Jump to content
H1nd

Strategic and tactical realities in CMBS

Recommended Posts

And you prove your version with the link to a US news-paper, seriously?

 

Well, believe it or not, here in the "West" newspapers ( news media in general ) have to have verifiable facts to back up their stories. If they get caught making stuff up, they would lose all credibility and shortly thereafter go out of business. This sort of thing is taken very seriously.

 

So, yes, a US newspaper - but a highly respected one, not just some random blogger making up whatever he likes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, so the only acceptable source to criticize Russia is a Russian source?

Read the article and check the sources it used. Those will check out unlike the sources you find in russian news that usually turn out to be non existent or faked. They include Bulgarian govt statements including ones from those defending the pipeline. It might make you look more serious if you actually can challenge the content versus just not liking the author.

Where did I say the source should be Russian? I would prefer Bulgarian sources on this exact matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, believe it or not, here in the "West" newspapers ( news media in general ) have to have verifiable facts to back up their stories. If they get caught making stuff up, they would lose all credibility and shortly thereafter go out of business. This sort of thing is taken very seriously.

 

So, yes, a US newspaper - but a highly respected one, not just some random blogger making up whatever he likes.

I think you should watch this video. It shows how some (I don't say all for sure) west medias work for goverment for propaganda purpoces instead of being a source of unbiased information. And against your theory it even doesn't ruin their media business.

Edited by Rusknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should watch this video. It shows how some (I don't say all for sure) west medias work for goverment for propaganda purpoces instead of being a source of unbiased information. And against your theory it even doesn't ruin their media business.

 

Well of course, you are linking Fox News, these are the guys who just recently said there are places in Britain and France where police and civilians don't go because they are afraid of the Muslims there. They apologized for it but they pull that kind of crap all the time.

Edited by Raptorx7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did I say the source should be Russian? I would prefer Bulgarian sources on this exact matter.

you know I am not Bulgarian right?  From now on I want you to only report on US issues using a swahili paper as your source okay?

 

Note that many of the sources quoted in that article are Bulgarian.  Next objection?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... these are the guys who just recently said there are places in Britain and France where police and civilians don't go because they are afraid of the Muslims there...

 

That was actually funny as hell over here - "gangs of Muslim 'police' enforcing Islamic dress code in London" :lol:  :lol:  :lol: It was so outrageous, people were literally rolling around laughing about it.

 

But that reinforces my point - the guy who made those claims was totally ridiculed - his credibility is as low as it can go  ( he claimed he was passed the information and just didn't check it, but how anyone in the media industry could think that was so unbelievable that no one will take ever take him seriously again )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well of course, you are linking Fox News, these are the guys who just recently said there are places in Britain and France where police and civilians don't go because they are afraid of the Muslims there. They apologized for it but they pull that kind of crap all the time.

LOL yeah, sorry Rusknight  I know these guys are a big media outlet, but most folks I know regard them to be about the same level as Life news.  Check out some of their reporting on Obama.  I swear to you these guys LOVE Putin compared to how they feel about Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well of course, you are linking Fox News, these are the guys who just recently said there are places in Britain and France where police and civilians don't go because they are afraid of the Muslims there. They apologized for it but they pull that kind of crap all the time.

The point of this video is not that they pull some crap there by mistake becouse they didn't check facts good enough. This video shows that they actually don't care about facts at all being a propaganda and as soon as it becomes clear that facts are against them and their propaganda they prevent a truth (or the opposite point of view at least) to be said. And they are still in business after it what ruins a theory about western medios being so special in terms of reputation.

Edited by Rusknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should watch this video. It shows how some (I don't say all for sure) west medias work for goverment for propaganda purpoces instead of being a source of unbiased information. And against your theory it even doesn't ruin their media business.

The difference is that in the west there is a lot of media with lots of opinions. If you look at Fox and compare it to other western channels (Let's say BBC) you'll see that they voice a very different opinion. Thats something that is very important for a free society.

 

Also, Fox is being accused for biased reporting by (alomst)  everyone. I don't see general distrust against something like RT. Thats the difference between "The west" and Russia.

 

Without a doubt the USA is an extremely powerfull country. However, I don't think that it is fair to call everyone who sees themselves as allies sattelites. Look at Germany. During the Lybian crysis, when the UN security council decided whether or not to get involved, Germany did not support the resolution. If they were an american sattelite, would they openly oppose American interests?

 

Many western countries don't support the US and its politics because the US controls them. They support them because they share the same values. If you have the same goals you tend to stick together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is that in the west there is a lot of media with lots of opinions. If you look at Fox and compare it to other western channels (Let's say BBC) you'll see that they voice a very different opinion. Thats something that is very important for a free society.

 

Also, Fox is being accused for biased reporting by (alomst)  everyone. I don't see general distrust against something like RT. Thats the difference between "The west" and Russia.

 

Without a doubt the USA is an extremely powerfull country. However, I don't think that it is fair to call everyone who sees themselves as allies sattelites. Look at Germany. During the Lybian crysis, when the UN security council decided whether or not to get involved, Germany did not support the resolution. If they were an american sattelite, would they openly oppose American interests?

 

Many western countries don't support the US and its politics because the US controls them. They support them because they share the same values. If you have the same goals you tend to stick together.

I like how US special services wiretaped Merkel - is it how allies and friends acts to each other?

 

Of course speaking about satelites I don't mean that they are by 100% controled by US. In fact US use the carrot and stick approach to control them but sometimes they can do something against US policy if population of their country is strongly against some US actions and ideas and if US won't punish them for it too harsh. National goverments still have to go via elections periodically so they cannot ignore all the time what people in their own country think and feel.

Edited by Rusknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few news sources you shouldnt cite in a conversation, or it presents a target for attack by the other party.  I'd say those are Fox News, CNN, and RT. 

I agree with you on here, If you people really want to know whats going on in Ukraine go see for yourself.

Edited by VladimirTarasov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of this video is not that they pull some crap there by mistake becouse they didn't check facts good enough. This video shows that they actually don't care about facts at all being a propaganda and as soon as it becomes clear that facts are against them and their propaganda they prevent a truth (or the opposite point of view at least) to be said. And they are still in business after it what ruins a theory about western medios being so special in terms of reputation.

LOL I think you are going to find almost unanimous opinion agreeing with you on Fox.  Ever watch the Daily Show? 

 

Here is a piece that will likely raise some hackles, but it explores the possible reasons why so many people adhere to Fox and the mis information that comes from that source.  It is actually kind of appropriate for this discussion.

 

http://www.alternet.org/story/154875/the_science_of_fox_news:_why_its_viewers_are_the_most_misinformed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or I can trust what I hear from the OSCE.  I am most definitely not gonna go wandering into a war zone.

 

http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/daily-updates

Well I'm going in a month or two this will be my second time, And they didnt treat me bad at all nor did they threaten me, And if you say "It's because your Russian" you may be right but go and find out yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm going in a month or two this will be my second time, And they didnt treat me bad at all nor did they threaten me, And if you say "It's because your Russian" you may be right but go and find out yourself?

I am betting the cost for you going is significantly less than what it would cost me (strictly speaking air fare here.).  I also think an American strolling around that area is going to find a less than friendly welcome.  I do recall the vice news guy getting tossed in that creepy little jail the separatists have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sburke,

 

I found the FOX News study link to be most engrossing and informative, so much so I sent it to siblings and friends. I confidently expect strong reactions from some, for many are avid (putting it kindly) FOX watchers. Reading how FOX is distorting their thinking will, of course, challenge their thinking. Which, after all, is the point.

 

Can't begin to tell everyone here how mind broadening it is to be able to see the world through a lens that isn't US. VICE is doing some pretty testicular on-the-scenes journalism, which I find, given the current low MSM standards, refreshing. If you haven't seen it, the ISIS embed is a must. Fortunately, decapitation free, if memory serves.

 

VladimirTarasov,

 

Going to Ukraine? In what capacity, please? Am hoping it's not in military uniform and under arms as a combatant! 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the OSCE Observer mission site (latest 21 January report)

 

"A Ukrainian soldier in a hospital in government-controlled Konstantinovka (56km north of Donetsk) told the SMM that he was being treated for injuries sustained at the Donetsk airport on 19 January. He said 80 Ukrainian soldiers in total had suffered the same injuries, manifested in uncontrollable muscle spasms, vomiting and difficult breathing. Some, he said, had become unconscious. Eleven of the soldiers had been transferred to a hospital in Dnepropetrovsk, he said."

 

The symptoms look suspiciously like a chemical agent weapon of some sort was used in Donetsk airport, more so when some 80 soldiers get the same symptoms more or less the same time.   This, if true, could mean a significant change in the conflict with potential larger ramifications if found to be true.

 

I really hope this is not the case because the ramification of chemical weapons being used potentially can throw all previous political and military assumptions out the door.

Edited by BlackMoria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the OSCE Observer mission site (latest 21 January report)

 

"A Ukrainian soldier in a hospital in government-controlled Konstantinovka (56km north of Donetsk) told the SMM that he was being treated for injuries sustained at the Donetsk airport on 19 January. He said 80 Ukrainian soldiers in total had suffered the same injuries, manifested in uncontrollable muscle spasms, vomiting and difficult breathing. Some, he said, had become unconscious. Eleven of the soldiers had been transferred to a hospital in Dnepropetrovsk, he said."

 

The symptoms look suspiciously like a chemical agent weapon of some sort was used in Donetsk airport, more so when some 80 soldiers get the same symptoms more or less the same time.   This, if true, could mean a significant change in the conflict with potential larger ramifications if found to be true.

 

I really hope this is not the case because the ramification of chemical weapons being used potentially can throw all previous political and military assumptions out the door.

 

I am surprised there are not more cases of this since the battlefield is usually full of residual smoke and dust. There is also a video from last year where the separatists were clearing out a terminal throwing grenades into cellars and covering up the holes.

Edited by Schmoly War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am surprised there are not more cases of this since the battlefield is usually full of residual smoke and dust. There is also a video from last year where the separatists were clearing out a terminal throwing grenades into cellars and covering up the holes.

I've been mildly nauseated by battlefield smoke during my service so I suppose someone may react a little more strongly than that.  Still, uncontrolled muscle spasms is not something I associate with nausea bought on by inhaling smoke but I am not a medical person so you may be right.  

 

Still, during my service, the drill is to mask up if the least bit suspicious.  I assume Ukraine soldiers carry gas mask protective gear as a minimum but looking at pictures, maybe they don't as a general practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the OSCE Observer mission site (latest 21 January report)

 

"A Ukrainian soldier in a hospital in government-controlled Konstantinovka (56km north of Donetsk) told the SMM that he was being treated for injuries sustained at the Donetsk airport on 19 January. He said 80 Ukrainian soldiers in total had suffered the same injuries, manifested in uncontrollable muscle spasms, vomiting and difficult breathing. Some, he said, had become unconscious. Eleven of the soldiers had been transferred to a hospital in Dnepropetrovsk, he said."

 

The symptoms look suspiciously like a chemical agent weapon of some sort was used in Donetsk airport, more so when some 80 soldiers get the same symptoms more or less the same time.   This, if true, could mean a significant change in the conflict with potential larger ramifications if found to be true.

 

I really hope this is not the case because the ramification of chemical weapons being used potentially can throw all previous political and military assumptions out the door.

 

Please post a link next time. It's important because there are lots of people going around the internet making stuff up. They post quotes that are made up. So, if you take the trouble to properly quote, then please post the link as well.

 

Here's the link:

http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/135671

 

I won't rule out a chemical weapon attack, but it's important to note what kind of spasm those soldiers have. If it's muscles near the eye or throat, then it may be white phosphorus (or similar) related.

 

Also, I'm not sure what the symptoms are of that Russian type incendiary/WP artillery rounds that were supposedly used a while ago by Ukrainian troops. Maybe Russia is using a similar chemical/incendiary weapon.

Edited by BlackAlpha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how the games moving along, but the war is progressing nicely.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/world/europe/russia-says-its-helping-restore-cease-fire-in-ukraine.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=photo-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

 

You have to give Putin this,  We are "restoring the ceasefire" by shelling the #%^#@Q# out of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

The conflict was initiated by the West, via sponsoring a take over in power by western/central areas of Ukraine, which could not out vote the eastern/southern areas of Ukraine. Same thing happened in 2004, as it did in 2014.

Previously, since before 2013 there has been an active ongoing public campaign to isolate Russia politically (by boycotting the Olympics, the Magnitsky process and so on). Hence Russia has been reacting to the western attacks, not attacking Ukraine as it may appear to you.

The roots of this conflict are within the resolution of the cold, where West assumed that Russia had no rights for national and security interests and thus ignored those. If not the actions by Yeltsin or the first maidan, the 2007 speech or the Georgian war were the waking calls that there is a need to respect Russian national and security interests.

However instead of seeking a good compromise, by providing the security guarantees to Russia, everything was done to threaten Russian security, including the expansion of NATO eastwards.

You could of course go and talk about the need to isolate evil Russia from the rest of the world, but the you have a right to express that view if you wish.

Note, Russia is not actually fighting a Cold war with the West at the moment, as we are free to acquire the critical consumer and industrial goods (and other things). It is a false sense that we are isolated economically and politically, an example of hybris on part of anyone who thinks so.

Now, onto the budget. The reason why we don't get a budget deficit due to falling oil prices is:

- because ruble also fell, which meant that we got the similar level of ruble budget income.

- the share of oil incomes is not as major as it is assumed.

Stuff about the budget deficit being shifted onto the large state owned corporations is simply not true - my father runs one (Rostelecom to be specific) and does not have any such issues.

So, to sum up, the sanctions and falling oil prices are not a good thing, but they are not doing critical damage to Russian economy as some appear to think.

Edited by ikalugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...