Ukraine.

[davidatpreston]

Until the break up of the Soviet Union the Ukraine was clearly under Russian stewardship - so that takes us to the end of the 1980's. In the 1990's Boris was in charge - drunk most of the time, and he was a bit of a Russian teddy bear when sober. After him comes Putin and his mate Med, the lawyer. Putin is ex KGB. If you want to see what the KGB do, visit Vilnius in Lithuania, where the KGB headquarters is now a genocide museum. Putin is ego centric in his own right, but also a trained and ruthless killer and strategic military leader. He is in complete charge and he isn't drunk all the time.

 

I have taken the bus from Tallinn to St Petersburg overnight and crossed the Russia / Estonia border. It is a military secure area right behind this border and if I was in Estonia I would have a sweat on right now. Without NATO this country would be back in the bloc now.

 

It was interesting to see the French in peace negotiations because France and Russia are natural allies and particularly going back to the period before WW1. That is seen in the French building Russian warships, a contract now in abeyance. Maybe they can provide some logic that is acceptable in the situation.

 

 

 

I have been to Estonia too (2005), and let's just say my experiences differed from yours completely. Perhaps your inbred animosity to all things Russian and Soviet gave you the 'sweat on' - but I found both Tallin and the areas nearer to Russia very laid back. Both have significant Russian ethnic populations, and they were living in harmony with the Estonian speakers.

 

Tallin has many Russian restaurants,bars and so on, and this situation will not change unless the US inflames it, visits from John McCain etc and ridiculous military exercises just yards from Russian soil. If Russia had wanted Estonia back (which it doesn't - it just wants no NATO threat from the Baltic states) it would have taken it before NATO virtually annexed those states after agreeing not to move East at the end of the 'cold war' then progressively breaking that agreement.

 

You seem to regard Russians as a different species,I am sure they have feelings, pride, compassion and want a peaceful life but you have to remember WW2 and how important secure borders must seem to a country that had 20 million people murdered by the Nazis.

 

You can call Putin names, but from what I read he had a fairly standard desk job in the KGB and is hardly likely to be 'a trained and ruthless killer' - have you any evidence for this stupid slur, calling an individual a murderer - I doubt it.

 

His biggest crime in my eyes is failure to implement human rights in Russia, which is a big minus point. But I am glad he is standing up to the fascist-infested slime that now run Ukraine and protecting the 3 million plus people in the East who are being terrorised from Kiev. Over a million now displaced thanks to that fat corrupt Poroschenko.

 

Finally, it would do Britain good to have a more pragmatic policy and look to trade and build proper relations with both Russia and China, there is an old saying, when goods cross borders, troops do not. However, this would not suit the interests of the US corporations and arms industry, would it ?

[davidatpreston]

I think you will find that intervening is what they do when they can ferment trouble and leave a mess in countries where they have not thought out what happens after their 'victory' - unless its Vietnam where they got a ****** nose.

 

again a honest reply if the armed forces had been allowed to the job they had been trained for and not shackled by congress and the president there would have been a completely different story and ending. Being hand tied by rules of engagement such as you can,t fire unless you,ve been fired at, and you can only destroy old rusty trucks!!! I tried to find the sorce of the two eg,s read them Friday but can,t find them now,

 

I did download the piece on Tito, I,m not that clever or wise,( hence that's why I support the Vale.)

 

 

 

Im not sure where you found the Tito stuff, but it reads like the rantings of a disturbed person with a grudge - certainly the Balkans were a hotbed of war and hatred from before 1900 up to 1914, and you will know what happened then, it caused WW1.

To unite them after WW2 was a great achievement, to keep them united and independent and not under NATO or the Warsaw Pact even more so, and for thm to get 40+ years of peace was great leadership of several peoples who have always hated each other. So you are bound to get some factions as in your cut-paste stuff who were a bit disgruntled, nothing more than the current England v Scotland stuff.

There was no bloodshed though, and relative prosperity until Tito died and NATO moved in to get Croatia - allies of the Nazis in WW2 and always cuddly with right-wing Germans - to demand independence, and now we have endless non-countries trying to co-exist on a knife edge. Bosnia has never been a nation, never will be. Kosovo is a cesspit full of groups that hate each other (Serbs, who it belongs to and Albanians who now want to leave in their tens of thousands and go to Hungary - a failed and non-state that isn't even recognised in half the countries of the world.

 

As for the rules in Vietnam, have a look at the BBC take on 'only firing when fired upon' and also, does that include dropping more bombs on civilian areas of North Vietnam than wer dropped in all of WW2? Not sure where you got those facts from, but anyone who wants the truth just has to look up civilian losses in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia - but please do read this....

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23427726

 

Yet the Vietnamese made the terrible mistake of freeing bomber pilots like John McCain, shot down whilst dive-bombing civilians over Hanoi, and he has spent the rest of his wretched existence fermenting war and hatred as a far-right senator and even became a presidential candidate. It is amazing that he was allowed to visit Ukraine before the coup a year ago to stir up unrest and set CIA plans in motion.

[Paul6754]

As I understand it the American Airforce was forbidden by President Johnson and Politicians in Washington to bomb Hanoi (where much of the armament factories/industries etc were located) and Haiphong (the major port for importation of Russian weapons eg SAM missiles etc) due to high population density, airfields in the North were also off limits. Another example of trying to fight a war with one if not two hands tied behind your back.

[Warren]

I have been to Estonia too (2005), and let's just say my experiences differed from yours completely. Perhaps your inbred animosity to all things Russian and Soviet gave you the 'sweat on' - but I found both Tallin and the areas nearer to Russia very laid back. Both have significant Russian ethnic populations, and they were living in harmony with the Estonian speakers.

 

Tallin has many Russian restaurants,bars and so on, and this situation will not change unless the US inflames it, visits from John McCain etc and ridiculous military exercises just yards from Russian soil. If Russia had wanted Estonia back (which it doesn't - it just wants no NATO threat from the Baltic states) it would have taken it before NATO virtually annexed those states after agreeing not to move East at the end of the 'cold war' then progressively breaking that agreement.

 

You seem to regard Russians as a different species,I am sure they have feelings, pride, compassion and want a peaceful life but you have to remember WW2 and how important secure borders must seem to a country that had 20 million people murdered by the Nazis.

 

You can call Putin names, but from what I read he had a fairly standard desk job in the KGB and is hardly likely to be 'a trained and ruthless killer' - have you any evidence for this stupid slur, calling an individual a murderer - I doubt it.

 

His biggest crime in my eyes is failure to implement human rights in Russia, which is a big minus point. But I am glad he is standing up to the fascist-infested slime that now run Ukraine and protecting the 3 million plus people in the East who are being terrorised from Kiev. Over a million now displaced thanks to that fat corrupt Poroschenko.

 

Finally, it would do Britain good to have a more pragmatic policy and look to trade and build proper relations with both Russia and China, there is an old saying, when goods cross borders, troops do not. However, this would not suit the interests of the US corporations and arms industry, would it ?

 

You seem to be inventing things I haven't actually said, if you read them properly. So no point debating further.

[davidatpreston]

As I understand it the American Airforce was forbidden by President Johnson and Politicians in Washington to bomb Hanoi (where much of the armament factories/industries etc were located) and Haiphong (the major port for importation of Russian weapons eg SAM missiles etc) due to high population density, airfields in the North were also off limits. Another example of trying to fight a war with one if not two hands tied behind your back.

 

 

I'm afraid that is absolute nonsense. You onl have to read about the mental case that stood as presidential candidate, war criminal John McCain, to see that he was actually shot down over Hanoi itself. Unlike the tens of thousands of civilians murdered in those cities, he recovered from his injuries and was set free by those he had dropped bombs on and dive bombed.

 

There was a gap in the bombing, but as you can see below, your understanding is mistaken, probably someone somewhere trying to rewrite history as the us always does.

 

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/united-states-resumes-bombing-of-hanoi-and-haiphong

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20719382

 

Thousands of British people gave a lot of aid to the Vietnamese people at the time, something I am glad I assisted in, including giving blood donations, clothing and medical help. The Vietnam Solidarity campaign were very active and successful and raised morale as well as providing practical and humanitarian help.

 

The famous demonstrations in London and just about every US city by decent Americans helped considerably as well in swaying public opinion against the war.

[Paul6754]

I'm afraid that is absolute nonsense. You onl have to read about the mental case that stood as presidential candidate, war criminal John McCain, to see that he was actually shot down over Hanoi itself. Unlike the tens of thousands of civilians murdered in those cities, he recovered from his injuries and was set free by those he had dropped bombs on and dive bombed.

 

There was a gap in the bombing, but as you can see below, your understanding is mistaken, probably someone somewhere trying to rewrite history as the us always does.

 

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/united-states-resumes-bombing-of-hanoi-and-haiphong

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20719382

 

Thousands of British people gave a lot of aid to the Vietnamese people at the time, something I am glad I assisted in, including giving blood donations, clothing and medical help. The Vietnam Solidarity campaign were very active and successful and raised morale as well as providing practical and humanitarian help.

 

The famous demonstrations in London and just about every US city by decent Americans helped considerably as well in swaying public opinion against the war.

 

Have to differ on this one, read about Operation Rolling Thunder 1965-68 and its cessation in March 1968. The USA were refrained from bombing within 60km of Hanoi and 10km of Haiphong. The article you posted confirms the bombing of Hanoi/Haiphong resumed in April 1972 after a 4 year lull (Nixon was then President) after the NV reneged on previous agreements including the Eastertide offensive. From the beginning of the war up to Apr 1972 the USA refrained from sustained/heavy bombing of the most strategic and potentially crippling to the NV targets of Hanoi and Haiphong harbor.

 

The bombings of Hanoi/Haiphong in Dec 1972 you refer to in your links were retaliation by the USA for the NV violations of the proposed peace treaty sometime (summer ?) during 1972. If Hanoi/Haiphong had been "maximally" bombed earlier in the war there may have been a different outcome.

 

John McCain is not one of my favorite people either but in the Vietnam he was just a pilot. I fail to understand your hatred of all things American as without American involvement prior to and during WWII you and I would be speaking German, the help the USA gave the UK during the Falklands conflict shouldn't be underestimated either.

[davidatpreston]

Have to differ on this one, read about Operation Rolling Thunder 1965-68 and its cessation in March 1968. The USA were refrained from bombing within 60km of Hanoi and 10km of Haiphong. The article you posted confirms the bombing of Hanoi/Haiphong resumed in April 1972 after a 4 year lull (Nixon was then President) after the NV reneged on previous agreements including the Eastertide offensive. From the beginning of the war up to Apr 1972 the USA refrained from sustained/heavy bombing of the most strategic and potentially crippling to the NV targets of Hanoi and Haiphong harbor.

 

The bombings of Hanoi/Haiphong in Dec 1972 you refer to in your links were retaliation by the USA for the NV violations of the proposed peace treaty sometime (summer ?) during 1972. If Hanoi/Haiphong had been "maximally" bombed earlier in the war there may have been a different outcome.

 

John McCain is not one of my favorite people either but in the Vietnam he was just a pilot. I fail to understand your hatred of all things American as without American involvement prior to and during WWII you and I would be speaking German, the help the USA gave the UK during the Falklands conflict shouldn't be underestimated either.

 

 

 

You had said Hanoi and Haiphong were not bombed - they were. Whether the US says it was about agreements, they still killed tens of thousands of civilians and even under Obama today would not blanket bomb cities.

 

It would be the exact equivalent of Russia bombing Kiev and Lviv and other Western ukranian cities now.

 

The links I showed you last time gave much detail from Western sources (BBC etc) that showed that genocide was carried out in South Vietnam - Me Lai was just one example of thousands of villages that had no military links where US forces just murdered everyone in sight for their body count.

 

One part of the report describes how 10,000 corpses yielded just 700 weapons - showing that the vast majority were civilians. The US measured success in 'body counts' and if the bodies were civilians then it didn't matter.

 

Therefor the outcome could never have been different, as the US declared war not on communists but on the entire Vietnamese people, and failed to understand that it was a nationalist war for them, they had to get rid of the Japanese and French before that and did so, then the Americans, who could never win without winning 'hearts and minds'.

 

I don't hate all things American - but I do despise the right wing republicans and their like who have mostly taken over running a beautiful country, as the right wing nationalists have taken over Ukraine which is what this thread was about.

 

America produces some of the best music, books, used to make magnificent films, has produced some magnificent people from Martin Luther King to Robert Kennedy, Ralph Nader, Harvey Milk, Eugene McCarthy especially, even Al Gore since he took up environmentalism. notice that severalin that list were murdered by the right wing.

 

When liberal America is in bloom,the world flourishes, and it is a wonderful sight. The opposite side is too horrific for words, and nobody who stands up for the US ever answers things like this -

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/list-of-countries-the-usa-has-bombed-since-the-end-of-world-war-ii/24626

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

 

Now McCain and his gang want to keep their arms industry going by getting involved more in Ukraine, where their visits provoked the coup a year ago. You say he was just a pilot - I have no time for pilots who bomb civilians, and he is now mentally ill due to his imprisonment in Vietnam, and unfit to make policy decisions in a rational way.

 

What help did the US give in the Falklands war ? And in WW2 as I have said, they wouldn't help other than some aid ships in 1939, 1940 and 1941 when the Germans were winning and Britain was severely threatened with invasion. As in WW1 they waited years and only came in when they did because Hitler in a mad moment fuelled by his drug addiction and many say later stage syphilis, declared war on the US - otherwise they would have waited and just fought the Japanese. Why do you not acknowledge the sacrifice and help - despite Stalin also being a madman - of the Russian people, and the many brave Germans who stood up to Hitler and died for it, plus all the other countries like Greece, Yugoslavia, Norway where partisans did magnificent work.

 

Anyway, now it seems Cameron is going to send 'advisors' troops to Ukraine - absolute madness, and one more reason not to vote Conservative.

[kevin_struggles]

Every time the US intervenes outside its own territory, there is a disaster.

 

Ukraine is attracting all the attention, but maybe a look at what has happened in LIBYA, a country in ruins and probably under ISIS control, would be more appropriate. Libya is in pieces now, a failed state - it takes a special talent to make countries and whole populations of millions worse off than they were under Gaddhafi and Saddam, but yes, the good old US does it with ease.

 

IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN.....now YEMEN has no proper government.

 

They support the worlds most repressive regime in Saudi Arabia, where there have been more beheadings by the government than by ISIS.

 

If the reptilian republicans had their way, they would have got involved in SYRIA and IRAN too.

 

I read recently that something over half of US teenagers could not locate any of these places on a map, many not even the right continent, and it seems the politicians there are not much better - millions suffer their stupidity and war-lust.

 

 

All I would add is that we are nearly as bad because far too often we blindly follow behind like we are their puppy.

 

Meddel, meddle, meddle. Our countries are so perfect we feel entitled to force everyone else to follow our example. It would be funny if it wasnt so tragic.

[Paul6754]

You had said Hanoi and Haiphong were not bombed - they were. Whether the US says it was about agreements, they still killed tens of thousands of civilians and even under Obama today would not blanket bomb cities.

 

It would be the exact equivalent of Russia bombing Kiev and Lviv and other Western ukranian cities now.

 

The links I showed you last time gave much detail from Western sources (BBC etc) that showed that genocide was carried out in South Vietnam - Me Lai was just one example of thousands of villages that had no military links where US forces just murdered everyone in sight for their body count.

 

One part of the report describes how 10,000 corpses yielded just 700 weapons - showing that the vast majority were civilians. The US measured success in 'body counts' and if the bodies were civilians then it didn't matter.

 

Therefor the outcome could never have been different, as the US declared war not on communists but on the entire Vietnamese people, and failed to understand that it was a nationalist war for them, they had to get rid of the Japanese and French before that and did so, then the Americans, who could never win without winning 'hearts and minds'.

 

I posted "the American Airforce was forbidden by President Johnson and Politicians in Washington to bomb Hanoi (where much of the armament factories/industries and Haiphong...." which is true, the bombings of Hanoi/Haiphong in 1972 were sanctioned by Nixon to bring the NV to the negotiating table over the peace process. The NV deliberately put women and children in the firing/bombing line in Hanoi/Haiphong to deter the Americans and hence heavy bombing of these cities didn't occur 'til 1972, it's a different picture to the one you paint.

 

Any bombing of cities whether by the British, Germans, Americans or whoever is awful. Sadly, atrocities in Vietnam were committed by all three sides.

 

I don't hate all things American - but I do despise the right wing republicans and their like who have mostly taken over running a beautiful country, as the right wing nationalists have taken over Ukraine which is what this thread was about.

 

Now McCain and his gang want to keep their arms industry going by getting involved more in Ukraine, where their visits provoked the coup a year ago. You say he was just a pilot - I have no time for pilots who bomb civilians, and he is now mentally ill due to his imprisonment in Vietnam, and unfit to make policy decisions in a rational way.

 

I'm certainly not a Republican myself. McCain was interviewed on CBS the other night, he seemed the same as he always does, he's a senior figure in the Republican Party but I have no idea how influential he is.

 

Your statement "I have no time for Pilots who bomb civilians", does that include British Pilots in WWII who helped to provide you with the life you have today.

 

What help did the US give in the Falklands war ? And in WW2 as I have said, they wouldn't help other than some aid ships in 1939, 1940 and 1941 when the Germans were winning and Britain was severely threatened with invasion.

 

The US gave Britain intelligence information on troop/ship movements, and missiles although support for Britain was not unanimous among US government officials. Caspar Weinberger, the US defence secretary, was awarded a knighthood for his support. Your words about WWII show you greatly underestimate the help the US gave Britain before it became directly involved in WWII.

[davidatpreston]

I posted "the American Airforce was forbidden by President Johnson and Politicians in Washington to bomb Hanoi (where much of the armament factories/industries and Haiphong...." which is true, the bombings of Hanoi/Haiphong in 1972 were sanctioned by Nixon to bring the NV to the negotiating table over the peace process. The NV deliberately put women and children in the firing/bombing line in Hanoi/Haiphong to deter the Americans and hence heavy bombing of these cities didn't occur 'til 1972, it's a different picture to the one you paint.

 

Any bombing of cities whether by the British, Germans, Americans or whoever is awful. Sadly, atrocities in Vietnam were committed by all three sides.

 

 

 

I'm certainly not a Republican myself. McCain was interviewed on CBS the other night, he seemed the same as he always does, he's a senior figure in the Republican Party but I have no idea how influential he is.

 

Your statement "I have no time for Pilots who bomb civilians", does that include British Pilots in WWII who helped to provide you with the life you have today.

 

 

 

The US gave Britain intelligence information on troop/ship movements, and missiles although support for Britain was not unanimous among US government officials. Caspar Weinberger, the US defence secretary, was awarded a knighthood for his support. Your words about WWII show you greatly underestimate the help the US gave Britain before it became directly involved in WWII.

 

 

 

if you believe the nonsense about North Vietnam putting women and children in the firing line, there is little point in me trying to convince you, as the BBC link I put up included details of a large area of Hanoi, many blocks of residential housing totally destroyed - they lived there for fuucks sake.

 

And no, I cant even endorse the British bombing of German cities in WW2 like Dresden and Hamburg - tens of thousands including the many Germans who hated Hitler - he never had 50 per cent support of the population, so that means half of those killed were not enemies other than by the accident of where they were born.

 

Civilian mass bombing has been proved not to work in military terms, it does not give any advantage and is always morally repugnant. It didn't help in WW2, it is also interesting that the Allies would not bomb concentration camps as begged to be the Jewish lobby which would have saved many more lives.

[For Us All]

Putin ready to turn off the gas?

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crisis-putin-will-cut-gas-to-europe-unless-russia-is-paid-by-the-end-of-the-week-10071475.html

[davidatpreston]

Putin ready to turn off the gas?

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crisis-putin-will-cut-gas-to-europe-unless-russia-is-paid-by-the-end-of-the-week-10071475.html

 

 

 

The trouble is that when you read deep into the story, and check elsewhere, it seems that fat fascist Poroschenko has turned off the gas supplies to no less than 4 million people in the east of Ukraine, his own countrymen supposedly, and Putin is just responding.

 

 

Another example of selective journalism, and who else supplies things without payment - I am seriously worried about the neutrality in our news lately, or the lack of it.

[Paul6754]

if you believe the nonsense about North Vietnam putting women and children in the firing line, there is little point in me trying to convince you, as the BBC link I put up included details of a large area of Hanoi, many blocks of residential housing totally destroyed - they lived there for fuucks sake.

 

Why didn't the NV move the civilians away from Hanoi a la the British did from London etc during WWII, the reason is they were located/re-located around strategic targets to deter American bombing and it worked 'til 1972. The bombing of Hanoi in 1972 forced the NV back to the negotiating table, Hanoi and Haiphong were spared heavy bombing 'til then, it may not fit with your view but read the history.

 

And no, I cant even endorse the British bombing of German cities in WW2 like Dresden and Hamburg - tens of thousands including the many Germans who hated Hitler - he never had 50 per cent support of the population, so that means half of those killed were not enemies other than by the accident of where they were born.

 

So you would have been happy to see many more British and American lives lost fighting their way through Germany, words fail me.

 

Civilian mass bombing has been proved not to work in military terms, it does not give any advantage and is always morally repugnant.

 

It is repugnant. Hiroshima/Nagasaki would say it has been proved to work, if it's a choice of their lives or mine I would be in favor and so would you.

 

It didn't help in WW2, it is also interesting that the Allies would not bomb concentration camps as begged to be the Jewish lobby which would have saved many more lives.

 

I would guess the allies wouldn't bomb concentration camps because there were innocent Jewish people in them and as I understand it the allies weren't 100% sure of the intelligence until troops entered the first one.

[For Us All]

Putin opponent shot dead in Moscow.

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2015/02/russian_opposition_leader_bori.html

[davidatpreston]

Putin opponent shot dead in Moscow.

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2015/02/russian_opposition_leader_bori.html

 

 

Headline says it all - guilty with no proof again.

Soon we will see that Putin was funding Jimmy Savile and Jihadi John too, no doubt.

 

Just as in the John Kennedy and many other assassination cases, there were many enemies and to link Putin immediately is at best lazy journalism.

 

If he was exposing corruption as it says, he will have had many enemies, mafia and others. And I wouldn't totally rule out a far right Ukranian role to get just this reaction.

 

Putin could have been involved, would like to see some evidence if so, - it didn't say 'Nixon opponent Kennedy shot dead' in 1963 did it ?