StarGateWars Forums

Drachenstein wrote:Just heard Bush is sending US troops to Georgian on a humanitarian mission.

Just heard? I learned of this a few days ago. The US has been sending C-130's to transport goods to Georgia and has sent some military humanitarian assessment personnels.

Kieltyka wrote:

Drachenstein wrote:Just heard Bush is sending US troops to Georgian on a humanitarian mission.

Just heard? I learned of this a few days ago. The US has been sending C-130's to transport goods to Georgia and has sent some military humanitarian assessment personnels.

afaik the goods were some of the georgian troops and cargo stationed in iraq, they helped with the transport. that happened those few days ago

russians invited military observers even from the eu to come so that's no issue.

but military tropps is a totally different category

Saakashvili did recall Georgian troops that were in Iraq to fight against the Russians. But from what I know, the US is only sending humanitarian aid and supplies. No combat personnel will be deployed.

urogard wrote:well it was kinda expected.

their neo-colonialist doctrine cannot allow russian presence near the sole to be oil pipeline not passing through russian soil.

and the russian dislike the idea that some one might by pass them. This is what this is about. Oil. more than any thing else, oil and natural gas. Russia has been using it as a stronge arm tact for the last year and half. It was hearting to here germany, there biggest trade partner, has condemded them for this.

Apparently I was wrong about the earlier post of America Blockading Iran.

It was a hoax.

Well I'll get my hat, who has the salt & pepper?

Still I'd rather air on the side of caution, I'm actually very happy that I was wrong on this occasion. This is the cost of being vigilant I guess.

It amazes me how America is calling Russia rotten for it actions, and yet look at what they have done to Iraq & Afghanistan with their Illegal preemptive wars of aggression, total hypocrisy on their part.

International law doesn't count when it comes to America apparently

a hoax you say a hoax? didnt i say that i found nothing of an armada heading for iran? and that it was probably bull **Filtered**? and that those who strongly confirmed the armadas existed would loose all credability?

you believed so much in this 'hoax' that you found online on some retard website or in a false youtube clip. you knew this was fact lol and you failed. now you are wrong. you have no credability. eat my **Filtered**

LiQuiD wrote:

Apparently I was wrong about the earlier post of America Blockading Iran.

It was a hoax.

Well I'll get my hat, who has the salt & pepper?

Still I'd rather air on the side of caution, I'm actually very happy that I was wrong on this occasion. This is the cost of being vigilant I guess.

It amazes me how America is calling Russia rotten for it actions, and yet look at what they have done to Iraq & Afghanistan with their Illegal preemptive wars of aggression, total hypocrisy on their part.

International law doesn't count when it comes to America apparently

a hoax you say a hoax? didnt i say that i found nothing of an armada heading for iran? and that it was probably bull **Filtered**? and that those who strongly confirmed the armadas existed would loose all credability?

you believed so much in this 'hoax' that you found online on some retard website or in a false youtube clip. you knew this was fact lol and you failed. now you are wrong. you have no credability. eat my **Filtered**

Well, does this mean that all media sources have no credibility? Because I'm 1000% sure that they've all got in wrong at least once or twice.

My credibility is fine, just shows that I jumped the gun.

I've learned my lesson and will endeavor to confirm at a "creditable" media outlet before posting.

You never answered my earlier question about which media outlets you find credible, please, I would love to know.

I think you can only get balanced info if you take two medias who are completely biased, one to each side.
then you see what they say and then stick with the middle value.

urogard wrote:I think you can only get balanced info if you take two medias who are completely biased, one to each side.
then you see what they say and then stick with the middle value.

Good answer, Lets make up our own minds.

The latest news, on the right we have this, and here's the lefts version.

Interpretation should be left to the public.

To put things into perspective...


Putting aside what russians took as grave insults from the US over the last decade or so (In july (g8 summit) for instance, Bush refered to Medvedev as a "smart fellow" but sent connie to Prague to finalise the balistic defence agreement just a day before that summit... Which for the russians ammounted to a clear message that Medvedev is an idiot and the US could not care less what russia opposes or what it thinks of its international standing heh...)






Putting that aside, yes it is mostly about energy policy.

It has turned out that Russia under Medvedev runned a very lively and most of all effective foreign energy policy. In july medvedev visited azarbejdzan, turkmensitan & kazahstan and managed to secure new deals musceling out western (eu&us) competitors and got assurances their oil wont circumvent russian soil in tranzition to the west.
What really made a difference thoe was Gazprom (russian state oil company) making headways into africa. US convinced Gadafi to open up Libia for foreign investment and energy deals setting up the western companies for fat deals. However it was Gazprom that secured a deal for any and all future energents making their way out of Libia, to mainly EU and US lol. Russians are also expanding their buisiness into Niger and coming to agreemen with Algeria about joint marketing of natural gas in europe.

All the US&EU effort that went into especially Libia evaporated and Americans flipped their lid so to speak lol. They`ve excluded Russian companies from any oil dealings in Iraq - russia previosly writing off a massive Iraqi state debt to them in anticipation of securing siad oil deals - cheeky and painful hit. Gazprom responded by a trip top Iran, securing major strategic agreements about Iraninan oil/gas exports. coincidentally (lol?) Washington promptly changed the tune and sent a message to Teheran that "washington is sworn to diplomacy" heh. Taking the battle to "eurazia" in response was really to be expected. Just not so litterary as to really start a war...

So all in all, Russians outplayed the US both in diplomacy and on the market. In one of the most sensitive issues on the planet. And an american "democratic" satelite starts the first war in the Caucasus in the 21st century.
Coincidance?

You be the judge heh...







Also some funny stuff from the unbiased media:
[spoiler]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtdVS8646GI&eurl=http://www.rtvslo.si/modload.php?&c_mod=forum&op=viewtopic&mode=viewtopic&topic_id=32443&forum=121&sta
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fBGtXS66VM&eurl=http://www.rtvslo.si/modload.php?&c_mod=forum&op=viewtopic&mode=viewtopic&topic_id=32443&forum=121&sta[/spoiler]

LOL @ the first one

the lost the connection??
hehe and there are people who really try to tell us that the USA has free and unbiased media

That was a Canadian news company

i say, we roll up to Montreal, cause they are a break away province of Canada, and protect those Canadians who have dual passports for the US of A, and then introduce them to direct tv, so they can get 102 home shopping channels , infomercials, and lost transmissions.............(j/k love those people, my daughter's living there....try to tell her that there was no draft, but.....)

WTH?

how did you work out that a republic is a bad form of government?

the US republic did rather well for itself from 1776 to 1913, the US economy went from strength to strength as did the dollar, year after year and their was virtually NO inflation till the illegally passed federal reserve act.



lets not forget that america had NO enemy's until the late 40's then suddenly they have enemy's all over the world that hate their freedom, where was this hate of freedom pre late 40's?

Jack wrote:When did I say that a republic was a bad form of government?

you may have said it, you may not have. if the conspiracy clubs sources told them you said it, its probably false. lol they believe anything that reinforces their fantasy.

and werent they wrong about the armada heading for iran? i mean trying to lessen the shame of being utterly wrong they now make excuses for their error. how many more things they firmly believe in could be lies?

i define credible sources as the ones you apparently dont know of. . .

you fail

Jack wrote:When did I say that a republic was a bad form of government?

Jack wrote:

[KMA]Avenger wrote:so what are we sposed to do when our governments are illegal (there has been no election in england that elected gordon brown, he was given the office of prime minister when tony blair resigned) and are involved in illegal activities?

It's called an armed revolution.


One thing I can't stand about people that go around shouting to the top of their lungs about random conspiracy theories, is that they're all talk and no walk. In one hand they say that no one listens to them, and that the government is "illegal" and doesn't do what it's supposed to. But then they go out and waist their time protesting, like it's really going to help their cause, even after they've spent forever complaining about the government doing what it likes, when it likes.



P.S. I don't know if anyone's brought this up yet or not, but America IS a republic. It's NOT a democracy, which is what you actually want. Which is actually a far worse form of government

have i misunderstood?