It's war. Part III

[Serb]

Originally posted by Velociryx
One of MSN's headlines just reported that Shrub officially "warned" Russia re: the contested provs. (they are apparently REALLY behind the curve).

So if they attack again during the next 12 months, we'll have a CB on them?

Cool.

-=Vel=-

(apologies for the EU reference)

I believe Georgia have been warned by us that if they will try to conquer South Osssetia we will defend them. So in EU's terms we HAD a CB on them.
(apologies for the EU reference) (c).

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Serb


Both Russian and US nuclear arsenal is limited to 2000 warheads, not 5000, iirc.
First there are 10 interceptors, then 100, then... ???
But a hundred would be enough to shot down remaining Russian missiles in case if they destroy the bulk of our missiles in a surprise attack.

I just read that it's 5,000, but this is funny. You are really afraid of our missle interceptors aren't you? So funny.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
Attacking Georgia under the cover of the Olympics was not smart on Russia's part. It will definitely strain relations between Moscow and Beijing.

Well, thank you very much for your valuable input, Mr. DL, but it was Georgia who attacked South Ossetia at the oppening day of the Olympics by bombarding its capital and killing Russian peacekeepers. The Russians retaliated the day after.


And after such brilliant example of how well your western brainwashing propaganda machine did its job to wash your brains, do you think you are smart enough to talk about how smart Russia is?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I just read that it's 5,000, but this is funny.

I'm sure you are wrong there.

You are really afraid of our missle interceptors aren't you? So funny.

One thing I know for sure - you let some US military folks in, and soon they'll bring more US military folks and stay there forever.

Besides, if your shield is vs. Iran only, then why you reject our porposals to use a radar in Azerbaijan (which is better for monitoring Iran territory, but it can't see the Russian territory) and still want to relocate your radar to Czehia (which is far from Iran, but can scan the Russian territory up to the Ural?).

[Kidlicious]

I don't think there is much to be afriad of. Some of your people are making a big deal out of this.

[Serb]

You and me are not military experts.
So how can you be so sure that "there is no much to be afraid of" is beyond me.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Serb
You and me are not military experts.
So how can you be so sure that "there is no much to be afraid of" is beyond me.

I know this about militaries, they like to make big deals about things like this. It makes them seem important.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Serb
Besides, if your shield is vs. Iran only, then why you reject our porposals to use a radar in Azerbaijan (which is better for monitoring Iran territory, but it can't see the Russian territory) and still want to relocate your radar to Czehia (which is far from Iran, but can scan the Russian territory up to the Ural?).

Uhm, what if they promise to warn you if someone should attempt to make another Rust on you ?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Victor Galis


I don't think you understand... the missile shield is completely ineffective.

If it is so ineffective, then why do you want a part of it to be placed in Europe?
If it is completely ineffective how can it save you from Iran (the country that don't have any nukes or missiles capable to reach the US)?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I know this about militaries, they like to make big deals about things like this. It makes them seem important.

And? Does it mean they are always wrong?

[Serb]

Originally posted by BlackCat


Uhm, what if they promise to warn you if someone should attempt to make another Rust on you ?

I don't get it. Rust??? WTF?

[Serb]

Oh, you meant that crazy German CIA sponsored pilot?

[Serb]

great joke, my arse.

[Harry Tuttle]

Critical Mass attained! Whoop, whoop!

[Serb]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The true size of Russia's lies has now become clear. While Russia was claiming 2000 civilians were killed in the first day the reality is that in the entire conflict just 45 civilians died. Clearly Russia deliberately VASTLY exaggerated civilian deaths in order to come up with an excuse to attack Georgia.

1) Show me a single "independent" report" which proves that "in the entire conflict just 45 civilians died".. What you show is a single report (against many) which says about 45 dead bodies in one exact place of the city. It doesn't say a single word about how many were already buried or still lying on the streets or in the cellars or anywhere else. It doesn't say a single word about civilians killed outside the capital (and at least ten SO villages have been destroyed). And SO authorities never claimed that civilians have been killed ONLY in Tskhinvali and nowhere else. In fact it's your own fantasy and and wrong assumption. This single article proves nothing. Except that there were casualities among the civilian population due to the Georgian aggression.

The article doesn't say a single word about the TOTAL NUMBER of dead civilians.

What are you doing by waving this piece of BS above your head is just lying and whitewashing the butchers of Tskhinvali.

2) Russians never claimed that 2000 civilians were killed the first day. The South Ossetian leadership claimed that 1 400 have been killed after the first day and 2 000 total.
3) What Russians could claim for sure is casualties among their own peacekeepers. And it was claimed that 10 Russian peacekeepers have been killed within the first hours of Georgian aggression. Do you need to see the graves of our soldiers?
4) Once again, even if we assume for a second, that your WSJ's bullsh!ts are correct and the total number of killed Ossetian civilians is several times lesser than 2000, even then, HOW THE **** THAT JUSTIFIES A SURPRISE ATTACK VS. THE PEACEFULLY SLEEPING CITY? How the **** the suprise night bombardment of the residential area of the city can be justified at all?
How the **** that justifies an attack vs. the PEACEKEEPERS (and attack vs. a peace keeping force considered a WAR CRIME according to UN regulations, iirc).
5) Once again, what would YOU, as a supreme comander of US the military DO, if 500 of your peacekeepers were UNDER ATTACK by owerwhelming force and ten of them were already KIA and many more wounded?
WOULD YOU SEND THEM REINFORCEMENTS AND TRY TO SAVE THEM or just let them die there without any help?

ANSWER THIS QUESTION!

So what we have is Russia deliberately arming their surrogates and having their surrogates launch devastating artillery attacks on Georgia hoping to provoke a response which Russia could use to attack. Immediately as soon as Georgia took the bait Russia's military launched their planned attack and simultaneously spun lies with their propaganda machine. Making claims of 2000 dead civilians and blocking independent journalists from reporting on the ground because the Russians didn't want people to know how big their lies really were.

I answered to this bullsh!t in my posts above. Don't want to repeat the same crap over and over again.

The west needs to understand that Putin's new Russia is a militant expansionist state which is more then willing to create conflicts in order to force it's hegemony on other former Soviet states. Or at the very least block them from pursuing independent policies & alliances.

The World needs to understand that the United States of America is a militant expansionist state which is more then willing to create conflicts in order to force it's hegemony over the World. Or at the very least block some countries from pursuing independent policies.

I would be very worried if I was the Ukraine.

Fortunatelly you are not the Ukraine, though your goverment have installed its puppets both in Ukraine and Georgia for the reasons described above.