RUSSIA: Attack on Tehran is an Attack on Moscow

page: 34
56
<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by victor7
 





It seems to me that Russians have some "UNCONTROLLABLE" Erotic desire to polish the shoes of the NATO and hand wash NATO's laundry. They are working very hard and focused towards the fulfillment of this desire.

In the mean time, Chinese are very happy being the 'slave labors' to the west while riding the bubbles in their own economy.

When self pride is lost then the soul is lost.............at that point country, religion, culture, family all does not matter a squat.



Yes, But dont you see the common nominator here?

Putin is not doing NATO laundry. He is supervising.
And i bet that the Chinese top notch ain't doing any slave labour.

So who is doing all the crap?

When you see who is doing all the slave labour does it really matter what tactics the elite use?

It wont matter to them, that's for sure. Not as long as we do as they command. Things would be a hell of a lot different if they to had to work for a living.

The Irony is that we curse our leaders for making horrible choices. But still we work hard to make the crappy choices become a reality. This just tell me how dumb we really are, and it is because we are so dumb they can keep it up.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Do not blame Putin alone for the mess in Russia. He could have been more strict and done much more to clean up corruption but then there would have been voices raised on him being a Stalin. It is the corrupt communist background culture in Russia, China and other third world nations which creates corruption, mismanagement, inefficiencies looting of the state resources etc. Leaders live well and they sure can do alot more to clean out the problems, but then these leaders come from within the population, they are no different people.

Russia lived off Stalin's hard enforced industrialization from 60s to 80s. By 80s, technological hops and leaps in western societies started to show up and Soviet leaders panicked. Also, oil and energy prices cycles have a lot to do with Russian state of affairs. When these prices go up, Russia is merry in vodka and caviar, when these prices go down then Gorbys are appointed to beg around the world for loans and investments.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
www.globalresearch.ca...

Unmanned warfare by US



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   
All this talk about Nuclear War is a JOKE! This topic was about Russia supposedly defending Iran against a U.S. attack when we all know now for several days that both Russia and China have told Iran that they will NOT get involved with any U.S./Iranian War.

If Russia or China were really as powerful as some of you have declared...do you really think both of them would back out like this? Absolutely NOT! The reality is that both Russia and China are well aware of current U.S. Military capabilities and neither is going to risk war with the U.S. over Iran. Period! Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


The elite within the US knows this. Its just that the US is being played this time around. They have no other alternative but to play the game of capitalism as it is being played.

I am totally impressed with their helplessness in changing the rules of the game they invented when their own destruction is imminent but can change them as they please to destroy others who gain advantage over them in the same game.


The US have written obligations and agreements they cant just stop at own will. Capitalistic rules and agreements. You can probably face in the Federal reserve as the main game player. The US owns that bank a ton of promises.

They can ignore obligations and agreements with other countries, but cannot ignore those to a bank created by their own laws and within their country?

If you actually believe that, I guess there isn't much more for us to discuss. I don't live in a fairyland where magical powers exist, while you obviously do.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Observor
 


No, we have no more to discuss because your not bright enough to understand or to argue.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by victor7
 


Did anyone got nuked as a result of 911.........No! Because it was the work of the non-state operators.

I am really surprised you would mention that in defense of a strategy to keep the West at bay. If I believed it was indeed the work of Islamic terrorists, which many Westerner believe or pretend to believe, I would have quoted it for the exact opposite: against a strategy of terrorism.

In fact I was tempted to mention it when saying why terrorism wouldn't help, but only hurt, but didn't do so only because I don't believe it to be the work of Islamic terrorists.

I am not sure anyone's objective when fighting the West is "not to get nuked". That can be done by surrendering without a fight too. We are looking for a strategy that will keep them at bay. And that is the last thing 9/11 achieved as will any genuine terrorist attacks even if they can succeed, the possibility of which itself is very slim.

Iran has lots of non state operators and if it is attacked we will see lots of nonsense actions.

So what do suggest? That they blow up some American civilians to prevent an invasion? Because most of the "bomb Iran" crowd are praying that some such incident blamed on Iran happen so that they can get going. Or they blow up some American civilians in response to an invasion and make them withdraw? If that happens, the "bomb Iran" crowd is likely to see it as a license to "turn into glass" as they are so fond of saying.

Or it supposed to be some satisfaction of having gotten a few of the enemy while you are being totally destroyed? If so, that is not the objective I am interested in.

For small nations fielding a 1980s Brezhnev era armies, the better tools are guerrilla warfare, insurgency and terrorism. Brezhnev era equipment can be blown up in two weeks as we have seen many times.

Iraqi tried insurgency, it didn't work. It is not working for Afghans either.

The point is that the psychopaths know every possible response from their victims, considered the costs of each of them and are prepared to pay the cost regardless of the response chosen by the victim. There are no surprises. If they are not prepared to pay the cost of a certain response they don't go in just then. That is why they are not in Iran yet, even though they have set their eyes on attacking Iran as far back as 2005 and have been playing fast and loose since then.

Ask the western policy makers what it would have meant to lose even several hundred civilians as a result of the terrorist actions in response to attacks by the "power drunk" psychopaths. When your own civilians are getting bombed then have no hesitation extending the courtesy to the civilians of the attackers.

If you think the Western elite (most of them are not policy makers) care terrorist attacks by a nation that has itself been attacked by them as just or not, you are mistaken. Psychopaths don't care about what is just and what is not. If you ask them they will tell you it is not just to attack civilians not in war zone. Since their country is not in war zone, terrorist attacks against civilians are not justified. Hence it will increase their resolve to destroy the enemy to a level they won't even consider a retaliation. If they had foreseen a possibility of retaliatory terrorist attacks and considered some of them unpreventable, they would have accepted the casualties of such successful attacks even before going in (regardless of what they will admit publicly), so there isn't any chance of withdrawing because of those attacks. A few thousand civilians is like a scratch on a hungry lion, it won't stop it, only piss it off.

If on the other hand the retaliatory attacks, whatever the mode, leave them shaken for the extent of devastation caused and fearing more successful such attacks which they cannot prevent if they don't relent, then they will relent.

I don't know much about weaponry, so I don't know if terrorists can successfully attack a couple of large cities, each of a few million population, and take them out, but I suspect no such mechanisms exist. If they can, that would stop the West.

Contd...



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by victor7
 

...Contd

Anything the psychopaths can predict in response to their actions would already have been factored in before the attack. I don't think they are any less clever than you or I and hence I believe every tactic we can think of would already have been considered by them.

So what could possibly stop them? Only something that would take them completely by surprise.

What could possibly surprise them? Say, Syria contrary to all available knowledge and belief already possesses WMD and missiles that can deliver them to US, that would come as a total surprise and will end their game once Syria in response to an attack on it, wipes out a couple of US cities. But we know that is more of a miracle than a surprise, although that too would work


Let us say Russia declares that any attack by the West without UN authorisation would result in a retaliation by Russia just as if it had been an attack against Russia, that too would be a surprise. But if you look closely why should that be a surprise? Why is anyone not surprised that the US/West can declare a right to attack anyone they please and under any excuse they please, bypassing the UN, but we should be surprised when someone says they will defend the defenseless as if they were one's own? We are surprised because we have been conditioned to think in terms of our immediate interests and threats to them, while the psychopaths have long term vision and planning. It would be a surprise that someone outside of the psychopaths exhibits long term vision and planning instead of being consumed by their immediate interests.

Let us say Russia fails to find the words necessary to warn the West of what kind of actions in general are unacceptable without looking hypocritical, they can do so on a case by case basis. That would be like the post that started this thread: That an attack against so-on-and-so would be considered a serious threat to Russia's defenses and that they reserve the right to retaliate. This would merely delay the attack, because Russia has made no commitment to anyone that they would retaliate.

Eventually when no one can surprise them any longer, they will feel free to do as they please



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


All this talk about Nuclear War is a JOKE! This topic was about Russia supposedly defending Iran against a U.S. attack when we all know now for several days that both Russia and China have told Iran that they will NOT get involved with any U.S./Iranian War.

First off there won't be a nuclear war, merely a nuclear attack on the US that will end the war the US begins.

In addition, if either Russia or China do it, it will be to defend themselves and not Iran. If they let the US pick anyone the US pleases without any repercussions, one day in the not too distant future, they too will receive the same fate as Iran today, especially Russia.

If they are smart, they will do it. If not the psychopaths would have won another trophy and can gloat over it.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN

RUSSIA: Attack on Tehran is an Attack on Moscow


www.israelnationalnews.com

Russia has given Iran its bear hug and warns Israel and the West that an attack on Tehran would be considered an attack on Moscow.
(visit the link for the full news article)



Moscow didn't deter the United States when it was part of the Soviet Union so what does it matter in regards to Tehran. (obviously rhetorical question).



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Observor
 


So your end conclusion is only 'Surprise' will keep the psychopaths away from attacking other countries. Your second option is 1000x more viable than the first. Russia coming out openly and saying attack on Iran would be considered an attack on Russia itself. This might work but not for long.

Individual countries need to develop force and tools to be able to tell the west that attack on them might not be a good idea after all. Each and every time Russia is not going to come out and provide protection to countries.

Also, individual countries need to learn how to play international politics. Serbians chasing Kosovo people out of their home and out of Serbia is something west can really pounce upon through disinformation and media stage setting. Also, Syria needs to conduct reforms that bring some sort of normalcy in their society which has been under the 'emergency laws' for decades now. It is said that every second Syrian is a government spy. Dictators cannot act like spoiled brats and go on getting in trouble and hope Russia or China will come out a protect them every time. Although Gaddhafi became a 'good boy' to the west but he still paid the price for the bad days. So when power ratios are in a mismatch, nations have to keep west at a distance especially when it comes to issues that may develop global consensus for attack.
edit on 28-1-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by victor7
 


I have a funny feeling this will be the beginning of a bad era to be from the US...

The best option: expatriation! New sights...exotic foods...learn a new language...experience life outside of the imperial nightmare...just choose your "impatriation" location carefully,they'll all still have local issues to deal with, such as Haiti. And you don't want places that would be indirectly involved, such as Venezuela or India. And if you can, avoid places that could get sucked in to global conflict by proxy, such as Mexico or Brazil. However, if they're side-line nations, just hang in their backwater areas and learn subsistence farming and traditional hunter-gatherer techniques...that should work.

Also, new to me that Jesus has a second coming in Islam as well...fabulous. The Hardline Muslims and Evangelicals should work together to get all the Jews back in Israel, go through the motions of Mageddo or what not and then we can have the rapture/tribulations/arrival of Mahdi and finally Isa-Jesus...Should coincide with December 21st this year for maximum prophetical effect, no? Come to think of it, avoid the Yucatan for your expatriation, maybe that is where the 12th Imam will descend to Earth, perhaps at Chichen Itza. Maybe Gukumatz/Quetzalcoatl was really a metaphor for the Mahdi.

Love the irony of religion, kill lots and lots of people so peace can come back! Religious prophecies sure can be a self-fulfilling contradiction.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 
Maybe while the usa's military and "oil focused thought patterns" are tearing around the middle east some more,north korean,chinese and russian armies will invade the west coast of the united states and imo,if they did,they would be able to penetrate a couple hundred miles before the usa could even properly react.Walk around any usa mall on a saturday night and look around at the majority of people you'll see,a cross sections of americans who would be physically useless and mentally helpless trying to stand up to a "real invasion" of the usa...

edit on 28-1-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 
Maybe while the usa's military and "oil focused thought patterns" are tearing around the middle east some more,north korean,chinese and russian armies will invade the west coast of the united states and imo,if they did,they would be able to penetrate a couple hundred miles before the usa could even properly react.Walk around any usa mall on a saturday night and look around at the majority of people you'll see,a cross sections of americans who would be physically useless and mentally helpless trying to stand up to a "real invasion" of the usa...

edit on 28-1-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)


Bloc....you have to understand that Pacific Ocean both Notrh and South as well as the Indian Ocean...and in reality...every single Ocean or Non-Land Locked Sea on Planet Earth is the U.S.N. Playground. United States Navy Carrier Groups unto themselves and this includes accompanying Subs...a single Carrier Group is more powerful than entire Countries Militaries.

And I am not talking about some small jerk water country military....The Fifth Fleet alone is more powerful than the entirety of all Iranian Military Branches.

When you start talking about the the Pacific...the United States has one of it's STATES out in the Middle of it...Hawaii! Plus hundreds of Islands and Territiries that fall under either U.S. Jurisdiction or like Guam a U.S. Territory with 178,000 American Citizens living on it....this lends itself to the U.S. having the largest military forces especially Naval in the entire Northern and Southern Pacific Oceans.

One of a Highly respected Soviet Admiral once called the Pacific a U.S. Bath Tub and the idea that ANY Nation or combination of Nations could mount a surprise attack with an Invasion Force anywhere in either on the Wesstern Seashore of either North or South America is ABSURD!

The USN would blow them out of the water as well as the U.S. B-52 fleet stationed at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean could easily destroy any attempt of an expeditionary force launched from either China or North Korea coming from the opposite direction and flying at altituted too high for either of these countries to Shoot down a B-52 using precision guided weapons or cruise missles.

THE UNITED STATES MILITARY is a GLOBAL FORCE. It is unlike any other current military past or present or even contemplated in the future by any other country. Plus...China nd Russia have far too much in common with us as apposed to the insanity of war with us...a war they could not win. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by victor7
 


So your end conclusion is only 'Surprise' will keep the psychopaths away from attacking other countries.

No, surprise doesn't keep them at bay. Surprise makes their plans go awry resulting in their failing to achieve their objectives. Which would either set them back significantly or result in a total collapse of their domination depending on the scale of the surprise.

For example when they start bombing Syria, if Syria responds with a barrage of missiles sinking their aircraft carriers and destroying bases in the Middle East causing huge losses in the beginning of the conflict, that would result in a stalemate and the West would be forced to withdraw, if nuking Syria is the only option left to "win". Nukes against Syria are not a justifiable option, since it would have been supposed to be a "humanitarian bombing" to begin with. Also since they are not accusing Syria of being an existential threat to anyone, "winning" against them by all means necessary isn't a justification that can be offered. It would result in a huge loss of prestige, but there is no immediate threat to Western hegemony because Syria can't be expected to become a regional power for others to rally around. The recent Russia shipment of missiles to Syria likely expects to spring this kind of a surprise.

However if Syria responded by attacking US mainland with WMD, that would be a huge surprise. However, they won't be withdrawing, but simply nuking the entire country to dust. That can be justified as a defensive action. But that would be a complete defeat of their objectives. That they may not be in complete control of the conflict once initiated will definitely set them back, until they figure out how Syria surprised them as it did and how they can avoid such surprises in future. However, what would most likely happen is that no one would want to risk a similar fate again and the West would simply splinter and the hegemony disappear.

Your second option is 1000x more viable than the first. Russia coming out openly and saying attack on Iran would be considered an attack on Russia itself. This might work but not for long.

In other words what you consider a viable option is not really viable, not in the longer term at least


Individual countries need to develop force and tools to be able to tell the west that attack on them might not be a good idea after all.

You are joking, right? If every country had that capability, why would anyone need to point it out? Don't you think, they out of their own self-interest would have done it?

Each and every time Russia is not going to come out and provide protection to countries.

Exactly which country has Russia come out and protected that anyone would expect Russia to do that each and every time?

Iraq and Libya are instances of the exact opposite, Iraq that Russia won't bother to use its influence and standing even to condemn the Western aggression and Libya that they would even sell themselves out and support Western aggression.

Also, individual countries need to learn how to play international politics. Serbians chasing Kosovo people out of their home and out of Serbia is something west can really pounce upon through disinformation and media stage setting. Also, Syria needs to conduct reforms that bring some sort of normalcy in their society which has been under the 'emergency laws' for decades now. It is said that every second Syrian is a government spy. Dictators cannot act like spoiled brats and go on getting in trouble and hope Russia or China will come out a protect them every time. Although Gaddhafi became a 'good boy' to the west but he still paid the price for the bad days. So when power ratios are in a mismatch, nations have to keep west at a distance especially when it comes to issues that may develop global consensus for attack.

So any country that doesn't want to be attacked by the West has to be a "perfect", according to the West, nation against which West cannot manufacture any excuse and a "global consensus" over that excuse? Funny that theocratic dictatorships like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are never in the Western list for regime change. Bahrain which brutally suppressed the Arab spring in its backyard somehow doesn't get any mention. Yeah right, other countries are at "fault" for giving the West an "opportunity" to manufacture excuses for building a "global consensus", while not licking the West's boots. Or perhaps those part of the "consensus" don't deserve to be called human, for they don't know what self-respect and respecting others' boundaries mean.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by blocula
 


Long before these armies reach the US ports they will be identified. Long before means atleast 1000 miles and even much more. Then they will have nice welcome committee waiting for them in form of Aircraft Carriers, Precision Bombers, Subs and you name it. Further, there are all sorts of sensors under SOSUS type program that would tell them the moment they even reach the middle of Atlantic. Sorry to say but this idea is good only for some comedy movie.

To add, US would know and knows the troop movements of any country it wants via intelligence sources. So idea of armies moving to US port to have a nice brunch on Saturday afternoon is little too spicy to digest.
edit on 29-1-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Observor
 


Once any war starts, US does not disengage easily therefore small surprises will not result in some sort of backing off. However, you sink 1 aircraft carrier and 2 destroyers and along with them 1000 soldiers, and west will immediately run away with tails between their legs. 16 American soldiers were killed in Somalia and in couple of days Clinton ended the operation. 250 Soldiers were killed in Lebenan and Ronald Reagan closed the base immediately.

Syria or any other country should not think of even using WMDs on battlefields let alone in other areas.

Individual countries need not want to become Superpowers. They need enough assets to inflict sizable losses to the aggressors. That will keep 90% of psychopaths at a distance.

During Iraq 2003, Russia was too weak to help anyone. In Libya it was Medvedev who spoiled the UN vote. Hence Russia was not even able to provide arms and intelligence to Gaddahafi.

There is huge difference between a shop lifter and a shop break-in burglar and daylight gun totting robber. Individual countries need not be perfect and they can get away with small shop lifting every now and then. But outright murdering people and chasing them from homes to another country etc. is a good recipe to fall into the hands of the western attackers whose real intention is to steal resources of the country under the cover of humanitarian help.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 
Whatever military technologies the usa has,russia has them to and so does china,more or less all bought with money and they have people with brilliant minds as well,not just the usa.The usa has missiles,subs and jets and so does russia and china.The usa isnt the be all end all of tehnological progression...



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
The USA could and should have taken care of this whole Middle Eastern mess back in 1945-1948 when we had the golden opportunity to do so.We should have taken over the entire region and we could have done so without firing a shot,because we were the only country that had the Atom Bomb...

"Sign this surrender document or you'll wish you were never born" Thats all we had to do and say and they would have complied,then we would own and distribute the oil instead of having to bow down and accept it at their price from a bunch of Jihad posessed Muslims...

We already had millions of battle hardened troops in Europe,some of which could easily have been transfered to the Middle East and we already knew that we depended a lot on oil and so we should have most definitely taken over the oil producing Middle Eastern Regions and they would have been able to do nothing to stop us...Nothing at all...

Now look at the hornets nest of chaos and evil that is runnung rampant all over the Middle East...

And if the Muslims had destroyed the Empire State building in 1945,killing thousands of innocent American civilians in the process,all done in the name of Allah and the perpetual jihad mentality thats brainwashed into their hearts and minds...

And or if they released footage of Americans getting their heads hacked and sawed off while screaming and crying for their mothers...

Roosevelt and or Truman,Macarthur,Patton,Eisenhower,Nimitz ect,ect would have unleashed a vengeance upon them that would have been like an asteroid strike.We would have sent over a million men into their countries and brutally crushed them beyond recognition,carpet bombed their towns and cities and smashed them with seige artillery,massed tanks and flame throwers so terribly and completely,they would never again dare to touch us and the oil would be ours...

We use to fight wars with brass knuckles,now we fight wars with boxing gloves,so we dont upset the enemy too much...

General Patton knew what we should have done and he wasnt afraid to say so and he was killed for doing so...Imo... > Gen Patton's Clear Vision - Why He Was Murdered > www.rense.com...

How soon we forget and most people probably dont even know that...

England invaded and occupied Iraq in 1941 > en.wikipedia.org...

England and Russia invaded and occupied Iran in 1941 > en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 29-1-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Please allow me to doubt the source since not a single Russian news source has reported this. I mean if Russia did actually say this then they would make sure everyone knew.

Haven’t commented for a long time but have to post it. Tired of reading WW3 all the time, no WW3 will come, in the near future anyway. Please sleep at ease





 
56
<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in

join