It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia has every right to act in Ukraine - George Galloway

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   

flammadraco
He was also quite cushty with Saddam Hussain



Exactly! Thank you for posting this. Galloway is a traitor who sold my country out for his own self interest and ego. He should be serving time in prison, ideally the Tower of London entering via Traitors Gate!! I have no time for the man.




posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   

SLAYER69
reply to post by andy1972
 




People tend to ignore forget where all that Russian made scrap metal Iraqi Military got all it's equipment from.


Indeed.

For every major confrontation that the US or NATO had in the past 20 years, there was a fair dose of russian equipment present in such combat scenarios. But it's also due to their cost. Russian gear is extremely cheap but reliable for the objectives it is intended - like, for instance, asymmetric warfare - but I've my doubts all of it came directly from Russia.

A lot of ex-USSR material was sold at a bargain when the Cold War ended, and not all boxes ended up in Russian hands. A lot of it went to second-hand sellers. Which, apparently, was one of the causes of rapid armament of certain groups around the world.

I've seen stances where the US funded X or Y country, and the equipment they got was not american, but Russian. Provably due to a cost-effectiveness reason or whatever.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by GarrusVasNormandy
 


It's a long read but worth the time...


The USSR tilts towards Iraq (1982–86)

However, the Iranians rebuffed Soviet offers of friendship and by 1982 they also had the upper hand in the war. They decided to push on into Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein. This led to a change in Soviet policy from Summer, 1982. The Soviets did not like the implications of an Iranian victory, fearing Tehran would go on to export Islamic revolution elsewhere in the world. Although officially still neutral, the USSR gradually increased economic and military support to Iraq to stop the collapse of Saddam. The Soviets had a commitment not to let an ally be overthrown and support for Iraq also played well with many Arab nations (the Soviets finally achieved diplomatic relations with Oman and the UAE and an agreement to supply arms to Kuwait). In 1983, the actions of the Iranians became increasingly anti-Soviet. The authorities cracked down on the Moscow-backed Iranian communist party, Tudeh, and then expelled 18 Soviet diplomats. The Soviets were also keen to counterbalance Iraq's increasingly friendly relations with the West by boosting military aid to Saddam. Iraq became "the largest recipient of Soviet-bloc military aid among the countries of the Third World". In 1984, Iraq officially established diplomatic relations with the USA. This, combined with the outbreak of the "tanker war" (Iranian-Saudi confrontation over oil tankers in the Persian Gulf) opened the worrying prospect for the Soviets of an increased US presence in the region. The USSR responded with yet more military aid to Saddam.


Active support for Iraq (1986–88)

In 1986–7, the Soviet Union definitely turned to supporting Iraq. The war had been bogged down in a stalemate until the Iranians had taken the Faw Peninsula. This and other military gains offered the prospect of an Iraqi collapse. This worrying development pushed the conservative Arab rulers closer to the USA, which they saw as their protector. The USSR did not relish the idea of increased American military presence in the area. The Soviets were also worried about what would happen in Afghanistan. They had invaded this neighbour of Iran in 1979 and fought a long war there. Iran had provided support to some of the anti-Soviet Afghan Mujahideen. In March, 1987 the Soviets decided to withdraw their forces from Afghanistan, and they were concerned that the vacuum would be filled by an "Islamic fundamentalist" regime. There was also the prospect of Islamist revolution spreading to Soviet Central Asia. This "Islamic factor" became a major[citation needed] concern for the Soviet leadership during the last phase of the Iran–Iraq War and led them to boost arms supplies to Iraq. "The decision to give Iraq the military edge was universal. Not only the Soviet Union, but the entire Western alliance,[clarification needed] largely financed by conservative Arab states, engaged in the most comprehensive and massive arms transfer in history to a Third World state engaged in conflict (...) The 'Western package' for Iraq, however, paled in comparison with the Soviets'. Between 1986 and 1988, the Soviets delivered to Iraq arms valued at roughly $8.8 to $9.2 billion, comprising more than 2,000 tanks (including 800 T-72s), 300 fighter aircraft, almost 300 surface-to-air missiles (mostly Scud Bs) and thousands of pieces of heavy artillery and armored personnel vehicles." The massive increase in weaponry allowed Iraq to regain the initiative in the war. At the same time, the USSR continued to press for a ceasefire and offer itself as a mediator. To this end, the Soviets made several economic concessions to Iran and opposed the US reflagging of ships in the Persian Gulf. However, Iran showed little interest in friendship with the USSR, rejecting the Communist world along with the West. Soviet aid allowed Iraq to begin a renewed offensive against Iran in April, 1988, the success of which led to a ceasefire and the end of the war on August 20 of that year.


Linky here
edit on 5-3-2014 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   

buster2010

Are you saying that Russia doesn't have a right to protect their people and property? If that was an American base and personnel that was possibly in danger would you be saying don't do anything?


Yes. If those people and that property are in another country and decided to go there of their own volition, that is a risk they consciously took. Why should we waste our money and resources protecting their asses...er...assets?


And ETA: And no country ever has any right to send troops to another for any reason. It's a declaration of war.


edit on 3/5/2014 by ~Lucidity because: corrected typo and added thought.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Speaking of which...



So that means....


edit on 3/5/2014 by ~Lucidity because: fixed pic



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


If US/NATO can go to Kosova and bomb Serbia into 19th century

If US/NATO can go Iraq based on false cooked reports of WMDs and bomb it 50 years back and kill 250K in resulting process

If US/NATO can raise the possibility of massacre and bomb Libya, incite civil war and result in 50K dead


THEN

Russia can also do the same in Georgia, Ukraine and other places.

Go back to 1989 and certain agreements (even verbal or gentlemanly) made regarding NATO expansion. If those are not honored, as they have not been, then there comes a point where Russia will do the needful.

Trust me !! It is not Putin alone who is pulling the whip here. It is the Russian Strategic Thinking which is behind all of this. This includes military, political and economic minds. Ukraine in NATO make Russia indefensible to easy ground attack.

Cold War II is already here. The question is if Kremlin is going to come to blows with NATO and exchange nuclear missiles ??

China holds the strong cards here both politically and economically. Militarily it can cancel out Japan, Australia and Tukey at least.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by victor7
 


Are you implying somehow that I agree with what NATO and/or the US did?

You would be wrong. You have no argument from or with me. Russia needs to stay the hell out.

edit on 3/5/2014 by ~Lucidity because: -n



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I think George Galloway is usually spot on, he tells it how It is and calls out the UK and US governments where he sees fit.
The complete hypocrisy of the UK and US to lecture anyone on invading other nations is totally offensive.
While I don't really agree with what Russia are doing 100%, I find it laughable that the 2 most war mongering nations of the last decade are trying to tell another leader not to protect his assets and bases.
If this was the UK and US, we would have already bombed the crap out of whoever we invaded, while ignoring the UN and others telling us our actions are illegal, Russia have not shot at anyone.

This is one point I do agree with Russia on.
We have no room to talk.

edit on 5-3-2014 by stargatetravels because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by stargatetravels
 


That we have no room to talk and do still doesn't make it right. At some point this excuse needs to become unacceptable. Yeah, I know...good luck with that.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   

~Lucidity
reply to post by victor7
 


Are you implying somehow that I agree with what NATO and/or the US did?

You would be wrong. You have no argument from or with me. Russian needs to stay the hell out.


A country will (legal or not) defend its MAJOR STRATEGIC REASONS where it sees them them threatened.

UKRAINE IN NATO DIRECTLY THREATENS RUSSIA'S STRATEGIC SAFETY.

That is why WARS and WORLD WARS happen.


edit on 5-3-2014 by victor7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 02:49 PM
link   

RocksFromSpace
If only we had more Congress critters you spoke the truth like this man

You'd be mining the moon for jellybeans if you had Congressmen like him. One of him is quite bad enough thanks.


RocksFromSpace
we are being fed massive amounts of Propaganda on the MSM news shows daily and RT seems to be the only resource to turn to for REAL NEWS.

I lost brain cells reading that



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:09 PM
link   
At least he's giving some other sound; better then that the EU does mostly everything the people don't want.
So with giving other sound, what did he do?? what bad things did he cause as opposed the stuff he's preaching against??

As today in the news; the EU giving 11 billion euro to Ukraine, if we really care about that country so suddenly. It's about power/control.. same when you buy a house and you must pay each month your payment + interest.. and with that you can control and have power and let them do as you please.

Russia didn't do anything bad, and also didn't do anything serious in recent years, only giving some ''sound'' that the current powers don't like. Russia didn't invaded Ukraine or started bombing yet and the other powers (US, EU, Nato) did in recent years and as we know, causing terrible things, based on lies..

So those people who where fighting for ''freedom'' in Ukraine, they only loose freedom in reality and will become in total control in the money scheme when being control of the world bank, the EU, US.
They shouldn't picked either side, exept their own, not in control of anything but their own, that is real freedom.

It is and is Always a power game, not about the people.
edit on 5-3-2014 by Plugin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Soshh
I lost brain cells...

Quite obvious from your post.
Now please continue feeding your gray matter with BBC/CNN/Fox nutrients.
I'm sure that helps.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   

IamTheManWithThePlan

Soshh
I lost brain cells...

Quite obvious from your post.
Now please continue feeding your gray matter with BBC/CNN/Fox nutrients.
I'm sure that helps.

You seem upset.
edit on 5/3/14 by Soshh because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Soshh

IamTheManWithThePlan

Soshh
I lost brain cells...

Quite obvious from your post.
Now please continue feeding your gray matter with BBC/CNN/Fox nutrients.
I'm sure that helps.

You seem upset.
edit on 5/3/14 by Soshh because: (no reason given)


No, not really.
Try again.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   

IamTheManWithThePlan
No, not really.
Try again.

Try what? You're not making very much sense.

Wait.. Is that you George? You're not allowed to run away from your minders and defend yourself on the internet. You're a bad pussycat, yes you are.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Soshh

IamTheManWithThePlan
No, not really.
Try again.

Try what? You're not making very much sense.

Wait.. Is that you George? You're not allowed to run away from your minders and defend yourself on the internet. You're a bad pussycat, yes you are.


Oh, another attempt at humor..ughhh. I'm sure you consider yourself witty...
Anything else to contribute to the discussion (other than telling us how credible mainstream media is)?



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   

IamTheManWithThePlan
Oh, another attempt at humor..ughhh. I'm sure you consider yourself witty...
Anything else to contribute to the discussion (other than telling us how credible mainstream media is)?

My contribution was to imply that Galloway is doolally and not worth listening to. I didn't have anything else to say really, which is why I didn't say anything else. I certainly didn't anything about the mainstream media, that was you! You're getting confused. And I do consider myself quite witty yes.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:54 PM
link   

flammadraco
This man is an embarrassment to the UK political system, Google him to see what else he believes in.....



At least he's honest and doesn't go globe trotting killing millions of people in illegal wars ..like the Tony Blairs and Bushes ..
What he does in his free time is his business .. I'm sure the rest of the lot do #tier things in private, in addition to worshiping the devil and murdering innocents ..



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   
He's an idiot!
/

Edit: In the Interests of balance peeps,
Cameron and his poodle Hague are also
disgusting immoral tools too.
edit on 5-3-2014 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join