thisislondon.co.uk— Moscow has issued an extraordinary warning to the West that military assistance to Georgia for use against South Ossetia or Abkhazia would be viewed as a 'declaration of war' by Russia.
Aug 27, 2008View in Crawl 4
@Naieve Of course, I do not justify Japan. They fought on the side of Hitler. U.S. and the USSR fought together against Japan.But I understand them. Pearl Harbor - it was the destruction of the military fleet. This was partly justified as military action. Had they not destroyed fleet, the navy would then fought against Japan and it would have caused huge losses.Hiroshima and Nagasaki - is mostly civilians. The war is coming to an end. Japan was close to surrender. There was no requirement to destroy two cities, along with the entire population (mostly women, children, elderly). This was just a senseless massacre.And unfortunately this is no exception. We see the U.S. in action.In Vietnam, it was even worse - you have used chemical weapons. The consequences they feel even now (after 30 years). Just look at some photos: <a class="user" href="http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883">http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883</a>Just last small example occurred a few days ago. 90 civilians killed:<a class="user" href="http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops_deal_after_NATO_bombs_90_civilians">http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops ...</a>You, Americans, mostly good guys. But war is war. Your media talk to you about the exact armaments. And just do not talk about casualties of civilians.And now you ask: I believe that the American president can start nuclear war? I say, yes, of course! If he will think that the first blow could destroy almost all the missiles, and the remaining missiles will be intercepted by shield, he can press the "red button". A reason for the attack can be any small conflict.
"Hiroshima and Nagasaki - is mostly civilians. The war is coming to an end. Japan was close to surrender. There was no requirement to destroy two cities, along with the entire population (mostly women, children, elderly). This was just a senseless massacre."A senseless massacre? We dropped leaflets in every major industrial town we bombed, INCLUDING Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Key Words: Industrial Center. Civilians build the weapons the military fights with, welcome to war.Go look at the conduct of the Russian Army when YOU went into Germany.Katyn Forest?So you have any idea how many MILLIONS of people would have died in the invasion that most assuredly would have happened had we not nuked them?Secondly, go research the Japanese Biological testing in China, then the Rape of Nanking, and the conduct of war in China which lead the US to impose the sanctions we placed upon it."And unfortunately this is no exception. We see the U.S. in action.In Vietnam, it was even worse - you have used chemical weapons. The consequences they feel even now (after 30 years). Just look at some photos: <a class="user" href="http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883">http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883</a>Just last small example occurred a few days ago. 90 civilians killed:<a class="user" href="http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops">http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops</a> ..."Are you talking about Agent Orange? The Defoliant we sprayed on everyone there INCLUDING our own troops?"And now you ask: I believe that the American president can start nuclear war? I say, yes, of course! If he will think that the first blow could destroy almost all the missiles, and the remaining missiles will be intercepted by shield, he can press the "red button". A reason for the attack can be any small conflict."We could never stop the thousands of warheads Russia has. Let alone take out all your SSBN's before they launch.... You are in fact building stealth nuclear missiles with decoy warheads specifically made to bypass the interceptors.There is no way any US President will be able to launch a nuclear strike without Russian retaliation.The second fact is that no US President would do it because he would immediately be impeached.Unless of course you were acting like Japan in China and WW2.In that case, we might trade some cities to stop mass genocide.
It is a sad day when Putin has more balls than Congress and the American people to stand up to Bush and the people over him with all the power in the US.f**kin' MADD soccer moms raised a bunch of pussies.
Funny how ignorant you still are on this issue. If the STATE had not been prevented AT GUNPOINT from reinforcing the levees by FEDERAL THUGS, the levees would have held. And if all the aid being sent to New Orleans hadn't also been turned away AT GUNPOINT by FEDERAL THUGS, aid would have arrived sooner, and if the city hadn't been prevented AT GUNPOINT from using the buses to evacuate people by FEDERAL THUGS, they would have. Yes, the Bush government is to blame. They did it deliberately and now they've stolen the land and handed it over, for free, to a Halliburton subsidiary to build casinos on.
and thats why we havent right? have you seen the rest of the worlds actions? even our own? a us ally went down and we said "uhh you should stop that please"where was the ass kicking then? nowhere. you know WHY? because we are struggling and no one else rallied because the rest of the world needs russia more than us right now.
Jake: what does Russia export apart from oil and gas? Where is the manufacturing base? What about the added-value economy? "The American military has nothing except nuclear weapons to threaten Russia with"Who is threatening who? Russia has said Poland will be a target if it establishes defensive systems - and Poland rushed to finalise the deal when Russia entered Georgia. They know a thing or two about Russia in Warsaw.
9bpm9Aug 28, 2008
Well the UN sure doesn't do jack s**t.
hanglyAug 29, 2008
The housing bubble began in the Clinton administration.Not that that makes it Clinton's fault. Blame Greenspan.
broohoAug 29, 2008
@Naieve Of course, I do not justify Japan. They fought on the side of Hitler. U.S. and the USSR fought together against Japan.But I understand them. Pearl Harbor - it was the destruction of the military fleet. This was partly justified as military action. Had they not destroyed fleet, the navy would then fought against Japan and it would have caused huge losses.Hiroshima and Nagasaki - is mostly civilians. The war is coming to an end. Japan was close to surrender. There was no requirement to destroy two cities, along with the entire population (mostly women, children, elderly). This was just a senseless massacre.And unfortunately this is no exception. We see the U.S. in action.In Vietnam, it was even worse - you have used chemical weapons. The consequences they feel even now (after 30 years). Just look at some photos: <a class="user" href="http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883">http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883</a>Just last small example occurred a few days ago. 90 civilians killed:<a class="user" href="http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops_deal_after_NATO_bombs_90_civilians">http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops ...</a>You, Americans, mostly good guys. But war is war. Your media talk to you about the exact armaments. And just do not talk about casualties of civilians.And now you ask: I believe that the American president can start nuclear war? I say, yes, of course! If he will think that the first blow could destroy almost all the missiles, and the remaining missiles will be intercepted by shield, he can press the "red button". A reason for the attack can be any small conflict.
naieveAug 29, 2008
"Hiroshima and Nagasaki - is mostly civilians. The war is coming to an end. Japan was close to surrender. There was no requirement to destroy two cities, along with the entire population (mostly women, children, elderly). This was just a senseless massacre."A senseless massacre? We dropped leaflets in every major industrial town we bombed, INCLUDING Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Key Words: Industrial Center. Civilians build the weapons the military fights with, welcome to war.Go look at the conduct of the Russian Army when YOU went into Germany.Katyn Forest?So you have any idea how many MILLIONS of people would have died in the invasion that most assuredly would have happened had we not nuked them?Secondly, go research the Japanese Biological testing in China, then the Rape of Nanking, and the conduct of war in China which lead the US to impose the sanctions we placed upon it."And unfortunately this is no exception. We see the U.S. in action.In Vietnam, it was even worse - you have used chemical weapons. The consequences they feel even now (after 30 years). Just look at some photos: <a class="user" href="http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883">http://www.webpark.ru/comments.php?id=35883</a>Just last small example occurred a few days ago. 90 civilians killed:<a class="user" href="http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops">http://digg.com/world_news/Afghans_want_new_troops</a> ..."Are you talking about Agent Orange? The Defoliant we sprayed on everyone there INCLUDING our own troops?"And now you ask: I believe that the American president can start nuclear war? I say, yes, of course! If he will think that the first blow could destroy almost all the missiles, and the remaining missiles will be intercepted by shield, he can press the "red button". A reason for the attack can be any small conflict."We could never stop the thousands of warheads Russia has. Let alone take out all your SSBN's before they launch.... You are in fact building stealth nuclear missiles with decoy warheads specifically made to bypass the interceptors.There is no way any US President will be able to launch a nuclear strike without Russian retaliation.The second fact is that no US President would do it because he would immediately be impeached.Unless of course you were acting like Japan in China and WW2.In that case, we might trade some cities to stop mass genocide.
theredsea00Aug 30, 2008
It is a sad day when Putin has more balls than Congress and the American people to stand up to Bush and the people over him with all the power in the US.f**kin' MADD soccer moms raised a bunch of pussies.
nonserviumAug 31, 2008
Funny how ignorant you still are on this issue. If the STATE had not been prevented AT GUNPOINT from reinforcing the levees by FEDERAL THUGS, the levees would have held. And if all the aid being sent to New Orleans hadn't also been turned away AT GUNPOINT by FEDERAL THUGS, aid would have arrived sooner, and if the city hadn't been prevented AT GUNPOINT from using the buses to evacuate people by FEDERAL THUGS, they would have. Yes, the Bush government is to blame. They did it deliberately and now they've stolen the land and handed it over, for free, to a Halliburton subsidiary to build casinos on.
wunkstaSep 1, 2008
and thats why we havent right? have you seen the rest of the worlds actions? even our own? a us ally went down and we said "uhh you should stop that please"where was the ass kicking then? nowhere. you know WHY? because we are struggling and no one else rallied because the rest of the world needs russia more than us right now.
writieSep 1, 2008
Jake: what does Russia export apart from oil and gas? Where is the manufacturing base? What about the added-value economy? "The American military has nothing except nuclear weapons to threaten Russia with"Who is threatening who? Russia has said Poland will be a target if it establishes defensive systems - and Poland rushed to finalise the deal when Russia entered Georgia. They know a thing or two about Russia in Warsaw.