Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

What would it take for Russia to be #1?


  • Please log in to reply
7545 replies to this topic

#4641 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 January 2005 - 12:47 PM

Originally posted by woj1@cyberonic.
I don-t see nothing wrong in Saddam ;
in contrary, he provided for their people free education, free medical care and life free from paying taxes.
He secured shelter for evicted from their homes Palestinians; so . I wouldn-t in any case agree with you on comparison.



Howdy guys
Little lion lived like a king, tortured, gassed, invaded Iran (ask them what they think of him) and served as pawn to America.

A wise ruler would have avoided all of that in order to avoid so much pain to his country. He fell victim to the Law of the Jungle that he played by. That's the risk of lions. "It's a fight between lions," say the little animals...:(
  • 0

#4642 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 15 January 2005 - 05:48 AM

Howdy DonQ:
His number one crime was he wouldnt recognise Israel and the second was he sent the Palestinians money in compensation for the destruction by Israel.
Heavy investment in health and education meant medium term to long tern they potentially would create a stronger national in everyway than Israel. Put with this the fact that they werent subject to fundamentalism which is recognised by the strategists as a brake on progresiveness, it would be hard for Israel to dominate and remember the idea of a Middle East Market for Israel to dominate was made public.
I think the Royals all inclusive have prostituted themselves to Zionism to survive.
Between Iraq and Iran then the two best choices to invade obviously Iraq was the best option as an attack on Iran would have been seen clearly an attack on Islam. Iran is now surrounded.
  • 0

#4643 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 15 January 2005 - 11:29 AM

Originally posted by donquijote
Howdy guys
Little lion lived like a king, tortured, gassed, invaded Iran (ask them what they think of him) and served as pawn to America.

A wise ruler would have avoided all of that in order to avoid so much pain to his country. He fell victim to the Law of the Jungle that he played by. That's the risk of lions. "It's a fight between lions," say the little animals...:(



Although removing the American
  • 0

#4644 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 15 January 2005 - 12:25 PM

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 31


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. Planning for War in Europe, 1963-64
Edited by William Burr
May 24, 2000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The release of Cold War-era Soviet and East European documents on war plans and nuclear planning raises questions about U.S. war planning during the same period. A central issue is the degree to which U.S. and NATO planning posited early or initial use of nuclear weapons like the 1964 Warsaw Pact plan from the Czech archives. Certainly, by the 1950s, NATO war plans assumed early use of nuclear weapons, even immediate use under some circumstances.[1] By the 1960s, however, the situation began to change as the Kennedy and Johnson administrations began to push for contingency planning for conventional and limited nuclear war. Moreover, U.S. presidents would make final decisions on nuclear weapons use (unless the president was out of action and predelegation arrangements kicked in). Nevertheless, as shown by the documents that follow, high-level U.S. officials assumed that a Warsaw Pact conventional or nuclear attack on NATO Europe would invite a U.S. nuclear response (unless the Soviets agreed to limit fighting to conventional weapons). Rejecting the idea of "no first use," senior U.S. officials took it for granted that a massive Warsaw Pact conventional attack on Western Europe would prompt a nuclear response from outnumbered Western forces.
The following documents, a sampling from the 1963-64 period, were selected to invite comparison and contrast with the 1964 Warsaw Pact war plan and related documents that are now available on the website of the Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The U.S. documents suggest how senior civilian and military officials in the Kennedy-Johnson administrations thought about nuclear war and nuclear weapons use in European and intercontinental military operations. The theater and strategic war plans that they approved, however, remain classified. Yet, basic planning concepts and nuclear targeting options in U.S. war plans come across as does the political context that shaped military planning.
Not surprisingly, just as the Soviet and Czech documents imputed the most aggressive purposes to NATO, the U.S. documents ascribed comparable aggressive purposes to the Warsaw Pact side. Interestingly, however, some of the U.S. material partially validates Soviet fears of first strikes and surprise nuclear attack. Yet, when American war planners thought about striking first, they believed that it would be in response to certain information that the Soviet military was planning to strike American and European targets. In this way, American leaders thought it possible to preempt a Soviet attack.
One wonders if comparable Soviet-era material exists, whether in Politburo, Party, or Defense Ministry archives. The new documents were produced by the military but given that "politics was in command" during the Soviet era, one wonders how military and civilian leaders thought about and discussed the problem of nuclear weapons use in private. Is there a record of a comparable Politburo or high command discussion where top officials argue that they have deterred the Americans from undertaking rash actions in Central Europe? Is there a record of Communist party leaders suggesting that they had any doubts about first use of nuclear weapons? In this connection, documents that elucidate Soviet-era procedures and policies for nuclear weapons use would be especially significant.
  • 0

#4645 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 15 January 2005 - 12:56 PM

Wolfowitz Shuns Deadline for Troops in Tsunami Relief
The U.S. can't give a deadline on withdrawing its military forces from relief assistance in Asia's tsunami-struck areas, though troops won't stay any longer than necessary, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said.

``We'd like to be out of this business as soon as we responsibly can,'' You can't put a timeline on that.''

Wolfowitz for Banda Aceh, capital of Indonesia's Aceh province, the worst-hit area in southern Asia.
He will also visit Sri Lanka.
Indonesia upset US giving military forces involved in the relief effort until March 26 to leave the country. Aceh is place a separatist rebellion against the Indonesian government for several decades.

US heplped East Timor to seperate from Indonesia.

``I hope that our Indonesian friends will accept it is the needs of the population that will decide when military assets should be phased out completely,'' ``There will be many more weeks for a very substantive military presence.''
The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, stationed off Aceh's coast, is serving as the staging ground for rapid- deployment teams who are being dispatched to coastal areas of Aceh.
survivors.
some from http://quote.bloombe...zzOY&refer=home
Wasn
  • 0

#4646 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 03:46 AM

Have you noticed Woj that there are two conflicting views regards India and the US. One being they are buddies and the other that India has demanded a distance.

I cant see any reason to trumpet S. Hussein as some messiah.
Similarly I dont see Iran as anything negative, being targetted by the US is now days held to be complimentary, isnt it?
I think Hussein is largely incidental to global strategy.

LOt of talk/sdvice for the US to get out this year. Be a huge mess and then the Iraqis will be blamed for fighting one another while the US looks good do releif work elsewhere.
  • 0

#4647 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 01:14 PM

Originally posted by Bader
I cant see any reason to trumpet S. Hussein as some messiah.
Similarly I dont see Iran as anything negative, being targetted by the US is now days held to be complimentary, isnt it?
I think Hussein is largely incidental to global strategy.

LOt of talk/sdvice for the US to get out this year. Be a huge mess and then the Iraqis will be blamed for fighting one another while the US looks good do releif work elsewhere.



All of Mildest countries are under strongly influenced by the American pretension of wealth.
And they are the victims of US mystification.
They believe that going with rich they also makes them rich.
It is absolute nonsense perception, but it is unfortunately Arab philosophy.
They are agree to be kicked by riches to be also rich maybe less but rich.
Donq says that Saddam lived as a king. It is necessary in Arabs countries.
King living as a Shepard is unacceptable . Positions of dignity and power demand decorum.
In result of leadership Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Hoseini-KHAMENEI sent insults under Israel address but so far he didn
  • 0

#4648 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 01:37 PM

From
http://info.onet.pl/...,686,item.html/ after RAI;

on Friday exploded 2000 Hg thermometers and these which didn
  • 0

#4649 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 02:32 PM

Originally posted by Bader
Have you noticed Woj that there are two conflicting views regards India and the US. One being they are buddies and the other that India has demanded a distance.

I]



India can handle tsunami crisis on its own: Powell

No immediate tsunami aid to India: IMF said it is not giving any immediate assistance to India, as the country is capable of handling the situation arising out of tsunami disaster.
"India has refused help, so IMF is not providing any immediate assistance to India for tsunami relief," IMF First Deputy managing Director Anne O Krueger said. http://www.hindustan...01301540005.htm
it means that both sides say the truth.

US manipulates between Pakistan and India . India can not ignore the trade with US totaled $18 billion in 2003, a 13.5 percent increase from the previous year.
US can not ignore the facts that Indian computer systems analysts can sabotage US computers network.

Because US the same time offers its support in Kashmir to Pakistan and India , so its no true love.
India looks for father growing of situation and will support the stronger. She won
  • 0

#4650 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 03:13 PM

Originally posted by woj1@cyberonic.
I don-t worry about situation in Iraq after US leave.
Nation is not in chaos; violence is directed only to US and US collaborators.
It was no violence when US left Vietnam and will be also peace in Iraq when US leave.
Saddam is and will be hero because he fought for his country freedom, thought he, with his money and connections could find sanctuary everywhere. Iranian shah died in US , licking fingers his masters.. .
One says; U.S. Aid Effort Winning Thanks, Not Hearts and Minds.

:)



As peaceful as Vietnam? Why have a puppet regime by force when they can behave like one voluntarily?

It's hard to know who won the Vietnam war, the little people of the Socialist Republic who now provide cheap labor, or the little people of the Mother of Democracies who now see their jobs "outsourced" (shipped) abroad? Or perhaps the elites of both countries who so nicely get along?:confused:

The Honorable Nguyen Manh Hung, Consul General of Vietnam in San Francisco
in Portland, Oregon says:

"Fourth, don
  • 0

#4651 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 January 2005 - 03:49 PM

"the United States is this singular animal in the international jungle that is interested in everything that is happening and that triggers the interests of everybody when it does something."

I kind of suspect who it is...;)

But this article written in 2000--who could have known about 9-11?--fails to account for all the conflict and destruction this beast creates. It talks about it being a source of stability, when injustice can only bring violence. These "experts"--on the lion's payroll--got it upside-down.:confused:


What about the United States? What, beside its hegemonic position, besides the apparent universality of what it has to offer the world, is particularly marked about the way it will approach the world?

Let's start off with its position in the international system, which is unique, uniquely powerful. This sobriquet "the last remaining superpower" is really true. There's nothing out there remotely resembling the U.S. And more importantly, there's not going to be anything out there for the next twenty-five years remotely resembling the United States. So the United States is this singular animal in the international jungle that is interested in everything that is happening and that triggers the interests of everybody when it does something. So this double role of being number one, overwhelmingly powerful but also overwhelmingly watched because it affects so many people everywhere in the world, that's what distinguishes the U.S. from any other country. You don't hear people protest Malaysian power or even Russian power these days. But the United States is ubiquitous, overwhelming and, in many respects, also indispensable.

http://globetrotter....joffe-con5.html
  • 0

#4652 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 12:07 AM

I liked that Woj.

I suspect Iraq under Hussein and Iran were the only nations which the Zionists (includes US) didnt have a powerful influence,
meaning in relation to their instability which the zionists could manipulate. The other factor is the US subsidy to Egypt and Jordan to send xmas cards to Israel as good neighbours.
Iraq and Iran dont recognise the Zionist state as some Jews dont either. Syria plays the beligerent role but I suspect the leader is like Arafat was. A convenience, less trouble than radicals that would replace them.
The Royals invest in the zionist backing economy and the Jewish media in the US, they are the two faced ones that have sold out.
This is why the Iraqi invasion received no opposition, not even through OPEC. Kuwait played a key game to entice Hussein to invade to justify the US war on Iraq and the UN selective attack on the Iraqi civilians while ignoring Israels sixty odd violations of
Un resolutions. THe UN obviously has an interest in the outcome
of the illegal destruction of Iraq.
I dont know what Irans policy is on Chechnia, also muslim, may see them as in a similar situation to Palestinians, but Iran has a rather strong relationship with Russia while under an embargo by the US, so I dont see them trying to please the US who have publically said they as seeking to overthrow the islamic revolution from within using young people.

Iraq and Vietnam will not be the same. A communist govt took over Vietnam which had a powerful army. Iraq will likely split up into three which was the original zionist plan. The Kurds will take over the north, which Israel is busy training commando type forces, the Sunni the central region and the Shiites the south.
Jordan has encouraged the clash between the Sunni and shiite of which they largely are against the shiites who are the most numerous in Iraq. Iran will back ther Shiites. Turkey and Israel will support the Kurds and Isarel will support the Royals backed Sunni to destroy the shiite power to isolate Iran further.
The interest in destroying the shiites by the Royals is that the fundamentalists will not be able to try over throwing them and forming a islamic state like Iran.
Same old game of using/manipulating self interest to destroy
brothers and neighbours. But take away US subsidy of Israel would this be possible? Who owns the banks- Fed Reserve?
  • 0

#4653 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 01:12 PM

Originally posted by donquijote
"the United States is this singular animal in the international jungle that is interested in everything that is happening and that triggers the interests of everybody when it does something."

... the United States is ubiquitous, overwhelming and, in many respects, also indispensable.

[



Pentagon Spurned Plan to Initiate Enemy Homosexuality
The U.S. military rejected a 1994 proposal to develop an "aphrodisiac" to spur homosexual activity among enemy troops but is hard at work on other less-than-lethal weapons, defense officials said Sunday.
The idea of fostering homosexuality among the enemy figured in a declassified six-year, $7.5 million request from a laboratory at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio .
"One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior," said the document, obtained by the Sunshine Project.
The Air Force Research Laboratory also suggested using chemicals that could be sprayed on enemy positions to attract stinging and biting bugs, rodents and larger animals.

http://www.reuters.c...storyID=7343855

Maybe military rejected but enemy uses it with big success, don
  • 0

#4654 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 01:45 PM

Originally posted by woj1@cyberonic.
Pentagon Spurned Plan to Initiate Enemy Homosexuality
The U.S. military rejected a 1994 proposal to develop an "aphrodisiac" to spur homosexual activity among enemy troops but is hard at work on other less-than-lethal weapons, defense officials said Sunday.
The idea of fostering homosexuality among the enemy figured in a declassified six-year, $7.5 million request from a laboratory at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio .
Maybe military rejected but enemy uses it with big success, don-t you think? :)



some from http://info.onet.pl/...96,16,item.html"Current Biology".

Epidemy of HIV/AIDS

When scientist changed the Rhesus protein on human type the rhesus lost their protection on aids.
Rhesus version of gen Trim5-alfa provides protection for HIV/AIDS in peoples. Fragment of rhesus gen Trim-5 alfa which blocks HIV/AIDS differentiates only one amino acid from human version.
Simplicity in difference might be one more proof that HIV/AIDS is laboratory product.
Difference between human and Rhesus is most studied issue. HIV/AIDS as the homosexuality, is not only one way sword. :)
  • 0

#4655 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 02:14 PM

Originally posted by donquijote
[
What about the United States? What, beside its hegemonic position, besides the apparent universality of what it has to offer the world, is particularly marked about the way it will approach the world?

Let's start off with its position in the international system, which is unique, uniquely powerful. This sobriquet "the last remaining superpower" is really true. There's nothing out there remotely resembling the U.S. And more importantly, there's not going to be anything out there for the next twenty-five years remotely resembling the United States.



Donq
  • 0

#4656 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 17 January 2005 - 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Bader
II dont know what Irans policy is on Chechnia, but Iran has a rather strong relationship with Russia while under an embargo by the US, so I dont see them trying to please the US who have publically said they as seeking to overthrow the islamic revolution from within using young people.



Iran has good relations with Russia, but their leader was eliminated by Russia in the past . Now no Iran no Russia pretend to remember that. Israel helps to build peace even unintentionally ....ha, ha ha. .
But Iran has stronger relation with Germany; during last WWII , allies war transports were forbidden to cross Iran territory. Germany as a US debts holder might be very pressing side for US politics. Hit in American pocket might be the most painful punch.

Talking on US attack on Iran sounds good in American society and in Israel (Kerry started that even early) but it is rather theatrical move in real world .:) No more German money to play.
  • 0

#4657 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 18 January 2005 - 05:13 AM

I was thinking similar to you Woj - your last comment after the news the Pentagon were thinking of insiting homosexuality in enemy armies.
What have the Chem-trails done to the US? The carry on by the perverts in the infamous prison by their lesbians (my guess) is an international disgrace to every US citizen.

Germany let Iran down badly over the nuclear power plant they pulled out of years ago. After being paid billions.

AIDs is man made. That has been known for many years.
  • 0

#4658 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 18 January 2005 - 10:35 AM

Originally posted by Bader
[
I dont know what Irans policy is on Chechnia, also muslim, may see them as in a similar situation to Palestinians.
[/B]



Palestinians in Israel I and Chechen in Russia.
Chechen in Russia were treated as full rights Russians, they had positions in government and army.
For example Dzhokhar Dudayev was former Soviet military officer.
Same of they like Szamil Basayew just were traitors who look for better paid job in England or Denmark and jeopardize their nation. Putin even pay retirement pension to Chechen .
It is not accident that traitors find home in England, she since from Queen Victoria time attacked Russia hoping to snick her boots in Crimea, (battle of Sevastopol).
Have you ever hear about the Palestynians in Israel or Israel army? no. Or Israel pension to Palestynians?. No. So how anyone can make such as assessment.
  • 0

#4659 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 18 January 2005 - 11:07 AM

Originally posted by Bader

What have the Chem-trails done to the US? The carry on by the perverts in the infamous prison by their lesbians (my guess) is an international disgrace to every US citizen.

Germany let Iran down badly over the nuclear power plant they pulled out of years ago. After being paid billions.



Germany Kohl the most prominent bachelor in Germany was rescue during tsunami by air force from Thailand.
Thailand were famous from sex- tourism industry.
Maybe Iran tradition values played role in Kohl to Iran attitude? Some finance scandals also hunt his name.

LAGOS, -- A Nigerian woman has given birth to a baby with many abnormalities in the form of two male organs, no anus and four legs. http://news.xinhuane...nt_2461020.htm.
During Clinton time , Mrs. Albright were tin Nigeria and built democracy and tolerance. :) :) :confused: :confused:
So maybe it was result of experimentation on sexual warfare.
  • 0

#4660 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 18 January 2005 - 11:41 AM

Polish government in secrecy before Polish society agreed yesterday to pass American active uranium through the Polish territory. http://info.onet.pl/...08,11,item.html, jeopardizing heath and security of Polish citizens.
This in secrecy acting government US called democratic, when I would prefer to see their members on electric chair.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru