, but take off your blinders people and quit letting your emotions guide your thoughts.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Has anyone checked on the latest news about the Georgia/Russian conflict? It sounds quite possible that Georgia was at fault. Not that I feel comfortable with Russia's actions, but take off your blinders people and quit letting your emotions guide your thoughts.

Democracy Now! reported on this last night saying that monitors have shown that Georgia attacked Ossetia first. Of course, this gave Russia an excuse to get involved, but because Russia quelled the fighting so quickly and then removed its troops makes me think that Russia was just flexing its muscles and delivering a message to the West.

Democracy Now! also reported that Obama is planning on discontinuing the missile defense system since it is widely seen as a first strike facility and not as a way of protecting Western Europe from Iran (which is ridiculous). I think that such a move would be extremely helpful in the West's dealings with Russia. The last thing the world needs is a return to the mutual destruction policies of the Cold War.

 

[mightypeon]

On that matter, Turboswede makes a lot of good points.
If you do something that makes the Russian think that the Nuclear arsenal may no longer be working, they may want to use it before it becomes out of date.
This is clearly destabilizing.

Apart from that, I would venture that about 50% of the American population will not see why a country like Poland will need a missle shield against Iran, in light of Iran never threatening it. Are you that amazed that Putin looks at it in the same way?

Also, the missle shield has highly sophistiaced Radar technology, if that technology can watch unto Iran, it can also peek at Moscow. Would you like it if Russia has a permanent radar vision of Washington DC and New York?

Last but not least, even a "defensive" missle shield system basically consists or rockets filled with explosive stuff. It could easily be used in an offensive way (although it would not be terribly efficient).

P.S.
I would not belitle the conventional Russian military. For a fact, their self propelled Artillery systems are better than the U.S. Paladin 109 MA6.
They are worse than the new PzH2000 used by Germany and the Netherlands, but the quantities are a different beast.
On Average, the US has the technological advantadge, but everyone who underestimated Russia payed for it.
People claiming that the Russian T-80s from the 80s will have no chance against American M1A1 Abrams should check when the Abrams were built.

The last war that Russia lost was WW1, mostly due to a certain German secret weapon named Lenin. Their defeat made way for a certain German invention named Ukraine.

P.P.S. As a reserve Soldier of the German army, I have absolutly no interest in fighting Russia on the behalf of Georgian or Ukrainian leaders. On a more specific term, I would have resisted offensive orders in the Georgian crisis because going to war on behalf of Georgia would have (since Georgia started it) been an aggressive war (Angriffskrieg) which is specifically forbidden in the German constitution (Grundgesetz, we dont really have a constitution but the "basic law" acts as one).

 

[Andrew2382]

People claiming that the Russian T-80s from the 80s will have no chance against American M1A1 Abrams should check when the Abrams were built.

M1A2

been revamped from the A1

thanks for playing

 

[Sovereignty]

Foreign countries around the world view the Americans by the politicians they elect. The policies our politicians make reflects badly on the average American reguarding foreign countries.

Also, when American Big Business goes to Central America and uses herbicides and pesticides that have been banned for 40 years in the U.S. They hire local village people and their new born children end up with birth defects and the field worker die quickly of cancer, when they didn't have a problem previously, they're angry.

President Bush was exposed of his botched attempt to take over Iraqi oil fields. He could have cared less what Sadam did to his people in the 1980's and everyone knows it! He lied and got caught!

Now, it comes out that Bush and his cronies have given themselves permission to enter into any country they wish and bomb and destroy it, looking for terrorism without permission of that country!

What do you think the world is going to think about America? What would America do if other countries adopted this same policy? We have got to get a handle on our politicians and pull in the reigns pronto!

Excerpt and Paraphrase:

Secret Order Lets U.S. Raid Al Qaeda

November 9, 2008

The United States military since 2004 has used broad, secret authority to carry out nearly a dozen previously undisclosed attacks against Al Qaeda and other militants in Syria, Pakistan, Ethiopian, Somalia, Kenya, Iran and elsewhere. A 2004 order permits attacks on terrorists outside war zones. The classified order authorizing the C.I.A. to kill or capture Qaeda militants around the globe.

The 2004 order identifies 15 to 20 countries, including Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and several other Persian Gulf states, where Qaeda militants were believed to be operating or to have sought sanctuary. The C.I.A. had carried out, and running missions without an ambassador’s knowledge or approval, with the approval of President Bush.

The secret order gave the military new authority to attack the Qaeda terrorist network anywhere in the world, and a more sweeping mandate to conduct operations in countries not at war with the United States.

The New York Times, 2 page report:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/washington/10military.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=todayspaper

 

[Sovereignty]

One reason for America to put missiles in Poland is China is sharing Nuclear Technology with Iran. Iran is friends with Venezuela and Venezuela is buying Nuclear Technology from Russia.

In the end it will be one big fat nuclear war! Destroy your planet to show your superiority!

 

[Turboswede]

M1A2

been revamped from the A1

thanks for playing

Going off topic here, but it sure is fun!

I want to remind folks that, while the US has been decimating Russian military equipment in the Middle East since the 1st Gulf War and the Israelis for much longer than that, the Russian bear is nothing for NATO to sneeze at even though our defense spending exceeds Russia’s by a factor of 5:1. Some things that should be taken into account when Sizing up the Russians are:

1. The weapons systems we have faced in the Middle East were designed for export
2. The weapon systems have been 20 years old at least
3. The US has always had complete and total air superiority
4. The US has always had a reliable supply & logistical support system in place
5. The weather is very stable in the Middle East
6. The Russians have never exported depleted uranium penetrators

I sometimes worry that the spectacular victories in Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom could lead the American public to assume the U.S. military is invincible when employed in a traditional (i.e. not COIN) role.

On veteran’s day I would never disparage the US armed forces, but I do occasionally fear that the decisive victories achieved by our soldiers, sailors and airmen could lead to dangerous overconfidence on the part of the American public.

 

[DavidS]

One reason for America to put missiles in Poland is China is sharing Nuclear Technology with Iran. Iran is friends with Venezuela and Venezuela is buying Nuclear Technology from Russia.

In the end it will be one big fat nuclear war! Destroy your planet to show your superiority!

You sound paranoid, Sov. No country is going to attack another one using nuclear weapons - unless they want their country destroyed. America has more nuclear, chemical and biological weapons than any other country on the planet. Attacking America or one of its allies with a weapon like that would mean certain destruction.

Countries are allowed to build alliances for fear that the US and its allies are going to attack them. If I were Iran right now, I'd be shitting in my pants because there ain't much keeping Bush from attacking them. Even Olmert wants to attack them. To suggest that a country that is under direct threat from two nuclear powers and not build any defenses is ridiculous.

 

[Sovereignty]

You sound paranoid, Sov. No country is going to attack another one using nuclear weapons - unless they want their country destroyed. America has more nuclear, chemical and biological weapons than any other country on the planet. Attacking America or one of its allies with a weapon like that would mean certain destruction.

Countries are allowed to build alliances for fear that the US and its allies are going to attack them. If I were Iran right now, I'd be shitting in my pants because there ain't much keeping Bush from attacking them. Even Olmert wants to attack them. To suggest that a country that is under direct threat from two nuclear powers and not build any defenses is ridiculous.

“In the end it will be one big fat nuclear war! Destroy your planet to show your superiority!”

I meant that in sarcasium, have you ever heard of STUPIDITY? The Supreme Leader Ali Hoseini-Khamenei, Ayatollah and Pres. Mahumud Ahmadinejad aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed. Putin said it himself, in the end countries will be fighting each other for natural resources.

Although, I believe it'll be Turkey, Pakistan Iran or India that'll start WWIII.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Has anyone checked on the latest news about the Georgia/Russian conflict? It sounds quite possible that Georgia was at fault. Not that I feel comfortable with Russia's actions, but take off your blinders people and quit letting your emotions guide your thoughts.

Georgia was indeed and in fact at fault.

No one wants to answer why the Georgian president would start a conflict he knew he would immediately lose .. and why did Obama and Biden think we should give the Georgian president one billion dollars of taxpayer money for his treachery?

 

[Sovereignty]

He'll Be Back!

Medvedev submits bill for 6-year presidential term

Excerpt:

MOSCOW – President Dmitry Medvedev submitted a bill Tuesday to extend Russia's presidential term from four years to six. If approved as expected by lawmakers, means that Vladimir Putin would be eligible for another 12 years in a second presidential stint. Aides say the term change would only apply to future presidents.

The widely popular Putin — Putin current prime minister, is still widely seen as the man calling the shots in Russia.
The constitution does not prevent Putin from running again. Putin might not wait until scheduled elections in 2012 to seek a return to the office.

"There is little doubt that Putin remains the most powerful politician and makes all the major decisions".

SOURCE:
Yahoo News
Medvedev submits bill for 6-year presidential term - Yahoo! News

 

[DavidS]

“In the end it will be one big fat nuclear war! Destroy your planet to show your superiority!”

I meant that in sarcasium, have you ever heard of STUPIDITY? The Supreme Leader Ali Hoseini-Khamenei, Ayatollah and Pres. Mahumud Ahmadinejad aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed. Putin said it himself, in the end countries will be fighting each other for natural resources.

Although, I believe it'll be Turkey, Pakistan Iran or India that'll start WWIII.

I don't believe there will be World War 3. I think countries are tired of war and are backing away from it right now.

 

[DavidS]

He'll Be Back!

Medvedev submits bill for 6-year presidential term

Excerpt:

MOSCOW – President Dmitry Medvedev submitted a bill Tuesday to extend Russia's presidential term from four years to six. If approved as expected by lawmakers, means that Vladimir Putin would be eligible for another 12 years in a second presidential stint. Aides say the term change would only apply to future presidents.

The widely popular Putin — Putin current prime minister, is still widely seen as the man calling the shots in Russia.
The constitution does not prevent Putin from running again. Putin might not wait until scheduled elections in 2012 to seek a return to the office.

"There is little doubt that Putin remains the most powerful politician and makes all the major decisions".

SOURCE:
Yahoo News
Medvedev submits bill for 6-year presidential term - Yahoo! News

NY mayor wins chance for 3rd term

By Edith Honan

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Mayor Michael Bloomberg signed a term-limit extension law on Monday that will allow him to run for a third term next year and earn a chance to guide New York City through the global financial crisis.

Bloomberg's backers hail him as the right man to guide one of the world's financial capitals through uncertain times, while critics accuse him of a naked power grab using the financial crisis as a pretext.

The original bill, passed by the city council on October 23, allows the New York mayor, the 51-member council and other elected officials to seek three 4-year terms, up from two.

The vote reversed two public referenda imposing term limits and passed with the support of a majority of the council, including members who otherwise would have been barred from re-election next year.

"I feel that this time, the public should have a choice," Bloomberg, a former Wall Street trader and self-made billionaire who was elected in 2001 and in 2005, said of running for re-election again.

The formal signing came after four hours of public testimony from more than 100 elected officials, private citizens and good government groups. Some called the law essential but many called it appalling, often in heated terms.

"You have the money and the power and you're just trying to use your money to keep the power," said Ronnie Colangelo, 52, who said he has voted for Bloomberg in previous elections but had been turned off by the term-limits issue.

Bloomberg's legacy as a reform-minded champion of open, nonpartisan governance may have been tarnished in the process, one speaker said.

"He has diminished his own reputation as a nonpartisan," said Gene Russianoff, a lawyer for the New York Public Interest Research Group and a frequent ally of the mayor.

"The question is, how much harder will it be for him to govern in an environment where he's just seen as another politician desperately trying to hang onto their job."

But one expert said that Bloomberg, who is expected to spend as much as $80 million on his re-election, is almost certain to win a third term.

"He's a very popular politician," said Mickey Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "He has a zillion dollars and he's perfectly willing to spend it. Yes he could lose, but I'm italicizing the could."

A longtime Democrat before becoming a Republican to run for mayor in 2001, Bloomberg then dropped party affiliation after being re-elected in 2005.

He has pledged to create a charter review commission that could potentially roll back the term-limits change.

(Editing by Daniel Trotta and Philip Barbara)

NY mayor wins chance for 3rd term | U.S. | Reuters

 

[Ravi]

Georgia was indeed and in fact at fault.

No one wants to answer why the Georgian president would start a conflict he knew he would immediately lose .. and why did Obama and Biden think we should give the Georgian president one billion dollars of taxpayer money for his treachery?

I don't know. Do you have a link to that?

Obama is certainly not going to be the left wing's wet dream.