BBC Says Russia has invaded the Ukraine (10th time)

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Russia need not provide men to Syria or Iran. Russia needs to provide good weapons and other expertise to such countries. These countries would also need Russian and Chinese support and protection in the UN and political gathering. Russia does not have confident capabilities in force projections outside its near abroad and around.

Russia needs to throw punches in own house cleaning in various matters. Iran can field 5 million men right away to defend against any attack and have 100s of thousands go to Syria to help them out.

a reply to: victor7

Syria just asked for more "advanced" weapons, only one problem with that, Russia can`t send in too much of their latest weapons because the information regrading them might fall into Western hands leaving Russia vulnerable when being attacked itself later on.

a reply to: VirusGuard

No mate, unconfirmed reports is not propaganda in the least

So then by you admitting that, you just showed that your OP is a total fabrication in the sense of being propaganda.

Good Job.

Silly me, I forgot the BBC just happens to spend as much of its time on these "unconfirmed reports" as it does in asking news casters about their thoughts on subjects that they know nothing about because they don't have any news footage or even pictures but these news casters always have a opinion that is aligned with the double speak coming out of Downing street.

And the interesting thing is none of what you posted proves the sourced article is propaganda.

So again I will ask who is benefitting from this source article that makes it propaganda?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Every time the Dutch MH17 investigators want to search the crash site Kiev starts with this BS.

And yet the separatists are the ones who control that area so why haven't they allowed the investigators the ability to do their jobs?

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: victor7

Syria just asked for more "advanced" weapons, only one problem with that, Russia can`t send in too much of their latest weapons because the information regrading them might fall into Western hands leaving Russia vulnerable when being attacked itself later on.

Dont think the west is worried about Russian tech there at least two decades behind the west in military tech. Now if you made the argument China i might agree the Chinese need anything they can get from the Russians and trust me they will be dying to get a chance to pilfer and re manufacture Russian tech. This is why they keep buying stuff from Ukraine for example.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

So then by you admitting that, you just showed that your OP is a total fabrication in the sense of being propaganda.

both you and me know I was be sarcastic and given that the public in the UK are forced by the government to pay the BBC a licence fee then it would be silly to argue that the BBC was anything other than a state propaganda new station.

a reply to: victor7

Dont think the west is worried about Russian tech there at least two decades behind the west in military tech. .

Is that what they told you at school or was it because the USA is going around the world telling everyone how good its hardware is because it is trying to sell weapons system to anyone and everyone.

When it comes to rockets you will find that its the USA who is "two decades behind" so don't fall in to the trap the Germans did by thinking they could take Russia in six weeks only to have their arse handed to them by Russia on a plate.

Go checkout Georgia if you need to know how western hardware did against those old rusty tanks that were sent by Russia

Britain is so panicked by Russian that its starting to see things and last week scrambled two jet fighters to intercept a little plane from Latvia and forced it to land at Standstead because they thought they were under attack by a Russian bomber

Update : US, NATO say no evidence of new 'Russian invasion' of Ukraine

rt

Both Pentagon and NATO are aware of a “Russian invasion” rumor produced by Kiev official, but said they have no evidence to back it, instead claiming that Russia again boosted military presence along the border in yet another potentially threatening move

a reply to: Agent_USA_Supporter

Nice try with the claims that Putin is the only one whom was Defending Soviet's pact with hitler. Britian & America are the ones whom had a warm relationship with hitler.

Tell him about operation paper clip after the war.

BornAgainAlien

Russia doesn`t have huge numbers of good soldiers, so if they control Ukraine, they have less to defend the Main land and to help out Syria or Iran if needed. Russia has only about a couple of 100.000 well trained soldiers to work with.

Well we would need to ignore the fact that the USA is trying to fight a war on ten fronts too and your comments about "good soldiers" is baseless as is the number 100,000 that was plucked from thin air.

Toe to Toe these Russians are trained out in the cold (No McDonalds) and are hard as steel whereas your average American personal rely on having ten inches of steel and better weapons else they would soon be running home crying for mummy.

I don't think you will find many Gay Russians working on the frontlines

ETWolf

Both Pentagon and NATO are aware of a “Russian invasion” rumor produced by Kiev official, but said they have no evidence to back it, instead claiming that Russia again boosted military presence along the border in yet another potentially threatening move

Russia has every right in the world to do what it wants on its own turf and this build up could be ten tanks or 1,000 so lets see some pictures and not just "We Know" but cannot tell you more due to national security because both sides can play that game.

What we do know is that NATO said it would not move closer to the Russian border and now we have NATO knocking the front door and that is not something Russia will allow so lets remember who goes back on deals and who is the aggressor here.

"potentially threatening move" is just code for Russia telling the USA to put up or shut up but for all we know it could just be a global ploy to fool the public and the USA sending an extra (paid for by American tax payers) 15,000 troops to Iraq could be deemed a "threatening move"

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

And yet the separatists are the ones who control that area so why haven't they allowed the investigators the ability to do their jobs?

source ?

And yet the separatists are the ones who control that area so why haven't they allowed the investigators the ability to do their jobs?

If these investigators want to say its not safe for them to investigate the crash because my wife is in the area then it's not safe and if Kiev wants to leave the area under the control of the rebels then they will.

It does not take a year to workout if a plane was shoot down by 30mm cannon from a SU-25 or hit by a missile so no they don't want a quick result to this investigation plus flight performance data from the jets in the area that Russia recorded was altered to reduce its height celling on the internet after MH17 was shoot down.

Both sides are playing games but Kiev did have the powers to prevent civilian planes from flying over the area but instead asked the pilot of MH17 to reduce his height just before the plane got shoot down so I can only guess which side is telling the truth.

Putin I bet must had downed flight MH370 too according to what some people say here.

BBC is a pure propaganda tool designed to fool the masses . It is the British version of Russia Today , designed to serve their own vested interests.

originally posted by: ETWolf
BBC is a pure propaganda tool designed to fool the masses . It is the British version of Russia Today , designed to serve their own vested interests.

Sorry I cannot agree that they are the same and here is why.

All the big western media corporations are in the same bed and feed us the same propaganda whilst at the same time keeping a lot of stuff out the news but Russia today breaks the mould and goes out of its way to show us stuff the other state owned news stations block/hide/twist.

Was Russia today broadcasting to Russian then yes, I am sure it would be just as bad or even worse than what we get from the CNN/BBC.

Another thing with Russia Today is that it questions reports on the ground at the scene but the likes of the BBC that have had such a monopoly on the news for so many years has become too lazy to even send out reporters and instead relies on a army of public relations consultants to sit on their bums in the news station, sipping coffee and passing judgment that are fixed anyway.

RT works well away from home but when you look at it the BBC was the first to play away from home and was broadcasting British propaganda all over the world in places like India back in the 1950s and this is why the brits are forced to pay a licence fee to pay the BBC for being a worldwide propaganda tool of the British.

You cannot make an informed decision without hearing both sides of the argument but even worse than the BBC is Aljizeera that fakes news on a regular bases and this then allows the likes of the BBC/CNN to quote someone else and blame them when the deception is discovered.

France24 and C4 News is worth watching now and then but not on their own.

originally posted by: VirusGuard
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

So then by you admitting that, you just showed that your OP is a total fabrication in the sense of being propaganda.

both you and me know I was be sarcastic and given that the public in the UK are forced by the government to pay the BBC a licence fee then it would be silly to argue that the BBC was anything other than a state propaganda new station.

a reply to: victor7

Dont think the west is worried about Russian tech there at least two decades behind the west in military tech. .

Is that what they told you at school or was it because the USA is going around the world telling everyone how good its hardware is because it is trying to sell weapons system to anyone and everyone.

When it comes to rockets you will find that its the USA who is "two decades behind" so don't fall in to the trap the Germans did by thinking they could take Russia in six weeks only to have their arse handed to them by Russia on a plate.

Go checkout Georgia if you need to know how western hardware did against those old rusty tanks that were sent by Russia

Britain is so panicked by Russian that its starting to see things and last week scrambled two jet fighters to intercept a little plane from Latvia and forced it to land at Standstead because they thought they were under attack by a Russian bomber

There is definitely a considerable difference in tech and funny were you aware that the area you think Russia is ahead in namely rockets is well funny. See Russia produces a rocket based off a design and licensed from the US We used it in the 60s its called Apollo. What you believe to be a lead was nothing more than having Russia produce rockets for the cheaper labor. By the way there are only so many ways to build a rocket but if you want to talk propulsion the US is again decades ahead of Russia. Apparently no one in the world but you thinks Russian tech is equivalent to the west and even Russia itself started a modernization of its military how by buying western tech . Why do you think Russia was ordering weopons from europe not to mention ships. You are aware they dont even produce there own power plants for there jets arent you??

a reply to: VirusGuard

Russia today breaks the mould and goes out of its way to show us stuff the other state owned news stations block/hide/twist

Agreed

a reply to: VirusGuard

It does not take a year to workout if a plane was shoot down by 30mm cannon from a SU-25 or hit by a missile

Please support this statement with a specific case, then explain how the operators of the missile or aircraft can be determined from the wreckage alone.

a reply to: dragonridr

There is definitely a considerable difference in tech and funny were you aware that the area you think Russia is ahead in namely rockets is well funny. See Russia produces a rocket based off a design and licensed from the US We used it in the 60s its called Apollo.

Boy this is going to be hard.

Well was you to know your history then you would know that the Apollo flew a bit later after Russia had become the first nation to not only put a satellite into space but also a man and whilst the USA put a man on the moon the Russians were the first to build space stations so that's 3:1 to Russia.

The USA needed Von someone or other who designed and built Hitler's V2 rockets to even get off the ground and many of the top security personal working in the USA were as a result of operation paperclip and had blood on their hands not that this ever concerned the USA.

OK That's your history lesson so lets ask who is the worlds leader in launching missiles into space at a fraction of the costs that anything NASA or the USA can come up with. Who was it that could not send up anything bigger than 6 tons to the ISS and who sent up the big (37 Ton) parts.

The USA spent millions trying to develop a pen that would work in space, Russia just used a $0.10c pencil but I guess that's the price of having military contractors bribing all your leaders with Americans tax dollars.

Your best high speed recognisance jet(I think its still the best) the black birld got shot down by a Russian made rocket back in the 1970's so lets hope your stealth fighters that's everyone seen fair a little bit better.

Have you ever seen a Russian stealth fighter ? I think that question might go over your head.

Yeah that rocket that blew up the other week in the US was using some old Russian engine designed in the 1960's and the reason it blew up was because the NASA contractors had tried to modify this nail of a engine and got it wrong.

Funny to see someone try to debate something they know little about

a reply to: VirusGuard

Boy this is going to be hard.

You mean this is going to be a major detour off tpic.

Well was you to know your history then you would know that the Apollo flew a bit later after Russia had become the first nation to not only put a satellite into space but also a man and whilst the USA put a man on the moon the Russians were the first to build space stations so that's 3:1 to Russia.

Germany was the first country to put a man made object (V2 rocket) in space. The man who created that rocket eventually went to work for NASA. The United States technically put men in space first, thanks to the X-15 rocket plane. The Soviet Union's early successes were due to their disrtegard for human life. Further, many of their much touted "firsts" were little more than publicity stunts. After sending the first woman into space there has not been a woman cosmonaut in decades. The first multi-manned mission was achieved by cramming three men without spacesuits into a capsule designed for one. Their first "rendezvous" in space were two spacecraft that had no independent control of their flight; they were launched so they happened to pass near each other. The United States was the first to achieve a true rendezvous and docking, first to use an engine to boost a craft to a higher orbit in flight and first to intentionally send a crewed craft into the ERBs.

The USA needed Von someone or other who designed and built Hitler's V2 rockets to even get off the ground and many of the top security personal working in the USA were as a result of operation paperclip and had blood on their hands not that this ever concerned the USA.

Von Braun, in turn, was indebted to the work of Robert Goddard, the American rocket pioneer. The Soviet Union gt their share of Nazis, too, but because they operated in greater secrecy, their contributin remains obscure.

OK That's your history lesson so lets ask who is the worlds leader in launching missiles into space at a fraction of the costs that anything NASA or the USA can come up with. Who was it that could not send up anything bigger than 6 tons to the ISS and who sent up the big (37 Ton) parts.

That is not a matter of technological know-how, it is a matter of skewed political priorities. Congress foolishly belied that Russia would be reliable.

The USA spent millions trying to develop a pen that would work in space, Russia just used a $0.10c pencil but I guess that's the price of having military contractors bribing all your leaders with Americans tax dollars.

And those pens continue to sell because they have proven their value on Earth. The United States encourages the development of new technologies with unforeseen applications. The Russians stick with old technologies that work. That is why other nations want to develop their own "Silicon Valley," not their own "Tomsk Polytechnik."

Your best high speed recognisance jet(I think its still the best) the black birld got shot down by a Russian made rocket back in the 1970's so lets hope your stealth fighters that's everyone seen fair a little bit better.

You are thinking of the U-2 spy plane that was shot down in the early 1960's. Let's hope your Russian pilots fly better than you research.

Have you ever seen a Russian stealth fighter ? I think that question might go over your head.

Have you ever seen an invisible man?

Yeah that rocket that blew up the other week in the US was using some old Russian engine designed in the 1960's and the reason it blew up was because the NASA contractors had tried to modify this nail of a engine and got it wrong.

Accidents happen.

Funny to see someone try to debate something they know little about

Yep, you've been hilarious.

a reply to: ETWolf

source ?

Sure...

Who controls the crash site...

www.detroitnews.com...

Investigators not able to do their jobs...

The crash of flight MH17 as it flew over the conflict zone stirred angry mutual accusation between Moscow and the West over who was responsible. Investigators have had little access to the site which is under rebel control.

www.voanews.com...

Anything else I can help you with?

a reply to: VirusGuard

Have you ever seen a Russian stealth fighter

Sure have...

No Evidence of Russia’s Alleged Incursion Into Ukraine: Pentagon

en.ria.ru...

"I don't have any independent operational reporting that would confirm that report, that these formations have crossed the border," Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said at a press briefing Friday.