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.

 

something i got from a social media site from europe/russia

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
a reply to: intrptr
Very predictable. I think a token sent to the Baltic States as a reassurance is somewhat different from a full mobilisation. This token does not constitute a war mobilization and move to attack Russia, as oft quoted by the "Russia is a victim" brigade.


There is nothing "token-istic" about Mi Abrams tanks. Neither are they 'defensive' armament. Heavy artillery on tracks are 'mobile' for a reason.

Full "mobilization", although occurring slowly, is the end result. Done quietly, to be sure.




posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel



The Soviet Union had a nuclear cruise missile directed at the Bay of Pigs in `61 which they would have used to wipe out the American landing forces we now know.


A cruise missile in 1961? Sure why not, it's the internet.


What do you think a 1945 V-1 'buzz bomb' was? It's a cruise missile, a one way aircraft with a single payload.

They weren't precise until the 80's with radar terrain guidance & mapping & computers.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ScientificRailgun


America isn't the one supplying troops, armor, and weapons to the rebels in Eastern Ukraine.

No, just to the Junta in Kiev.


You mean "Elected government"?

Let's remember:

(a) Yanukovych was impeached by a unanimous super majority vote, including many members of his own party. (The rest were absent and fled, likely because they would be exposed and prosecuted for corruption).

(b) There were later new elections, contested nationwide except in areas under rebel control. Reasonably fair (more than in Russia).

(c) Russia already stole Crimea, and has admitted its denials and the election there were a sham.

The West, so far, is not supplying weapons to Ukraine, but it has the right to buy them.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dimithae
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Well I know that if I saw someone out hanging around my house in the middle of the night,I would not wait until they are actually breaking in before calling the police. I would call before they got in or tried. I guess Russia is supposed to wait until we are actually in there,and we all know how that goes once we are in. We are like cockroaches,you can't get rid of us once in.


You mean like the Phillipines? Wait, the elected government asked the USA to leave and the USA left.

The cockroaches scenario is much more applicable to Poland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia---where the occupying Russian army & KGB imposed vile Communist dictatorships for 45 years. That's how the Cold War started: Stalin did it.



If I were a leader of a country and saw the US lining up bases around my country,I would put 2+2 together really quick.


Yeah, you might wonder why all your neighbors which used to be allies have turned to the other side. Maybe if you have a problem with all your neighbors, the the problem is you, not them.
edit on 17-3-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

Ukraine was a young country before the coup. It was a coup. It took direct advantage of the fragile state of affairs within the new government (since the Soviets left).

It was an easy house to topple. NATO promised not to do this kind of thing in Eastern Europe. How far back you want to go?



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dimithae
If you can't even keep your people fed,why would you go out and buy weapons to kill then?


Because your neighbor, ruled by a militaristic jingoistic oligarchical dictatorship, is threatening to invade you, and is already sponsoring military rebellions and supplying heavy weapons to the rebels and maybe some soldiers as well?



They are cutting people's pensions,their salaries(expect for those in the Rada of course),their gas to keep warm and cook by is going waaaay up,but they have money for weapons. If you and your family were starving to death,I'm sure you would take that last $20 and spend it on a weapon right? No you would buy food for them to eat.And this one is just coming in......every bit of charity given to Ukrainians will now be taxed at 20%. Think I'm joking? Go look it up. Anything that actually helps the people is being taken from them. But they have money to buy weapons of course.


And will Ukraine ever be able to threaten Russia? Obviously not.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: mbkennel

Ukraine was a young country before the coup. It was a coup. It took direct advantage of the fragile state of affairs within the new government (since the Soviets left).


You mean 24 years ago?



It was an easy house to topple. NATO promised not to do this kind of thing in Eastern Europe. How far back you want to go?


NATO didn't do anything.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel


You mean 24 years ago?

No I mean only a few nations can aspire to the term "true republic". Mostly after a lot of blood shed.

Every former soviet satellite is young (24 years).


NATO didn't do anything.


Lulz…




posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

If your people are all dead from starvation,its wasn't really worth going and buying the weapons,now was it?
Unless Poroshenko plans on picking up a gun and fighting himself,which will never happen.Lol



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

Yeah,all I have to say on that is look at Japan. How long have they wanted us now?

second line




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join