Russian TV in the service of Iraqi Information Ministry

[Sirotnikov]

Bull****. I don't know where you get it, but I suspect it was work of your Israel chanel 9 (or whatever you call it) editors. I saw the interview with Peter Arnet on Russian ORT TV channel and there was no "voice over" only translation of asked questions and consider what I heard he said, it was very accurate translation.

Excuse me, but you need not put words in my mouth.

I saw the same interview on ORT.

The translation was not sub-titled but rather voiced over the original soundtrack, however I also heard what he said in english.

What ORT did, is show a 2 minute clip, with the voice-over translation completely NOT sticking to the original text.

[Saras]

Originally posted by muxec
Russia is country of late pride. Of late hopes. Your sportcommenter commenting olympics said "Íàø ñïîðòñìåí âîø¸ë â äâàäöàòüñåì¸ðêó ëó÷øèõ" ("Our sportsman had entred top-27"). It's situation in whole Russia now. Your polliticans steal billions and your pensioners count kopeyka's.

Y'all be surprised by this coming from a lithuanian, but you guys need to fvcking cheer up about your country. To help this, I'll quote a beautiful research piece by a guy I konw at Goldman Sachs (a US investment bank, actually the first of the big boys to open up in Moscow, only to close it before the 1996-1998 GKO binge.

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

"Since his unheralded arrival, Putin has been impressive. He has built on the promise of the
situation handed him, delivering the prerequisites for growth and making good progress on the reforms needed to build a well-functioning market-based system. Yet many challenges remain.

Principal amongst them is building a trusted domestic financial system. Given Russian banks’ bad history, to
do so will require the entry of foreign banks in force. If they do so, Russia could follow Poland’s relatively
smooth growth path. If not, expect a boom-bust cycle – quite possibly an exaggerated one – as capital comes
and goes.

Regardless, growth is now the norm, not the exception. Asset prices do not reflect this though, being undervalued compared to those in comparable markets. We expect them to increase strongly – on average – in
coming years but with equity now leading the way.
But the big-picture is key. Russia is choosing to gain its place at the West’s high-table, and to do so is taking on
the values associated with it, above all the seeking after individual prosperity through peaceful means.
The first post-Soviet President of Estonia, Lennart Meri, a man widely experienced in the politics, society and
culture of the Soviet Union, illustrated the vastly bigger difficulties Russia faced changing its ways than his
Baltic state did as follows: “A super-tanker needs 16 nautical miles to reverse her course. AnEskimo kayak can
do it on the spot”.

The super-tanker is now well past 90 of the 180 turn and is beginning to accelerate. How fast it will do so
remains an open question, but its direction increasingly does not. As Meri also said: “The 21st century will be
the age of a beautiful, reformed Russia. I am absolutely sure of this. This is not only politically evident but, even
more so, it is a law of nature. It will be a Russia that we have never seen before.” It takes someone with his
experience to be so sure. But there is reason to believe.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

There are no US soldiers in Basra.

Wrong. There are some, but not many.

[Sikander]

Re: Re: Russian TV in the service of Iraqi Information Ministry

Originally posted by LaRusso

at the end of GW 1 coalition reported 8 killed. now the tally is at 174. you do the math

Bull****! The SCUD that killed the 20 or so reservists was reported immediately, while the war was still going on. Are you saying that a week later the Coalition made the claim that they had only lost 8 men? Talk about an embarrassment! They had to dig up all those people who were erroneously buried! You really have no idea what you are talking about. I never had very much trust in your sources before, and now I am absolutely positive that you are completely full of sh!t. If you are interested, you can do a wee bit of research into the matter by reading old newspapers. You will see that KIAs were reported regularly throughout that war.

Originally posted by LaRusso

whereas you believed americans when saying that they blew up the tank. well, believe in whatever you want to

It works for you I guess, but the photo evidence completely supports this view. It's going to be pretty hard for the parents of those poor tankisti to understand why their boys were killed in a training accident months after the war is over, especially when their comrades come round to pay their respects after the war and explain what "really" happened.

Originally posted by LaRusso

your outpour is remarkable. why dont you go back to cnn.com and stop watching evil russian tv?

It's not his responsibility to uphold anyone else's fraud. Russian TV like so many of your posts turn to dust in the daylight.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Nevs23



(it seems fortunately aren't all Americans stupid warmongers ).

Well, Sava disproves the warmonger bit I guess. Stupid is still in play.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Serb
Democracy, my ass.
Democratic countries usually respect international laws and UN charter, not invading countries looking for oil.

Thanks for reminding us that Russia is the leading producer. We'll tell Putin you were the one to remind us.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by paiktis22
i think the one who really took the beating is the supposed supremacy if the american military machines.
which constitute by themselves a reason for that war too. marketing in the field.

how many american helicopters went down, missiles went astray, friendly kills etc etc?

I'd say for a 3rd world country equiped with outdated weapons the Iraqis have certaintly made the american military technology seem far from trustworthy...


and again, calculating objectivity by level of involvment in iraq, really burns the US and the UK....

If you were a serious poster I would destroy your points one by one, just as the U.S. Army is knocking off T-72s. But you are just a troll, much like Saddam's regime.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Sava
If Russia were so interested in selling military equipment, wouldn't they support conflict? BTW, the US is the leading arms exporter in the world... far above and beyond everybody else.

Let's pretend that your paranoid world view is reality. How would the purveyer of defective parachutes sell his wares? He would package them as reserve chutes in order to prolong his ability to swindle his clients as long as possible. Thus the Russians don't want to see their crap shown up, they'd rather continue the illusion. The U.S. of course needs to show how devestatingly superior their equipment is, so like Nike they get the Michael Jacksons of militarism (the American Fighting Man) to show just how damned high those shoes can make you jump.

/end Sava mode

[Sikander]

Originally posted by spiritof1202


you mean the visit to the airport prior to the capture?

If they still control it and killed so many Americans, why no recent pictures now?

They've not offered to take any journalists to the airport, yet claim to have masacred the US there. It's just a joke.

And not a very convincing one.

I guess they correctly assumed that the airport story was being covered by the journalists embedded with U.S. forces.

[Bereta_Eder]

they had taken journalists to the airport when the US media said that it was captured by the US.

It wasnt.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Nevs23

Who said this... CNN?


I think the truth is someplace between the US, Iraq and other media.

The most important question (natural for me ) finally is: Why Iraq?

Why not North Korea?
Why not Katar?
Why not Saudi Arabia?
Why not... etc.

Making jokes about oel seems to be a good way to close the eyes before the truth.

Who the hell makes a decision based on "why not"? You seem to be merely trying to waste everyone's time by having them consider the relationship between every country and the U.S. and U.K. Why not Germany? Why not the Holy Roman Empire? Why not Tibet? The false assumption here is that you seem to think that there was going to be a war between the U.S. and someone, and it came down to a debate about who we were going to war with, as opposed to whether we were going to war with anyone.

This war is about a lot of things, but the critical reason why we are attacking Iraq IMO is that they violated the cease fire agreement early and often, for a dozen years. During that same time Saddam managed to also create an artificial humanitarian crisis amongst his internal enemies and blamed the sanctions. We don't fight offensive wars for our health, we fight offensive wars to change things. Why would a powerful alliance allow a weakling to break all the agreements that were paid for with so much blood? The answer is that they don't allow it, or at least the powerful countries in that alliance don't allow it.

[Bereta_Eder]

although to be 100% serious there were some suspicious points:

_if there was a fight and they pushed back the yanks where were the bodies?

_also the site seemed a bit empty

[Ned]

paiktis, your information is largely based on propaganda published by the Iraqi's. No serious person now believes anything Baghdad Bob was saying.

[Bereta_Eder]

He wasnt the one saying it. int. journalists were on the spot.

[Bereta_Eder]

what happened was the US went in and was pushed back, they hasted into changing the name of the airport, and yeah they lied *gasp*