What is Digg?69 Comments
- bearsandbulls, on 08/27/2008, -0/+23What is wrong with Russia doing a weapons test in it's own waters? They make it sound like Russia invaded the Black Sea.
- A11YND, on 08/27/2008, -10/+31The USA and NATO countries can not only sink green peace boats but test in arab waters and such... but the minute Russia does it, thats it, the gloves are ***** off!
- da_bradler, on 08/27/2008, -1/+18I think people underestimate how pissed off the Russians are right now. Georgia launches a military offensive on Russian land(in their view at least) Russia retaliates by invading Georgia, then America and Nato send forces to georgia for protection.
To Russia that basically is NATO saying "feel free to attack Russia because if they counter attack we'll come bail you out" - damack, on 08/27/2008, -2/+16It's ironic isn't it Russia aren't allowed in their own territorial waters when NATO have a whole bunch of warships stationed there. Maybe Russia need to send some warships off the coast of NATO nations and see how they react. A missile shield in Cuba to defend against Venezuela a nation that the US says has an unstable leader is also a good idea.
I'm from the west and I know a stand off with Russia isn't good for our nations but to be honest I'm glad somebody is standing up to our corrupt leaders and making them think twice about their corrupt foreign policies. - slavix, on 08/27/2008, -3/+15The aggression is defiantly directed from US. Saakashvili is a neocon puppet, brought to power in a cia sponsored 'color revolution', armed and financed by his masters in US. Saakashvili is used a tool of his masters to provoke Russia, paint it as aggressors, restart cold war, scare American public and hold on to power. What this documentary shot in South Osetia if you want to see who was the aggressor and what it was like to be there.
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Documentary_Tski ... - vxp19, on 08/27/2008, -0/+11NATO can't 'bail out' the homicidal lunatic Saakashvili.
If they'd try, it'd be the start of WWIII which I'm pretty sure nobody wants.
I highly doubt that even Bush is that retarded.
I may be giving him too much credit, though..... - vxp19, on 08/27/2008, -1/+10News at 11: USA invades Nevada and does nuclear tests.
Nevadians are not amused. - x060t, on 08/27/2008, -0/+8Sure we're seriously pissed off. Since the fall of USSR, NATO is expanding and gets closer and closer to our borders. Somewhere it plays with the hate of our soviet past (Latvia for example), somewhere installs puppet government (Georgia). If things keep going that way, we soon find ourselves surrounded by NATO missiles and lose any remaining influence in the world - believe me, that's not what we dream of.
When western world accepted Kosovo's independence - we warned that they're igniting a cord to many explosive sites in the world, but it's not that we could do anything about it. Georgia surely didn't want Abkhazia/Ossetia going the same way, so they tried to make a preemptive strike and solve its territorial problems by force, boot us out of the territories clear out Ossetians/Abkhazians who support us, and then get into NATO - seriously, WTF? Did they think that we'll just give up? - vxp19, on 08/27/2008, -0/+7That's why NATO is playing with fire.
It shouldn't be there, and should GTFO in order to not escalate this, for one, and to not risk starting WWIII over something retarded.
This is like the simple gun rule: don't pull your gun out unless you're willing to shoot it.
Don't send your warships unless you're willing to start a war.
Etc. - Jeez, on 08/27/2008, -0/+5NATO needs to focus on afghanistan not get bog down with Russa.
As i said before the bigger issue is russia ending cooperation in Afghanistan (alowed us of russian bases and air place helped stablize northern afghanistan) and the implications it has for the war there especially with recent upsurge in voilence.. - trollick, on 08/27/2008, -0/+4How many Russian ships are now in Gulf of Mexico? Just asking.
- da_bradler, on 08/27/2008, -0/+5true I doubt NATO will actually engage militarily. But if they put themselves in the wrong spot and Russia attacks them thinking they are the Georgian military, this whole issue could turn into a big ***** mess really fast.
- A11YND, on 08/27/2008, -2/+6believe it or not, the USA is not the ultimate judge and jury of evil in the world and its going to shock you more to know that most of the world shares that view.
- Iatethecrayon, on 08/27/2008, -0/+4@vxp19:
"This is like the simple gun rule: don't pull your gun out unless you're willing to shoot it."
Totally agree with you. And if everyone is pointing and ready to pull the trigger, it's another cold war. - xero69, on 08/27/2008, -0/+2This sounds more like posturing than a real "threat". Maybe Russia is pissed off and venting due to recent NATO/Georgia conflict. Besides it's their own territorial waters, let them do their tests and lets try not to stir up any new *****.
- da_bradler, on 08/27/2008, -0/+3umm which side are you on because both sides are saying that.
- MoeWasHere, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1HMMMMMMMM .. ..
I wonder if Russia is thinking the following of the USA:
1) Their military is spread thin already.
2) They're broke and borrowing money
3) It would be a sucker punch if we hit em now and take what we want. - caveman84, on 08/28/2008, -0/+2i think NATO needs to focus in Afganistan where Taliban as powerful as ever , that is a real issue how bout that NATO
- BESTenemy, on 08/27/2008, -0/+2 Chavez gave Medvedev an open invitation for a joint naval exercise last week after having received a fresh shipment of 24 fighter jets from Russia. Raul Castro had also given a support speech regarding Russian intervention in South Ossetia.
... so don't hold your breath. - inactive, on 08/27/2008, -0/+2clear out Ossetians/Abkhazians )
You mean LIQUIDATE,,,murder,,, open fire with artillery
As an American I'm discusted with the thought of U.S. aide
going to murdering Georgian's
I think puntang & bush are in this together
just waiting for Dick
if putin relay wanted peace he'd run a spot in the media =
3 pics. of bomb strikes on a open field
3 pics. airplane crash wreckage
1 pic. shanksvill PA. crash
- vxp19, on 08/27/2008, -0/+21. Humanitarian aid is normally not distributed by warships, there are other vessels better suited for that very purpose. Wars are distributed by warships.
2. Russia "occupies" what it's allowed to occupy based on the original peacekeeping treaty made years and years ago. The west interpreted the ceasefire agreement as 'retreat to the exact positions you had before hostilities', Russia interpreted it as 'retreat to the positions you're allowed to have based on the original treaty'. - BohicaTwentyTwo, on 08/27/2008, -2/+4Did I miss the part of the article where the US or NATO complained about the weapons testing? Ease off the vodka comrades, you're jumping to conclusions.
Also, the only US ship that carries Tomahawks is the USS McFaul. Coast Guard cutters don't have missile cruise missiles. Neither do command ships. The largest weapons on the USS Mount Whitney 25 millimeter cannons used for self defense against small boat attacks. None of the other NATO ships carry Tomahawks, but I do believe they have Harpoon anti-ship missiles. - Seaton, on 08/27/2008, -0/+2I would not call a Slava class a flagship when they still have several Kirov class ships in service. Russians also have an aircraft carrier.
- feeldarhythme, on 08/27/2008, -0/+2Oh, yeah.
US will surely send a pack of submarines to deliver humanitarian aid to poor Georgian kids :-) - inactive, on 08/27/2008, -0/+2Long explanation to lead someone down the road for a conspiracy.
Shorter answer with straight facts gets you the truth.
Russia wants power. - TPorter72, on 08/27/2008, -0/+2OMG how can we let Russia test Weapons in their territorial water.
- vxp19, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1yeah, except neither side (NATO / Russia) is willing to shoot at the other side.
It's basically posturing, on NATO's side, to send its warships to the region. Humanitarian aid is not normally distributed by the means of warships.
Posturing/showing off is normally OK, except when it's done at a time when it risks starting a war with a thermonuclear powered nation.
***** stupid. I don't want to die just because Bush wanted to show how large he thinks his dick is. - vxp19, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1Lets liberate Nevadians first.
- Virgule, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1It seam quite challenging to me to sneak a submarine in there:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.093325,29.05 ...
Maybe these small attack type?
http://www.mcguinnessonline.com/finback/images/pho ... - anillop, on 08/27/2008, -2/+3Well it is good to see the Russian propaganda squad is awake this morning. I love hearing about how some tiny little country is somehow the new Hitler and thankfully the defender of freedom Russia is there to save the poor oppressed people of Georgia. Please save your propaganda for someone who might actually believe you.
- da_bradler, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1 We need to protect the Black seadians?
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 08/27/2008, -1/+2The Black Sea is international waters. The US has every right to be there. We also have the right to deliver humanitarian aid to Georgia. To try to stop aid shipments would be a violation of the ceasefire agreement agreed to by Russia and Georgia. Russia still occupies the Georgian port of Poti and has warships in Georgian territorial waters. So the only one who have no business in Georgian waters is Russia.
- Remelox, on 08/27/2008, -1/+2I think your view of America is a little distorted (and yes, I realize you might be American, I don't believe you said one way or the other). I'm not saying there isn't some validity in your argument. Does aggression with Russia play into McCain's hands? Of course it does. Somehow there is an image in America that only Republican presidents can wage war when necessary. This is probably brought on by Republican presidents to start conflict when unnecessary.
Our media is not bought and paid for in the sense that the administration controls what they do. Our media is free to do as they wish. However, media makes money when it has viewers for their advertisers. You get viewers by using sensationalism, sound bites, and access to the people that the public wants to hear from.
The sensationalism of villifying Russia sells. Not because we hate Russians, I don't really know anyone that does. Russia is still viewed as a major power in the world, as is China. When the media vilifies them, it gives people chills. People then have to check the news, make sure everything's okay. "Still no war with Russia? Good. Oh, but look, now their attacking the Black Sea! I better check in tomorrow."
Politicians are like the media, they know what sells. Their currency is votes. Their sound bites reinforce the media sensationalism so of course they get aired.
The media is not as critical of the administration as it could be, and there is plenty of criticism if you know where to look, because the media doesn't want to lose those interviews and the access that a friendly relationship allows.
The fault is not with the media but with its dependence on corporate sponsorship. This is generated from viewer numbers. And these are caused by the general public being stupid. Not because we watch the shows so much but because most people pick one or two sources and stick with them. We allow the more sensational news programs to become more sensational.
If I had my way, there would be a constitutional amendment to ensure the future of media as an independent institution sponsored by the government but free of any financial or political retalition from any administration. How would I do this? I don't know, that's what my advisors are for.
Oh, and don't think we Americans, stupid as we may be, are not aware that the media does not give us the whole story. We're just too lazy to go find other sources. - BohicaTwentyTwo, on 08/27/2008, -1/+2If you think people who get their information from the Russian media are spreading the truth, you are more deluded than I thought.
- trollick, on 08/27/2008, -1/+2Hmm. Shouldn't Russia be testing weapons in Caspian Sea then? And why does Russia totally leaves Azerbaijan alone, you know, the place where that oil actually is?
- vxp19, on 08/27/2008, -1/+2... and none of them have any business being there. None.
Whether you pull out a bazooka, or an uzi, or a revolver - you're still a threat. - theredsea00, on 08/27/2008, -4/+5I'm of the opinion that the elites that control USA are orchestrating this whole dance. Why? Here are some possible reasons:
1) The power elite want McCain elected; he will go into Iran.
2) The power elite perhaps already know that the US economy will totally collapse and are already planning the big war to pull us out of it--they may have planned the collapse themselves for profit.
3) This is the "event" to call off American elections using Federal Emergency Powers in the case that McCain is not elected.
Why I believe this:
Elite American generals and their rich employers (the Administration) know there is ZERO risk from Iran at the moment. Iran is years from creating a nuke and a missile capable enough to reach the USA, so there is no threat from Iran. Why would brilliant military types risk a confrontation with Russia with NO gain for the USA? Answer: they wouldn't.
Even if there was a .000009% chance of a threat from an Iranian missile, why choose the week after Russia is fuming about the Western media and political slamming, to sign that missile defense shield pact with Poland? It is retarded. Our generals and leaders are not retarded, more like brilliant, they only seem stupid because they follow orders from even smarter people who are not making the RIGHT choices for those they represent, but the choices they want based on their own selfish motivations.
So again, why is the US poking the giant bear?
The answers to this question are scary as hell, and yes, nuclear war is a very real possibility.
I'm not afraid. I am an avid history buff, and having read quite a bit about WWI and WWII, a small minority of people like to cause millions of deaths over stupid crap.
I think Putin and pals know that what is going on is a total farce, and will wait until the election is over before going "ballistic." If Obama is elected and comes to power, he will build a bridge to Putin and this situation will be "defused."
If not, buy stock in bomb shelter material and buy lots of canned goods.
It is slightly possible that a lame duck administration is trying to push through a larger military presence in former Soviet bloc countries. The timing and methodology is suspect.
I don't even pay attention to US media. The first day they told the truth, but after that, the story changed, and the block headed Middle America, Bush/Jesus crowd drank it up like pigs before the slaughter.
It is sad so few Americans know their media is bought and paid for, and worse, are reactionary to those who inform them of the truth. - feeldarhythme, on 08/28/2008, -0/+12Bohica
I think, the way americans deliver humanitarian aid is ineffective.
It's far better to use nuclear submarines for that. Or even launch a couple of ICBMs with humanitarian aid. It's much faster and easier at least. What do you think? - inactive, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1One thing, Georgian territory is NOT Russian.
Period.
End of discussion, you can argue all you like, but it ISNT!
And Russia is blocking a northern Georgian port. - feeldarhythme, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Some georgian territory isn't georgian neither.
Since its citizens want independence and they got it.
And Saakashvilli's move to put all ossetians in prison (or to kill them) is not gonna make them want to change their opinion. - redeye69, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1The penny drops....
Besides, it's a Lebowski quote. - r3bol, on 08/27/2008, -1/+2Is this move something Russia is doing to get back at he west over the Serbian / Kosovan thing?
- pilobilus, on 08/27/2008, -1/+2You may be onto something there, but even if so, there will be no need to interfere with the election. Obama is a boot licking NeoCon lap dog, he will do as he is told as long as he is allowed to "put a good face on it", which is why your power elites are sponsoring him for President. At least that's what it looks like to me at the moment... The dead giveaways are Obama taking time off from campaigning to vote against our 1st and 4th Amendment rights, and his commitment to shield capital felons in the Bush Administration from prosecution.
- heystoopid, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1Watch a lot of Fox News Propaganda I see !
- heystoopid, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1"NUTTS"
Or "Not Understand The (word what US advanced military(it's all made in China , Korea or Japan these days )) Technology S****"!
Or , as they say any fool that counts all his pigeons as winners before they come home to roost is a loser before the game has even started !
Tell me have you actually graduated from Intelligence 101 Pre School yet ? - inactive, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1Ok now that's just spooky!
Seems like a whole new Cold war. - inactive, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1Submarines usually escort the air craft carriers.
And yes one is bound to make a visit soon if Russia starts to build its naval forces there too much. - heystoopid, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1Bad choice you lost that round !
- redeye69, on 08/27/2008, -4/+4This aggression will not stand, man.
- GalaxyJob, on 08/27/2008, -5/+5Badly disguised war for oil in Caspian Sea: new huge oil field (biggest found in last 30 years) is being developed and sheduled to start production in 2012th.
-
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 