StarGateWars Forums

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:04 am**

hmmm thats interesting. ive shunned news today.

and kma i wasnt being serious in my last post. i didnt mean to imply my previous series of posts werent sensible. seems i accidentaly misled you there. dw it happens :wink:

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:23 am**

LiQuiD wrote:there is only 1 superpower at the moment. thats the usa.

Russia was and still is a superpower. Proof? Russian armaments are amongst the most durable and work under most if not all conditions on the earths surface, they have tanks that can start up under such severe frost in which the US tanks are nothing but a lump of frozen metal.
not to mention it's nuclear stockpiles are enough to wipe out the earth several times over.
And guess why the USA was so furious when the russians were discussing an armaments export treaty to Iran? In case the USA would be stupid enough to invade iran, they'd suffer disastrous casualties should the iranians have russian technology such as the kashtan defence platform at their disposal.

Not to mention that china already is a superpower. If they wanted they could crash US economy any second and their army is also top quality.

LiQuiD wrote:they spend more on their military than nearly the whole of the world combined. i believe russia doesnt spend much more on their forces than the uk. the russian military is mostly old and in poor repair.

There is a very neat russian anecdote which reflects your thinking.
The americans spent 10 millions dollars to research a pen that works in space.
The russians spent 100 roubles to buy a box full of pencils.

Russian ingenuity is unmatched. Well, probably except for german ingenuity. That's why the AK 47 is the most used weapon in the world, that's why us troops abandoned their m4's in favor of the more durable ak 47 in both vietnam and iraq in significant numbers. That's why in dogfights during the vietnam war russian mig 21s were killing 1.5 phantoms for each 1 mig destroyed. that's why american airforce was at an all time low and a joke compared to pre-vietnam status.

LiQuiD wrote:they show their strength by sending out ancient bombers to 'scare' nato. these bombers are met by advanded interceptors. the usa has technology and hardware beyond any other country. you spend over 300bil per year on somethin and you get benefits.

Again, go and actually read up something on the subject before you decide to post something where you'll just ridicule yourself.

LiQuiD wrote:in a few years id imagine china catches up and there will be another superpower. but theres no way russia could realistically challenge nato in a conventional war.

See above.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:36 am**

erm, nope...

didn't get the feeling of being misled, was simply asking a question, nothing was intended or implied by the question :-)

back on topic, a big sigh of relief this crap didn't escalate and get out of hand, but then again

....

Georgia has ordered its forces to cease fire in the rebel province of South Ossetia - but reports from the region say the fighting is continuing.

A resident in the Georgian town of Gori weeps outside her bombed-out home

Georgia told Russia it had ceased fire and called for immediate negotiations on a "termination of hostilities".

Earlier it pulled troops out of Tskhinvali, capital of the breakaway province, after three days of heavy fighting with Russian forces and pro-Russian separatists.

However, Russia said troops on the ground had not yet obeyed the ceasefire order, and were continuing to fire shells.

"We have been handed a note that from 2am BST Georgia stopped firing and is withdrawing forces from the conflict zone, but our information does not confirm the Georgian statement," the Interfax news agency quoted Russia's Foreign Ministry as saying.

Tbilisi international airport was hit in a Russian air strike hours before the scheduled arrival of French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner on a peace-brokering mission, witnesses said.

The airport was hit 200 metres from the runway in a raid that also hit a nearby military airport and factory, according to reports from the area.

However, Russia denied the claim, labelling it "disinformation".

Russia says 2,000 people have been killed in the fighting and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev have accused the Georgian military of committing genocide.

But Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili said reports of mass killings of civilians were "a lie".

Georgia says its troops have withdrawn from South Ossetia following days of bloody battles with the Russian army for control of the area.

Russian forces are in control of Tskhinvali, and its jets have also bombed Georgia's capital, Tblisi.

The president of Abkhazia, another region that wants independence from Georgia, has decreed a 10-day "state of war" in some border areas.

P.S.

urogard wrote:
LiQuiD wrote:in a few years id imagine china catches up and there will be another superpower. but theres no way russia could realistically challenge nato in a conventional war.

See above.

but i would also add this, america is bankrupt which is why they have to sell treasury bonds to BOTH china and japan to keep funding the war in iraq, and american expenditure for that war is going to increase significantly in the coming years and most of the money being spent by the US government is going to the corporations and the banks...this cant continue and must be stopped for obvious reasons.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:58 am**

Update on the war guys:

One of the groups of georgian soldiers who ended up as russian hostages had an afroamerican as member. Said person is US citizen and worked as NATO consultant.

USA not involved in any way, my ass.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:23 am**

urogard wrote:Update on the war guys:

One of the groups of georgian soldiers who ended up as russian hostages had an afroamerican as member. Said person is US citizen and worked as NATO consultant.

USA not involved in any way, my ass.

since bush is out of the country it has to be CIA backed and wouldn't surprise me 1 bit if Cheney is behind the whole thing!

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:25 pm**

btw for all people who are unaware of NATO entry requirements.
A country that wishes to join must not have any running territorial disputes.

Saakashvili therefore, with the blessing of washington (after the recent Condoleezza Rice trip to georgia) and NATO, invaded the two regions South Ossetia and Abkhazia, both of which are seeking independence from Georgia and instead attachment to the Russian Federation for years.

His hopes were that he'd either win and be able to request to join NATO or just get beaten around but still get pittied by the international community which would be all pointing fingers at big bad mother russia supposedly "bullying" a small country for nothing.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 2:05 pm**

urogard wrote:Russia was and still is a superpower

it really isnt mate. it was, but not anymore. admittedly they have increased funding but no where near enough to compare with the usa. and it is predicted to be a slow process.

in 2003 the USA spent 956 billion US$ which was 47% of the world military expenditure for that year. russia on the other hand spent 13billion US$ which was 1% of world expenditure. you cant make up that difference and create a modern army overnight. the USA also has more troops than russia and NATO has way more.

urogard wrote:not to mention it's nuclear stockpiles are enough to wipe out the earth several times over.

as is NATOs.

if the us wanted to attack iran it would be a one sided conflict. invasion would be costly, but why invade when you can target them from a thousand miles away?

urogard wrote:Not to mention that china already is a superpower. If they wanted they could crash US economy any second and their army is also top quality

china is powerful but its technology or spending still do not match that of the usa. if they crashed the us economy there would be a worldwide recession and crisis. people without cash to spare dont buy goods. . .and china is a manufacturing based econmy, unlike the services based economies of the west. it would loose the source of its recent rapid growth.

urogard wrote:There is a very neat russian anecdote which reflects your thinking.
The americans spent 10 millions dollars to research a pen that works in space.
The russians spent 100 roubles to buy a box full of pencils

were not talking stationary dude were talking about expensive military hardware. cash buys the top spec equiptment to fight a war.

the ak47 is a durable weapon. it is simple, like most russian military weapons. its not a very good weapon though. terrible accuracy. and the new version of the ak is no where near as widely used.

the vietnam war was fought a long while ago. nato now has a whole new generation of hardware. where as much of russian hardware dates from the cold war.

urogard wrote:Again, go and actually read up something on the subject before you decide to post something where you'll just ridicule yourself.

russia sends out 50 year old bombers (eg the Tu-95) and nato meets them with modern aircraft. i know what im talking about. perhaps you should 'go and actually read up something on the subject before you decide to post something.'

[KMA]Avenger wrote:since bush is out of the country it has to be CIA backed and wouldn't surprise me 1 bit if Cheney is behind the whole thing!

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 2:24 pm**

Georgia is getting spanked.
What was Shakashvili thinking.. kill Russians, shoot down jets, destroy armour divisions, then claim the war is over!?

rofl.. that is just crazy.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 2:44 pm**

LiQuiD wrote:it really isnt mate. it was, but not anymore. admittedly they have increased funding but no where near enough to compare with the usa. and it is predicted to be a slow process.

in 2003 the USA spent 956 billion US$ which was 47% of the world military expenditure for that year. russia on the other hand spent 13billion US$ which was 1% of world expenditure. you cant make up that difference and create a modern army overnight. the USA also has more troops than russia and NATO has way more.

See the russian anecdote above.
It's not the quantity, it's the quality that matters.
And shooting past the target is kinda useless anyway too. It's a waste to try and create something complicated, albeit useful, if there's already something that does the job perfectly well even though it doesn't look like top-notch.

LiQuiD wrote:were not talking stationary dude were talking about expensive military hardware. cash buys the top spec equiptment to fight a war.

Again, you need a lot of cash if you have private companies which put unreasonable price tags on their mofo stuff. See the russian anecdote above.

LiQuiD wrote:the ak47 is a durable weapon. it is simple, like most russian military weapons. its not a very good weapon though. terrible accuracy. and the new version of the ak is no where near as widely used.

As history has shown, it's kinda useless to have a more accurate (which the m4 or m4a1 indeed is) weapon if it jams regularly unless being made subject to expensive and time-consuming maintenance (cleaning the gun once doesn't take much time, doing it a million times does).
Besides in certain conditions you do not need accuracy past 100-200 metres tops, such as many urban and forest areas.

LiQuiD wrote:the vietnam war was fought a long while ago. nato now has a whole new generation of hardware.

So do the russians.

LiQuiD wrote:russia sends out 50 year old bombers (eg the Tu-95) and nato meets them with modern aircraft. i know what im talking about. perhaps you should 'go and actually read up something on the subject before you decide to post something.'

If you say they send such old technology meeting nato tech and yet the russians still acquired air superiority the moment they went in.
50 year old soviet planes beat current nato planes. You do know what that means?

anyways jokes aside. Russia doesn't bother with bombers in ossetia, they only send out fighters such as the Su-24/25/27, moderately old yet still top notch and more than a match for any nato plane.
And mate, this isn't my first day, neither is it my first year, reading up on this stuff, so please don't try to lecture me.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:24 pm**

Urogard; There is no way in hell if we took nuke's out of the equation that Russia could conceivably wage a conventional war with NATO.

American tank's do not turn into useless junk in frost, there's a reason Israel's tanks trounced the Egyptian and Saudi tanks. The Arab's were supplied by the Russians and Israel by us, admittedly they were old Russian tank's but not that old, American tank's had a clear superiority then.

Now i'm not saying it's as one sided as LiQuiD says, Russia could definitely wage a half decent war. Their equipment is as you said, durable to an extreme, it's got good forces but the fact is true, our tech is just that much better. For example, in night attacks every single US soldier has night goggles, that cannot be said for the average russian trooper.

We have clear air superiority in regards to bombers and such, our stealth capabilities are unmatched by anything in the entire world, bar none. Our missiles are more accurate, and despite Russia's start at modernizing their airforce and army with the new equipment, they are not at the level or numbers of NATO counterparts.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:26 pm**

btw im not saying russia is weak at all. im only making my point that they are not a superpower or a match for the usa/nato anymore.

urogard wrote:See the russian anecdote above.
It's not the quantity, it's the quality that matters.
And shooting past the target is kinda useless anyway too. It's a waste to try and create something complicated, albeit useful, if there's already something that does the job perfectly well even though it doesn't look like top-notch.

well nato spends a lot more naq on quality. whats going to be better? a £1 wine or a £100 wine. and if the simple good old fashion weapons worked well, why replace them. . .

better goods tend to cost more. nato weapons are of a higher quality.

urogard wrote:As history has shown, it's kinda useless to have a more accurate (which the m4 or m4a1 indeed is) weapon if it jams regularly unless being made subject to expensive and time-consuming maintenance (cleaning the gun once doesn't take much time, doing it a million times does).
Besides in certain conditions you do not need accuracy past 100-200 metres tops, such as many urban and forest areas.

the sa80 a2 rarely jams, and is far superior. cleaning a rifle such as the sa80 is quick and easy once you know what you're doing. lol yes in some situations you dont need accuracy past 100-200 metres. it will get very difficult if you happened to fight an enemy who was 500 metres away. hmmm an ak Vs an sa80. . .who would win. the sa80 is comparable with the m16 and the m16 beats the ak47 on all combat effectiveness tests.

the russians may have got some new hardware but they still have much cold war equiptment in use.

urogard wrote:If you say they send such old technology meeting nato tech and yet the russians still acquired air superiority the moment they went in.
50 year old soviet planes beat current nato planes. You do know what that means?

i never said the 50 year old bombers were being used in ossetia. and the georgia armed forces have only 28k troops to russias 1million. russia easily outnumbers gerogia (with 30 times their population aswel)

urogard wrote:anyways jokes aside. Russia doesn't bother with bombers in ossetia, they only send out fighters such as the Su-24/25/27, moderately old yet still top notch and more than a match for any nato plane.
And mate, this isn't my first day, neither is it my first year, reading up on this stuff, so please don't try to lecture me

yet you try to lecture me. i know what im talking about aswel. i have no significant bias to either russia or the usa. i post is what i consider to be accurate and true.

i dont get how you think russia can get a military more powerful than the usa by spending a tiny ammount of money (compared to the usa). you cant make war machines out of cardboard, tin foil and masking tape. state of the art weaponry takes huge ammounts of cash. cheap/old isnt state of the art.

the russians can hardly maintain their military. how long were the americans paying them to take care of their own nuclear submarines? they may even still be doing it.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 5:11 pm**

I'll suport Georgia because i know how crappy and provocative neighbor Russia can be. Always spreading lies about my country by its controlled media. And if Russia spreading lies about my country he probably spreading lies about Georgia also. Once liar always a liar!

I have no love regarding to Putin and his puppet Medvedev... I watched today when Putin was giving a report to Medvedev... Body language was way off... It was like Putin was the president and Medvedev PM.

BTW Russia is attacking gori(Georgian City) atm. with ground forces!

And whats that crap about Georgia attacking another separated region... When you have trouble to hold one front why you open another? On the other hand if you could not brake one front fast enough then you open another. So who is attacking who in another separate region?

You guys really need some downtime with the news(and i do not think Russian ones). Russia sent hes army in that region yesterday and bombed villages there.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:07 pm**

urogard wrote:
Thriller wrote:I disagree.. with a few points. 1) Washington is probably not backing Georgia because they have their own problems right now. The COLD WAR IS OVER!!!

Maybe the cold war is over, but the neo-colonialist+neo-imperialist foreign policy of the USA remains.
And by saying that you have most likely no clue about political strategies and common sense. A tiny country will never go provoking a superpower without knowing it has the backing of another strong country.

Thriller wrote:Russia has a declining population, declining standard of living(this is starting to Flatten out) and has a potential aids epidemic on their hands. The war being started by Russian influence makes more sense because they have a growing descent growing amongst their people over the declining living standards and increased mortality rate.

You seriously need to get some fresh air and need to read up on some real information instead of the right wing several decades old propaganda.

nvm, i forgot that russians also smell of vinegar, wash their beards with vodka, even woman have beards and they fluoridate your water to make you more succeptible to brainwashing.

Thriller wrote:Can you think of a better way of instilling national pride then defeating an aggressor army and liberating a region from invaders(WWII....?). If you knew the history of the region though you would know that this conflict has been brewing for quite sometime so its no surprise it went off. Russia will probably win this war and get back some of its pride, which just maybe the kick start they need to get their country out of what i consider the tail end of the Russian Great depression.

I know the history of a lot of regions quite well, most likely even better than you. Why? I have my reasons.

And again you have no understanding of russian mentality because of it I'll explain you a simple concept even I hold on to.
There are 2 types of people, one who constantly needs to proove to others their strength in order to keep up their pride and show how tough they are, i.e. Georgia. And there are the kind of people who know how strong they are, they know they don't have to care and they really don't care about what others think of them. They also don't need to proove anything to themselves but they will hold their ground when some idiot from group 1 goes and annoys them year after year and finally crosses the border by attacking their troops without any good reason.

haha everything i stated about Russia is fact dimwit. Read a book

here are some sources plz provide your own to support your own ridiculous claims.

Declining population and unemployment trends
http://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedin ... chap2.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_20339797

Aids epidemic
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1043675.stm
http://www.aidsonline.com/pt/re/aids/ab ... 28!8091!-1

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:34 pm**

APADAMEK! wrote:Our missiles are more accurate

if they are so accurate then the question becomes, has american airforce been engaging in murder of civis since day 1 then?
i have seen millions more civis killed by all manor of bombs but very few troops since it became acceptable to bomb cities.

and these new smart bombs are smart compared to what. a dumb bomb??

so instead of having to fly directly over a hospital to blow it up with a dumb bomb you can now just put the location into the GPS and blow a hospital or house up from miles away...

thats very smart alright, its also called, MURDER.

all i have to say is, dont underestimate the russians, they have trade surplus...you know what that means??

money to burn :wink:

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:10 pm**

Thriller wrote:
urogard wrote:
Thriller wrote:I disagree.. with a few points. 1) Washington is probably not backing Georgia because they have their own problems right now. The COLD WAR IS OVER!!!

Maybe the cold war is over, but the neo-colonialist+neo-imperialist foreign policy of the USA remains.
And by saying that you have most likely no clue about political strategies and common sense. A tiny country will never go provoking a superpower without knowing it has the backing of another strong country.

Thriller wrote:Russia has a declining population, declining standard of living(this is starting to Flatten out) and has a potential aids epidemic on their hands. The war being started by Russian influence makes more sense because they have a growing descent growing amongst their people over the declining living standards and increased mortality rate.

You seriously need to get some fresh air and need to read up on some real information instead of the right wing several decades old propaganda.

nvm, i forgot that russians also smell of vinegar, wash their beards with vodka, even woman have beards and they fluoridate your water to make you more succeptible to brainwashing.

Thriller wrote:Can you think of a better way of instilling national pride then defeating an aggressor army and liberating a region from invaders(WWII....?). If you knew the history of the region though you would know that this conflict has been brewing for quite sometime so its no surprise it went off. Russia will probably win this war and get back some of its pride, which just maybe the kick start they need to get their country out of what i consider the tail end of the Russian Great depression.

I know the history of a lot of regions quite well, most likely even better than you. Why? I have my reasons.

And again you have no understanding of russian mentality because of it I'll explain you a simple concept even I hold on to.
There are 2 types of people, one who constantly needs to proove to others their strength in order to keep up their pride and show how tough they are, i.e. Georgia. And there are the kind of people who know how strong they are, they know they don't have to care and they really don't care about what others think of them. They also don't need to proove anything to themselves but they will hold their ground when some idiot from group 1 goes and annoys them year after year and finally crosses the border by attacking their troops without any good reason.

haha everything i stated about Russia is fact dimwit. Read a book

here are some sources plz provide your own to support your own ridiculous claims.

Declining population and unemployment trends
http://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedin ... chap2.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_20339797

Aids epidemic
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1043675.stm
http://www.aidsonline.com/pt/re/aids/ab ... 28!8091!-1

You have got to be kidding me. Seriously.

First off an aging populus is a hallamrk of a post war baby boom generation getting old. And it is no idication of economicall succes. Schratch that, the older the populus and the fewer the children it produces the more "well off" society seems to be. Case in point is Europe, the aging demographics of the past 2 decades did not seem to hurt us *that* much lol. You want a 30year average with 5 kids per woman? I suggest you look to the subsaharan desert. Fact of life.

As far as stuff like unemployment goes... you could start by updating your sources by I dunno 10 years :lol:

You`re operating with charts that ed at 1997 for Christ sake lol! Thats the basic of your "conclusions"? Logic escapes you BIG time. By your standards USD is still the strongest currency arround.

For fracks sake atleast try I doono looking it up on wikipedia if you cant do better. And look at the pictures displaying GDP, Debt, trade surplus, n of graduates investments etc.

And Aids is without a cure still you know heh? You got "epidemic" fears all over the world. Speaking of it I wonder when the nondiscriminating US will let aids infected ppl enter the country heh...

But since you prolly wont be bothered by checking all the sources in that wikipedia article I`ll just pitch you one you should be worshiping:

Dated May 30, 2008
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/106151.pdf

and if you`re too lazy for that still:

[spoiler]

Summary
The Russian economy has grown impressively since 1999 and, by some
measures, has been one of the fastest growing economies in the world. The growth
has brought an improvement in the standard of living of the average Russian citizen
and has brought economic stability that Russia had not experienced in at least a
decade. This strong performance is a major factor in the popular support that former
President (now Prime Minister) Putin enjoys– some 70%-80% of the population view
him favorably. The improvement in the Russian economy is also arguably a factor
in the boldness with which the Putin leadership has reasserted Russia’s status as a
world power, challenging the United States, Europe, the other former Soviet states
in economic and national security areas.
The Russian economy is highly dependent on the production and export of oil,
gas, and other natural resources. Its success has largely been the result of recordbreaking
world energy prices, although prudent fiscal policies have also helped to
promote economic stability. However, oil dependence could prove to be a doubleedged
sword. The Putin regime’s failure to complete important economic reforms
and its penchant for re-asserting government control over key economic sectors also
loom among the possible roadblocks down the road. How Putin’s successor,
President Dmitriy Medvedev, will proceed is still a matter of speculation.

Although its influence has been greatly diminished since the Soviet period,
Russia remains a formidable force on the global stage, and its influence seems to be
growing. Russia’s economy is large enough to influence global economic conditions.
Many European countries and former Soviet states are highly dependent on Russian
natural gas. Russia is a significant player on a number of issues critical to the United
States, for example, nuclear proliferation by Iran and North Korea. Russia’s
perceived national interests do not always match those of the United States, creating
an environment for disagreement if not conflict.
While U.S. exports to Russia are still relatively small, for some producers, such
as poultry, energy equipment, and technology, Russia is an important market. Russia
is also an important supplier of a number of raw materials that are critical to U.S.
manufacturers. These links have drawn the attention of some Members of Congress.
Hearings have recently been held on Russian economic performance and policies.
Congress may consider in the near future whether to extend permanent normal trade
relations (PNTR) status to Russia as Russia pursues accession to the World Trade
Organization (WTO). This report on Russian economic conditions and policies will
be updated as events warrant.

Part directly responding to your claims about living standard & unemployment:

As Figure 1 and Table 2 show, Russia has experienced strong economic growth
over the last nine years (1999-2007), during which time its GDP has increased 6.9%
on average per year in contrast to an average annual decline in GDP of 6.8% during
the previous seven years (1992-1998). The positive GDP trends are reflected in other
measurements that point to an improved Russian standard of living throughout the
period. Average real wages in Russia increased 10.5% per year from 1999-2007.
(Real wages actually increased 14.7% from 2000-2007, having declined by 23.2%
in 1999 because of spike in inflation that year.) In addition, real disposable income
(the income that the average Russian resident has available from all sources after
taxes) increased 10.7% from 2000 to 2007 (8.5% from 1999 to 2007). The Russian
unemployment rate has also declined during the 1999-2007 period, from 12.6% to
6.2%.

All I can add is lulz, get up to date.[/spoiler]

Now if you`re gonna cry in a corner over this burst bubble of yours, I can give you a hankie.

StarGateWars Forums

2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War

Re: 2008 South Ossetia War