Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: john9001 on November 30, 2005, 02:57:43 PM
-
the news today said the terrorists captured 4 "peace activists" who were in iraq to help them win, if the terrorists are that stupid they cannot win.
unless it's a cover for the activists to link up with the terrorists.
sheehan needs to go to iraq to protest the killing of iraqs by the terrorists.
-
Peace activists have always been way out of their depth in the Middle East; remember that girl who got flattened like a pancake when she stood in front of the Israeli bull dozer? How about those Human Shields in Iraq? A lot of those UMC types were doing the frantic back stroke once they saw reality over there. If those peace activists don't get their heads sawed off, they will probably get the Stockholm Syndrome and want to help terrorists kill the enemy in the name of Allah.
-
Originally posted by john9001
the news today said the terrorists captured 4 "peace activists" who were in iraq to help them win, if the terrorists are that stupid they cannot win.
unless it's a cover for the activists to link up with the terrorists.
sheehan needs to go to iraq to protest the killing of iraqs by the terrorists.
alot of these groups are either DEEPLY fanatical or they are just thugs, IE common criminals that use the veil of islam to mask their movements. I completely agree with you.
Iraq is just the begining in the war on terror and radical islam. These people are hell bent on imposing their ways on the entire world. This is one thing that these victoms wont/dont/cant understand is there is no appeasing these radicals, they will say "thanks for the help right before they chop your head off"
-
If you were to put the stupidity of the terrorists in Iraq up against the stupidity of the left wing liberal retreaters in america who do you think would win?
-
Sunnis: Release Westerners (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177196,00.html)
-
Originally posted by Yeager
If you were to put the stupidity of the terrorists in Iraq up against the stupidity of the left wing liberal retreaters in america who do you think would win?
hmmm that's a toughy.
Between bombing your own country and killing a wedding party
or
Marching in the street for "peace" and fire bombing a newspaper building and setting fire to a police officer in the act.
The amount of violence involved aside, it would seem both are contradict your own philosephies.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
Sunnis: Release Westerners (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177196,00.html)
Good for them....as long as they didn't pay them off.
-
lol, the stupidity of the anti-war activists that travel to that region is pretty hard to beat. I guess its sad, really. that idealistic persons are fooled by American style politics and their support groups to enter into life threatening circumstances armed only with their idealism. I love them, but I will grieve them too.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
lol, the stupidity of the anti-war activists that travel to that region is pretty hard to beat. I guess its sad, really. that idealistic persons are fooled by American style politics and their support groups to enter into life threatening circumstances armed only with their idealism. I love them, but I will grieve them too.
hell I hope more of them go. Not so that they can get caputered and beheaded, but to see that the Iraqis want their freedom and work with the Americans and want to succeed. They don't want the Americans to leave until they can stand on there own and are actually a good generous people deserving of freedom.
Part two would be that they see everyday the sacrifices made by the American troops there. They would see the pains they go through in trying to inflict colateral damage on the civilian population. They would see all the medical help that is given to Iraqi children. They would see who the monsters in this war really where.
-
Maybe you are right, Gunslinger. I'm not sure. I am concerned for the idealogical kid who wants to go over there and "fix things" without any practical understanding of the circumstances. "Peace Activists" are targets. Nobody gives a ***** about peace activists over there.
That stuff only works in a democracy with TV cameras willing to cover it. Either way, they will be used, or killed. I don't have much hope that they will report truth without suffering severe trauma, which is likely. How long do you thing they can wonder around without getting .... ?
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
Maybe you are right, Gunslinger. I'm not sure. I am concerned for the idealogical kid who wants to go over there and "fix things" without any practical understanding of the circumstances. "Peace Activists" are targets. Nobody gives a ***** about peace activists over there.
That stuff only works in a democracy with TV cameras willing to cover it. Either way, they will be used, or killed. I don't have much hope that they will report truth without suffering severe trauma, which is likely. How long do you thing they can wonder around without getting .... ?
If they are a "christian" organization not very long. "Christians" are being persued everywhere it seems.....well maybe not everywhere but they are extremely dissliked in most "hotspots" that involve radical islam.
What these people don't understand is you cannot reason with extremest. You cannot appease them. You cannot try to understand them. You cannot deal with them. They want world domination were the only form of expression is done under the flag of islam. That's it.
The irony in all of this is that it's the leftist peacniks that push all this diversity crap apon everyone else yet this is what they are getting for their money.
There's also another angle to this that doesnt get said much. There's a rather large element in Iraq that is not bent on religious Ideology but rather are just plane criminal thugs. They may see a profit in this as they can maybe capture these people and sell them to the zealots for money or guns or whatever the trade. From what I've read it's these thugs that are doing alot of the kidnaping because it is profitable. If the only organization that wants to pay money for them is the radicals than so be it.
Rest assured there is no apeasing these guys. What's that saying about appeasment? "appeasment is like feeding alligators hoping you're the last one to get eaten"
edit: my post above contains a typo that I can't edit. I meant to say they take pains NOT to inflict colateral damage.
-
Well Im glad they let them go but I'd say they got lucky.
What people dont seem to understand is the radicals over there do not care if you were for,against or indifferent on the war.
If you are a westerner you are in infadel and as such must die.
Anyone that dosnt beleive that should see if they can find a copy and view the videoclip of that "impartial" reporter who had his head sawed off.
Orrr they should go over. Take the chance and roll the dice and find out for themselves.
Maybe they too will be lucky.....or not
-
what if they captured them just to let them go, for publicity. Capturing people and letting them go could win them some support from some people.
-
Originally posted by MrCoffee
what if they captured them just to let them go, for publicity. Capturing people and letting them go would win them alot of support from people who are into that sorta thing (mercy).
You may be on to something. Really there's no evidence of this. Either way these people are morons from the word go:
We are angry because what has happened to our teammates is the result of the actions of the U.S. and U.K. governments due to the illegal attack on Iraq and the continuing occupation and oppression of its people. blah blah blah blah blah
They really don't get it.
BUT back to your point about the publicity thing.....doing this to somone:
(http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WORLD/meast/03/31/iraq.main/story.hostages.jpg)
isn't that nice. Lets not forget that they ARE or are COPYING known murderers.
-
If you people would have read the article and have been paying attention, they haven't let them go. The link says, "Sunnis: Release Westerners". As in, the Sunni clerics are calling for their release. As much as I hope otherwise, these people will never be released. They are "Infidels" and we all know what the Curran says about infidels. If anything comes from this, perhaps this will show the apologists that there is no appeasing these maniacs.
Already on other message boards the conspiracy theorists are saying that the US government actually did this to bolster their stance in the fight against insurgent Muslim extremists…
-
Originally posted by Skilless
Already on other message boards the conspiracy theorists are saying that the US government actually did this to bolster their stance in the fight against insurgent Muslim extremists…
Seems like a silly idea to me.
If they were goign to stage somethign why didn tthey just plant WMDs and "discover" them.
Woulda been a hell of alot easier,no innocent lives woulda been put at risk and they
Woulda drummed up one hell of alot more support that way
-
Excerpt from their public statement posted on their website:
"We are angry because what has happened to our teammates is the result of the actions of the U.S. and U.K. governments due to the illegal attack on Iraq and the continuing occupation and oppression of its people. "
-
How can we not win? After over two years we have...
wait for it...
A STRATEGY! (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051130-2.html)
Woot!
-
The strategy is working, we will win and the naysayers are gonna look dumb.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
The strategy is working, we will win and the naysayers are gonna look dumb.
I thought the goal was to capture bin laden, how it got to be winning whatever we are winning in Iraq is beyond me
-
Infidels are infidels as an infidels, regardless of their peaceful intentions….
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
I thought the goal was to capture bin laden, how it got to be winning whatever we are winning in Iraq is beyond me
Actually the "goal" is to win the war on terrorism.
Oust Sadam and stableize Iraq and reurn it to the Iragis
We see BinLaden as a figurehead because of 9/11
but in reality Bin Laden is but a small peice of the puzzle.
Even with Binladen killed or captured very litttle will change.
Be like cutting the head off a dandaline. It doesnt kill the weed. It just grows a new one
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Actually the "goal" is to win the war on terrorism.
Oust Sadam and stableize Iraq and reurn it to the Iragis
We see BinLaden as a figurehead because of 9/11
but in reality Bin Laden is but a small peice of the puzzle.
Even with Binladen killed or captured very litttle will change.
Be like cutting the head off a dandaline. It doesnt kill the weed. It just grows a new one
My how things have changed in two years
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
My how things have changed in two years
And how have things changed?
It was never about just getting Bin Laden.
After 9/11 it was declared a "Gloabl war on terrorism"
That included Bin Laden but didnt end with him by any stretch of the imagination.
Never has.
And youve been around long enough to realise that overall strategies and goals are forever changing due to forever changing cicumstances.
-
Gloabl? (http://www.markfiore.com/animation/planner.html)
Perhaps you meant to say "gullible" ?
-
Originally posted by Russian
Infidels are infidels as an infidels, regardless of their peaceful intentions….
Hmm.
It seems that Chechens have broader views. At least they had Western journalists and non-Islamic mercenaries fighting together with them. And some countries like Poland support Chechen murderers as if it's Polish national sport.
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
Gloabl? (http://www.markfiore.com/animation/planner.html)
Perhaps you meant to say "gullible" ?
yup just keep thinking that....who was it that was burning cars in france recently? Christians? Who was it that bombed busses in the UK and trains in Spain?
-
It was buddhists, right?
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
Gloabl? (http://www.markfiore.com/animation/planner.html)
Perhaps you meant to say "gullible" ?
after 9/11 and well before we invaded Iraq there was declared a "Global war on terrorism"
Matter of fact it was Sept 2001
"Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated"
The entire Text is here if you canre to read it
Address to a Join Session of Congress and the American People (http://hitechcreations.com/frindex.html)
also
NEWS BRIEF: "Stage Set For Attack", by Susanne M. Schafer, Associated Press, The Sun Chronicle, Friday, September 14, 2001.
"WASHINGTON -- "In the most explicit descriptions yet of the Bush administration's intentions, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said Thursday the retaliation would be continued until the roots of terrorism are destroyed. 'These people try to hide. They won't be able to hide forever ... They think their harbors are safe, but they won't be safe forever ... it's not simply a matter of capturing people and holding them accountable, but removing the sanctuaries, removing the support systems, ending states who sponsor terrorism." [Page 2]
"Ending states" is a most somber and terrifying term, for it strongly implies that the Bush Administration has every intention of destroying entire nation states with unconventional weapons. And, we have them in abundance, despite the years of military drawdown by the Clinton Administration. We have nuclear, chemical, biological weapons, and scalar weapons [HARRP electromagnetic weapons] that can easily destroy entire states in a matter of an hour or two.
Just two days after the attacks of 9/11, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz warned that the United States would strike without warning into the countries suspected of planning terrorism, sponsoring terrorism. At this time, we warned that an entire country might be annihilated because of bad intelligence, a reality which occurs all the time! For the first time, an official of the Bush Administration warned other sovereign nations throughout the world that we would reserve the right to attack their country -- or attack within their country -- if we suspected them of harboring terrorists. Even though the last sentence captured our attention -- "ending states who sponsor terrorism" -- if you take this sentence away, Wolfowitz might very well have been hinting that the U.S. would surgically strike at the Weapons of Mass Destruction within the country possessing them.
NEWS BRIEF: "Bush Says US Must Prepare For Preemptive Action", by Adam Entous, Rense.com, June 2, 2002.
Jussssst a Bit before we went to Iraq. and includes more then just Bin Laden
-
Citing Paul Wolfowitz doesn't do an awful lot to support Iraq as part of a "global war on terror." Wolfowitz supported regime change in Iraq long before 9/11 for other reasons (see the Project for the New American Century), wanted to pin 9/11 on Iraq on 9/12 to further his goals (didn't want to hear about no Al Queda) and has largely been discredited and dumped when his rosy scenario for remaking the middle East through some democracy domino effect fell flat.
He was able to achieve his ultimate goal though, using 9/11 and the GWOT to lever action that would have been a much tougher sell otherwise.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Charon
Citing Paul Wolfowitz doesn't do an awful lot to support Iraq as part of a "global war on terror." Wolfowitz supported regime change in Iraq long before 9/11 for other reasons (see the Project for the New American Century), wanted to pin 9/11 on Iraq on 9/12 to further his goals (didn't want to hear about no Al Queda) and has largely been discredited and dumped when his rosy scenario for remaking the middle East through some democracy domino effect fell flat.
He was able to achieve his ultimate goal though, using 9/11 and the GWOT to lever action that would have been a much tougher sell otherwise.
Charon
for that matter I also supported regime change in Iraq long beore 9/11 for other reasons.
But he wasnt the only one that I quoted to make my point
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
for that matter I also supported regime change in Iraq long beore 9/11 for other reasons.
But he wasnt the only one that I quoted to make my point
for that case the US govt supported it itself 3 years before 9/11 (SEE: Iraqi liberation act of 1998)
:)
-
If you were to put the stupidity of the terrorists in Iraq up against the stupidity of the left wing liberal retreaters in america who do you think would win?
Barbara Boxer? Ted Kennedy? Nancy Pelosi? John Kerry?
or
Mahat Macoat? Ma Shoes? Abdullah CamelHump? Allah Musthavebeengay?
Tough call there
-
Originally posted by john9001
sheehan needs to go to iraq to protest the killing of iraqs by the terrorists.
Seeing as she lost a son in this war I believe she has a right to invoke her right to protest!
You on the other hand have invested what in this war?
-
Originally posted by RedTop
Barbara Boxer? Ted Kennedy? Nancy Pelosi? John Kerry?
or
Mahat Macoat? Ma Shoes? Abdullah CamelHump? Allah Musthavebeengay?
Tough call there
Depends if any of em are dumb enough to get into Teds car and let him drive;)
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
And how have things changed?
It was never about just getting Bin Laden.
Oh yes it was, very much so. That is why we went to afghanistan first, to get bin laden
-
there is a much larger picture than you are seeing sixpence......
9/11 goes a lot deeper than bin laden.
in any event OBL is most likely dead. It doesnt matter.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Oh yes it was, very much so. That is why we went to afghanistan first, to get bin laden
But Bin Laden is only part of the picture. and a part of the goal.
Again since you seem to have missed it...
"Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated" Sept 2001
"And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime. "
Bust address to joint session of Congress and the American people Sept 20,2001 (http://www.tetvet.org/gwb092001.html) (this link works)
-
Hi Boroda,
Originally posted by Boroda
Hmm.
It seems that Chechens have broader views. At least they had Western journalists and non-Islamic mercenaries fighting together with them. And some countries like Poland support Chechen murderers as if it's Polish national sport.
Regarding the Chechens, admittedly the Western democracies have done a lot of stupid things. They chose to frame that conflict entirely in political terms and naturally took the side of the third world "underdog" against the big ole mean former superpower. I don't think it was really until the massacre of hundreds of schoolchildren in Beslan by Chechen jihadis that the world finally realized - "Hey these guys are part of the worldwide Islamic revival and jihad movement as well. Whoops." But by that time it was much too late, and the Chechens are now helpfully providing groups like Al Qaeda with caucasian looking Jihadis who are much better at penetrating our security.
The same mistakes were made in Kosovo, we smashed the facts flat, put the white hat on the Kosovars and the black hat on Serbians and bombed the Serbs until they capitulated, and withdrew their forces, leaving the ethnic Serbs in Kosovo to the tender mercies of the ethnic Albanians. Now of course Al Qaeda is opperating in Kosovo as well, and we've ended "attacks on ethnic Albanians" by making it safe to ethnically cleanse the ethnic Serbs from Kosovo. Now the Mosques are safe and the churches are being burned.
Until we realize that this really is a global conflict, that it is far more than simply "political" and that there is no middle ground in it between victory and defeat, this kind of silliness is going to go on endlessly with various Western administrations occasionally backing the very people who are going to be killing them next. So, yes, its time we crumpled up the cold-war era political template and threw it away. As much as the idea of being allies with the Russians on anything appalls some in the West, I can't think of a better cause to be allied on than united resistance to the worldwide Jihad.
-
So Seagon, your suggestion for ending the conflict is to simply build a huge wall around the combatant nations and let them fight it out. We then breach the wall and send in the street sweepers once the shooting has stopped for 3 weeks??
:p
-
Boroda,
I just deleted a text i wrote in a replay for your comment about Poles... why?
I realized that the more i write, the more you will deny :) Also i realized that i don’t; care about what Russians (or any other nation) think about Polish support for the Chechens, Ukraine (about a year ago) Iraq and any other place/nation.
I'm glad that we can speak freely... express our opinion as we want to and help whoever we want for any reason we have. It's better than before, when by many years we were Soviet slaves and have to speak what we were told by Soviets.
I won't say more about the Chechens, terrorists or whoever else... more that just this - if i wanted to be free i would fight for it. If someone would rape my wife or my lil daughter i would kill him if a had a chance... i think you would do the same.. even if most likely you will deny right now :)
And that's actually it...
-
To Seagoon: I agree with every word. What goes on now is a result of a dounle-standards policy that we discussed in another thread. :( For example: recently RF stopped supplying weapons to Afghanistan. Noone in the West noticed that since 2001 Russia was sending armour and other Soviet weapons to Afghan for free, the weapons that Northern Alliance and other groups of anti-Taliban fighters requested. What we get in responce? I'll tell you: US forcing Russian and Commonwealth border-guards to withdraw from Afghan border. To remove the only force that stops drug traffic into Russia and Europe!
To Bikekil: It's sad, but it's a fact that Poland plays a significant role in Chechen terrorist support, I mean - government, not the people. They try to make us propaganda pawns, and they use a Western tradition of calling Russia the "mother of all evil". Soviet slavery - please think, what national debt Poland has now... If it was "slavery" (while I still wonder who was who's slave) - then maybe you just changed masters? :( You know my attitude to Russo-Polish relations: we'd better be friends, because forces who make us hate each other are our mutual enemies.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
yup just keep thinking that....who was it that was burning cars in france recently? Christians?
If you have a source for this information please post it.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Hmm.
It seems that Chechens have broader views. At least they had Western journalists and non-Islamic mercenaries fighting together with them. And some countries like Poland support Chechen murderers as if it's Polish national sport.
We all know how kind and gentle the Russian are with non-russian population after all the word погром (pogrom) ils a well known polish word.
-
Originally posted by straffo
If you have a source for this information please post it.
Don't be too harsh with the self-proclaimed world analysts. After all, their prediction about the burning cars being the first sign of a massive islamic uprising crumpled, the results of the Iraqi elections are taking an 'unexpected' turn... they going thru sour times right now.
-
Originally posted by deSelys
Don't be too harsh with the self-proclaimed world analysts. After all, their prediction about the burning cars being the first sign of a massive islamic uprising crumpled, the results of the Iraqi elections are taking an 'unexpected' turn... they going thru sour times right now.
so you are saying that the recent riots in france did not in fact happen. It wasn't muslims that were rioting? The bus bombings in the UK did not happen? and since they didn't actually happen it wasn't well off muslims that did those henus acts?
Wow you revisionists work quick
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
so you are saying that the recent riots in france did not in fact happen. It wasn't muslims that were rioting?
Nope.
Well to be correct it was not only muslim but also atheists , christians and so on.
The common denominator was income , not religion.
-
Originally posted by straffo
Nope.
Well to be correct it was not only muslim but also atheists , christians and so on.
The common denominator was income , not religion.
but you are saying they didn't happen???? nore did any of the other's mentioned?
-
Guns, I think you could patent a game. Call it "Jump to Conclusions." You would jump to a spot and each spot would have a different conclusion on it.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Guns, I think you could patent a game. Call it "Jump to Conclusions." You would jump to a spot and each spot would have a different conclusion on it.
-SW
"that's a terrible idea"
samir natgonworkhere anymore
-
Wow indeed. With such poor reading skills as yours, I wouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions....
1) Where in my post do I say something about the UK bus, pls?
2) Where in my post did I say that riots didn't happen, pls?
3) Where in my post did I say that not a single rioter was moslem. As Straffo already pointed out, some were. Damn good 'moslems' too...drinking alcohol and doing drugs and stealing cars and group raping girls from their own community...
If I was as fast as you to make assumptions, I would say that your post is a proof of the low level of eductation in the USMCs. But I won't (for now).
-
Originally posted by deSelys
Wow indeed. With such poor reading skills as yours, I wouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions....
1) Where in my post do I say something about the UK bus, pls?
2) Where in my post did I say that riots didn't happen, pls?
3) Where in my post did I say that not a single rioter was moslem. As Straffo already pointed out, some were. Damn good 'moslems' too...drinking alcohol and doing drugs and stealing cars and group raping girls from their own community...
If I was as fast as you to make assumptions, I would say that your post is a proof of the low level of eductation in the USMCs. But I won't (for now).
want to talk about my reading skills.....you quoted straffo, who was a response to me about a post I made about the war on terror being global. Straffo then posted asking for a source saying that the riots didn't happen....then he said that they did happen maybe but it wasn't muslims rioting. He ignores the the other things I mentioned because they prove my point that this is a global struggle against radical fascist islam.
You can pick on me and insult me but cherry picking what I say to disprove it wont work for you or straffo.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
but you are saying they didn't happen???? nore did any of the other's mentioned?
Please note that my quote was only about the event in France and so I did answer only this part of your post.
I'm curious to know were did you got I was negating the event ?
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Straffo then posted asking for a source saying that the riots didn't happen....
Nope , I asked for a source about the affirmation the riot were a made by muslim, even if I was perhaps not clear I didn't wrote the riot didn't happened.
then he said that they did happen maybe but it wasn't muslims rioting. [/B]
Wrong , there was not a single "maybe" in my post.
And I pretend you have no way toi say it was a muslim riot ,I should remeber it's illegal in France to question some one about his religion or to make statistics about religion (since the last war we're pretty serious on this matter)
He ignores the the other things I mentioned because they prove my point that this is a global struggle against radical fascist islam. [/B]
I ignored the other points because it was not those points I questionned.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Good for them....as long as they didn't pay them off.
hehe.... you can only laugh, when you see pictures of evil terrorist like this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4552212.stm
Im just wondering if he got that gun from Santa Claus or white Norweigian granny who attacked WTC(tm of grunhertz ?).
anyway quetion is not if, or whenever you are going to win in Iraq.
Question is, if it was worth of that = .. Dick honey come closer, how much did we earn since invasion ?
-
blah blah blah blah, GS. You never answered my questions.
-
Originally posted by straffo
We all know how kind and gentle the Russian are with non-russian population after all the word погром (pogrom) ils a well known polish word.
Smoke some history please.
Pogroms were directed against Jewish population. Jews didn't live in Russian parts of Empire, except for servicemen, merchants of 1st guild, craftspeople and people with high or senior education.
There were no "pogroms" in Moscow or Tver. It explains why "pogrom" is a Polish word (BTW, thanks for telling me that, I thought it is Ukrainian).
See, you again blame Russian for the crimes we didn't commit. That's why I asked for a definition of "Russian" in another thread.
-
Boroda,
As you probably remember, many times i wrote that Russians (at least the ones i know.. the ones my father knows and our friend knows) are really great folks :)
There is one thing tho, you really think we should love you for the 50 years of the communism here... and it's not possible.
Look, propaganda is a pretty cool thing... when i wans young i seen in TV or heard in radio, how great our friendship is and how much our countries do for each other. Probably you heard the same in your contry. Pretty cool huh?
Not exactly, because it's far from being truth.
At the same time due to the orders sent from Moscow (yup) a lot of folks were prisoned of just killed. Of course it's not a fault of a Russian nation (when it comes to people), but that's how it was.
I say we were slaves, not because we had to wear nice shiny chains, but because we couldt say what we wanted. We couldn't do what we wanted and we were getting killed for expressing our opinions.
You say, we've changed the master - i'm not really sure.
If you look on what we are doing in EU, i say we are far from being gentle and peacefull :D
If you say about US... well... you can balem us on supporting Iraq, but i believe it's a good thing. Our guys got along with the locals pretty well and i believe we are helping the people.
If we are suporting US at the same time (witch for me is a secondary thing here) - i'm glad... i hope they would do the same for us... especially after what our allies done to us after WW2... maybe this will show them something.
Boroda, i would like to see some more respect from Russia nowdays... also i would love to see Poland showing some more respect to Rusisa at the same time, but i doubt it's about to happened anytime soon. Let's just hope it will happened someday, because it'd be cool to have you as friends not as enemies.
As for the pogrom's... they were inspored by politicians on both sides. Sad thing is that neighbours who lived in peace for a loooong time were harmed by them.
(too tired to check the spelling... sorry for typos)
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Smoke some history please.
Pogroms were directed against Jewish population. Jews didn't live in Russian parts of Empire, except for servicemen, merchants of 1st guild, craftspeople and people with high or senior education.
There were no "pogroms" in Moscow or Tver. It explains why "pogrom" is a Polish word (BTW, thanks for telling me that, I thought it is Ukrainian).
See, you again blame Russian for the crimes we didn't commit. That's why I asked for a definition of "Russian" in another thread.
feel free to correct this page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Smoke some history please.
Pogroms were directed against Jewish population. Jews didn't live in Russian parts of Empire, except for servicemen, merchants of 1st guild, craftspeople and people with high or senior education.
There were no "pogroms" in Moscow or Tver. It explains why "pogrom" is a Polish word (BTW, thanks for telling me that, I thought it is Ukrainian).
See, you again blame Russian for the crimes we didn't commit. That's why I asked for a definition of "Russian" in another thread.
Jews didnt live in Russian parts of the empire? Are you joking?
You need to read history..
Tell me Boroda is Odessa part of Russia............Plenty of Jews were killed there during the pogroms. Some of my relatives......
-
Obviously your family and history is lying. Boroda and his ministry of korrect russian information is right...........
Dowding that is more sarcasm in case you didn't get it. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Obviously your family and history is lying. Boroda and his ministry of korrect russian information is right...........
Dowding that is more sarcasm in case you didn't get it. :rolleyes:
:rofl :rofl :rofl
(http://pic4.picturetrail.com/VOL767/2726312/8668097/122627846.jpg)
-
I don't think that Maverick needs a cheerleader, Rip.
-
Originally posted by straffo
feel free to correct this page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom
It's unusual for Wikipedia, but the article is mostly correct. No Russian cities are mentioned there.
Your problem is that you don't understand the meanings of a word "Russian". It has two meanings, and in Russian language we have two words for it. The old definition of Russian by nationality (Velikoross) isn't used since Revolution. I am half Russian (Great-Russian, Velikoross), half Ukrainian (Small-Russian, Maloross) and a Russian citizen (Rossiyanin).
Like a person can be a Jew and a Russian at the same time (in English), in Russian he's a Jew (Yevrey) and a Russian citizen (Rossiyanin).
Home work: are Chechens Russians?
This things lead to many misunderstandings. It also shows how little you guys know about us, and how distorted some things are in your minds.
-
Originally posted by Silat
Jews didnt live in Russian parts of the empire? Are you joking?
You need to read history..
Tell me Boroda is Odessa part of Russia............Plenty of Jews were killed there during the pogroms. Some of my relatives......
Yyyyy!!!
You guys are sometimes truely entertaining.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement
Odessa isn't a part of Russia, it's a part of Ukraine. It was built as a "free trading zone" in XVIII century on the lands taken from Ottman Empire. It was a part of Russian Empire, but never a part of Great Russia. Nikolaev was excluded from Pale of Settlement, Odessa wasn't.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
It's unusual for Wikipedia, but the article is mostly correct. No Russian cities are mentioned there.
Your problem is that you don't understand the meanings of a word "Russian". It has two meanings, and in Russian language we have two words for it. The old definition of Russian by nationality (Velikoross) isn't used since Revolution. I am half Russian (Great-Russian, Velikoross), half Ukrainian (Small-Russian, Maloross) and a Russian citizen (Rossiyanin).
Like a person can be a Jew and a Russian at the same time (in English), in Russian he's a Jew (Yevrey) and a Russian citizen (Rossiyanin).
Home work: are Chechens Russians?
This things lead to many misunderstandings. It also shows how little you guys know about us, and how distorted some things are in your minds.
It your problem, not mine, I have one and only one definition of Russian and guess what... it's not the post revolution one.
Home work: are Chechens Russians?
Ethnically ,Economicly or politically ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
It your problem, not mine, I have one and only one definition of Russian and guess what... it's not the post revolution one.
Ok, if "pogroms" happened in Algeria in 1930s - are you to blame French people for it? Are you to blame Russian people for "pogroms" that happened in Kingdom of Poland before WWI?
Originally posted by straffo
Ethnically ,Economicly or politically ?
Ethnically - Chechens by nationality. By citizenship - Russians. What do you mean by "ecnomically"?
When we argue - IMHO most of the things where we disagree start with simple misunderstanding. We have to define terms before we make conclusions.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Yyyyy!!!
You guys are sometimes truely entertaining.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement
Odessa isn't a part of Russia, it's a part of Ukraine. It was built as a "free trading zone" in XVIII century on the lands taken from Ottman Empire. It was a part of Russian Empire, but never a part of Great Russia. Nikolaev was excluded from Pale of Settlement, Odessa wasn't.
What are you the Director of the Department of Misinformation?
Part of the Russian Empire it is. That makes it for all intents and purposes Russian Boroda.
-
Originally posted by Silat
What are you the Director of the Department of Misinformation?
Part of the Russian Empire it is. That makes it for all intents and purposes Russian Boroda.
Tell it to current Ukrainian or Polish government.
Quite funny that you try to blame Russian people about what Polish anti-semites did. BTW, Kingdom of Poland had it's own laws.
As usual - if someone is beating Jews - it's Russian Empire, in any other case - it's poor opressed Poland.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
When we argue - IMHO most of the things where we disagree start with simple misunderstanding. We have to define terms before we make conclusions.
certainly , add to this trhe fact I'm answering from the a place were the internet connect can live more than 2 minutes with this ^**$^* 56k modem hanging up as often as it can !
more later