Syria

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
And as has been pointed out already it was Russia that applied pressure by covert means onto Crimea. One day no Russian troops in Crimea, next day, oh sorry we forgot to mention it. There are Russian troops in the Ukraine and the Russians are employing the same tactics there that they used in the Crimea.

The last people to bully Russia were the Germans.

Nope. The Afghans saw them off.
 
Says the man who tries to use RT as a reliable source of information. <rofl>

It's taken me a while longer than normal but now I've got it, you are not playing with a full deck.

To the extent that you have any argument there, it's circular and hollow.

1. You are determined come what may to believe that Russia is the bad guy.
2. Therefore you don't believe Russian press.
3. You laugh off anything stated in the Russian press as obviously wrong, on account of your own preconceptions.

You can't simply say that it can't be true that part of Russia is in the Balkans, because it says so in the RT article, and the RT article can't be right, because it was written by RT. Just look at a map of Europe !! Or has RT faked all the maps on the internet as well ?

The fact is, that what little information you have provided in an attempt to support your anti russian stance, you have provided no analysis of whatsoever.

On the other hand, I have produced information from a variety of sources AND analysed that information, as well as providing a logical overview analysis of the situation. Without fail you have either completely ignored the compelling information presented to you, or laughed at it on the basis that it contradicts your preconceptions therefore it can't be true.

And then you call me "blinkered" etc.

Your arguments are vacuous. Your preconceptions are ill conceived. Your analysis is no where to be seen. You have flunked.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EDGE.
If I had to choose I think I'd rather live in the US than Russia. So would most Russians, probably.

If I had to choose I'd rather live in Russia. Government's more autocratic and the state-sponsored homophobia's appalling but at least the Russians have a rich culture. Burger King and baseball is the closest thing Americans have to a 'culture'.

Yep, Russia seems more interesting to me as a History student. Ideally, I'd rather live in Denmark, Norway or Iceland.
 
You're resorting to personal attacks on someone because of their spelling and use of block capitals

This is typical of u when u are angry and are losing the debate

Look stupid.

I think I'll pass, I have no intention of debating with someone who can't spell "Ally", or "Cited". Especially if that certain someone thinks it a good idea to try to prove a point by posting in BLOCK CAPITALS after failing to even look at the link he's trying argue about.

<doh>


Do you get it now or do you want to continue down the failure path?
 
To the extent that you have any argument there, it's circular and hollow.

1. You are determined come what may to believe that Russia is the bad guy.
2. Therefore you don't believe Russian press.
3. You laugh off anything stated in the Russian press as obviously wrong, on account of your own preconceptions.

You can't simply say that it can't be true that part of Russia is in the Balkans, because it says so in the RT article, and the RT article can't be right, because it was written by RT. Just look at a map of Europe !! Or has RT faked all the maps on the internet as well ?

The fact is, that what little information you have provided in an attempt to support your anti russian stance, you have provided no analysis of whatsoever.

On the other hand, I have produced information from a variety of sources AND analysed that information, as well as providing a logical overview analysis of the situation. Without fail you have either completely ignored the compelling information presented to you, or laughed at it on the basis that it contradicts your preconceptions therefore it can't be true.

And then you call me "blinkered" etc.

Your arguments are vacuous. Your preconceptions are ill conceived. Your analysis is no where to be seen. You have flunked.

RT actually stands for “Russia Today,” and on their website they claim to be an autonomous non-profit organization.” It turns out that Russia’s state-owned news agency RIA-NOVOSTI launched RT in 2005 in an effort to improve Russia’s image abroad. It’s currently broadcasting in English, Spanish and Arabic.

Russia Today launched with a mission to cover international news with a Russian outlook and while insiders have praised its staff’s work, many seem to be in agreement that objectivity is not the network’s goal. It’s been accused of both a strident anti-American stance and towing the Kremlin line by repeating government talking points. Regardless, RT is more successful than any other foreign broadcast stations that are available in the United States.

Is Russia Today State Sponsored?

Without a doubt RT is receiving its funding from the Russian government. In 2005 they started with a $30 million budget that has recently skyrocketed to over $300 million. So saying they’re an “autonomous nonprofit organization” is like saying the same thing about the Pentagon. Citing a Western news bias against Russia, the channel sees itself as balancing the equation. During a studio visit, Putin himself said that RT’s goal was to “break the monopoly of the Anglo-Saxon mass media.”


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Your source.
 
http://yournewswire.com/psychic-edgar-cayce-predicted-putin-would-save-world-from-ww3/

As events in Syria and Iraq have become more convoluted and devastating for people in the region, the Islamic State (ISIS) has been on a campaign of shock and awe, reigning bloody terror on Christians, Syrians, Kurds, moderate Muslims, Shia Muslims, and anyone in between. ISIS, as everyone apparently knows, is funded and supplied weaponry by the US and Israel as a means of indirectly toppling the Assad regime in Syria.

As the US and its allies pretend like they are not responsible for ISIS and act like they are powerless to stop ISIS, Putin has calmly told the world in no uncertain terms the truth about the West’s support for ISIS and the other mercenary factions which have completely destroyed Syria, already killed hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions, and forcing the engineered refugee crisis on Europe, expanding the crisis now into Macedonia.

In this video Vladimir Putin cogently explains the Syria situation with striking clarity:


You must log in or register to see media
 
RT actually stands for “Russia Today,” and on their website they claim to be an autonomous non-profit organization.” It turns out that Russia’s state-owned news agency RIA-NOVOSTI launched RT in 2005 in an effort to improve Russia’s image abroad. It’s currently broadcasting in English, Spanish and Arabic.

Russia Today launched with a mission to cover international news with a Russian outlook and while insiders have praised its staff’s work, many seem to be in agreement that objectivity is not the network’s goal. It’s been accused of both a strident anti-American stance and towing the Kremlin line by repeating government talking points. Regardless, RT is more successful than any other foreign broadcast stations that are available in the United States.

Is Russia Today State Sponsored?

Without a doubt RT is receiving its funding from the Russian government. In 2005 they started with a $30 million budget that has recently skyrocketed to over $300 million. So saying they’re an “autonomous nonprofit organization” is like saying the same thing about the Pentagon. Citing a Western news bias against Russia, the channel sees itself as balancing the equation. During a studio visit, Putin himself said that RT’s goal was to “break the monopoly of the Anglo-Saxon mass media.”


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Your source.

Ok. 3 questions.

1. Why does a goal to, "break the monopoly of the Anglo-Saxon mass media", mean that this is an unreliable news source ?

2. Are you aware that part of Russia is in the Balkans, as pointed out by the RT article. Are you claiming that RT has invented this ?

3. Are you aware that the BBC licence fee is set each year by Parliament, and is effectively recovered as a tax ? Does this mean that you laugh at the suggestion of the BBC being taken credibly too ?
 
Look stupid.




Do you get it now or do you want to continue down the failure path?

You hadnt read it either though tbf, because you apparently hadnt spotted that many of the incidents referred to involved western european planes in or around russian airspace.
 
Ok. 3 questions.

1. Why does a goal to, "break the monopoly of the Anglo-Saxon mass media", mean that this is an unreliable news source ?

2. Are you aware that part of Russia is in the Balkans, as pointed out by the RT article. Are you claiming that RT has invented this ?

3. Are you aware that the BBC licence fee is set each year by Parliament, and is effectively recovered as a tax ? Does this mean that you laugh at the suggestion of the BBC being taken credibly too ?


RT is a totally unreliable source of information Rob, it's a modern day Pravda ffs, I thought everyone knew that. Nothing it says can be trusted.

An American anchor for the Kremlin-funded news channel RT has quit on air and accused the network of "whitewashing" Moscow's military intervention in Crimea. Liz Wahl, a Washington-based correspondent for RT-America, part of the network formerly known as Russia Today, told viewers on Wednesday she was resigning because of its coverage of President Vladimir Putin's actions in the Ukrainian region. Veerng off script, Wahl said: "I cannot be part of a network funded by the Russian government that whitewashes the actions of Putin. I'm proud to be an American and believe in disseminating the truth, and that is why, after this newscast, I'm resigning."