gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 79,045
- 43,484
- 2,605
What we need is regime change of our government, not Russia’s.That is true, but once he is dead, they'll have to chose to continue to war against the West, or maybe come to the table.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What we need is regime change of our government, not Russia’s.That is true, but once he is dead, they'll have to chose to continue to war against the West, or maybe come to the table.
I doubt any of that is true. It’s just wishful thinking on your part.For every NATO tank destroyed a hundred Russian tanks have been destroyed. In war equipment gets destroyed, it's a fact of life, what determines the end result is how much equipment is left and Russia is running out of tanks to refurb and its production levels are far below NATO levels AND the tanks its producing are essentially 1980s models with inferior fire control as well as the well-known tendency to "blow their tops" due to exposed ammo inside the tanks which kills the entire crew.
CIA likely.![]()
Secret Service smashes massive telecom ‘network’ threat to NYC cell service ahead of Trump’s United Nations address
The threats threat were ‘directed towards senior U.S. government officials,’ according to the Secret Serviceuk.yahoo.com
"
Secret Service smashes massive telecom ‘network’ threat to NYC cell service ahead of Trump’s United Nations address"
"“My instinct is this is espionage,” Anthony J. Ferrante, a cybersecurity expert who previously served at the White House and the FBI, told the New York Times."
Now it's the US's turn. Only a few possibilities and two of them are China and most likely, RUSSIA>
Why is it not possible to compete with Russia in the artic? Do we want them to have a direct water way to the west?The Russian army is actively developing its military presence in the Arctic, creating and modernizing bases such as the Arctic Trifolium and forming specialized Arctic troops to protect national interests and resources in the region.
Specially designed equipment and weapons are used to operate effectively in the harsh Arctic conditions, and the main task of the troop group is to ensure the defense and implementation of Russia's interests in the Arctic.
Russia is indeed the strongest player in the Arctic. Despite all attempts by NATO countries, it is Russian military polar explorers who are the main specialists and “colonizers” in the high latitudes.
Unlike NATO countries, the Russian Armed Forces have a permanent presence on the subcontinent, rather than limiting themselves to one-off visits and demonstrations of force. It would not be an exaggeration to say that today, the Russian Army is synonymous with global Arctic civilization.
The military intelligence agency Army Recognition notes that the Arctic contains 25 percent of the world's hydrocarbon reserves, and Russia intends to take control of 55 percent of Arctic oil and gas by 2030. At the same time, the Arctic is the shortest route for American ballistic missiles targeting Russia and the shortest route from Northern Europe to Asia, which is gradually becoming ice-free.
Yes, NATO countries are now saying that they would like to expand their presence in the Arctic. But competing with Russia at this stage is hardly possible.
In addition, Russia has the world's largest icebreaker fleet, which numbers about 40-46 vessels, including eight nuclear-powered and many diesel-electric icebreakers. In the coming years, the fleet is expected to be further expanded with new nuclear icebreakers.
The US has two heavy icebreakers, none of which are nuclear-powered.
Martyr Adopted by MongersNot true if you knew anything, but you rarely do so I expect this response
If Farage becomes PM, he should deport all Nazislamis out of the formerly Great Britain at gunpointWell they are now after the Serbs were attacked and Nato supported Islamists and Fascists.
The Best Checks and Balances Money Can BuyAlso refused to be subservient to International bankers
He saw what they did towards and Qaddafi and must have warned them he would not tolerate any similar moves
Always Making Excuses for the RichKid ReichAt the time, Iran was the issue. Bush (or Halliburton) wanted to take out Iran. Afghanistan sits on the other side of Iran to Iraq, who they also invaded.
That is, Russia's existence should depend entirely on the interests of the United States... Are you even listening to yourself?Do we want them to have a direct water way to the west?
Who are these Nazislamists? there are two Polish families living on my street Farage is talking about deporting people like that they have lived here years their kids were born here one of them is a Nurse another works in the local supermarket, Farage is a nasty piece of work who may have to deport his own wife who is GermanIf Farage becomes PM, he should deport all Nazislamis out of the formerly Great Britain at gunpoint
the last so called British politician to say foreigners should be deported was this piece of garbage John Tyndall of the National Front, look at the scum in a Nazi style uniform with people like Farage and that other pieceof garbage Tommy Robinson the UK is in danger of sleepwalking into a very dark place.Always Making Excuses for the RichKid Reich
Then why didn't the sheltered sissyboy just cut to the chase, blame Iran for 9/11, and wage total war on it? Besides, the Sunni Taliban are more likely to neutralize Iran than we ever will. They were supposed to link up with ISIS; that was declared and obvious. Trump even asked, "Why am I stuck with defending Assad and the Ayatollah?"
Have you ever questioned why these lunatics even want to wage war on these Countries? it's pure bloody evil.As far as I can tell, Bush knew Iraq would be easy, but Iran much harder. So they thought they'd take over Iraq within days and use it as a base. How do you attack Iran? From where? With Iraq and Afghanistan in their pockets, they thought it'd be easier. But then Iran took the fight to Iraq and Afghanistan instead, because Bush and Halliburton didn't understand Iran.
If you want to be technical about it, Russia has effectively been at war with around 40 or so countries, given that this is how many countries have contributed in some way to the endeavor against it.
Maybe this maybe that, don't worry the usual suspects will find some evidence it was Russia, if not they will invent some like they have many times before and the brainwashed herd will lap it up.![]()
Danish drone attacks seem professional, says minister, but no evidence of Russian involvement
The incidents come after Copenhagen airport was forced to close earlier this week due to a drone incursion.www.bbc.co.uk
"Airport drone attacks seem professional, says Danish minister, but no evidence of Russian action"
No evidence doesn't mean it's not Russia. Might be that Russia paid some local criminals to do it, but smells like Russia.
NO what i was asking for was info on what's going on in the Artic,That is, Russia's existence should depend entirely on the interests of the United States... Are you even listening to yourself?
Given the skillfully orchestrated hysteria, I predict that they will start shooting down their own aircraft, possibly civilian ones.I imagine NATO countries are going to start aggressively shooting down drones and aircraft in their airspace.
Shooting down imaginary Russian drones the Russians can do the same in their airspace, but in Russia they are not imaginary some are multi million pound Cruise missiles.I imagine NATO countries are going to start aggressively shooting down drones and aircraft in their airspace.