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.

 

Okay, are you willing to die for Russia and Putin, are you

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DeadSeraph


Someone needs to call his bluff, nukes or not.

"Nukes" aren't a bluff, Einstein.


All weapons are a bluff 99% of the time.

It is called "saber rattling" for a reason.

Threats were made the same when the saber was the common weapon.

Politics hasn't changed, it is all the same. Countries bluff just like people.




posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: yorkshirelad


Sanctions are a peaceful alternative to war.

Phooey.

Sanctions are about disrupting the economy of another sovereign country. Imposing ones will monetarily is economic warfare, just like any siege of old.


…the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible.

Laying Siege


Sanctions like Blockades are a part of siege warfare, renamed to dissuade people from their intended purpose.

How fast y'all come out the woodwork when the euphemisms get exposed. Like every other nation the US has "intervened and "regime changed", the proponents of US propaganda are as thick here as they are in the main stream.
edit on 25-3-2015 by intrptr because: spelling



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: johnwick


originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: msallo

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: msallo

Open warfare is the finale, the final act of a drawn out process practiced deceptively, intending to lead to surrender of the targeted city or state.

Sanctions are siege measures, a gentle euphemism designed to throw people off, like you are doing right now.


no

siege is an act of the military. sanctions do not always nor mostly lead to war. the act of a sanction is not an act of armed conflict and so not act of war.

war
wôr/Submit
noun
1.
a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state

sanctions are not an act of a state of armed conflict between nations or states or different groups within a nation or state

protip: drinking starbucks doesnt make you smart



That is funny because every nation on earth and the UN regard economic sanctions as "an act of war".

Hhmmm, I just don't know who to believe is right here.

Some random guy on the internet, or every major gov on earth and the binding rules of the UN??..


ill take back everything if you can cite to that UN resolution, random internet guy

protip: resolution 3314 article 3

-attorney at law

i expect nothing short of a sincere apology


edit on 25-3-2015 by msallo because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-3-2015 by msallo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: johnwick


Politics hasn't changed, it is all the same. Countries bluff just like people.

Except Russia hasn't actually done anything, so "bluffing" is all you can blame them for. Unlike the US congress that just passed another bill approving more arms for the Junta in Kiev.

Thats as real as the NATO exercises in Estonia on Russia's border. Unlike US troops in far away Estonia, the Russians are defending their own borders.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

As they did in Ukraine ?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: dollukka


As they did in Ukraine ?

You mean after the US led coup?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: DAVID64
Just thought I'd drop this here.

www.businessinsider.com...

the Russian government apparently pays people to "sit in a room, surf the Internet, and leave sometimes hundreds of postings a day that criticize the country's opposition and promote Kremlin-backed policymakers."

Read more: www.businessinsider.com...


This right here∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆

I can name about 5 new members to ATS this obviously applies to.


Hint hint.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
Except Russia hasn't actually done anything, so "bluffing" is all you can blame them for. Unlike the US congress that just passed another bill approving more arms for the Junta in Kiev.


There's a danger that you'll start believing what you are writing. Are you able to give a reliable source that details whether (and what) lethal arms have been sent to Ukraine from the US? There's pressure to make that step from inside the US, but that step has not yet been taken.

What's a Junta? That's a word oft used by people who want to believe something that is not.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
They have build these wars for ages dear ppl, its not weather you and i want it, its up to much more important ppl than any of us 7billion on this planet. Our life means so very little compared to them, we are ants and they are our "!gods" in human form... War and slavery is our backbone ppl, quit whining about it..
Rant off: I do not want to fight for any country



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi


There's a danger that you'll start believing what you are writing.

But not you…



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
The Russian people are no enemy of mine. I will not put on a uniform and fight them because my country wants make money for banks and defence contractors.

If my government EVER told me the truth about ANYTHING, I might consider fighting for their cause. The way it is now, I owe my government nothing - not even respect - and have no interest in fighting the Russian people.


Edit to add:

I wrote my government on this months ago. I reminded them that Russia is Canada's ally.
edit on 25-3-2015 by MALBOSIA because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA


and have no interest in fighting the Russian people.

Thats why propaganda uses "Putin" as their scapegoat. See how they do that? Ridicule directed at world leaders makes war with their nation more acceptable. Blaming one man is better than blaming people. Who wants to fight ordinary people?

"Regime change" instead of assassinate.

"Intervention" instead of Invasion.

"Sanctions" instead of siege.

My all time favorite is "Department of Defense".



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: johnwick


Politics hasn't changed, it is all the same. Countries bluff just like people.

Except Russia hasn't actually done anything, so "bluffing" is all you can blame them for. Unlike the US congress that just passed another bill approving more arms for the Junta in Kiev.

Thats as real as the NATO exercises in Estonia on Russia's border. Unlike US troops in far away Estonia, the Russians are defending their own borders.


So russia didn't just invade and annex Crimea????

Really?

As far as exercises in another country, whose location doesn't matter as it is outside if russia.

Or is it then OK for Russian bombers, nuclear capable bombers mind you, to buzz other countries.

But war games with allies that happen to be near russia...oh no that's not OK!!!

Do you not see your hypocrisy?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: dollukka


As they did in Ukraine ?

You mean after the US led coup?



Prove that.

We can all prove russia invaded Crimea and backs the eastern separatists.

Can you prove the US led a coup in Kiev?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: johnwick

Invaded or were welcomed in? I rather fancy it was welcomed in because so many of the people there speak Russian and voted to stay Russian.

What bothers me is that the USA and UK (hands up but not my politics) have been invading countries since the Gulf with the most deplorable record imaginable. And all I can ask is How's that doing for ya because it doesn't look like your policy of invasion and war has done one single thing to improve the world today, in fact its made it far more dangerous for us ordinarily folk? not to mention the ordinary folk trying to live their lives peacefully in the debris left behind with Western war mongering



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
I wrote my government on this months ago. I reminded them that Russia is Canada's ally.


And yet, along with the rest of the developed world, Canada has introduced sanctions against Russia for their behaviour in Ukraine.



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: dollukka


As they did in Ukraine ?

You mean after the US led coup?



Prove that.

We can all prove russia invaded Crimea and backs the eastern separatists.

Can you prove the US led a coup in Kiev?


Russia hasn`t invaded Crimea, because it was allowed to have 25.000 troops in Crimea.

Read my posts on these two pages and you got your proof about a US coup...

Here

And here


edit on 25 3 2015 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7




Invaded or were welcomed in? I rather fancy it was welcomed in because so many of the people there speak Russian and voted to stay Russian.


Unless Ukraine invited them in (and I don't think that happened) then they invaded.

Better yet Putin has admitted to sending armed troops without insignias for the purpose of annexing Crimea...which was already decided before the referendun was done.




What bothers me is that the USA and UK (hands up but not my politics) have been invading countries since the Gulf with the most deplorable record imaginable.


I rather fancy it as being invited...see it is the same since you think Russia was invited to invade a sovereign country the same argument can be used for what the US did. The difference is the US leaves, and does not annex any part of the country they go into...something Russia can't say.



the ordinary folk trying to live their lives peacefully in the debris left behind with Western war mongering


I guess you forgot about this...

Chechnya after Russia...





But it is easier to say the US does all the bad...right?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: johnwick

Invaded or were welcomed in? I rather fancy it was welcomed in because so many of the people there speak Russian and voted to stay Russian.

What bothers me is that the USA and UK (hands up but not my politics) have been invading countries since the Gulf with the most deplorable record imaginable. And all I can ask is How's that doing for ya because it doesn't look like your policy of invasion and war has done one single thing to improve the world today, in fact its made it far more dangerous for us ordinarily folk? not to mention the ordinary folk trying to live their lives peacefully in the debris left behind with Western war mongering


It isn't my policy.

I voted for Ron paul.

I want nothing to do with any of them.

War should only be fought in defense of ones nation, or at certain times its allies defense from aggression.

Not proactive BS.

As for "welcoming" them in.

So since California has so many Mexicans. Mexico can just "welcome" California in with armed military?

Or how about the fact so many in Canada speak French, can France just "welcome" Canada in with armed troops?



posted on Mar, 25 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien




Russia hasn`t invaded Crimea, because it was allowed to have 25.000 troops in Crimea.


That might hold some weight had Putin not already admitted to sending troops to Crimea for the sole reason of annexation.


Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday that Russian forces had been deployed to Crimea last month to support local defense teams, the first time he has admitted such involvement by Russia.


www.businessinsider.com...

HAd those troops in Crimea been used he would have said they were sent into Crimea, meaning they were already there and not sending troops to Crimea.

No matter how many times you try and say they were already there won't make it true, since Vlad already admitted the truth.



Read my posts on these two pages and you got your proof about a US coup...



You didn't prove it in those threads the first time why do you think this time will be any different?




top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join