"Illegal bombing"? According to whom? Found illegal according to whom? I never said the Kumanovo Agreement was a surrender, but please feel free to prove me wrong.
I never said that NATO defeated Yugoslavia, but please feel free to prove me wrong.
NATO never tried to "defeat" Yugoslavia. All NATO wanted to do was end the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo & bring Yugoslavia to the negotiating table, thus bring peace to the region; this was achieved, but I never said NATO defeated Yugoslavia. NATO didn't try to 'defeat' Yugoslavia.
Yes, the US will not remain a global dominant superpower forever, China's century comes closer each day. But to think the US will geographically crumble like the USSR did is just ridiculous. The USSR geographically crumbled because it was 15 major nations in one sovereign state under the control & dominance of the Russians.
The world is changing fast, you're correct. The word has changed a lot since I finished school, however Russia is still a former super power & a wannabe superpower; that hasn't changed.
But as the world changes, so will Russia. Russia's limited power which doesn't expand much past it's former borders other than former alliances from the USSR days. Once the Cold War generation dies out, Russia will grow closer to the rest of Europe and North America once Russia realises European-Western-Christian culture & dominance in the world is in decline; this is inevitable.
NATO seriously discussed a land invasion of Yugoslavia from Hungary, but discounted it as the loss of lives (their troops) would have been very high.
Yes Yugoslavia was powerless to stop the bombing because had the Russians paid their debt in S300 series missile systems there would have been no NATO aircraft left – why do you think that the mighty western windbags are not doing the same with Syria? The Russians had threatened the US if they arm the rebels (who now compose of Islamist fanatics that include al Qaida and 200 fighters from the Taliban recently arrived) they will hand over the S300 over to Assad. So what does the United States of Piss and Wind do? NOTHING.
It took 19 countries to try and subdue Serbia while your Albanians all it takes is a phone call from Brussels. NATO was not involved in Iraq. In fact the US and their allies left Iraq with nothing. The west has not profited one cent from those natural resources that you talk about – try the Chinese and Russians.
“Russia isn't powerful. Their army is made up of relative untrained conscripts”
If you work in the UK health system I hope you’re the cleaner and nothing else because what do you think makes up the majority of US troops today? Yes reservists like the ones who were in Abu Grahib prison or as most people know them as trailer trash. They are very poorly trained except given a title such as “Specialists”.
NATO's illegal bombing of Yugoslavia ended with the signing of the Kumanovo Agreement. This was not a surrender, this was an agreement between the Serbian government and NATO gangsters to cease hostilities and allow the UN to bring peace to Kosovo.
The Nazis didn't sign agreements with the Polish, Czech or Yugoslav governments; they defeated each in war and occupied those lands and ruled as they pleased. I will repeat. NATO did not defeat FR Yugoslavia. If NATO can't defeat a impoverished country of 10 million what chance does it have of defeating Russia?
Russia can't defeat America, but it can defeat NATO in Syria. When NATO is gone it will be replace by a resurgent Germany.
No foreign power can destroy America, but if things continue as they are then it will fall to pieces just like the USSR. Unlike the USSR, however, America has no dominant State to take over its Super-Power role. None of the States in the USA is a match for Russia.
The world is changing fast and will look very different when you leave school, Ian.
Had NATO actually invaded Yugoslavia properly, Yugoslavia would have been defeated in a day had NATO gone in all guns blazing.
========================
How old are you?
It is in Russia's interests because Russia is profiteering from selling weapons to Islamist terrorists and Assad in Syria. Russia is benefiting from the suffering of others in Syria.
What do you mean NATO failed to "defeat" Yugoslavia? NATO's objective was to force Yugoslavia to pull out of Kosovo, to bring Yugoslavia to the negotiating table and to stop the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo; all of this was achieved. During the 90's days, all Yugoslavia could do was shoot down 3 NATO planes and a bunch of UAV's, apart from that Yugoslavia was powerless to stop NATO's bombing. Had NATO actually invaded Yugoslavia properly, Yugoslavia would have been defeated in a day had NATO gone in all guns blazing.
NATO removed Saddam Hussian from Iraq and now natural resources are been sold, NATO achieved their objectives, they don't care if the locals want to blow each other up every now and again. Afghanistan is an unwinnable war.
Russia isn't powerful. Their army is made up of relative untrained conscripts and unsuperior technology. Russia relies on it's nukes too much. Russia doesn't have the military capacity to fight much beyond's borders. Russia is a wannabe military superpower. And if for argument's sake NATO and Russia did go to war, both would crumble as both have nukes.
I agree with you over Israel. Israel would be over run in a day if the US decided to stop supporting Israel.
It is in Russia’s interest that NATO falls to pieces and that American forces return to their failed state across the Atlantic. Better for the Russians (and Chinese, for that matter) to fight this war in Syria than on their own territory.
NATO is not as powerful as you believe. It failed to defeat Yugoslavia, and it is retreating from Iraq and Afghanistan. Against a powerful opponent like Russia it would crumble in weeks.
You also over estimate the power of the Jewish state. Israel looks powerful when it overruns (with Christian American help) poorly armed and trained Arab countries. But against Russia? Israel exists because America wants it; without American support there would be another Jewish Exodus.
"It involves 160,000 troops and 5,000 tanks, and represents the largest military maneuvers in Russia since the era of the Soviet Union"
Old thinking... who's going to attack Russia so that Russia's army can make any use of those 5000 tanks ? Somebody is being nostalgic about WWII tank battles. Is Russia going to use those 5000 tanks to attack the US or Israel or achieve any global goal ? That's laughable - Russia has no serious logistic capability to deploy that force in any place that is not in Russia's borders.
So, yes, a very impressive show; but just a show...
This is more than just practice. The Russians are showing Israel and its NATO puppets what they will face unless they back off in Syria.
Things are getting very dangerous very quickly.
(Michael Thomas, 16 July 2013 21:56)
Comment - Russia has no chanse against neither Israel nor Nato.
You dont seem to have any military insight neither regarding Strategy not Tactic.
The Mideast is not the Natural playground neither of or for Russia,
it is not Russias National interessts.
By the Way - Israel dont give a shit about Russia - Russia can do nothing but to loose in the Mideast.
Assads Syria will fall - Saudiarabia and the other Sunnimuslim Countries will se to that.
It's about 100 billion/year until 2020. How much could be done with this money for the millions of pensioners who are living in or on the edge of poverty in Russia?
(Questioner, 16 July 2013 17:31)
=====================================
About as much as for the same demographic in the US. At least Russia is not spending their money on invading other countries, unlike the US.
So many homeless and more becoming homeless in America while their elites spend obsene amount of money on invasion. Russian military needs to be strong because they need to worry about America. Why does American military need to be strong? Russia is not going to play in their backyard.
"At the same time the modernization of the Russian army is continuing - an equivalent of USD 640 billion has been set aside for this purpose through 2020."
It's about 100 billion/year until 2020. How much could be done with this money for the millions of pensioners who are living in or on the edge of poverty in Russia?
"At the same time the modernization of the Russian army is continuing - an equivalent of USD 640 billion has been set aside for this purpose through 2020."
It's about 100 billion/year until 2020. How much could be done with this money for the millions of pensioners who are living in or on the edge of poverty in Russia?
NATO seriously discussed a land invasion of Yugoslavia from Hungary, but discounted it as the loss of lives (their troops) would have been very high.
Yes Yugoslavia was powerless to stop the bombing because had the Russians paid their debt in S300 series missile systems there would have been no NATO aircraft left – why do you think that the mighty western windbags are not doing the same with Syria? The Russians had threatened the US if they arm the rebels (who now compose of Islamist fanatics that include al Qaida and 200 fighters from the Taliban recently arrived) they will hand over the S300 over to Assad. So what does the United States of Piss and Wind do? NOTHING.
It took 19 countries to try and subdue Serbia while your Albanians all it takes is a phone call from Brussels. NATO was not involved in Iraq. In fact the US and their allies left Iraq with nothing. The west has not profited one cent from those natural resources that you talk about – try the Chinese and Russians.
“Russia isn't powerful. Their army is made up of relative untrained conscripts”
If you work in the UK health system I hope you’re the cleaner and nothing else because what do you think makes up the majority of US troops today? Yes reservists like the ones who were in Abu Grahib prison or as most people know them as trailer trash. They are very poorly trained except given a title such as “Specialists”.
It's about 100 billion/year until 2020. How much could be done with this money for the millions of pensioners who are living in or on the edge of poverty in Russia?
(Questioner, 16 July 2013 17:31)
=====================================
About as much as for the same demographic in the US. At least Russia is not spending their money on invading other countries, unlike the US.
So many homeless and more becoming homeless in America while their elites spend obsene amount of money on invasion. Russian military needs to be strong because they need to worry about America. Why does American military need to be strong? Russia is not going to play in their backyard.
This is more than just practice. The Russians are showing Israel and its NATO puppets what they will face unless they back off in Syria.
Things are getting very dangerous very quickly.
(Michael Thomas, 16 July 2013 21:56)
Comment - Russia has no chanse against neither Israel nor Nato.
You dont seem to have any military insight neither regarding Strategy not Tactic.
The Mideast is not the Natural playground neither of or for Russia,
it is not Russias National interessts.
By the Way - Israel dont give a shit about Russia - Russia can do nothing but to loose in the Mideast.
Assads Syria will fall - Saudiarabia and the other Sunnimuslim Countries will se to that.
"It involves 160,000 troops and 5,000 tanks, and represents the largest military maneuvers in Russia since the era of the Soviet Union"
Old thinking... who's going to attack Russia so that Russia's army can make any use of those 5000 tanks ? Somebody is being nostalgic about WWII tank battles. Is Russia going to use those 5000 tanks to attack the US or Israel or achieve any global goal ? That's laughable - Russia has no serious logistic capability to deploy that force in any place that is not in Russia's borders.
So, yes, a very impressive show; but just a show...
It is in Russia’s interest that NATO falls to pieces and that American forces return to their failed state across the Atlantic. Better for the Russians (and Chinese, for that matter) to fight this war in Syria than on their own territory.
NATO is not as powerful as you believe. It failed to defeat Yugoslavia, and it is retreating from Iraq and Afghanistan. Against a powerful opponent like Russia it would crumble in weeks.
You also over estimate the power of the Jewish state. Israel looks powerful when it overruns (with Christian American help) poorly armed and trained Arab countries. But against Russia? Israel exists because America wants it; without American support there would be another Jewish Exodus.
It is in Russia's interests because Russia is profiteering from selling weapons to Islamist terrorists and Assad in Syria. Russia is benefiting from the suffering of others in Syria.
What do you mean NATO failed to "defeat" Yugoslavia? NATO's objective was to force Yugoslavia to pull out of Kosovo, to bring Yugoslavia to the negotiating table and to stop the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo; all of this was achieved. During the 90's days, all Yugoslavia could do was shoot down 3 NATO planes and a bunch of UAV's, apart from that Yugoslavia was powerless to stop NATO's bombing. Had NATO actually invaded Yugoslavia properly, Yugoslavia would have been defeated in a day had NATO gone in all guns blazing.
NATO removed Saddam Hussian from Iraq and now natural resources are been sold, NATO achieved their objectives, they don't care if the locals want to blow each other up every now and again. Afghanistan is an unwinnable war.
Russia isn't powerful. Their army is made up of relative untrained conscripts and unsuperior technology. Russia relies on it's nukes too much. Russia doesn't have the military capacity to fight much beyond's borders. Russia is a wannabe military superpower. And if for argument's sake NATO and Russia did go to war, both would crumble as both have nukes.
I agree with you over Israel. Israel would be over run in a day if the US decided to stop supporting Israel.
Had NATO actually invaded Yugoslavia properly, Yugoslavia would have been defeated in a day had NATO gone in all guns blazing.
========================
How old are you?
"Illegal bombing"? According to whom? Found illegal according to whom? I never said the Kumanovo Agreement was a surrender, but please feel free to prove me wrong.
I never said that NATO defeated Yugoslavia, but please feel free to prove me wrong.
NATO never tried to "defeat" Yugoslavia. All NATO wanted to do was end the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo & bring Yugoslavia to the negotiating table, thus bring peace to the region; this was achieved, but I never said NATO defeated Yugoslavia. NATO didn't try to 'defeat' Yugoslavia.
Yes, the US will not remain a global dominant superpower forever, China's century comes closer each day. But to think the US will geographically crumble like the USSR did is just ridiculous. The USSR geographically crumbled because it was 15 major nations in one sovereign state under the control & dominance of the Russians.
The world is changing fast, you're correct. The word has changed a lot since I finished school, however Russia is still a former super power & a wannabe superpower; that hasn't changed.
But as the world changes, so will Russia. Russia's limited power which doesn't expand much past it's former borders other than former alliances from the USSR days. Once the Cold War generation dies out, Russia will grow closer to the rest of Europe and North America once Russia realises European-Western-Christian culture & dominance in the world is in decline; this is inevitable.
NATO's illegal bombing of Yugoslavia ended with the signing of the Kumanovo Agreement. This was not a surrender, this was an agreement between the Serbian government and NATO gangsters to cease hostilities and allow the UN to bring peace to Kosovo.
The Nazis didn't sign agreements with the Polish, Czech or Yugoslav governments; they defeated each in war and occupied those lands and ruled as they pleased. I will repeat. NATO did not defeat FR Yugoslavia. If NATO can't defeat a impoverished country of 10 million what chance does it have of defeating Russia?
Russia can't defeat America, but it can defeat NATO in Syria. When NATO is gone it will be replace by a resurgent Germany.
No foreign power can destroy America, but if things continue as they are then it will fall to pieces just like the USSR. Unlike the USSR, however, America has no dominant State to take over its Super-Power role. None of the States in the USA is a match for Russia.
The world is changing fast and will look very different when you leave school, Ian.
It is in Russia's interests because Russia is profiteering from selling weapons to Islamist terrorists and Assad in Syria. Russia is benefiting from the suffering of others in Syria.
What do you mean NATO failed to "defeat" Yugoslavia? NATO's objective was to force Yugoslavia to pull out of Kosovo, to bring Yugoslavia to the negotiating table and to stop the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo; all of this was achieved. During the 90's days, all Yugoslavia could do was shoot down 3 NATO planes and a bunch of UAV's, apart from that Yugoslavia was powerless to stop NATO's bombing. Had NATO actually invaded Yugoslavia properly, Yugoslavia would have been defeated in a day had NATO gone in all guns blazing.
NATO removed Saddam Hussian from Iraq and now natural resources are been sold, NATO achieved their objectives, they don't care if the locals want to blow each other up every now and again. Afghanistan is an unwinnable war.
Russia isn't powerful. Their army is made up of relative untrained conscripts and unsuperior technology. Russia relies on it's nukes too much. Russia doesn't have the military capacity to fight much beyond's borders. Russia is a wannabe military superpower. And if for argument's sake NATO and Russia did go to war, both would crumble as both have nukes.
I agree with you over Israel. Israel would be over run in a day if the US decided to stop supporting Israel.
"Illegal bombing"? According to whom? Found illegal according to whom? I never said the Kumanovo Agreement was a surrender, but please feel free to prove me wrong.
I never said that NATO defeated Yugoslavia, but please feel free to prove me wrong.
NATO never tried to "defeat" Yugoslavia. All NATO wanted to do was end the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo & bring Yugoslavia to the negotiating table, thus bring peace to the region; this was achieved, but I never said NATO defeated Yugoslavia. NATO didn't try to 'defeat' Yugoslavia.
Yes, the US will not remain a global dominant superpower forever, China's century comes closer each day. But to think the US will geographically crumble like the USSR did is just ridiculous. The USSR geographically crumbled because it was 15 major nations in one sovereign state under the control & dominance of the Russians.
The world is changing fast, you're correct. The word has changed a lot since I finished school, however Russia is still a former super power & a wannabe superpower; that hasn't changed.
But as the world changes, so will Russia. Russia's limited power which doesn't expand much past it's former borders other than former alliances from the USSR days. Once the Cold War generation dies out, Russia will grow closer to the rest of Europe and North America once Russia realises European-Western-Christian culture & dominance in the world is in decline; this is inevitable.
This is more than just practice. The Russians are showing Israel and its NATO puppets what they will face unless they back off in Syria.
Things are getting very dangerous very quickly.
(Michael Thomas, 16 July 2013 21:56)
Comment - Russia has no chanse against neither Israel nor Nato.
You dont seem to have any military insight neither regarding Strategy not Tactic.
The Mideast is not the Natural playground neither of or for Russia,
it is not Russias National interessts.
By the Way - Israel dont give a shit about Russia - Russia can do nothing but to loose in the Mideast.
Assads Syria will fall - Saudiarabia and the other Sunnimuslim Countries will se to that.
"At the same time the modernization of the Russian army is continuing - an equivalent of USD 640 billion has been set aside for this purpose through 2020."
It's about 100 billion/year until 2020. How much could be done with this money for the millions of pensioners who are living in or on the edge of poverty in Russia?
"It involves 160,000 troops and 5,000 tanks, and represents the largest military maneuvers in Russia since the era of the Soviet Union"
Old thinking... who's going to attack Russia so that Russia's army can make any use of those 5000 tanks ? Somebody is being nostalgic about WWII tank battles. Is Russia going to use those 5000 tanks to attack the US or Israel or achieve any global goal ? That's laughable - Russia has no serious logistic capability to deploy that force in any place that is not in Russia's borders.
So, yes, a very impressive show; but just a show...
It's about 100 billion/year until 2020. How much could be done with this money for the millions of pensioners who are living in or on the edge of poverty in Russia?
(Questioner, 16 July 2013 17:31)
=====================================
About as much as for the same demographic in the US. At least Russia is not spending their money on invading other countries, unlike the US.
So many homeless and more becoming homeless in America while their elites spend obsene amount of money on invasion. Russian military needs to be strong because they need to worry about America. Why does American military need to be strong? Russia is not going to play in their backyard.
It is in Russia’s interest that NATO falls to pieces and that American forces return to their failed state across the Atlantic. Better for the Russians (and Chinese, for that matter) to fight this war in Syria than on their own territory.
NATO is not as powerful as you believe. It failed to defeat Yugoslavia, and it is retreating from Iraq and Afghanistan. Against a powerful opponent like Russia it would crumble in weeks.
You also over estimate the power of the Jewish state. Israel looks powerful when it overruns (with Christian American help) poorly armed and trained Arab countries. But against Russia? Israel exists because America wants it; without American support there would be another Jewish Exodus.
Had NATO actually invaded Yugoslavia properly, Yugoslavia would have been defeated in a day had NATO gone in all guns blazing.
========================
How old are you?
NATO's illegal bombing of Yugoslavia ended with the signing of the Kumanovo Agreement. This was not a surrender, this was an agreement between the Serbian government and NATO gangsters to cease hostilities and allow the UN to bring peace to Kosovo.
The Nazis didn't sign agreements with the Polish, Czech or Yugoslav governments; they defeated each in war and occupied those lands and ruled as they pleased. I will repeat. NATO did not defeat FR Yugoslavia. If NATO can't defeat a impoverished country of 10 million what chance does it have of defeating Russia?
Russia can't defeat America, but it can defeat NATO in Syria. When NATO is gone it will be replace by a resurgent Germany.
No foreign power can destroy America, but if things continue as they are then it will fall to pieces just like the USSR. Unlike the USSR, however, America has no dominant State to take over its Super-Power role. None of the States in the USA is a match for Russia.
The world is changing fast and will look very different when you leave school, Ian.
NATO seriously discussed a land invasion of Yugoslavia from Hungary, but discounted it as the loss of lives (their troops) would have been very high.
Yes Yugoslavia was powerless to stop the bombing because had the Russians paid their debt in S300 series missile systems there would have been no NATO aircraft left – why do you think that the mighty western windbags are not doing the same with Syria? The Russians had threatened the US if they arm the rebels (who now compose of Islamist fanatics that include al Qaida and 200 fighters from the Taliban recently arrived) they will hand over the S300 over to Assad. So what does the United States of Piss and Wind do? NOTHING.
It took 19 countries to try and subdue Serbia while your Albanians all it takes is a phone call from Brussels. NATO was not involved in Iraq. In fact the US and their allies left Iraq with nothing. The west has not profited one cent from those natural resources that you talk about – try the Chinese and Russians.
“Russia isn't powerful. Their army is made up of relative untrained conscripts”
If you work in the UK health system I hope you’re the cleaner and nothing else because what do you think makes up the majority of US troops today? Yes reservists like the ones who were in Abu Grahib prison or as most people know them as trailer trash. They are very poorly trained except given a title such as “Specialists”.
IMAGE SOURCE
19 Komentari
Sortiraj po: