Why Belarus Is About To Get Interesting

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

ya dude no bias there. you warmongers have become soooooooooooooooooo transparent its not funny anymore. its fu*#ing sick!!!!
en.wikipedia.org...

In October 2006, Illarionov was appointed senior researcher of the Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity of the US libertarian think tank Cato Institute in Washington, DC.[6] In this position, he has lamented "[Russia's] new corporate state in which state-owned enterprises are governed by personal interests and private corporations have become subject to arbitrary intervention to serve state interests"[7] as well as "new ways in which political, economic and civil liberties are being eliminated."[8]

On 14 April 2007, and 9 June 2007, Illarionov took part in opposition Dissenters' Marches in Moscow and Saint Petersburg, respectively.

Illarionov is one of the 34 first signatories of the online anti-Putin manifesto "Putin must go", published on 10 March 2010.

As a well known opponent to Vladimir Putin and his policies he criticized Václav Klaus for his views which involved critics to EU´s and USA´s big role to escalate conflict on Ukraine more than Vladimir Putin. He achieved conclusion cooperation between Cato Institut and Václav Klaus.[9]

ya no ngo bias there. have you heard about the new video and bullet information some of the families of the ukraine let be released? you wont like the source its not as credible as a one valuewalk site which is used in the op but it will give you a few hours of csi to undertake.

russia-insider.com...

The video compilation provides previously withheld crucial information, which combined with previously available information, provides new evidence that the protesters were killed from the Maidan-controlled locations and that the official investigation is falsified for this reason.

For instance, apparent positions of Anatolii Zhalovaha in this video seconds before a deadly gunshot at 9:43am and in a new photo immediately after his killing and whip-like sound of gunshots during his killing indicate that Zhalovaha was shot dead from a rifle from the Maidan-controlled Hotel Ukraina and not from an AKM by the Berkut from a barricade in front of him. An exit bullet hole in the back of his helmet and a testimony of another Maidan protester show that Zhalovaha was killed in the back, i.e., from this hotel. This witness also disclosed a finding of official investigation that Zhalovaha was shot from the same exact weapon as 10 other protesters were killed. www.volynnews.com...…/batky-vidshukaly-zahybloho-syna…/.

a reply to: DJW001

you seriously tried to justify the bay of pigs. i hope your not working for the government. i mean really hope not.

originally posted by: letscit
a reply to: DJW001

you seriously tried to justify the bay of pigs. i hope your not working for the government. i mean really hope not.

Where did I try to justify the Bay of Pigs? All I did was explain why the government thought it was justified, See the difference?

a reply to: letscit

Yep, Russian propaganda proves that it's always anyone's fault but Russia's.

a reply to: letscit

ya dude no bias there.

Bias that was close to Putin, or truth that some can't handle?

russia-insider.com...

And you talk about bias...or propaganda your choice, but using Russian media as a source is laughable.

a reply to: letscit

maybe you should make a new thread about the new no-fly zone that is about to be over syria.

Well let's see here...

However, the dispatch of advanced anti-aircraft missiles would appear to undermine that justification, since neither Islamic State nor any other Syrian rebel group possesses any aircraft.

Lavrov also said coordination was needed between Russia's military and the Pentagon to avoid "unintended incidents" around Syria.

www.reuters.com...

It's a way to keep from having another MH 17 happen...but to you it means something nefarious I see.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

True however we again run into the issue of Belarus not being a member of NATO. Given the worlds response to what occurred in Ukraine I fear we are once again back to European appeasement. I can understand non involvement.... to a point.

At what point though do we move from noninvolvement and the Chamberlain doctrine the Churchill doctrine?

Ah yes, good old Churchill.

I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas.

I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected. "

Winston Churchill's Secret Poison Gas Memo

On second thought, perhaps Europe shouldn't follow the Churchill doctrine after all. Right?

Just another reason why Belarus might indeed become important :

The Minsk Process: Belarus Diplomacy at Center of Ukrainian Peace Initiative

Sorry warmongers.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Actually they should...

Appeasement didn't work the first time around and it wont work this time around either.

Appeasement makes the aggressor more aggressive. As evidenced by Russian actions towards former SSR's and now Syria. The Baltics... The Swedes.. Fins...

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
Just another reason why Belarus might indeed become important :

The Minsk Process: Belarus Diplomacy at Center of Ukrainian Peace Initiative

Sorry warmongers.

Except this thread deals with a possibility of a Russian military base and the possibility of Russia seizing Belarus if they say no.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

"... gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected. "

Winston Churchill's Secret Poison Gas Memo

On second thought, perhaps Europe shouldn't follow the Churchill doctrine after all. Right?

The Muslims killing each other in the Levant certainly aren't. They've gone straight to chlorine. "Kill them all and let Allah sort them out " seems to be the doctrine there. Destroying humanity's cultural heritage for orgiastic fun seems to be another.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Except this thread deals with a possibility of a Russian military base and the possibility of Russia seizing Belarus if they say no.

Not for some they enjoy taking these threads in a whole different direction when it doesn't make RUssia look good.

Viva la' Putin.....

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Winston Churchill's Secret Poison Gas Memo

Got something a bit more credible than global research as they are a well known parrot for Russian media?

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Sorry warmongers.

You like to use that word a lot, do you know what it means?>

noun
1.
a person who advocates, endorses, or tries to precipitate war.

dictionary.reference.com...

Nobody here is advocating, or endorsing war so please learn the right way to use the word.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Except this thread deals with a possibility of a Russian military base and the possibility of Russia seizing Belarus if they say no.

Possibility of a possibility if ...

Is that all the credit we can give to this thread ?

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Considering the article and what is contained in it yes. Until Russia follows through with what's being discussed its a possibility.

What's so difficult to understand about it?

originally posted by: Xcathdra

What's so difficult to understand about it?

The reason why you feel the need to echo obviously anti-Russian propaganda.

Valuewalk

=>

Eurasia.net

=>

Eurasia Program of the Open Society Foundations

=>

George Soros

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Nobody here is advocating, or endorsing war so please learn the right way to use the word.

That's not true! At least one contributor to this thread applauds every time Russia does something militarily aggressive.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

The Open Society Foundations work to build vibrant and tolerant societies whose governments are accountable and open to the participation of all people.

Your own source.

You're right. Any group dedicated to building vibrant and tolerant societies with accountable governments open to the participation of all people must necessarily be opposed to Fascist Russia.

a reply to: DJW001

'My own source' is part of the food chain of the OP and thus worth the same.
I'm glad you appreciate it for what it's worth.