Publius Pundit

« Previous · Home · Next »

There's No Fool Like a Russian Fool

Filed under: Russia

ap_russia_missile_defense_file_15dec07_eng_195.jpg
Meet a classic Russian idiot.

Allow me to introduce Russian General Yuri Baluyevsky, who declared over the weekend on government-owned national television that "We do not intend to attack anyone, but we consider it necessary for all our partners in the world community to clearly understand that to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia and its allies, military forces will be used, including preventively, including with the use of nuclear weapons."

Apparently, this cretin thinks that by making this statement, he is indicating Russian strength and striking fear into the hearts of Russia's enemies. In fact, exactly the opposite is achieved.

As defense experts are quick to point out: "Baluyevsky's statement means that, as before, we cannot count on our conventional forces to counter aggression. It means that as before, the main factor in containing aggression against Russia is nuclear weapons." That's what Russian expert Alexander Golts says. His colleague Pavel Felgenhauer puts it this way: "We threaten the West that in any kind of serious conflict, we'll go nuclear almost immediately."

In other words, what this Russian general is actually saying (or perhaps admitting would be a better word) is that Russia's conventional military power is non-existent. Thanks for the info, comrade.

So Russia will "go nuclear" to defend itself? Ah, scary prospect. Except that this "general" doesn't seem to realize that Russia's enemies also have nuclear weapons, and won't hesitate to use them if Russia does so first. In that event, Russia would be erased from the face of the Earth. Is that what this so-called Russian patriot is saying? Is he saying that Russia would prefer to cease to exist than to be invaded and conquered, say by the evil forces of NATO? Has he asked the people of Russia about that? Is he quite sure they'd rather perish in a nuclear holocaust than join the European Union, destroying all Russian culture for all time in the process?

This is classic Soviethink. Just as Vladimir Putin thinks he shows "strength" by jailing or killing his political rivals (and by attempting to brutally crush Western cultural institutions like the British Council), this general thinks he too is demonstrating Russian power and courage. In fact, both reveal the exact opposite -- the fundamental weakness of a crude bully who knows he is surrounded by civilized people and who has only barbaric violence to fall back upon, no other resources.

The irony, of course, is that while these statements are designed to encourage respect for Russia, they achieve the opposite, actually making it more likely that the world will move against Russia, fearing it is governed by a clan of feral lunatics who are fundamentally weak and cannot be trusted to wield power in a responsible manner. Certainly, it can only cause Russia's words to be utterly discounted in any diplomatic context, fundamentally undermining its international clout on issues Russia is obsessed with, like Kosovo independence for example. How can Russian complaints about U.S. "unilateralism" possibly be taken seriously when a top general is so irresponsible in talking about nuclear weapons, or when Russia behaves with abject unilateralism in dealing with nations like Ukraine and Georgia?

Indeed, hearing bellicose unprovoked rhetoric like this, how can the leaders of Ukraine and Georgia do other than scramble to seek NATO admission? How can NATO itself do other than gear up for a new cold war, including an arms race that will surely break the Russian economy, and now can the EU even think of relying on Russia as an civilized energy partner? As British columnist Martin Ivens puts it:

By the law of unintended consequences, Russia's hardmen are at last revealing their true selves to peaceable folk in Europe. After cutting off gas to Ukraine, who would now rely on Moscow as sole supplier for its energy needs? Germany and France, under new and more realistic leadership, are wary of Putin. However late in the day, the European Union is beginning to learn that it must be more supportive of Russia's democratic neighbours.

As always, by far the worst enemy Russia has it itself.

Social Bookmarking:
Del.icio.us this del.icio.us | digg this digg | Add to Technorati technorati | StumbleUpon Toolbar stumble upon | Furl this furl | Reddit this reddit

Comments


john says:

you're nothing but mindless imperialist xenophobic idiot. you belong to one of your world famous insane asylums.


john says:

who let you keyborad monkey out of the world famous Camarillo Asylum of the Insane. were the guards on long vacation? Is that how you escaped??


Vova says:

Right on, Kim, bit I fault you again for engaging in anthropomorphism. The monkey (or is it a pig?) pictured in your article is a "ряженый" in Russian or a Halloween costumed clown. Don't take this piece of fecal matter seriously, like the rest of his "government"


Lu says:

The reactions to Ukraine's letter to NATO esp. from military establishment are interesting in their rhetoric but Baluyevsky's comments are terrifying in the extreme.

(u probably saw but in case not ... opinion posted at RIA Novosti "NATO and Ukraine: who needs the other more?"
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080118/97289307.html


john says:


Vova/Kimmy monkey pairs,
you are the ugliest monkeis that have ever learned to go online. you imperialist A**H**LE. how much do you get paid from your MI5/MOSSAD/CIA handelersfor spewing your nonsence. you too belong in your masters insane asylum. we know your kind too well you pice of sh*t aka freshed fecal matter just born out of MI5/MOSSAD/CIA A**SH*LE.


Richard Chan says:

“There’s no fool like a Russian fool.” This is a racially intolerant statement. Kindly remove it from the article.

On preemptive strikes: this is an ethical question. Whether it is justified or not is debatable, yet history has shown that industrialized western countries seem to argue that such an attack is indeed ethical. Iraq is a recent example of that, and countless police actions in the past also back up the claim.

Concerning the question of whether Eastern Slavs would rather be conquered or destroyed, I simply cannot weigh in on the ignorance of the author. Even a suggestion of an offensive action against Russia, and the destruction of its culture is bigoted beyond all belief. The proposal to break Russia’s economy through an arms race is all together idiotic. Let’s not dwell on prejudice. And let’s not forget that Russia is not the only great military power besides the United States. China and India look just as unfavorably on extensive military build up.

The concluding statement is another argument. The worst enemy of an individual may indeed be himself – a fact that can be amplified for any country on the globe. Please refrain from spreading racism through news sites from now on.


La Russophobe says:

RICHARD:

"Russian" is not a race, it is a nationality, and only a racist Russian nationalist sees it otherwise. Kindly apologize for your racist statement.

Just as those who disagree with American polices have every right to criticize the Americans who make and enforce them, and are not the least bit racist in doing so, I have every right to criticize the Russian nationalists who make and enforce policies that lead Russians into a second cold war they cannot win, a sub-60 adult male lifespan and a sub-$4/hour average wage. In my view, those who fail to attack such persons are far more hostile to the Russian people than the harshest critics. What Russia needs is far more, not less, of such criticism, in the hopes that its people will rouse themselves from their dreams before their ship of state founders and sinks forever.


Artfldgr says:

USA has her military doctrine, allowing her to strike preventivly, using means of her choice. The USA has proven the doctrine is real by going for unprovoked war in Iraq. Why Russia may not have the same kind of military doctrine?

Because its not the same doctrine… US leaders do not have the “means of their choice”, they do have to answer to a public that Russian leaders do not have to do. they also have to answer to a world in which they owe a lot of money, and so they don’t have freedom to use nuclear weapons pre-emptively.

A democratic republic has no means of holding on to another state against its will. Oil is more expsnsive now than before, and no one is stealing the oil and sending it someplace as spoils. So you’re a moron if you think things are equivalent.

The doctrine that the US has is only allowed to pre-empt a nuclear attack with a nuclear attack… that is if someone decided to fire a nuke, THEN the us can fire… which combined with the new Russian doctrine, with no such limitation, means that if Russia starts firing, then the us can preempt and attack EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT THE OBJECT OF ATTACK, which would make the attack pre-emptive.

However the US isn’t the country building up their nuclear stuff, we have been paring it down…

Yamentau mountain, care to give us a good explanation as to why they decided to take billions that could help their people integrate in the world market and make their use of nuclear weapons akin to shooting themselves? nope, they took the monies and upgraded underground nuclear cities with capacities over a hundred thousand people. Now they are calling for pre-emptive rights.

The US has no such protections… none… so which is more likely to actually use the weapons? The country that has many protections for their people and leaders, or the country that has none? This is what makes you an idiot.

Then how about the new Russian nuclear bomb? The US hasn’t created new nuclear weapons, but Russia has… and it took that money from its people as well…

Then how about nuclear secrets? Russia has sold them to Syria, Iran, Korea, India, Pakistan, China, and more…

How about the fact that Russia has violated EVERY nuclear treaty while the USA has followed treaties it never even signed or ratified!!!


So while America has been dismantling, Russia has been making new ones, testing new ones, and being bellicose about the will to use them (as china did about Taiwan). Here is a list of much of their nuclear toys… many are new or newly upgraded.

Some were made after the 90s… the US hasn’t created a new missile since the early 80s. though it has upgraded current systems!!

SS-18 Satan (RS-20)
SS-19 Stiletto (RS-18)
SS-24 Scalpel (RS-22 Molodets)
SS-25 Sickle (RS-12 Topol)
SS-27 RT-2UTTH (Topol-M)
SS-N-18 Stingray SLBM Mod 1 (RSM-50)
SS-N-20 Sturgeon (RSM-52)
SS-N-23 Skiff (RSM-54)
AS-15 Kent ALCM (Kh-55 or RKV-500)
AS-16 Kickback SRAM (Kh-15P)
SH-08 Gazelle ABM (UR-96)
SH-11 Gorgon ABM (UR-96)
SA5-B Gammon SAM (S-200 Volga)
SA-10 Grumble SAM (S-300)
AS-4 Kitchen ASM (Kh-22 Burya)
Gravity Bombs // 1,700
SS-N-9 Siren SLCM (Malachit 4K85)
SS-N-12 Sandbox SLCM (Bazalt 4K80)
SS-N-19 Shipwreck SLCM (P700 Grant)
SS-N-21 Sampson SLCM
SS-N-22 Sunburn SLCM
SS-N-15 Starfish ASW
SS-N-16 Stallion ASW (Vodopod)
Torpedoes (Type 53-68 HWT / Type 65 HWT)
Also an unknown number of Nuclear Depth Charges


And this doesn’t include the weapons that are sitting around waiting to be destroyed. They claim they cant afford to destroy them!! so while they treaty says they have 5000, there is another 15000 laying around that are still usable, that they are taking their time getting rid of. Note that they do have enough money for new planes, submarines, tanks, nuclear missiles, torpedoes, and on and on… but not enough to take apart the weapons that everyone thinks are gone!

"Russia is currently estimated to have about 5,000 strategic nuclear warheads plus 3,400 tactical nuclear weapons. It should be noted, however, that estimates of Russia's tactical nuclear arsenal vary widely, ranging upwards to 10,000-15,000 when estimates include weapons waiting dismantlement."

Russia: Strategic Nuclear Weapons: 5,000 (active)
Non-strategic (tactical) Nuclear Weapons: ~3,400 (active)
Total Nuclear Weapons: ~8,400 (active)
Total Reserve Forces (stockpiled and not mated to delivery vehicles): ~11,000+
(the exact number is unknown, although most of these weapons are non-strategic)

US: Strategic Nuclear Weapons: 8,855 (7,000 active, 1,855 inactive)
Non-strategic (tactical) Nuclear Weapons: 1,600 (800 active, 800 inactive)
Total Nuclear Weapons: 10,455

The US arsenal covers the US, Canada, UK, Europe, Japans, and more…

Russias covers only russia…

Russia favors fewer large scale deterrent missiles…and have huge quantities of tactical nuclear weapons as they are not tracked in treaties as much…


here read an assesment... with numbers

In 1988 military spending was a single line item in the Soviet state budget, totaling 21 billion rubles, or about US$33 billion. Given the size of the military establishment, however, the actual figure was at least ten times higher. Western experts concluded that the 21 billion ruble figure reflected only operations and maintenance costs. The amount spent on Soviet weapons research and development was an especially well-guarded state secret, and other military spending, including training, military construction, and arms production, was concealed within the budgets of all-union ministries and state committees. Apart from considerations of state secrecy, this allocation of military spending to ministries other than the Ministry of Defense reflected the Soviet approach to managing resource allocation. Weapons produced by agencies such as the Ministry of General Machinebuilding [missiles] or the Ministry of Shipbuilding Industry [ships] were essentially provided as "free goods" to the Ministry of Defense.

By the mid-1980s, the Soviet Union devoted between 15 and 17 percent of its annual gross national product to military spending, according to United States government sources. Until the early 1980s, Soviet defense expenditures rose between 4 and 7 percent per year. Subsequently, they slowed as the yearly growth in Soviet GNP slipped to about 3 percent. In 1987 Gorbachev and other party officials discussed the extension of glasnost' to military affairs through the publication of a detailed Soviet defense budget. In early 1989, Gorbachev announced a military budget of 77.3 billion rubles, but Western authorities estimated the budget to be about twice that.

With the end of the Cold War, the combined military expenditure of Russia and other successor states of the USSR fell dramatically. In 1997 it was around one-tenth of that of the USSR in 1988. Between 1988 and 1993 weapons production in Russia fell by at least 50% for virtually every major weapons system. Weapons spending in 1992 was approximately 75% less than in 1988. Almost all of Russia's arms production is for sales to foreign governments, and procurement of major end items by the Russian military had all but stopped. By 1999 Russia had dramatically downsized its military and was no longer channeling one fifth of its national resources into maintaining it. In 1997 Russian military spending was only 1/7 of its Soviet era peak in 1988 and 2/5 of its level in 1992.

By 2006 Russia spent about 2.7 percent of its GDP on defense, about that of advanced European countries. Military leaderss protested that this was far too little to achieve foreign policy professed goals, while civilian leaders resisted militarizing the federal budget or economy as in Soviet times.

By 2007 the Russian defense budget had almost quadrupled to $31 billion over the previous six years. In 2005 Russian defense spending rose 22 percent, 27 percent in 2006 and analysts estimate that in 2007 it could increase by an additional 30 percent. In 2007 the Russian Government approved a re-armament program through the year 2015 with a $240 billion budget.

and america is disarming more... so what do you think this will do for the direction of the movement of such?

Russian media sources have reported large increases in military procurement since the year 2000 - a 25 percent increase in 2000 compared with 1999; a 20 percent increase in 2001 over 2000; and whopping 40 percent increase in 2002 compared to 2001.

so much for not enough money to take apart missles and reduce what they have to match the US...

The Military Balance, 2000-2001 by the International Institute for Strategic Studies set Russian military expenditures at $56 billion.
===============
In January 2002 the Cabinet approved a plan to boost spending on arms, upgrades and research in 2002. The procurement plan topped the previous year's expenditures by nearly 40 percent. In 2001 Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin had indicated that the 2002 procurement budget would likely increase by 27 billion to 79 billion rubles ($850 million to $2.5 billion). The entire 2002 national defense budget is 284.18 billion rubles. The the major priorities are developing a next-generation fighter and new nuclear submarine, as well as new technologies in communications and conventional weapons.
==========
When Sergei Ivanov spoke to deputies on 11 September 2002, he said that in 2003 defense expenditures would amount almost to 380 billion rubles [which would be one-third more than in 2002]. The conclusion of the Duma Defense Committee on the draft budget for 2003 signed by chair of the committee, Andrei Nikolaev, mentioned quite different figures for the military budget for 2003, namely 345.7 billion rubles, which corresponded to its increase by 20.3% in comparison to 2002. As of December 2002, according to the Duma Defense Committee, defense spending in 2003 would account for 2.6 percent of GDP, or 14.6 percent of total budget expenditure.
========
In July 2003 Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov stated that the Russian government had cut the funding for its planned transition to a mostly professional army by more than 40 percent, or US$2 billion over the next four years. Ivanov said that funding until 2008 for military reform was cut from 138 billion rubles (US$4.6 billion) to 79.1 billion rubles (US$2.6 billion). Almost half of the country's soldiers would remain conscripts after the first phase of the reform ended in 2008. A total of 147,500 soldiers and sergeants would be recruited as contract servicemen in 2004-2007.
============
Defense appropriations emerged as the top priority in the draft budget approved 23 August 2004 by the Russian cabinet. Military spending is due to rise to 528 billion rubles ($18 billion - $1 is about 29 rubles) in 2005, up 28 percent from last year's 411 billion rubles ($14 billion). The nominal defense budget stays at a level of 2.6% to 2.7% of GDP. Years of neglect and under-funding have left the Russian forces in desperate need of extra funds. For 2005 the military was supposed to spend 146 billion rubles [$5 billion] for modernization.
A specific feature of the 2005 budget was a significant increase in defense spending (by 27.7% compared with this year), and in spending on national security and law-enforcement activities (by 26%). Without any problems, the 2005 budget was approved by deputies in its fourth and final reading and then submitted to the Federation Council, which supported the budget at a special session on 10 December 2004. Although the Russian military remains at a fraction of its former strength, training rates and defense spending were increasing.
================
2006 Budget
Russia's military budget for 2006 rose to approximately 578 billion rubles, or US$22.3 billion. This number is equivalent to a 23.8% increase from the 2005 budget, which totalled US$18 billion. Nearly a quarter of the funds were dedicated towards health services, education, and housing of military personnel. The main allocation of resources, however, was devoted to the purchasing of arms and equipment and research and development. In fact, 237 billion rubles (US$ 8.8 billion) was set aside for attaining military arms and equipment in 2006, as compared with 183 billion rubles (US$ 6.7 billion) the previous year. Furthermore, in response to the United States planned strategy to implement a new missile system in Poland and Czechoslovakia, Russia countered and assigned a further 54 billion rubles (US$ 2 billion) to augment the nation's missile defense and air defense systems.

The most substantial policy decision concerning the immediate future of the Russian military came at a meeting of the Military Industrial Commission on 2 June, 2006. During that meeting a new state armaments program, which will span 2007-2015, was agreed upon for an estimated 4.9 trillion rubles (US$186 billion). 63% is to be allocated for the procurement of modern weapons and euipment and 27% towards defense research and development.

so things have been increasing by huge amounts every year while the people rot... you didnt read this in the NEWS and so you think that the US has been increasing while russia and others habe been doing nothing much.

well russia has been creating brand new missiles, and now has moved out from the treaty that prevents it from invading coutnries, and has called that it will use nuclear weapons, of which it has thousands of more tactical ones that can be used in invasions and things than anyone else.

oh... and dont forget that some think that chernoble ended up as an experiment letting them know how much real damage would be done by conflicts.. and most of the damage was a lot less than anyone ever thought.

The new numbers are presented in a landmark digest report, "Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts," released Monday by the Chernobyl Forum.

Members of the Forum, including representatives of the three most affected governments - Belarus, Russia and Ukraine - are meeting today and tomorrow in Vienna at an unprecedented gathering of the world’s experts on Chernobyl, radiation effects and protection, to consider these findings and recommendations.

The report’s estimate for the eventual number of deaths is far lower than earlier, well publicized speculations that radiation exposure would claim tens of thousands of lives.

But the 4,000 figure is not far different from estimates made in 1986 by Soviet scientists, according to Dr. Mikhail Balonov, a radiation expert with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, who was a scientist in the former Soviet Union at the time of the accident.
As for environmental impact, the scientific assessments show that, except for the still closed, highly contaminated 30 kilometer area surrounding the reactor, and some closed lakes and restricted forests, radiation levels have mostly returned to acceptable levels.

"In most areas the problems are economic and psychological, not health or environmental," reports Balonov, the scientific secretary of the Chernobyl Forum effort who has been involved with Chernobyl recovery since the disaster occurred.


and that one of the points of the operations in the west was to convince the west that you cant have a nucelar war, and fight it.

but what does all that tell you above?


anyone want to read the old articles of hitler building up the military? people basicaly make excuses and so forth till someone rolls in.

imperialists take the countries AROUND them first, not far away ones... (makes no sense to grab iraq, when there is all of south america to grab, thats easier, and cant be supplied, etc).

russia wants its satellites back, and it wants to preserve the land bridge for its 20-30 billin in military equipment its selling to anyone that has the cash..

Yamantau
Beloretsk-15
Beloretsk-16
Alkino-2

know about them? (there are many more)

The exact location of this large facility is uncertain, and given its reported size it may span as much as an entire degree of latitude and longitude. It is apparently located near the the Zlatoust-36/Yuryuzan nuclear weapons production plant and the Yuryuzan national-level nuclear weapons storage facility. The Yaman-Tau Gory [mountains] range is centered at 52°25'N 56°45'E, while the peak of Yamantau Gora [mountain] is at 54°15'19"N 58°06'11"E. The town of Beloretsk is located at 53°58'N 58°24'E, though NIMA does not include a listing for Mezhgorye. This facility may be synonymous with "Alkino-2" since the town of Al'kino is nearby at 55°05'N 58°04'E.

========

On April 16, 1996, the New York Times reported on a mysterious military base being constructed in Russia: "In a secret project reminiscent of the chilliest days of the Cold War, Russia is building a mammoth underground military complex in the Ural Mountains, Western officials and Russian witnesses say. Hidden inside Yamantau mountain in the Beloretsk area of the southern Urals, the project involved the creation of a huge complex, served by a railroad, a highway, and thousands of workers."

=========

It is now known that the Soviet Union used secret underground bases in Eastern Europe to conceal nuclear missiles at the end of the Cold War, as an integral part of its nuclear war-fighting strategy. In all, some 73 SS-23 missiles, packing a nuclear punch 365 times the bomb that detonated over Hiroshima, were hidden by the Soviets in violation of the INF Treaty, which went into force in 1988. If war had broken out those missiles would have given the Soviets overwhelming strategic advantage against the United States, allowing them to decimate NATO forces in Europe in a surprise attack.

Today, Russia may be conducting nuclear deception on a far vaster scale beneath Yamantau Mountain, where it has dug out a gigantic underground military complex designed to withstand a sustained nuclear assault. A U.S. intelligence source was quoted as saying that the Yamantau complex is BUT ONE OF SOME 200 SECRET DEEP UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR-WAR FIGHTING SITES IN RUSSIA, many of which have been significantly upgraded over the past six years at a cost of billions of dollars.

Since the end of the Cold War in 1991, U.S. intelligence sources believe the Russian government has pumped more than $6 billion into Yamantau alone, to construct a sprawling underground complex that spans some 400 square miles! In 1998, in a rare public comment, then-Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) Gen. Eugene Habiner, called Yamantau: "A very large complex – we estimate that it has millions of square feet available for underground facilities. We don’t have a clue as to what they’re doing there."

It is believed to be large enough to house 60,000 persons, with a special air filtration system designed to withstand a nuclear, chemical or biological attack. Enough food and water is believed to be stored at the site to sustain the entire underground population for months on end.

"The only potential use for this site is post-nuclear war," says U.S. Representative Roscoe Bartlett. Bartlett is one of the handful of members of Congress who has closely followed the Yamantau Project.

The Yamantau Mountain complex is located close to one of Russia’s remaining nuclear weapons labs, Chelyabinsk-70, giving rise to speculation it could house either a nuclear warhead storage site, a missile base, a secret nuclear weapons production center, a directed energy laboratory or a buried command post. Whatever it is, Yamantau was designed to survive a nuclear war.

In response to repeated U.S. inquiries, the Russian government has provided no fewer than 12 separate and contradictory explanations for the site, none of them believed to be credible.


La Russophobe says:

PUBERTY:

You appear to have serious reading problems. This post isn't about the EXISTENCE of a doctrine, although that is highly questionable in a country where men don't live to see 60 and work for less than $4/hour, but rather about A GENERAL DISCUSSING IT ON NATIONAL TELEVISION. If you have examples of American generals threatening the world with nuclear attack in the last ten years on U.S. national television, please cite it. Otherwise, crawl back into your vodka bottle.


La Russophobe says:

PUBERTY:

They picked it up, you imbecile, because THEY WERE IN THE ROOM when he said it. How did they get there? Because he INVITED them.

Thanks for admitting you can't point to any similar example of such statements by any American general.

If this general wanted to mobilize opposition against Russian and thereby further imperil its security, he did exactly the right thing and should continue. He's a wonderful success, just like his Soviet predecessors, at destroying his country. If that's his goal, he's a true genius at it. In America, we have other goals for our generals. Maybe that's why America is a superpower and Russia, well, isn't.


Richard Chan says:

I think we have a misunderstanding Kim. If I was verbally vague, let me rephrase that request. Kindly remove your xenophobic statement. People in Russia can be encouraged to change without personal hate expressed towards them.


John Hussey says:

Russia’s stock market plummeted for a second day, pushing the MICEX index down 7 percent within the first minute of trading. On the MICEX, Surgutneftegas and UES shed 10 percent, and Uralsvyazinform sagged 12.5 percent while the RTS fell 5.8 percent to 1883. Sberbank, with its shares plunging 17 percent, was the biggest loser.

On Monday, the RTS index closed 7.38 percent lower at 1999.83, and the MICEX sank 7.47 percent to 1654.83.

http://top.rbc.ru/english/index.shtml?/news/english/2008/01/22/22124233_bod.shtml

Now there is something to worry about!


Artfldgr says:

entering puberty:

Your whole diatribe is a leftist rant that has no bearing on reality. Where are your links, your proofs? Your whole post is full of blind assertions in absolutist language that is trying to make me sound bad by saying I am saying things that are not in the posts!!

one: Vietnam war

how long did it take to stop the Vietnam war?

Interesting that you brought that up, if you know the history, you would know that that would not be a good example to bring up.

First of all, the war started way back in the early 50s with the FRENCH.
The US lost 50,000 soldiers, and 8 women nurses. About the same amount that died and were injured in one battle in the US Civil War.

The US is regarded to have won the war in Vietnam, but walked off the battle field. The war was arbitrarily stopped, and would you like to point out what the communists did AFTER the US citizens left.

But since you bring it up, lets look at the aftermath. Your so happy that the US lost (walked off, etc), so that means your happy with the results that came after.

After the US left… more than 100,000 south Vietnamese officials, were sent off to “education camps”, otherwise affectionately known as gulags.

Two million people were displaced from their ancestral home trying to flee the khmer rouge.

One million of these people drowned at sea. whole families, fathers, grandparents, mothers, grandmothers, children, all forced to float till they starved or drowned.

Then in 1978, the khmer rouge invaded Cambodia… after all, communists are not imperialists… right? They are liberators, who put the liberated in work camps and slaughter them in numbers that makes a statistic out of the tragedies.

Then the Vietnamese attempted to exterminate the Chinese. In case you didn’t know, the Chinese are the Jews of the east. Outside their own country, exterminations and other bad things are regularly visited upon them, and the khmer rouge were no different.

This then caused another boat people incident where thousands more starved or drwoned.

Then the Chinese communists invaded to attack their own political kind to save their own racial kind.

So far.. I am wondering how you can consider that to be better. We do have an alternative model for when the US won. South Korea. Millions were not killed, like in the north. No one was starved. There was no mass exodus that caused deaths of thousands of children.

But hey! You like it when America loses, and so you HAVE TO LIKE THE RESULTS

This is the problem with useful idiots. As they follow the ‘party line’ and lay down weapons and give up, the communists then flood in and take over.

THEN misery, torture, starvation, deprivation, and lots more becomes a way of life for everyone accept the party.

Its sad to read the report on it…

The dire predictions of a generation did not come to fruition. Since Thailand and other South East Asian nations did not fall to systematic Vietnamese aggression, the Domino Theory, so widely trumpeted, was said to have been an illusion. Vietnam, without the presence of the United States, showed itself to be of little economic or strategic value to anyone.
Americans knew it had no “strategic value”… unlike the russiand and the Chinese and the other communists… we actually stepped in after the French left because we knew what would happen to the people.

When our own fellow travelers, useful idkiots, and such got us to walk away, as they are doing in Iraq, they committed those people to the outcome that the Maoists, and others would have for them.

The leftists who caused America to leave the war after the Vietnamese were done for, have the blood of more than 1 million people on their hands for that, for that’s one estimate of the toll after we left.

So far, you’re for the murder, and imprisonment of all these peoples. You’re also for the invasion of Cambodia, and those people being killed, as well as the Chinese who died also after that. ALL OF THAT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED IF THE US DID NOT LEAVE.

You cant have it both ways.

End of pt 1


Artfldgr says:

entering puberty:


The government can manipulate or mislead the press and the public by submitting false information, to get the approval, like it was before attacking Iraq

True, but we are not anywhere as good at it as the Russians; the Russians have been able to insert lies into our OPEN press for more than 40 years.

Want to hear a classic? Well the stuff on HIV being from an American lab? That was in Pravda first, then it was printed in the west by fellow travelers, of which then useful idiots who really enjoy shadenfreude then revels in.

Was the work of Russian defectors included in your history? The one who removed the weapons of mass destruction for Syria? He admitted to the programs, and described how it was done. but that’s not mainstream. The US mainstream is very communist, otherwise why have Hitler (a socialist), and stalin (a socialist), and putin (a socialist), as men of the year… are you telling me there are no better than those to consider in a world of 6 billion

Remember all the US mainstream media screaming in one voice about how necessary the war would be?

Yup. I also remember the reports that were not in the press that deconstruct the anthrax and then laid out the companies that made the special material, the purchases of BT equipment covering BA creation, the use of special silica coatings, and of information we know and was admitted developed in Russia at the lab that leaked and killed a huge number of soviet scientists.

There was a lot of stuff like that…

Let me ask you a honest question. you are charged with protecting the public. doesn’t matter what public, your in charge.

But lets bring his closer to home.

You have a family.. a wife a kid… your charged as any husband with the protection of your family, your wife makes a new friend… he is nice… presentable.. but you find out from a good friend your wife doesn’t like but you have knwn and trusted, something about this persons past. they have been convicted several times of molesting children of friends.

Do you

A) throw him out and forbid your wife to talk to him, thereby going against her and the family and such, but doing so for their own good.

B) wash your hand of the responsibility for the outcome, and be happy and invite him in and welcome him completely as your wife wants him to.

This is the problem in the west… the people are starting to ask for their own demise, and the state of course is torn in letting them have it, or not.

So if you take your ideological point and apply it here, then what will you do?

It was Richard Nixon that said “the average person in America is like the small child of the family”.

And that’s the situation… the less the public can handle cogently, the more the state acts seemingly against it. This is not the same as them arbitrarily acting against them for their own ends. Though if the country falls, the murder of all those connected to the state, is a forgone conclusion given history. Remember the example you brought up of Vietnam (so conveniently).

End of part II


Artfldgr says:

entering puberty:

In your democratic republic the government, if wants something, will not give a damn for what you or the public think, and what the world opinion is!

Really?

Then why did the Vietnam war stop? Doesn’t that contradict your point? that your assertion is contradicted by a historical event you bring up within the same paragraph?


Artfldgr says:

entering puberty:

You think if democratic republic drops the bombs, it is very good for the ones on whom the bombs are dropped? Ask the Iraqi boy whose family of 11 was killed and whose own arms were blown off when a smart American bomb hit his house.

Interesting argument.

The democratic republic uses its money to develop highly targeted weapons. The point being that they don’t want to create firestorms like Dresden, or as happened in Japan.

But you’re too stupid to examine your own argument.

In the past, everyone’s idea of fair was to level entire cities, to start a fire that would create a conflagration that would devour the whole thing.

We free people of a democratic republic decided that that was too horrible. So we spent millions of our own money, to develop new smarter weapons so that we can just slam the people who are fighting.

We then spent billions modifying our entire arsenal, rather than doing what the Russians do, which is sell it to third world despots for destabilization.

Now each bomb costs a lot, but we can put them where we want them within three feet or less.

But smart is a misnomer, it’s a relative term. It doesn’t mean sentient, it means more smart than a rock falling from the sky at 30,000 feet, and more accurate. It doesn’t mean that it can tell whats in a building, and so forth.

What I wonder is why you don’t blame the soldiers who, like the Vietnamese dress in civilian clothes so that they draw fire down on their own people?

If the combatants didn’t try to pose as civilians, such errors would not occur. But your assertion is VERY disingenuous, as again, in the same paragraphs, you think its ok for your side to set 1 million families out on the ocean to drown

But think that accidentally killing a family, and removing the arms of a boy by accident, when the combatants are posing like civilians, and hiding in homes…

No wonder that you can’t see differences…

The khmer intended to kill the families and politicians. It was no accident. they drew up lists, went door to door… pulled people out of their homes… put them in cars and sent them to the torture camps.

But that’s ok…because America is more horrible… why? because they made weapons more perfect than any other that ever has existed in human history. Weapons that have saved the lives of literally thousands of civilians. And they are damned for one family.

Then I guess stalin was right… they kill a million, with malice and forethought and sadistic intent, and your tiny mind cant get around it, so it has no response.

But because you can get your tiny mind around one family, that is a trajedy.

And America is bad… why? because they made smart bombs that were not as smart as god.

That’s a false argument… its argument from the point of unreachable perfection. Since nothing can be perfect to those standards, then you win the argument till we get cartoon missiles that stop, knock on the door, take finger prints, and then blow up.

Big useful idiot, with tiny mind, sums you up to a tee.

End part IV


Artfldgr says:

i am tired of this...

here is the last on it... its just too much idiocy in one post to go on..

entering puberty:

As about Russian military build up, Russians just started modernization of their military, because even 4 years ago they did not have money for that.

Then you didn’t read my posts… I posted the military spending budgets… when they didn’t have money.

You didn’t look at the dates when they made these things and when they were put in service.

In fact, you have no idea what weapons they have. when they made them. what they do. etc.

Almost all the present weapons and equipment is from the Soviet times, worn out and obsolete.

Again… you didn’t read. They have a new torpedo, a new class of sub, a new nuclear missile, upgraded underground cities, new tanks, a new supersonic bomber, and lots more.

These didn’t just appear… they were created during the time that they told you that they didn’t hve money and were starving their own people and lowering the life expectancy to what it was before the Bolshevik revolution!

The SS-27 RT-2UTTH (Topol-M) was deployed in 1997…
Can you add up to ten?
2007 just ended… 1997 was ten years ago…
Did they do this new design in the middle of 1996 and knocked it off in a half year?
No, they got two supercomputers that the USA donated and 300 billion dollars that they were supposed to use for taking apart strategic nuclear weapons, that they still haven’t dismantled.
And on top of that… they bought a even better supercomputer
Russia Atom Aides Buy I.B.M. Supercomputer Despite U.S. Curbs

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C06E5D81E3EF936A15751C0A961958260
''Computer modeling is very important to us,'' Viktor N. Mikhailov, the Minister of Atomic Energy Affairs, said recently.
Recently, the head of Silicon Graphics, a California-based company, acknowledged that his company had made a mistake by selling two small supercomputer systems to Russia. The United States Attorney in San Jose has opened an investigation into that sale.
The I.B.M. supercomputer is even more powerful and can perform 10 billion calculations a second, Russian officials say. They say it is 10 times more effective than the computers now on hand.

So during the time they were said to be defunct, as you note, they were buying supercomputers, and spending billions on new technologies, and such… hiding behind “common knowledge” and their fellow travelers in the OPEN western press.

So I guess the problem here is that they have YOU fooled, and your trying desperately to have everyone be fooled like you. then it’s a happy teletubby world.
Guess what?
Your wrong… and your damned by the information from the side your defending. They are leaving you naked with nothing but empty falsehoods that you assert with such conviction it convinces those who don’t know, don’t read, refuse to check.
But for someone that has read, does read, checks facts, and checks them again in other sources… well, we just don’t have the same ‘facts’.
The Russians have failed to inform you, a loyal shill and useful idiot, that they have been lying. Lying as they have always done in modern memory and with almost every treaty.
Hey!
How about this… let me know how you fit this into your head!

U.S. Assistance to Russia -- Fiscal Year 2006
http://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/fs/66166.htm
In Fiscal Year 2006, the estimated $949.3 million budgeted by all U.S. Government agencies for assistance programs for Russia is allocated roughly as follows, based on information available as of the date of this fact sheet:
Democracy Programs $45.2 million
Economic Programs $7.0 million
Social Reform $23.6 million
Security & Law Enforcement $860.0 million
Humanitarian $8.7 million
Cross-Sectoral Initiatives $4.8 million

America is soooo mean… we gave almost 1 trillion dollars to help.
Care to do your research and let me know how much we have given every year since the fall?
By the way… that’s just the state… care to research how much the charities, businesses, and others are also trying to help?
And all the money and such gets diverted…


Artfldgr says:

You also listed such Russian weapons like "ship to ship" rockets and air defense (SAMs). Well, what it has to do with nuclear arsenals? Why didn't you listed RPGs then?

yup, that i did

want to guess why?

those are nuclear versions of those things.

i only have access to whats public, so here is a public version.

http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1687&catid=263

SS-N-22 Sunburn / Kh-41 (ASM-MSS) Moskit
Type: Air -to- Surface, anti-ship
Year: 1993

meaning they spent the money during the years that the people were suffering, and the time that you said they couldnt.

go down a bit more.. read warhead..

Warhead
320 kg HE semi-armor piercing or 200 kT nuclear

So just to let you know.. Russia has nuclear versions of air to air missles, sams, etc.

as to your point as to number of missiles.

i put up TACTICAL and STRATEGIC

you focused on strategic and took it out of context.

doing this is ingenous and expects someeone to not realize WHY the mix is different.

please note that the tactical weapons in some cases exceed the bombs we use as examples. the strategic weapons are many more times that size.

strategic missiles would be what would be used between the US and Russia...

TACTICAL weapons would be what would have to be used against europe, as using the strategic ones wouldnt leave much left of europe to fight over.

in the 80s Russia planned to invade europe, but alas, Reagan upped the ante each time that they thought they had it, and they toppled over in the wallet.

however only people like you are stupid enough not to realize that the way they have their system, having money doesnt matter when a war breaks out. in a state that has such overwhelming power over its subjects, and they having no power, the state just abolishes currency, and does what it wants.

this is a flexibility that the west does not have since the people in the west own the property. see how that works? there is no real way to compel them the way that they can be just ordered in an authoritarian state.

what we all forget is that just because a mean person is nice now, doesnt mean that they wont be mean again, true to their nature. nothing is meaner than murdering your own people to get results refusing to find a way around that (and refusing all help too).

in the west, there have been very few incidents of state meanness. no state is perfect, and the argument that holds us to a higher standard than russia has ever met in its state history is also disingenous.

and to claim that the US wants russia gone... but not know that we give nearly a trillion dollars a year.. 800 plus million for the police forces and such so that the russian public could have SOME protection instead of NO protection, is also disingenous.

if we didnt give that 800 million, then putin couldnt take 800 million out of the police force and use it for weapons that he threatens us with.

in the west thats called biting the hand that feeds you. what would happen if the security and police lost 800 million for next year?

kind of says something about who cares more for the russian people.



Artfldgr says:

and you might find this interesting too

Those of us who are old enough to remember the Vietnam era will remember how the two photos [the image of the man shooting another man in the head & the image of the young girl runing down the road napalmed] were ceaselessly used by the media to denigrate the American war effort. Larger versions of the photos are here http://www.cs.brown.edu/courses/cs024/images/canon/06.jpg and here http://www.phillip-lee.com/content/Blog_Images/vietnam%20napalm_m.jpg.

One depicts a little girl running naked from a napalm bombing and the other depicts a Vietcong assassin being executed. The impression always given is that America was guilty of brutality towards innocent Vietnamese. See here http://neoneocon.com/2008/01/16/a-mind-is-a-difficult-thing-to-change-part-7b-the-vietnam-photos-revisited/ for the real story.

American forces were not involved at all.

It helps put in context the way deceptive photographs are repeatedly used...

i cut the end since THEY were making a point as to Isreal, which was also valid but we have enough of a mess here without that too.

I already knew the story as to both these photos. As i do with lots of things that the main stream media gets wrong as well as hollyweird too.

in your case, as with many others, you never did learn those things in their historical factual full tapestry view... you got the high points, and then filled in the gaps with modern entertainment (or if in russia, revisionist versions - the west has revisionist versions too, but we also have other versions, and we have choices as to which to read, and can read all of them - so its not so effective as when the state says - this is the only one).



Artfldgr says:

My posting was not about the Vietnam war as such…

Your post was throwing everything but the kitchen sink, don’t think that its not possible to page upwards and actually pull out what you said. You gave absolutely no distinction to anything on that subject, nor in context does it lead to what your claiming now. you have revision the history already. duh

The victims do not care how democratic the warmongers are.

Care to ask the 1 million dead families? Oh yeah, unlike the democratic republics actions, the people that would complain and grouse the way your talking are conveniently dead.

You, buddy, had listened too many of senator Joseph McCarthy' speeches in 50’s

Really? Well why don’t you compare what we knew then to what we know now? I am VERY glad you brought McCarthy up.

Why? because thanks to defectors, decoded Venona transcripts, the Mitroken archive, and kgb files that were opened for a short while, that McCarthy was RIGHT!

That rather then it being a “witch hunt”, an act in which people chase after something we know is not real, it was a real hunt. While there are no real witches (in the sense we are talking about), there ARE subversives, illegal’s, fellow travelers, fronts, and useful idiots.

Remember Whittaker Chambers?

i doubt it… I doubt that you know anything but the main stream medias propaganda that mccarthy was after innocent people.

Well it was Whittaker Chambers, who was a communist, that changed sides and provided lists to Adolph Berle (then undersecretary of state). Roosevelt and Truman both chose to ignore it.

Time to open your eyes up again…

From 1943 until 1980, unbeknownst to virtually everyone, the National Security Agency intercepted every Soviet message going from or to the United States. It was not until 1994 that their existence was even acknowledged, and 1995 when the first 1,400 of 240,000 intercepts were released to the public. Their content was damning and supportive of the contentions of not only McCarthy but Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley, Hoover, and others.

Yes that’s right. Even though we couldn’t read just under 40 years of messages, we saved them all. and unlike in russia, or in the main stream media, we in America, can ignore the propaganda, and go to the archives!! We can accept the line we are given, as you did, or we can explore and find out the truth for ourselves.

So what happens when something like this gets decoded? The assumptions of history get corrected. and so the cover that was the destruction of McCarthy by the communists, turned out to be much different than the socialist press here let everyone know (hey, they did the same with Margret sanger, betty Freidan, Margret meade, albert Kinsey, and more!)

The information you have is based on a he said she said argument that went back and forth for 40 odd years, and since there was no hard evidence, the communists just kept pressing the propaganda
Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, followed two primary rules when brainwashing the German public. The first was to tell a big lie loud enough and long enough so that people would eventually start to believe it. The second rule was to always accuse your enemy of your own worst crime.
So if you understand this, and understand that the radical left socialist communists have the loudest voice, what they are yelling is the stuff they want you to believe, because they want your behavior to be as if that information is true.

However, the information is not true, and if you knew that, you would act differently. So the battle for hearts and minds is not an honest battle on their side, they don’t care whether you know or don’t know.

When you ride a horse, you don’t care what the horse thinks, do you? you only care that its material actions are what you need them to be in order to accomplish what you want. In this formula, you are the horse, and you come from a mental assumption that they are going to steer you with valid information and so its always correct to follow the mass line.

However, its hard to get people and horses to walk off a cliff. So they lie. They learned from their FRIENDS (Molotov ribbendorph agreement), the Nazies, who were ALSO socialists.

Anyway… I didn’t have to listen McCarthies speeches, as he didn’t really do that. he wasn’t a radcial socialist who took the podium and tried to mobilize the public into a religious fervor towards a socialist revolution or even towards what they should have done. which is remove those people who wish to harm the very country they are a part of.

Lets take a short trip and lets see who turned to really be spies… and not mere nothings.

[aren’t you glad you brought McCarthy up? I am!]

Alger Hiss who had been the number three man at State behind Dean Acheson and Dean Rusk, and who, most assuredly, at some point, would have eventually been Secretary of State.

So the number three man in the whitehouse was a spy… how nice.

Harry Dexter White, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, who purposely withheld allocated funding for the Chinese Nationalists, during their Civil War, that destroyed their currency and, thus, their efforts against Mao's Communists.

Assistant secretary of the treasury was a communist spy… and look what they did, they helped mao, which resulted in the deaths of more than 30 million people. lovely.

remember, this is the side your fighting on. these are YOUR people. these are the people and the ideas YOU support. You belittle me and make fun of me and make me out to be MUCH older than I am… the reason is that that makes me out to be an old man who can be ignored, rather than an erudite young man. McCarthy was decades before I was born. I just got a better education than you!!! whats amazig is that you also cant discern the qualitative difference between the two sides, and that you constantly keep bringing up something that you think is real and of substance, and throw it. like McCarthy, and your side didn’t hace the decency to let you in on the lies and propaganda so that you don’t step on these land mines and make yourself out to be a total idiot

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had been conduits for even more damaging information than the atom bomb, for which they were executed

Lauchlin Currie, Special Assistant to F.D.R.

Samuel Dickstein, member of the House of Representatives from Brooklyn.

William and Martha Dodd, son and daughter of the U.S. ambassador to Germany

Lawrence Duggan, State Department Director of Latin American Affairs

Harold Ickes, Sr., father of Clinton's impeachment flack, who was Secretary of the Interior.

William Weisband, U.S. Army Signal Security Agency

NONE of these ended up being expose by McCarthy because of the leftist and communists in the press and colleges and the arguments. The SAME argyuments that people like you perpetuate years and years later as truth…

[Bout the only real thing we DID do was contain them in jobs that no longer were useful]

Recent archive releases (like in the past year) put out a list of 12,000 people in the state who were confirmed by decoded transcripts to be spies.

Lattimore was a McCarthy "coup". Lattimore was the individual who coined the term "McCarthyism" in response to and defense of the charges brought against him. In a feeble attempt to attack the messenger, Lattimore went so far as to write a book declaring his innocence while, at the same time, attacking McCarthy.

So your spouting the defense stuff of one of the leaders of over 40 other spies and front organizations!

For all those rushing to put pen to paper to denounce any of the above, you'd be best advised to first do your "homework". Read "Venona" (Yale University Press); "The Secret World Of American Communism" (Yale University Press); "The Haunted Wood" (Random House); "The Venona Secrets" (Regnery); "The Secret History Of the KGB" (Basic Books); "Whittaker Chambers: A Biography" (Modern Library); and "Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the life and legacy of America's most hated Senator" (Free Press). If at first you haven't read the above, then you are coming unarmed for a battle of wits.

As I have said… you’re coming to a gunfight with a penknife.

I don’t have to be old… I can READ… and I don’t just read to confirm my ego, which is what your doing… you even prmote disinformation in an effort to preserve that fragile ego.

Your so sure of the facts that you know.. that your throwing them out as if lies are truth and mean something. Your not even smart enough to research your OWN assumptions!!!

I would not be surprized to have known that you lived as long ago as during the First Red Scare too.

Nope, much much younger.. that would be my grandfather, and my dad as a young lad….

And your link on mccarthy doesn cover the decoded transcripts and the full history. (if you take the time, wiki has a page that will tell you who corrected the page and such. very interesting to look at that too)

Your information on McCarthy is off… and you never asked the qyestion if he was right. You accepted the testimony of the guilty over the truthful. Lattimore was guilty.

You were so sure it was a ‘scare’ which denotes false information, that you never wanted to think of the implications that it wasn’t a scare and what THAT means.

Think of that. that your protecting your ego from having to conceive of such nastiness, and that protective reflex, makes you protect the people that are doing that, while pretending and denying that truth!

PRIOR to the decoding of the transcripts by modern computers, the complete truthful history was a matter of who could shout the loudest.

So contrary to me being old and backwards, it’s you, whose information is woefully incomplete, out of date, and not even wrong!

Given recent revelations from Soviet-era archives and new thinking about the Cold War, this biography was probably inevitable. Readers can therefore be thankful that Herman, a historian at George Mason University, has given us an occasionally strained but generally fair study of McCarthy rather than a one-sided defense or assault on him. The book will surely be controversial and subject to attack from all sides, for its author insists that we must hold McCarthy's enemies and victims to the same standards to which we hold him.

And another author

McCarthy stopped the highly organized, intellectual and productive Marxist movement and diverted its PATH from taking over in the USA internally; it never truly gained momentum afterwards. What Joseph McCarthy failed to realize was the breath and depth of the communist character and soul. The harshness and brutality of the attacks on McCarthy and co. were (in essence) a disclosure of an evil and misguided (but determined) will. Welded on an abnormal dogma of vicious misconceptions, SIMILAR IN CONCEPT ONLY TO NATIONAL SOCIALISM (...) IDEOLOGY, these attackers knew the game plan (all to well) of bombarding and destroying the enemy at all costs (another Lenin inclusion). Turning the tables as though J. McCarthy and co. were the "bad guys". If Joseph McCarthy, Roy Cohn and co. had been more well-read on material in the philosophical/political/psychological areas of communism, they would have been better prepared for the fight. Sizing up the situation as dealing with human beings - rational, reasonable, and of good-willed nature - was a big mistake. Because at the heart and core of the communist breeds the demon of illusion. As with the late actualized communistic State, the Soviet Union, they came out (in history) smelling like roses, when in reality, they had killed more innocent people than Nazi Germany. Only with the present day material, do we now have the truth of many misconceptions.

You experienced kinda strong emotions. They stay alive for the rest of the life...

Your way way off… my parents were flower children..

You’re an EGOIST… your spouts are LOGOREAH (diarrhea of the mouth). My PROOF comes from YOU.

and burried my brilliant post addressed

Whether it’s brilliant or not is not for you to decide you egotistical moron.

Once again… you have proved to argue from nothing but false arguments.

Ad hominem: old fart's

By authority: my brilliant post

Needling: calling me old when I am not

Straw Man: you caricatured my position and then attacked the caricature as if it was me

Special Pleading: using the arguments that support your position, but ignoring or somehow disallowing the arguments against.

Burden of proof: your mccarthy thing (since he was right, not wrong)

Other things you have used and that don’t work with me are:

Argument By Question

Argument by Rhetorical Question (the tack you took in the Vietnam post)

Fallacy Of The General Rule

Reductive Fallacy (Oversimplification):

Psychogenetic Fallacy: You experienced kinda strong emotions. They stay alive for the rest of the life...

Argument From Age (Wisdom of the Ancients): snobbery that very old (or very young) arguments are superior.

Poisoning The Wells: a variation of Ad Hominem

Argument By Emotive Language (Appeal To The People): (a big favorite)

Argument By Personal Charm

Cliche Thinking using as evidence a well-known wise saying, as if that is proven, or as if it has no exceptions. [mccarthyism. You also pulled Appeal To Widespread Belief too with this one]

Begging The Question (Assuming The Answer, Tautology):
This is another favorite of yours… reasoning in a circle. The thing to be proved is used as one of your assumptions.

Bad Analogy

Extended Analogy

Argument From Spurious Similarity another favorite of yours

Confusing Correlation And Causation

Causal Reductionism (Complex Cause)

Fallacy Of Composition

Complex Question (Tying):

Argument By Pigheadedness (Doggedness): refusing to accept something after everyone else thinks it is well enough proved. For example, McCarthy being an example of a false hunt, when its now proven that it wasn’t a false hunt.

Argument By Half Truth

Argument By Selective Observation another favorite of yours

Argument By Selective Reading

Argument By Generalization

Inconsistency another favorite of yours [kgb is great and superior, but there are rogues, etc]

Non Sequitur

Argument By Gibberish

Equivocation using a word to mean one thing, and then later using it to mean something different

Euphemism

Weasel Wording

Error Of Fact for example, "No one knows how old the Pyramids of Egypt are." (Except, of course, for the historians who've read the records written by the ancient Egyptians themselves.) // everyone knows that McCarthy was chasing innocent people, except the people who have read and studied history and not receive their education from the public trough.

Hypothesis Contrary To Fact

Changing The Subject (Digression, Red Herring, Misdirection, False Emphasis): [how did Vietnam get in here when it was a response to nuclear weapons]

Argument By Fast Talking if you go from one idea to the next quickly enough, the audience won't have time to think [doesn’t work with me, I think fast and know my subjects VERY well]

Ambiguous Assertion: you did this with the Vietnam thing.. shoved it in.. then later claimed that it was something else.


Outdated Information: information is given, but it is not the latest information on the subject. McCarthy.. your data was outdated…

Least Plausible Hypothesis

Argument By Scenario

Affirming The Consequent

Moving The Goalposts (Raising The Bar, Argument By Demanding Impossible Perfection): if your opponent successfully addresses some point, then say he must also address some further point. If you can make these points more and more difficult (or diverse) then eventually your opponent must fail. If nothing else, you will eventually find a subject that your opponent isn't up on.

Appeal To Complexity

Common Sense: [in your analysis of lugovoy, which is why you weren’t accepting the arguments I was giving since they were pointing out that this was your argument, and what you think is common sense may not be what someone else thinks]

Argument By Laziness (Argument By Uninformed Opinion): the arguer hasn't bothered to learn anything about the topic. He nevertheless has an opinion, and will be insulted if his opinion is not treated with respect.

if you were rating your posts on subversive and fallacious arguing ability, then yeah.. it was brilliant..

As a debate, its GARBAGE..

your arguing stule is attempting to ‘win’ by anything BUT merit, while ignoring that winning by those means is cheating. Like giving food poisioning to all the other racers and never having to actually run the race and getting the title by default. Wining that way you can be a quadrapelegic against an olypic runner and win – so your not really winning, no matter how much your little mind and swollen ego thinks so


in connection with La Russophobe's article and response to my comment?

I think that you made a point, but not the center of the target you were hoping to hit. Want to know the difference. The key point that is different?

This was a document presented to people, a suggestion. A proposal

The Russian situation was their adopted plan…

ALSO the Russians statements were escalatory (and a veiled threat to use nukes for IRAQ), and were a response to “conventional forces”, not nuclear forces. While the NATO suggestion does not say that NATO will respond to conventional forces with nuclear weapons.

And lastly… the general with the big mouth from russia, is still in his office serving and commanding, the general your referring to is “the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff”, so he is a NATO leader, not a US leader.

Read the qualifying difference here
Naumann conceded that the plan's retention of the nuclear first strike option was "controversial" even among the five authors. Inge argued that "to tie our hands on first use or no first use removes a huge plank of deterrence".
Reserving the right to initiate nuclear attack was a central element of the west's cold war strategy in defeating the Soviet Union. Critics argue that what was a productive instrument to face down a nuclear superpower is no longer appropriate.

Basically russia has built up their missiles and military in the past 8 years like germany did… they have abandoned treaties unilaterally so that they can continue building up.

The twos behaviors are not the same at all..

All your doing is the exact thing that George Kennan said as to dissimulation… that your just grabing whatever facts discordant or not that seem or sound like they bolster your position. It works with idiots, but it doesn’t work with cogent informed educated people.

I suspect that if I didn’t open my mouth… you might actually lean towards “False Compromise” if one does not understand a debate, it must be "fair" to split the difference, and agree on a compromise between the opinions. (But one side is very possibly wrong, and in any case one could simply suspend judgment.) Journalists often invoke this fallacy in the name of "balanced" coverage.


Artfldgr says:

My posting was not about the Vietnam war as such…

Your post was throwing everything but the kitchen sink, don’t think that its not possible to page upwards and actually pull out what you said. You gave absolutely no distinction to anything on that subject, nor in context does it lead to what your claiming now. you have revision the history already. duh

The victims do not care how democratic the warmongers are.

Care to ask the 1 million dead families? Oh yeah, unlike the democratic republics actions, the people that would complain and grouse the way your talking are conveniently dead.

You, buddy, had listened too many of senator Joseph McCarthy' speeches in 50’s

Really? Well why don’t you compare what we knew then to what we know now? I am VERY glad you brought McCarthy up.

Why? because thanks to defectors, decoded Venona transcripts, the Mitroken archive, and kgb files that were opened for a short while, that McCarthy was RIGHT!

That rather then it being a “witch hunt”, an act in which people chase after something we know is not real, it was a real hunt. While there are no real witches (in the sense we are talking about), there ARE subversives, illegal’s, fellow travelers, fronts, and useful idiots.

Remember Whittaker Chambers?

i doubt it… I doubt that you know anything but the main stream medias propaganda that mccarthy was after innocent people.

Well it was Whittaker Chambers, who was a communist, that changed sides and provided lists to Adolph Berle (then undersecretary of state). Roosevelt and Truman both chose to ignore it.

Time to open your eyes up again…

From 1943 until 1980, unbeknownst to virtually everyone, the National Security Agency intercepted every Soviet message going from or to the United States. It was not until 1994 that their existence was even acknowledged, and 1995 when the first 1,400 of 240,000 intercepts were released to the public. Their content was damning and supportive of the contentions of not only McCarthy but Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley, Hoover, and others.

Yes that’s right. Even though we couldn’t read just under 40 years of messages, we saved them all. and unlike in russia, or in the main stream media, we in America, can ignore the propaganda, and go to the archives!! We can accept the line we are given, as you did, or we can explore and find out the truth for ourselves.

So what happens when something like this gets decoded? The assumptions of history get corrected. and so the cover that was the destruction of McCarthy by the communists, turned out to be much different than the socialist press here let everyone know (hey, they did the same with Margret sanger, betty Freidan, Margret meade, albert Kinsey, and more!)

The information you have is based on a he said she said argument that went back and forth for 40 odd years, and since there was no hard evidence, the communists just kept pressing the propaganda
Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, followed two primary rules when brainwashing the German public. The first was to tell a big lie loud enough and long enough so that people would eventually start to believe it. The second rule was to always accuse your enemy of your own worst crime.
So if you understand this, and understand that the radical left socialist communists have the loudest voice, what they are yelling is the stuff they want you to believe, because they want your behavior to be as if that information is true.

However, the information is not true, and if you knew that, you would act differently. So the battle for hearts and minds is not an honest battle on their side, they don’t care whether you know or don’t know.

When you ride a horse, you don’t care what the horse thinks, do you? you only care that its material actions are what you need them to be in order to accomplish what you want. In this formula, you are the horse, and you come from a mental assumption that they are going to steer you with valid information and so its always correct to follow the mass line.

However, its hard to get people and horses to walk off a cliff. So they lie. They learned from their FRIENDS (Molotov ribbendorph agreement), the Nazies, who were ALSO socialists.

Anyway… I didn’t have to listen McCarthies speeches, as he didn’t really do that. he wasn’t a radcial socialist who took the podium and tried to mobilize the public into a religious fervor towards a socialist revolution or even towards what they should have done. which is remove those people who wish to harm the very country they are a part of.

Lets take a short trip and lets see who turned to really be spies… and not mere nothings.

[aren’t you glad you brought McCarthy up? I am!]

Alger Hiss who had been the number three man at State behind Dean Acheson and Dean Rusk, and who, most assuredly, at some point, would have eventually been Secretary of State.

So the number three man in the whitehouse was a spy… how nice.

Harry Dexter White, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, who purposely withheld allocated funding for the Chinese Nationalists, during their Civil War, that destroyed their currency and, thus, their efforts against Mao's Communists.

Assistant secretary of the treasury was a communist spy… and look what they did, they helped mao, which resulted in the deaths of more than 30 million people. lovely.

remember, this is the side your fighting on. these are YOUR people. these are the people and the ideas YOU support. You belittle me and make fun of me and make me out to be MUCH older than I am… the reason is that that makes me out to be an old man who can be ignored, rather than an erudite young man. McCarthy was decades before I was born. I just got a better education than you!!! whats amazig is that you also cant discern the qualitative difference between the two sides, and that you constantly keep bringing up something that you think is real and of substance, and throw it. like McCarthy, and your side didn’t hace the decency to let you in on the lies and propaganda so that you don’t step on these land mines and make yourself out to be a total idiot

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had been conduits for even more damaging information than the atom bomb, for which they were executed

Lauchlin Currie, Special Assistant to F.D.R.

Samuel Dickstein, member of the House of Representatives from Brooklyn.

William and Martha Dodd, son and daughter of the U.S. ambassador to Germany

Lawrence Duggan, State Department Director of Latin American Affairs

Harold Ickes, Sr., father of Clinton's impeachment flack, who was Secretary of the Interior.

William Weisband, U.S. Army Signal Security Agency

NONE of these ended up being expose by McCarthy because of the leftist and communists in the press and colleges and the arguments. The SAME argyuments that people like you perpetuate years and years later as truth…

[Bout the only real thing we DID do was contain them in jobs that no longer were useful]

Recent archive releases (like in the past year) put out a list of 12,000 people in the state who were confirmed by decoded transcripts to be spies.

Lattimore was a McCarthy "coup". Lattimore was the individual who coined the term "McCarthyism" in response to and defense of the charges brought against him. In a feeble attempt to attack the messenger, Lattimore went so far as to write a book declaring his innocence while, at the same time, attacking McCarthy.

So your spouting the defense stuff of one of the leaders of over 40 other spies and front organizations!

For all those rushing to put pen to paper to denounce any of the above, you'd be best advised to first do your "homework". Read "Venona" (Yale University Press); "The Secret World Of American Communism" (Yale University Press); "The Haunted Wood" (Random House); "The Venona Secrets" (Regnery); "The Secret History Of the KGB" (Basic Books); "Whittaker Chambers: A Biography" (Modern Library); and "Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the life and legacy of America's most hated Senator" (Free Press). If at first you haven't read the above, then you are coming unarmed for a battle of wits.

As I have said… you’re coming to a gunfight with a penknife.

I don’t have to be old… I can READ… and I don’t just read to confirm my ego, which is what your doing… you even prmote disinformation in an effort to preserve that fragile ego.

Your so sure of the facts that you know.. that your throwing them out as if lies are truth and mean something. Your not even smart enough to research your OWN assumptions!!!

I would not be surprized to have known that you lived as long ago as during the First Red Scare too.

Nope, much much younger.. that would be my grandfather, and my dad as a young lad….

And your link on mccarthy doesn cover the decoded transcripts and the full history. (if you take the time, wiki has a page that will tell you who corrected the page and such. very interesting to look at that too)

Your information on McCarthy is off… and you never asked the qyestion if he was right. You accepted the testimony of the guilty over the truthful. Lattimore was guilty.

You were so sure it was a ‘scare’ which denotes false information, that you never wanted to think of the implications that it wasn’t a scare and what THAT means.

Think of that. that your protecting your ego from having to conceive of such nastiness, and that protective reflex, makes you protect the people that are doing that, while pretending and denying that truth!

PRIOR to the decoding of the transcripts by modern computers, the complete truthful history was a matter of who could shout the loudest.

So contrary to me being old and backwards, it’s you, whose information is woefully incomplete, out of date, and not even wrong!

Given recent revelations from Soviet-era archives and new thinking about the Cold War, this biography was probably inevitable. Readers can therefore be thankful that Herman, a historian at George Mason University, has given us an occasionally strained but generally fair study of McCarthy rather than a one-sided defense or assault on him. The book will surely be controversial and subject to attack from all sides, for its author insists that we must hold McCarthy's enemies and victims to the same standards to which we hold him.

And another author

McCarthy stopped the highly organized, intellectual and productive Marxist movement and diverted its PATH from taking over in the USA internally; it never truly gained momentum afterwards. What Joseph McCarthy failed to realize was the breath and depth of the communist character and soul. The harshness and brutality of the attacks on McCarthy and co. were (in essence) a disclosure of an evil and misguided (but determined) will. Welded on an abnormal dogma of vicious misconceptions, SIMILAR IN CONCEPT ONLY TO NATIONAL SOCIALISM (...) IDEOLOGY, these attackers knew the game plan (all to well) of bombarding and destroying the enemy at all costs (another Lenin inclusion). Turning the tables as though J. McCarthy and co. were the "bad guys". If Joseph McCarthy, Roy Cohn and co. had been more well-read on material in the philosophical/political/psychological areas of communism, they would have been better prepared for the fight. Sizing up the situation as dealing with human beings - rational, reasonable, and of good-willed nature - was a big mistake. Because at the heart and core of the communist breeds the demon of illusion. As with the late actualized communistic State, the Soviet Union, they came out (in history) smelling like roses, when in reality, they had killed more innocent people than Nazi Germany. Only with the present day material, do we now have the truth of many misconceptions.

You experienced kinda strong emotions. They stay alive for the rest of the life...

Your way way off… my parents were flower children..

You’re an EGOIST… your spouts are LOGOREAH (diarrhea of the mouth). My PROOF comes from YOU.

and burried my brilliant post addressed

Whether it’s brilliant or not is not for you to decide you egotistical moron.

Once again… you have proved to argue from nothing but false arguments.

Ad hominem: old fart's

By authority: my brilliant post

Needling: calling me old when I am not

Straw Man: you caricatured my position and then attacked the caricature as if it was me

Special Pleading: using the arguments that support your position, but ignoring or somehow disallowing the arguments against.

Burden of proof: your mccarthy thing (since he was right, not wrong)

Other things you have used and that don’t work with me are:

Argument By Question

Argument by Rhetorical Question (the tack you took in the Vietnam post)

Fallacy Of The General Rule

Reductive Fallacy (Oversimplification):

Psychogenetic Fallacy: You experienced kinda strong emotions. They stay alive for the rest of the life...

Argument From Age (Wisdom of the Ancients): snobbery that very old (or very young) arguments are superior.

Poisoning The Wells: a variation of Ad Hominem

Argument By Emotive Language (Appeal To The People): (a big favorite)

Argument By Personal Charm

Cliche Thinking using as evidence a well-known wise saying, as if that is proven, or as if it has no exceptions. [mccarthyism. You also pulled Appeal To Widespread Belief too with this one]

Begging The Question (Assuming The Answer, Tautology):
This is another favorite of yours… reasoning in a circle. The thing to be proved is used as one of your assumptions.

Bad Analogy

Extended Analogy

Argument From Spurious Similarity another favorite of yours

Confusing Correlation And Causation

Causal Reductionism (Complex Cause)

Fallacy Of Composition

Complex Question (Tying):

Argument By Pigheadedness (Doggedness): refusing to accept something after everyone else thinks it is well enough proved. For example, McCarthy being an example of a false hunt, when its now proven that it wasn’t a false hunt.

Argument By Half Truth

Argument By Selective Observation another favorite of yours

Argument By Selective Reading

Argument By Generalization

Inconsistency another favorite of yours [kgb is great and superior, but there are rogues, etc]

Non Sequitur

Argument By Gibberish

Equivocation using a word to mean one thing, and then later using it to mean something different

Euphemism

Weasel Wording

Error Of Fact for example, "No one knows how old the Pyramids of Egypt are." (Except, of course, for the historians who've read the records written by the ancient Egyptians themselves.) // everyone knows that McCarthy was chasing innocent people, except the people who have read and studied history and not receive their education from the public trough.

Hypothesis Contrary To Fact

Changing The Subject (Digression, Red Herring, Misdirection, False Emphasis): [how did Vietnam get in here when it was a response to nuclear weapons]

Argument By Fast Talking if you go from one idea to the next quickly enough, the audience won't have time to think [doesn’t work with me, I think fast and know my subjects VERY well]

Ambiguous Assertion: you did this with the Vietnam thing.. shoved it in.. then later claimed that it was something else.


Outdated Information: information is given, but it is not the latest information on the subject. McCarthy.. your data was outdated…

Least Plausible Hypothesis

Argument By Scenario

Affirming The Consequent

Moving The Goalposts (Raising The Bar, Argument By Demanding Impossible Perfection): if your opponent successfully addresses some point, then say he must also address some further point. If you can make these points more and more difficult (or diverse) then eventually your opponent must fail. If nothing else, you will eventually find a subject that your opponent isn't up on.

Appeal To Complexity

Common Sense: [in your analysis of lugovoy, which is why you weren’t accepting the arguments I was giving since they were pointing out that this was your argument, and what you think is common sense may not be what someone else thinks]

Argument By Laziness (Argument By Uninformed Opinion): the arguer hasn't bothered to learn anything about the topic. He nevertheless has an opinion, and will be insulted if his opinion is not treated with respect.

if you were rating your posts on subversive and fallacious arguing ability, then yeah.. it was brilliant..

As a debate, its GARBAGE..

your arguing stule is attempting to ‘win’ by anything BUT merit, while ignoring that winning by those means is cheating. Like giving food poisioning to all the other racers and never having to actually run the race and getting the title by default. Wining that way you can be a quadrapelegic against an olypic runner and win – so your not really winning, no matter how much your little mind and swollen ego thinks so


in connection with La Russophobe's article and response to my comment?

I think that you made a point, but not the center of the target you were hoping to hit. Want to know the difference. The key point that is different?

This was a document presented to people, a suggestion. A proposal

The Russian situation was their adopted plan…

ALSO the Russians statements were escalatory (and a veiled threat to use nukes for IRAQ), and were a response to “conventional forces”, not nuclear forces. While the NATO suggestion does not say that NATO will respond to conventional forces with nuclear weapons.

And lastly… the general with the big mouth from russia, is still in his office serving and commanding, the general your referring to is “the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff”, so he is a NATO leader, not a US leader.

Read the qualifying difference here
Naumann conceded that the plan's retention of the nuclear first strike option was "controversial" even among the five authors. Inge argued that "to tie our hands on first use or no first use removes a huge plank of deterrence".
Reserving the right to initiate nuclear attack was a central element of the west's cold war strategy in defeating the Soviet Union. Critics argue that what was a productive instrument to face down a nuclear superpower is no longer appropriate.

Basically russia has built up their missiles and military in the past 8 years like germany did… they have abandoned treaties unilaterally so that they can continue building up.

The twos behaviors are not the same at all..

All your doing is the exact thing that George Kennan said as to dissimulation… that your just grabing whatever facts discordant or not that seem or sound like they bolster your position. It works with idiots, but it doesn’t work with cogent informed educated people.

I suspect that if I didn’t open my mouth… you might actually lean towards “False Compromise” if one does not understand a debate, it must be "fair" to split the difference, and agree on a compromise between the opinions. (But one side is very possibly wrong, and in any case one could simply suspend judgment.) Journalists often invoke this fallacy in the name of "balanced" coverage.


Artfldgr says:


OK, about your thoughts: What treaties do you think Russia broke? None!

Do you wish to start with all the friendship treaties she had while she was working out the pact with Hitler?
World War II losses in the Baltic states were among the highest in Europe. Estimates of population loss stand at 25% for Estonia, 30% for Latvia, and 15% for Lithuania. War and occupation deaths have been estimated at 90,000 in Estonia, 180,000 in Latvia, and 250,000 in Lithuania. These include the Soviet deportations in 1941, the German deportations, and Holocaust victims.[8]
Read the “treaty of tartu”, “latvian-soviet riga peace treaty”, “Soviet-Lituanian treaty of 1920”

On sept 24th in 1939, with these treaties still in effect, and another set for finland. Russia appeared off the shores or Tallinn. On September 25th Moscow demanded that these countries let them build military bases on their soil. The three countries were forced to comply, and signed an agreement letting russia house troops on their soil.

In early 1939, the Leningrad Military District had already allocated 17 divisions, about 10% of the Red Army, to the Baltic states. Mobilizations followed shortly. The 8th Army was dispatched to Pskov on September 14, 1939, and the mobilized 7th Army placed under the Leningrad Military District. Invasion preparations were by now nearing completion. On September 26, the Leningrad Military District was ordered to "start concentrating troops on the Estonian-Latvian border and to finish that operation on September 29th." The order noted, "for the time of starting the attack a separate directive will be issued."[16] Altogether, by the beginning of October, 1939, the Soviets had amassed along the Estonia-Latvia border:
• 437,325 troops;
• 3,635 artillery pieces;
• 3,052 tanks;
• 421 armored vehicles;
• 21,919 cars.[17]

Those were the people that they had friendship pacts with!!!

The finns were also asked to sign a pact with stalin, but they refused. On November 30th, 1939 the soviet union attacked finland launching the “winter war”.

The attack was judged illegal in the eyes of the world and Russia was kicked out of the league of nations (precursor to the united nations).

Finland succeeded in halting russia, however, they werer forced to cede nearly all of finish Karelia, with finlands industrial centers, finlands second largest city, in total they lost around 10% of their country to their FRIENDS. 12% of fins lost their homes, finland also had to cede part of the salla area.

But, unlike Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, their peoples were not loaded into cattle cars and tortured to death in slave labor camps while Russians were shipped into the country to force it to be Russian forever through occupation. Now when these states want independence, they have to be as mean as Stalin to get their country completely back (as the Russians used by Stalin have lives there, and now there is a political problem and a permanent base for spies – Latvia just ejected one as did japan, and uk, and the US. ).

From the NY times april 26 1903..
The reason I am posting this is so that you see that this is a way of Russians doing things. its not something new, its not something that has yet gone away. it’s a constant “way they are”. they haven’t changed, and everyone is waiting for them to.

Here is what was quoted.
we took occasion to point out that the fact that Russia had made an agreement raised no probabil- ity that she would keep it. Her perfidy, indeed, is quite unique among civilized nations in its shamelessness. If she were an individual instead of a huge nation nobody would consent to have any dealings with her, her reputation for truth and veracity is so bad.

That her promise for the evacuation of mancuria by three installments of six months each would be kept in good faith nobody was so innocent to imagine. It was supposed that she had made the agreement to gain time – time to fortify her self, to safe guard her interests, which she regards as exclusive, throught all Manchuria, and to mcomplete the communication with European russia and with the central asian khanates which would enable her to defy opposition.

Experts in her ways expected that she would then keep the world of promise to the ear. Having perfected her arrangements for breaking it to the hope.
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9506EFDE1F30E733A25755C2A9629C946297D6CF

Even though that’s before 1917, it shows that this way of dealing with the world predates their soviet ways. So in effect, all soviet did, was make them worse.

If you care to check treaties… America kept terms of treaties it never ratified, and Russia still has no complied with treaties it signed to destroy weapons. America even gave russia billions so that they could use the money to destroy the weapons and comply. They took the money, and still haven’t destroyed the weapons!

And what about the CFE treaty? In april 2007 russia unilaterally broke this treaty.

The CFE Treaty dates from the last days of the Cold War and limits the deployment of conventional arms, including tanks and other heavy weapons, on either side of the old Iron Curtain.

However, russia never fully complied with the treaty… what about troops in checknya? What about in Georgia? Etc. read the terms, they NEVER FULLY COMPLIED.

and before you whine as to the missle shield, the new nuclear weapon that they were building AFTER the fall, which you are still saying these are left overs Even primitive missile technologies would be enough for neutralizing the most up-to-date US global Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) system, Tass cited experts from the Russian Academy of Military Sciences as saying Wednesday.

so Russian military scientists have said that the shield has no real bearing to russia. It cant even stop primitive missiles. So it can only stop the really primitive missles of iran. It has little or NO actual effect on russia SO SAYS THEIR OWN PEOPLE.

their beef, as they state, is that they imagine that the US will use space based weapons LIKE CHINA DID.

Russian security experts said Wednesday that the US missile defense concept presupposes the use of modern space-based weapons.


Care to read the history on the islands that russia grabbed from china at the end of the war? Russia had already signed treaties in the 1800s settling it, but stalin wanted them, and again, this breaking of treaties is still a sore spot.

How about march 18 1921?

Russia, the Ukraine, and Poland… ring a bell yet?

It’s a peace treaty between Russia and Poland…
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9401E4DD103CE533A2575AC1A9659C946095D6CF

And how long did that one last? Till stalin and Hitler decided to cut their FRIENDS apart and take the spoils. Not even 20 years.

Basically this treaty ended the polish Russian war (1918 – 1921)

You know.. the peaceful guys that accuse others of what they do!! after all…care to add up the number of countries under Russian control, and the number of countries the US has ever had? Want to count how many they still have? want to count how many they want back?

By the way… russia had also signed peace treaties with Poland going back as far as 1686. that one was called the ETERNAL PEACE TREATY with POLAND.

But since your nuclear bound.. .

Salt I - Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty Agreement // http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SALT_I


You see it turns out that RUSSIA was the first country to create an ABM system and rachet up the nuclear arms.

The strategic nuclear forces niche of the Soviet Union and the United States were changing in character in 1968. The U.S.'s total number of missiles had been static since 1967 at 1054 ICBMs and 656 SLBMs

One clause of the treaty required both countries to limit the sites protected by an anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system to one.

Soviet Union had deployed such a system around Moscow in 1966 and the United States announced an ABM program to protect twelve ICBM sites in 1967. A modified two-tier Moscow ABM system is still used, probably with missile interceptors equipped with conventional instead of nuclear warheads. The U.S. built only one ABM site to protect Minuteman base in North Dakota where the "Safeguard Program" was deployed.


So the US complied… Russia did not. we signed it anyway.

Salt II

SALT II was the first nuclear arms treaty which assumed real reductions in strategic forces to 2250 of all categories of delivery vehicles on both sides. SALT II helped the U.S. to discourage the Soviets not to arm their third generation ICBMs. The USSR's missile design bureaus had developed in the late 1970s experimental versions of these missiles equipped with anywhere from 10 to 38 thermonuclear warheads each.

So who was racing forward building what?

An agreement to limit strategic launchers was reached in Vienna on June 18, 1979, and was signed by Leonid Brezhnev and President of the United States Jimmy Carter. Six months after the signing, the Soviet Union deployed troops to Afghanistan, and in September of the same year some senators like "Mr. Boeing" (Henry M. Jackson) unexpectedly discovered the so-called "Soviet brigade" on Cuba. As such, the treaty was never ratified by the United States Senate. Its terms were, nonetheless, honored by both sides until 1986 when the Reagan Administration withdrew from SALT II after accusing the Soviets of violating the pact.

And so SALT II was never ratified… why? russia was in violation from the start. The agreement was to give them a clear road to invade a country.

Unlike iraq though, this country had no despot. There were no people to liberate. It was just a land grab.

By the way, imperialists grab their neighbors first if they can… not fight wars from half way around the world… England lost lands that way.

Care to list out the country in modern times that has grabbed the most neighbors? Its russia.

Start / saltIII/ -
Reagan proposed a dramatic reduction in strategic forces in two phases, which he referred to as SALT III at the time.[1] The first phase would reduce overall warhead counts on any missile type to 5,000, with an additional limit of 2,500 on ICBMs. Additionally, a total of 850 ICBMs would be allowed, with a limit of 110 "heavy throw" missiles like the SS-18, with additional limits on the total "throw weight" of the missiles as well. The second phase introduced similar limits on heavy bombers and their warheads, and other strategic systems as well.

As Time Magazine put it at the time, "Under Reagan's ceilings, the U.S. would have to make considerably less of an adjustment in its strategic forces than would the Soviet Union. That feature of the proposal will almost certainly prompt the Soviets to charge that it is unfair and one-sided. No doubt some American arms-control advocates will agree, accusing the Administration of making the Kremlin an offer it cannot possibly accept—a deceptively equal-looking, deliberately nonnegotiable proposal that is part of what some suspect is the hardliners' secret agenda of sabotaging disarmament so that the U.S. can get on with the business of rearmament."

Ah… but where is the catch? With Russians, there is always a catch, or else they are not going to do business.

Time Magazine did point out that, "The Soviets' monstrous ICBMs have given them a nearly 3-to-1 advantage over the U.S. in "throw weight"—the cumulative power to "throw" megatons of death and destruction at the other nation."

So that’s why the US has more… we have more SMALLER bombs, while russia has more LARGER bombs.

So if you add up the megatonnage, which is the damage they do. russia has fewer missiles that each do many times the damage america has.

Remember your whining as to smart weapons? America limits its weapons to the minuimum necessary… and so they need more… while russia is indiscriminate, they don’t care if they wipe out more, and so they have the largest nuclear weapons on the planet.

In this argument which would you rather have? 5000 shots each worth 10 points. Or 500 shots each worth 300 points?

That’s what you don’t get when your arguing the numbers of missiles.

But we do get it… and so another set of arguments is shown to be false.

I can show treaty after treaty going back beyond the bolshivik revolution, and that after they were even less trustworthy on such things. which is why the people of europe don’t want to work with them.

The soviets refused to sign… and instead embarked on the famous run up of nuclear weapons and arms that caused their FINANCIAL collapse.

Their refusal to ratify it, caused them to put their necks on the block

because of their paranoia! Notice that after they collapsed, the US helped them, not too them over. So ratification wouldn’t have caused what they were paranoid it would cause. In the end, they ratified it days before they collapsed.


START II followed START I and, although ratified, the treaty has never entered into force; in other words never been activated.

So no one can be accused of cheating on it. though russia used america abandoning the ABM treaty when russia was breaking it (Which actually leads to the situation now in which america is putting an ABM someplace russia doesn’t like, but as put above, it means nothing to them as they have said the technology CANT be against them!)

the Soviet MIRV missiles were equipped with electronic countermeasures and heavy decoys, with heavy missiles like R-36 carrying as many as 40 of them.[1] These decoys would appear as warheads to ABM, effectively requiring engagement of 50 times more targets than before and rendering defense ineffective.

So the argument as to the defense sheild is a FAKE ARGUMENT by russia. They have been able to stop such a sheild since the 1960s.

However, IRAN, who has the simplest missle,s not missles capable of distance, multiple warheads, and 40 decoys…. Like russia.

At about the same time, the USSR reached strategic parity with the US in terms of ICBM forces. A nuclear war would no longer be a favorable exchange for the US, but both countries would be devastated. This led in the West to the concept of mutually assured destruction, MAD, in which any changes to the strategic balance had to be carefully weighed. ABMs, now ready for use after over a decade of development, seemed to be far too risky – it was better to have no defense than one that might trigger a war.
In the East however, the concept of MAD was almost entirely unknown to the public, studied only by those in the Soviet military and Government who analysed Western military behaviour. Soviet military theory fully involved the mass use of nuclear devices, in combination with massive conventional forces.[2]

You see. everyone is antsy because russia never saw MAD as a valid thing (after all it was their idea to give that idea to us!).

And that bolded area is why people are worried about them today.

Since I don’t have time, lets quickly recap

More than 100 years history of attacking countries they make friends with, right up to the modern era of our lifetimes.

The behaviors started before the revolution, and continue to this day

Each breaking of a treaty was to their advantage, and was part of a set of games they played (for isntance, limiting strategic nuclear weapons, and not limiting tactical. Strategic weapons are needed in the distances between US and Russia, but tactical is whats needed to take europe!!! And as I said, imperialists eat their neigbors first if they can).

Continuous spying murders and poisinoings… with their spy orgs created from the worst sociopathic and psychopathic people given power over government. or did you no9t comprehend the outcome of filling an organization like the CIA with nothing but the worst of the criminally insane? The pedigrees of both agencies do not compare. No other system has been so horribly negative all aroudn than the checka/kgb/svr

That their collapse and taking help and building up, like their treaty behaviors, is only the stall of a paranoid that thinks they need to buy time till they can get their attacker before their attacker gets them!!!

Total paranoia… the attacker never attacks.. when they are down, when they are hurt, on and on… the attacker never attacks… and so they have forever to get their house in order to get em. Totally nutty… but its FUNDEMENTAL to their STATED ideology.

And part of that STATED ideology is to be a liar, a cheat, etc. So you cant trust them EVER, and that’s by their own hand.


I have little time for you.

You live in a fantasy world were the facts are totally different than the rest of the world

And don’t answer me on this crap… go to the graves of the millions and tell them.

You were wrong on so many levels, in each post.. and you just come back with another wrong thing after another wrong thing..

Its like your side has abandoned you with fake bullets that don’t fire!


Artfldgr says:

All Russian wepon developments come from the time when the USSR was still alive. Even Topol-M was started in mid 80-th.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,276014,00.html
The first Topol-Ms were commissioned in 1997, but deployment has proceeded slower than planned because of a shortage of funds, and aging Soviet-built ballistic missiles remain the backbone of Russia's nuclear forces. Existing Topol-M missiles are capable of hitting targets more than 6,000 miles away.

The statement said the RS-24 conforms with terms laid down in the START-I treaty and the 2002 Moscow Treaty, which calls for reductions in each country's nuclear arsenal to 1,700-2,000 warheads.

So how did they comply back in time? they didn’t…
And your off by years.

So your

WRONG.

Ussr fell 91… I showed you development from 98… cant add can you?

The SERIES topol M was started earlier than the 80s.

The first test firing of a Topol-M took place on December 20, 1994. The flight and design testing of the Topol-M was successfully completed by 1995,

From the late 1950s through the end of 1994, the Soviet Union, and later Russia, built a total of 245 nuclear submarines, more than all other nations combined.

They didn’t get destroyed.. they still have them…

As of May 2000, Russia's nuclear navy included only 45 operational nuclear-powered submarines,[4,5] down nearly 80% from the 245 vessels produced between the late 1950s to 1994.[2]

However, it does not take much to take a ship out of storage and ramp her up. much faster than actually building them if a war starts. So they get the best of both. They can claim poverty, while saving.

Fourteen submarines had been dismantled as of December 2000.

By the way, they have similar records with nuclear warheads.

The newest topol-m was tested in 2007! (just to make sure your listening - The first Topol-Ms were commissioned in 1997)

And things get even weirder when you put articles next to each other.


Russia: New missile can penetrate any defense system / Wednesday, May 30, 2007

They think its new… but youi don’t… better call them quick…

Russian military officials have confirmed that the country has tested a new inter-continental ballistic missile designed to evade missile defence systems.
The massive ICBM, called the RS-24, was fired from a mobile launcher at the Plesetsk launch site in northwestern Russia.
The Russians say the missile is capable of evading Stars Wars-style defence systems like that the one the the United States wants to construct in Europe

So they have this great missle that doesn’t matter as to defense.

Iunt he last post, I have posted statements that their scientists don’t care about the primitive us defense system

And yet Russia issues new missile defence threat // Russia warned today that it would position its rockets close to the Polish border and point missiles at US bases in Europe if Washington rebuffed its latest offer of cooperation on missile defence.
Russia's hawkish first deputy prime minister, Sergei Ivanov, made it clear that Moscow would be forced "to respond" if the Bush administration snubbed Vladimir Putin's offer to work together on missile defence using a Soviet-era radar base.

So Moscow is forced to respond to a missle shield that they say is uneffective against their arms, and even less effective against the newest weapon they have (which was developed 6 years after soviet union ‘fell’, and tested 10 years after that).


Can you see why the only people that trust them are useful idiots?

Imagine you have a neighbor… you are invited over his house… and he shows off how much soundproofing he has… and how much work he has put into it… he shows you that with new equioment, no sound can penetrate (thanks bose)

Now the next week you get a noticve in the mail that your neighbor is complaining your dog is barking and that its disturbing them in ther den.

The same den that they just showed everyone is soundproof!

That’s why russia is so hard to deal with.

They are like some person who imagines themselves as invisible, because no one tells them we can see them!

So you watch as they snap their fingers… then go off and do something… then snap their fingers, then pretend that the whole thing you just watched them do was invisible.

Meanwhile… your standing there and they are talking as if they are invisible. Why?

because if they admit it then you know their secret!


Artfldgr says:

Just read about victims of McCarthism in Wikipedia.

so when a spy is caught, and their lives change for the worse and they are no longer allowed to spy, they are then victims?

most of those caught by the scare, turned out to be GUILTY...

lattimore, the man who coinded the term mccarthyism, WAS a spy!!!

they were committing an act that is a death sentence in most countries and yet you think they are victims because we wont let them turn secrets over anymore?

its YOU that should read... you havent read if the victims were actually victims or criminals claiming to be victims.

until the truth came out from the archives, idiots like you ahve been calling them victims.

they are TRAITORS...

the rosenbergs were traitors... got that?

those who were working for the soviet union, while working here, and pretending to be something else were guilty of HIGH TREASON..

we used to think that those walking aruodn in civilian clothes acting in combat during peace time were enemies.


there were no VICTIMS of mccarthy if they were spies or worked with them...

12,000 of them

what about the people THEY killed for their masters? what about the businesses they took over and the charitie they took over? what about the ill that people like dewey visited?

what about people like langston huges who says all his early works should be burned so that they dont influence others, now he knows the truth?

Spying is a normal business. The CIA is not a boy-scout organization, by the way. It is an ancient occupation, next after prostitution and journalism.

except that if you know the history of this in america... the US didnt hace such an agency till it was up against russia!!!

think of that one tootsie...

such organizations didnt exist in the US till the 50s... the earliest version was the oss in the 40s... but that was a war organization...

and they were created to battle socialists! hitler a socialist, stalkin a socialist.

prior to derzinsky and lennin, state orgs did not spy to the ruthless levels that the russians did.

it took the russian jews in the mossad to help them be the way they are today (which is why russia has a harder time with them than the US)

the OSS was born during wwII.... lenin and his cheka were already working and subverting in america for almost 30 years before we even started such an agency.

care to check out when englands got started?


prior to lenin and trotsky comeing up with the concept of constant war and revolition, such agencies were NOT normally permanent!

so you can thank russia for this too!

so i am glad you did bring it up.

the OSS was put together for wwii... stalin had already had his terror guys working. they had already committed assasinations around the globe. THEY, the russians, set the tone for the future!

they crossed lines that were not crossed before. they crossed the lines of morals, and such.. and so once they did, everyone else HAD to. got that?

that if your going to fight someone, you have rules. russians said that the revoltion was so important, that they had to ignore those rules. they had to cheat to the end extreme. and they did.

and once they did, they forced every other country to sink as low if they had any hope of defending themselves.

A month and a half after the war was won, the OSS was disbanded by President Truman, on September 20, 1945.

so again... these spy orgs were organizations of WAR.

and the soviet union declared constant war agaisnt capitalism... making a war time spy organization a permanent need.

in January of 1946, President Truman created the Central Intelligence Group (CIG) which was the direct precursor to the CIA. The assets of the SSU, which now constituted a streamlined "nucleus" of clandestine intelligence was transferred to the CIG in mid-1946 and reconstituted as the Office of Special Operations (OSO). In 1947 the National Security Act established America's first permanent peacetime intelligence agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, which took up the functions of the OSS.


the united states is 100 years older, and their spy agency is half the age of russias.


and the birth of russias PERMANENT spy and subversive organs?

was the first of a succession of Soviet state security organizations. It was created by a decree issued on December 20, 1917, by Vladimir Lenin and subsequently led by a Polish nobleman Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky.

so the cia was created in the 40s... in response to what?

well russia created their highly manipulative and dirty organ within one year of the revolutino.


let see... russia... born 1917... spy agency created the same year

lets see.. america born in 1776.. spy agency created 1941

1921 the Troops for the Internal Defense of the Republic (a part of Cheka) numbered 200,000. These troops policed labor camps, ran the Gulag system, conducted requisitions of food, put down peasant rebellions, riots by workers, and mutinies in the Red Army, which was plagued by desertions [1]

lets see. the american cia and such, looked for foreign subversives and spies...

while the russian version attacked their own families, like a true paranoid.

while the CIA was not military... cheka was..


from the KGB came the german stasi, the romanian organs, and tons of others.

may i ask the similar histories of the CIA?

they dont exist... the US never turned their agencies against their own people.

The agency performed mass arrests, imprisonments, and executions of "enemies of the people". In this, the Cheka said that they targeted "class enemies" such as the bourgeoisie, members of the clergy, and political opponents of the new regime. The very first organized mass repression began against the libertarian Socialists of Petrograd in April 1918.

they didnt even wait a year before exterminating their own people


so now its MY TURN...

your worried about the victims of mccarthy?

what about the victims of your own leaders?

mcarthies people had to find new jobs that didint let them spy.

lets see what chekas people got

Estimates on Cheka executions vary widely. The lowest figures are provided by Dzerzhinsky’s lieutenant Martyn Latsis, limited to RSFSR over the period 1918–1920:

For the period 1918-July 1919, covering only twenty provinces of central Russia:
1918: 6,300; 1919 (up to July): 2,089; Total: 8,389
For the whole period 1918-19:
1918: 6,185; 1919: 3,456; Total: 9,641
For the whole period 1918-20:
January-June 1918: 22; July-December 1918: more than 6,000; 1918-20: 12,733
Experts generally agree these semi-official figures are vastly understated.[10] W. H. Chamberlin, for example, claims “it is simply impossible to believe that the Cheka only put to death 12,733 people in all of Russia up to the end of the civil war.”[11] He provides the "reasonable and probably moderate" estimate of 50,000[12], while others provide estimates ranging up to 500,000.[13][14] Several scholars put the number of executions at about 250,000.[15][16] Some believe it is possible more people were murdered by the Cheka than died in battle.[17] Lenin himself seemed unfazed by the killings. On 14 May 1921, the Politburo, chaired by Lenin, passed a motion "broadening the rights of the [Cheka] in relation to the use of the [death penalty]."[18]

you actyually comnpare the checka/kgb/gru/svr/etc with the CIA/NSA/etc

how?

you guys are the total winners when it comes to exterminations...

millions and millions... and thats your own people. we can NEVER get that way... we arent that good at evil.


and you want to complain about cia torture? waterboarding? again... we are amatures compared to your poeple

The Cheka is reported to have practiced torture. Victims were skinned alive, scalped, "crowned" with barbed wire, impaled, crucified, hanged, stoned to death, tied to planks and pushed slowly into furnaces or tanks of boiling water, and rolled around naked in internally nail-studded barrels. Chekists poured water on naked prisoners in the winter-bound streets until they became living ice statues. Others beheaded their victims by twisting their necks until their heads could be torn off. The Chinese Cheka detachments stationed in Kiev reportedly would attach an iron tube to the torso of a bound victim and insert a rat into the other end which was then closed off with wire netting. The tube was then held over a flame until the rat began gnawing through the victim's guts in an effort to escape. Denikin’s investigation discovered corpses whose lungs, throats, and mouths had been packed with earth.[19][20][21]

Women and children were also victims of Cheka terror. Women would sometimes be tortured and raped before being shot. Children between the ages of 8 and 16 were imprisoned and occasionally executed.[22]

and not only that... but your people have given out the records of such actions... in other words... your own admitted that this is what they do.

and yet you can compare.

the dogs in animal farm are inspired by the checka, nkvd, ogpu, mvd! napoleon is stalin.

and unlike mistakes here in america.. the things in your country were not mistakes.

seems stalin wasnt the only one that hated the kulaks... and forgot that these were his own people, and the resources needed to grow!

The term Lenin's Hanging Order refers to the handwritten order[1] dated August 11, 1918, written by Vladimir Lenin instructing communists operating in and around Penza to publicly hang at least one hundred kulaks; publicize their names; confiscate their grains and to designate an unspecified number of hostages.


Artfldgr says:

It is useful to recall what Stalin told his Yugoslavian comrades in 1945: “The war will be over soon,” he said. “We shall recover in fifteen or twenty years, and then we’ll have another go at it.” This is how the totalitarian mind works.

In the early days of the Yeltsin presidency, a curious announcement went largely unnoticed in the West: The Russian government admitted to an increase in armaments spending. While the Kremlin cut back its troop numbers to save money, and while it held back pay to hundreds of thousands of soldiers, it nonetheless decided to modernize its military equipment. Russian soldiers might live in desperate conditions for a few years, and the army might fall to a quarter of its Cold War strength, but in the next war they would have the most advanced weapons.

The solution to Russia's military backwardness was therefore simple: Neglect the soldiers while you upgrade the weapons. Once the weapons are upgraded, go back to paying the soldiers -- and fill up the armed forces with recruits.


so are you awake... do you 'get' it?

that your mind doesnt have the power you think it does. it believes it can fathom things by judging them from its own place.

the problem is that your nicer than the power hungry sociopathics... and so you CANT conceive of such horrible things benig pragmatic and ok.

but look up the definition of sociopathic.

they have no abilty to feel remorse or guilt.

when one asks how can russian leaders do this, there is one EASY answer. their leaders are the same sociopats and psychopaths that lenin told derzinsky to tap from the prisons. once given the chance to weapons, access, money and power... something the old guards NEVER allowed for men of such ill, or RARELY allowed it by failure to act.

in russia, this is the norm... sociopaths, not limited by any sense of morals, or propriety.

which is why your so disinformed. sociopaths use people, and love to trick them. and so they LOve it when they can trick a whole nation into giving up everything that everyone has and puts it intheir pockets.

in fact their victims are so embarassed that they work real hard, as you do, to preserve that situation...

this is how the sociopath wins. escalates it past a point that a moral person would. create such a sitation where the embarrasment and acceptance is so great, that the victims all rally to fight for you to preserve them as they believe they are, rather than pay the piper.

Col. Stanislav Lunev, a defector from the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Russian General Staff, noted over a year ago that Russia had as many generals as it did at the height of the Cold War. "It takes eight weeks to make a soldier," said Lunev, "but it takes two years to make a division commander." In other words, Russia's military build-down was equivocal from the start. Russia created a mechanism for rapidly mobilizing millions of men in a short time and putting them into ready-made combat divisions. Today we see that a mobilization is taking place, masked at first by the Yugoslav crisis, then by the current civil war in Russia's south.

in other words they keep crap happening so that they have an excuse to maintain what they have.

they have fired the lower people that can be trained in a month, and kept the people that take years to train, and build alliances and be effective.

like i said. in a frost the body pares its blood flow from the whole body, to themost necessary organs.

so frostbite, is lack of money for a state, and so the organs of the soveit state did exactly what a body does.

they shut off flow to the people, and to the bottom soldiers. these are the lumpen proletariat... teh people they murder and use as convenience dictates.

so if they had to build up a military... they only need to conscritp troops, as the generals and others are still in place.

what do you say about an army that has enough generals to field a 20 millino man army, and a population of conscripts they can take such from when needed?

Russia's military is organized differently than the U.S. military. In America, we have five services: the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines and Coast Guard. In Russia, they also have five services: the Army, Air Force, Navy, Strategic Rocket Forces and Air Defense Forces. This organizational arrangement tells us a great deal. Russia's nuclear missiles have their own dedicated service branch. Even more interesting, Russia has a special anti-air and anti-ballistic missile service that is dedicated to shooting down American bombers and missiles (the Air Defense Forces). In other words, two of Russia's five service branches are entirely oriented towards nuclear world war.


fun fun fun... no?

for a country that cant afford conflict they are sure structured and prepared for offensive conflict of the most offensive kind!

and you can read their military theory books

"Military strategy under conditions of modern war," says the Soviet text, "becomes the strategy of deep nuclear rocket strikes in conjunction with the operations of all services of the armed forces in order to effect simultaneous defeat and destruction of the economic potential and armed forces throughout the enemy territory."


AND

our sources of information grow narrower and narrower. With each passing day, we know less and less about the ongoing crisis in Russia.


Artfldgr says:

The USSR was a revolutionary state by its nature. They were devoted believers, they wanted to build a new social order to make the whole world happy.

and of course what did they create? the worst possible hell for their people that has continued on to this day.

old russia, and new russia are not any different from each other. i can pull up quotes here from people who compare the actions of the czars with today and see little difference other than peopel who could never be in power under the czars are now ni power other wise.


do you really want to try again and bring up that list of items for me to teach you history?

do you really want to learn a non leftist revisioist history of slavery?

check out who sold the slaves FIRST... (their own countrymen).

and if you want to damn the US for slavery, the common practice of the period...

then lets damn russia for 100 million tortured to death.

americans treated their slaves better than russia treated its citizens either under the czars or under soviets, or under todays regime.

the USSR IS revolutionary in nature.. in fact socialism DEMANDS it. its a core of their ideology and as such, is why the spy agencies that were created during the revolution are still there. their job is to finish the never ending war till there is peace.

lenin defined peace as no opposition to socialism.

A revolution is always a blood-shedding. And the October Revolution in Russia, with its product, the USSR (almost during the whole time of the existance), were the part of the concieved All-World Working Class Revolution.

ah, yes... but not all revolutions are the same and have good outcomes.

in the case of the united states, the revolution produced more freedom, more productive, compassionate society that has EVER existed. the US gives away its wealth every year. last year we gave almost a trillion dollars to russia. 800 million for their police stations for the common man to have some form of protection.

may i ask the last time russia gave the US a trillion dollars? how about more than half a trillion a year for a decade?

have you EVER heard of a enemy turning over that much money to HELP?

all those messy events and leaders were of the same revolutionary kind.

far from it. it would be like saying your mother and you are exactly the same and both of you have sex the same way since your both from the same cloth. duh

your so stupid its amazing.

the american revolution and french revoltion were miles apart. the french as with socialist pogroms turned it into a bloodbath..

the american on the other hand did not go out and murder every british person or tory they could find. in fact when they won, they didnt then create a blood bath and a new efficient way to execute people.

notice that each socialist regime comes up with new ways to murder people. in soft socialistm its waiting, and lines, and omission of service (like that which killed what would have been my new nephew two weeks ago, instead we are buring him. it was death by socialism, not medicine)

the french came up with the guillotine.. the germans came up with the gas chambers and other things... russians came up with working them to death under feeding them.

so no, they are not anything like each other.

when the vietnamese socialist won their revolution, they killed more than a million families by drowning..

its a fundemental difference... russia takes over latvia... 1/3 of the population is moved to gulags and worked to death... russians are shipped in to lvie in their homes and have their property....

in japan, america takes over... we dont load them into gulags.. we didnt murder millions... we didnt even take their weapons from them!!! we left them their emperor... and then we gave them back their full economy and kick started it.

they are now independent... same as france.. germany... italy...

hey! lets go over the list of countries russia took over and then compare outcomes..

lets see... korea... north stays communist... and everyone suffers deprivations, starvation, camps, murders, and no progress.

america keeps them out of south korea... south korea is an independent modern state.

russia is yonjuger than us. and yet, they have not stopped grabbving lands TO KEEP...

the two are not teh same by a long shot.

here is another way to tell the difference.

what country do people kill themselves trying to get to? eh? given a choice of a free house in russia, and such... would an immigrant choose russia or america?

50,000 plus people from 800 countries move here by choice every year.

even more move here illegally

your picking and choosing to make your point and your used to debating with other idiots. so no one can challenge your assertions.


No matter how the armed forces organized the USA have Minitmans which have bigger range and accuracy than Topols.

really? did you look up what your saying? or are you again just having diareah of the mouth?

current minuteman - LGM-30 Minuteman III Modernization

current topol - RT-2UTTH - Topol-M
SS-27

from global security / the more sophisticated SS-27 Topol-M is comparable to the American Minuteman-3.

topol - Range (km) 10,000 -10,500 (6500 miles)

minuteman III - 6,000-plus miles (5,218 nautical miles)

care to figure out what the diameter of the earth is dummy? 12,756 km...

so to make a greater range you would make a missile that could fly around and hit yourself!!!

what was that quote again? oh yeah...

"have Minitmans which have bigger range and accuracy than Topols."

well, your wrong AGAIN (you have yet to be right on a fact, or havent you noticed?).

the us has Active force, 530 active minuteman III missiles, 0 reserve.

the number of missles russia has is unknown.. as they dont publish that the way the US does.

though estimates run to parity... low estimate 350... high estimate more than 500.

what i want to know is how can you even think of asserting how many there are when your state keeps all that as a secret and cheats?

[the reason is something called ransparency ]

want to look at something different that your conveniently ignoring.

the US minuteman has three warheads, reduced to 1 due to an agreement that we keep.

the topol in its latest incarnation has SIX warheads.

the american warhead yeild is 340kt...

the russian warheads, all six, are 550kt EACH

so the throw weight of the american missil is 340kt per missle

the throw weight of each topol is 3,300 kt

so the destructive power of each russian missle is TEN TIMES MORE POWERFUL....

wich brings me to the next stupid quote. the us bombs are more accurate.

yes they are... they dont want to kill people, only military... and so rather than make a 3.3 MT missile, they make a 3.4 KT missle and put it more accurately

russia on the other hand does not care about enemy civilans (ask the poles, the czeks, the latvians, the estonians, the lituanians, etc)

so they make a 3.3 MILLION TON puppy.

hey... lets see what else.

the US has 500 missils at 340kt.

the whole arsenals throw weight is 170,000 kt

take the lower estimate for russian topols and you get a total arsenal throw weight of

1,155,000

so with half the missiles they have how many times the destructive force?

each one of the six warheads are twice the power of one minuteman warhead.

ok... dance out of that one moron.

let me put this in perspective.

each minuteman missile is 16 times more powerful than the bomb that dropped on nagasaki (21kt)

each topol m can deliver 157 times the blast that was at nagasaki.

So it is not an issue. No matter how much Russia spends on her military, the USA spends tens time more.

well, lets say the kt was money... since you say the americans are bigger and better i guess you would want a dollar for each kiloton they can deliver...

but you would be poor... you would have less than 200,000 dollars...

however, i would select russia, and i would get more than a million dollars.

why?

because i know the facts, and all you nkow is propaganda... empty lies states over and over again till you believe them.

at no point have you decided to check if your side is lying to you.

you are doing us americans a great service. you hace given me the classic luines. and i have addressed each of them. the viewership from russia is large here, and so you have educated your people as to the lies of your own side.

for that i thank you.

you are a useful idiot twice over.

I do not see anything wrong with Russia military efforts even in 1993 if there were ones (to which I doubt). To preseve the infrastructure of the defense industrial complex was a good idea.

sir, there is no saving face.. each time yourwrong you try to keep going.. try to somehow salvage wrong to some kind of right.

that dont work... there WERE efforts... but we in the west have journalists we dont murder, our state is not run by a political engine created from the worst sociopaths in prisons.. you are doubting your own leaders annoncements and such!!!!!!!!!!

in other words, it sounds even stupider that your defending a situation in which your leaders have given speeches as to the truth.

so what it amounts to is that in the west we get the news of our own, and we get the speeches of your own, and we get to compare and read and our journalist are not killed.

what it amounts to is that you never know what your missing. how can you? you have not been told. and so yu have fileld in the blanks with all the positive ideas that you can muster towards your own (which is right), and they betray you.

each time you come out here, your nothing but a walking bag of lies... and the sad part is that you dont know it.

you think waht you know is right. but its only correct if you never leave russia, if your a bubble boy and have your whole input and outputs controlled by the state.

in one sweeping gesture you said a bunch of unfacts as truth... each was wrong.. the information for you to know IS available.. but i guess your government might not think to kindly of you inthe future if your going through military magazines and think tank articles.

would they?

Russia is a big country and to defend her interests she need some Army and weapons.

by that logic, then its ok taht the US has a lot more. the US has a lot mroe to lose. they have less land, but they have as many resourves, and they have even more resources in their common people. somethign russia doesnt have. those people were murdered over the past 100 years to make the new soviet man.

just as you can breed a pit bull to be meaner, you can also make people more docile by selecting those taht are not that way in the population and then removing them.

one big human breeding program.

its why the germans are such wimps now compared to their past. they lost two wars where their best and brightest and such were decimated... totally removed from the gene pool... same with russia, but they did it by choice to themselves.

As about the ABM in Europe, it can be neutralised by Russians now, but who knows what unsatiable Yankees are going to set there next. And there is nothing good for Russia to have the uSA radars wathing trough Russin air space up to the Urals.

so your admitting then that the whole bruohaha about the abm is a lie. after all, if the missles they want there are not these imagined future missles, and of course unlike russia, we print in the newspapers when we change missle.s so there is no way for such to happen without everyone knowing it.

in fact the russians are very much HAPPY the missles are going there. like actors dont want to be seen as a ham, so they pretend to despize paparazzi, who their publicists call.

russia wants the abm cmoing in, but its a good opportunity to play games and workt he system. the reason that they want it, its like deliving top secrets to the house next door. much easier to steal secrets from the missles stationed in those countries than to get them from the US.

so as you just showed, the ABM is a non issue, and me thinks the lady doth protestith too much.

There was an unwritten agreement not to destabilise the existing security settings of Russia and West Europe. And the USA are breaking this principle.

waht agreement is that? russia doesnt even keep the agreements it signs... so agreements that are verbal are worth the paper they are printed on.

give me a link to that agreement. dont just say it. you got all my links. and you can check the data.

your link is old news. and it doesnt confirm your side, it confirms my side. read it again.

An inquest might delve deeper for evidence, but there seems little prospect of that at the moment. Although Scotland Yard says its investigation was completed last May, with the director of public prosecutions recommending that Lugovoi be extradited and charged, the St Pancras coroner's office, which covers University College Hospital where Litvinenko died, told us that no inquest could be held since - in their view - the police investigation remains open. So large chunks of evidence about Litvinenko's activities remain unexplored. Goldfarb told us: "It could hang like this for years. Marina is very frustrated."

in other words, they need to have a grand jury hear the testimony and they need to arrest lugovoy to work that process. the process can just as easily absovle him of things as it could damn him. thats a major difference between the west and your state.

hows this. he can be so guilty that they have photos, they have tapes... witnesses, and so forth. but if they got the evidence outside the rules, its as if it doesnt exist. even worse, there is no way to ever make it exist in the eyes of the courts!!!

Litvinenko should have been wary of Lugovoi from the start, but the lure of money was too strong. Otherwise he might have found out that Lugovoi was a close associate of Alexander Talik; the two men served together in the same KGB and FSB divisions. Instead, Litvinenko confided to his good friend Alex Goldfarb that he had agreed to become Lugovoi's "man in London".

the interesting part in this

Others warned him to be careful, including Evgeni Limarev. Limarev was to play one last significant role in the Litvinenko affair: he sent a series of alarmist emails to Scaramella in October 2006, claiming that a Russian plot was afoot to kill everyone connected to the Mitrokhin Commission.


thats VERY damning for russia. do you know what the mitrokhin commission is? or who Vasili Nikitich Mitrokhin (Василий Никитич Митрохин) is?

that man during the soviet time hand copied KGB documents and stored them under his house. for decades after he entered the MGB in 1948, he took these notes.

Mitrokhin sometimes dated the beginnings of his disillusionment to Khrushchev's famous speech to the Communist Party congress denouncing Stalin, though it seems he may have been harbouring doubts for some time before that. For years he had listened to broadcasts on the BBC and Voice of America, noting the gulf between their reports and party propaganda.

Yet when he began looking into the archives, he claimed to have been shocked by what he discovered about the KGB's systematic repression of the Russian people. "I could not believe such evil," he recalled. "It was all planned, prepared, thought out in advance. It was a terrible shock when I read things."

Between 1972 and 1984 he supervised the move of the archive of the First Chief Directorate from the Lubyanka to the new KGB headquarters at Yasenevo. While doing so he made copies or stole documents from the archive. He retired in 1985.

40 years of the most top secret documents from the highest levels of kgb, and others.

he didnt defect till 1992...

Operations followed to retrieve the 25,000 pages of files hidden in his house, covering operations from as far back as the 1930s. He and his family were then exfiltrated to Britain, although authorities of Yeltsin's Russia were not creating any obstacles for free traveling abroad of active or retired members of secret services or members of their families.

Richard Tomlinson, the MI6 officer imprisoned in 1997 for attempting to publish a book about his career, was one of those involved in retrieving the documents from containers hidden under the floor of the dacha.

so if you think putin wants litvenenko.. no he want mitrokhen gone!!!

this is how the west knows so much right up to the days he left...

as well as venona

as well as golitsyn, lunev, sejna, and lots lots more..

all cross checked and details confirmed.


i stuck with it, because it was a chance to educate russian peoples.

if they had access to their own files, they could read what we ahve access to. but alas, russia has no real freedom of information act... and putin has slammed all the doors.

in a few years though some other interesting things will come out as the complete library of the CPUSA are now being pored over. 2 million pages that cover the subversion they denied for years (that venona, mitroken, and others showed were lies).

this is why putin is the way he is. the "great plan" is unraveling before its finished. and so close to the end. but when it started, as golitsyn talked, the internet had not yet been invented, and all this information was never thought to be able to get out as no tv station would cover it, and was seemingly already controlled by ridicule and mixing facts with the tin hat crowd.

however, all over the place, histories and lies are bleeding out of the cracks. feminists are found to be lliking the eugenciists that wanted to destroy the blacks (SAnger), how they denied real mathematical female genius (noether), their communist roots.

the science they faked is unraveling. as now we know franz boas was a spy (venona), margret meade was a shill he selcted and her work is now discredited, kinseys work is also discredited... marcuse...

even maynard keynes and kenesian economics is out, as keynes said he was wrong.. (and the socialists have bene using that to breakt he economics).

take care... just rememver, the person who really wants to help, will not paint so rosy a picture... the person who is lying to you about that, will paint it better than it can ever be. its a fool that selects the fantasy.

to imagene that after putin has total control and more countries, that he will dissolve the stae and give it back, is the biggest joke of all history.

its like the criminal saying... give me the gun and after the fight is over i will give it back.

once they have the power, the rest is forgotten. just as once puttin got the leadership, his stepping down is forgotten. all hs games are only a way to let others have plausible deniability. something they dont get to play with if he seizes it outright. doesnt matter, the control is the same. the man does not change because his suit today is blue, and yesterday it was brown.


HL Shancken says:

Thank you to Artfldgr for telling the truth.












jordan shoes wholesale says:

we prefer to buy a pair of cheap nike Shoes if they'r the same of brand.we can feel it comfortable what brought
by Air Jordan Shoes,but also relaxing from Jordan Kicks.once u wear Jordan Shoes,even u think u'r the NO.1,
you'r be more confident than before .i like Jordan Shoes.


Post a comment


(will not be published)



Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)




TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/604