War with Russia
Discussion
bluebarge there was a thread on militaryphotos.net forum, too lazy to search for it now
skyrover said:
The phrase 'routine combat training' and the fact that is in Rostov suggests to me that it was part of the preparations for the upcoming offensive.
more like a classic russian cockupThe Finnish military fired on Tuesday handheld underwater depth charges as a warning against a suspected submarine in waters near Helsinki.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/28/us-finla...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/28/us-finla...
AreOut said:
bluebarge there was a thread on militaryphotos.net forum, too lazy to search for it now
You mean you went to a forum with educated intelligent people who know the specific material inside and out who came to a conclusion based on thought and facts, and didn't trust a blog/MSM reposted news release that contained no proper analysis?skyrover said:
The phrase 'routine combat training' and the fact that is in Rostov suggests to me that it was part of the preparations for the upcoming offensive.
more like a classic russian cockupWhat were you thinking
Bluebarge said:
Well, going against the grain may cause problems for RT journalists but, aside from the political slant of certain newspapers which is well-known and relates to internal politics rather than foreign affairs, journalists are just expected to report stories and I don't think you will find a "party line" will hold for long in media organisations such as the BBC or AFP.
You've made this up, but you are free to believe it. I see a pattern.Bluebarge said:
As to "ignorance" I note that whenever you are asked for information that corroborates the points you make and which could lighten the darkness of us poor Westerners, you usually fail to deliver, and resort to "ad hominem" attacks instead, as you have just done above.
I have outlined my point of view and supported it numerous times in the previous thread on this subject. At some point however, one realizes that talking to your type is the equivalent of talking to a wall. In all fairness, however, the wall at least knows when to keep quiet. scherzkeks said:
I have outlined my point of view and supported it numerous times in the early pages of this thread. At some point however, one realizes that talking to your type is the equivalent of talking to a wall. In all fairness, however, the wall at least knows when to keep quiet.
I am of the same opinion, a handful of posters here never acknowledge when they were proven wrong and just change the goalposts, constantly coming up with generalisations and accusatory statements yet never allowing the onus to fall on them to prove anything firmly believing that the best defence is attack. It just gets tedious trying to have any sort of meaningful or neutral discussion. It jsut gets tedious real quick.isee said:
scherzkeks said:
I have outlined my point of view and supported it numerous times in the early pages of this thread. At some point however, one realizes that talking to your type is the equivalent of talking to a wall. In all fairness, however, the wall at least knows when to keep quiet.
I am of the same opinion, a handful of posters here never acknowledge when they were proven wrong and just change the goalposts, constantly coming up with generalisations and accusatory statements yet never allowing the onus to fall on them to prove anything firmly believing that the best defence is attack. It just gets tedious trying to have any sort of meaningful or neutral discussion. It jsut gets tedious real quick.As to the topic at hand, of whether the Western press is more reliable than Russia's state-controlled press, I'm really struggling to see how, in this internet age, with independent reporting and hundreds of news organisations operating in 120+ democratic countries in the world, each with different political agendas, you can contend that they are all toeing the same "party" line or are incapable of independent reporting free from political interference.
If that's what you want to believe, that's your prerogative, but it really is not something that you can portray as "fact".
Mojocvh said:
isee said:
AreOut said:
more like a classic russian cockup
The official story is an electrical short caused a fire which in turn cooked the ammunition. s
t happens by the sound of it.Amazing
DMN said:
Just like they knew it was a Dutch Sub, even though they were no where near themselves (nudge-nudge, wink-wink, say no more).
Goes both ways though no? How is that picture of a Russian sub which turned out to be a work vessel in the end coming along?To try and draw a parallel between an event that happened in the Russian military within Russian borders and the Russian opinion on something that Russia was accused of, though never proven to be involved in is just retarded.
It's like me saying I got the claps and you then insinuating that I cannot possibly know whether I got the claps or not because when you accused me of fooling around with your sister, to which I suggested that perhaps it was one of your neighbours as I don't even know you, let alone your sister. Do you see how it makes zero sense?
Putin Needs Neither War Nor Peace in Ukraine
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-29/p...
interesting article
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-29/p...
interesting article
AreOut said:
Putin Needs Neither War Nor Peace in Ukraine
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-29/p...
interesting article
Big whoop, russian companies can get overpriced credit; it's better than nothing, but it's not likely to help address their longterm competitiveness issues; their economy is going to remain in the shttp://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-29/p...
interesting article
tter. Much as being poked in the eye is better than being stabbed in the ribs or having bad AIDS.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff