It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Whereismypassword
EX Ukraine pm the one jailed for bribes with gas deals sad she wanted to nuke the Russian population in HER COUNTRY,let alone Russia!
Think about that,she would stop shelling the cities to the east and instead nuke them,very disturbing and shows how murderous some of the far right in Ukraine are
Mr Spad,you havnt changed one bit since shock and awe days here cheering from the sidelines while others watched in disgust as war crimes were created
Russia beat the Georgian army in FIVE days,if they realy were fighting in Ukraine this civilian cleansing by the Ukraine authority would have been over as quick as Crimea voted to join Russia
Have seen you numerous times on this site mention how bad the Russian army is
That's not true,in 5 days they beat the Georgians and didn't show their full hand at their disposal to the western world
Ukraine is a trap designed to pull Russia into a long prolonged conflict as like in Afghanistan they would win the war but bleed money and lives to the resistance gone to ground and popping up when time is right to hit small isolated targets or perhaps shoot down craft with the many SAMs floating about
originally posted by: Whereismypassword
Wi
Trouble is you can not underestimate Russia as The French and Germans did in history,they have the man power
originally posted by: pikestaff
Nukes that old would too radio active by now that they would be inoperable, the trigger board chips would be fried by now.
Concerning Georgia if America beat them in 5 days we wouldn't hear about a few aircraft losses and let's not forget NATO had trained them and supplied weapons seeing as Georgia was one of the few nations to put boots on the ground in our illegal war on terror Concerning Russia against Ukraine Ukraine army doesn't want and can't fight the rebels let alone Russia! Look at how professional the Russian army kept the local Ukraine armed forces out of the action in Crimea to ensure a safe area for its citizens.
originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: MrSpad
Well i was reading earlier about one of our UK military leaders reckoned how modernised the Russian military had become over the past few years. New tanks, apcs, weaponry, planes, subs, body armour, nukes.......................... Certainly doesn't sound like things are as bad as you dream Mr Spad. In addition to which Russia the biggest country on Planet Earth by a mile has actually been slowly increasing the size of the nation adding bits here and bits there and filling these places with Russian troops.
originally posted by: MrSpad
Russian forces have 3 huge problems First 75% of them are one year conscripts which means most of Russia reserve are former 1 year conscripts. Completely worthless until they have has some real training. Second low morale Russian Troops leave Unit to avoid Ukraine And third corruption at every level leading to terrible things like this 23 Soldiers die in barracks collapse Honestly by the time this is over nobody is going to volunteer to be in Russia's Army War in Ukraine ruined reforms
originally posted by: Xeven
originally posted by: MrSpad
Russian forces have 3 huge problems First 75% of them are one year conscripts which means most of Russia reserve are former 1 year conscripts. Completely worthless until they have has some real training. Second low morale Russian Troops leave Unit to avoid Ukraine And third corruption at every level leading to terrible things like this 23 Soldiers die in barracks collapse Honestly by the time this is over nobody is going to volunteer to be in Russia's Army War in Ukraine ruined reforms
Yep Putin has screwed the Russian people. Russia could have progressed and done well but Putin has ensured it will be a long long time before they are trusted and allowed to play monopoly with the big kids again.
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Despite all the hoopla, I'm almost 100% positive they didn't surrender all their nukes.
They would have been pretty foolish to. I'm thinking there are a lot of countries that deny or won't admit to having nukes but do.
originally posted by: MrSpad
Russian forces have 3 huge problems First 75% of them are one year conscripts which means most of Russia reserve are former 1 year conscripts. Completely worthless until they have has some real training. Second low morale Russian Troops leave Unit to avoid Ukraine And third corruption at every level leading to terrible things like this 23 Soldiers die in barracks collapse Honestly by the time this is over nobody is going to volunteer to be in Russia's Army War in Ukraine ruined reforms
originally posted by: openminded2011
I was interested in knowing, as Ukraine was once part of the Soviet Union, as to whether or not they had any nuclear weapons stationed on their soil. What I found was, up till the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine had the THIRD largest arsenal in the world, over 1900 warheads, more than Britain and China combined. Ukraine gave up its weapons in 1994, after signing the Budapest memorandum on Security assurances, which is basically gave Ukraine territorial integrity. The memorandum was signed by Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom. That memorandum has now been trchnically broken with Russia's invasion of Ukraine territory. As they gave up their weapons at the behest of this assurance, they are now in a position where they can legally re-arm themselves.
In the past few days, there are rumblings of calls to do this.
The Ukrainian Svoboda party is one of the 5 main political parties in Ukraine. It is an ultra right wing nationalist party, and models itself somewhat after the German NAZI party. Its membership has been limited to ethnic Ukrainians. Their MPMikhail Golovko, has called to re-arm the country in light of recent events"
T. Mikhail Golovko, Svoboda MP (speaking Ukrainian): “We made a very grave mistake when we gave up [our] nuclear arsenal. And right now we need to make decisions on how we can defend our statehood and sovereignty. We need to consider a number of options. One option would be to restore [our nuclear arsenal], but it’s a very complicated issue, because we’d have to obtain assurances and agreements from those world powers that are entitled to give them. We can also consider the option of Ukraine joining NATO since this is also an alliance for collective security.”
The comment to join NATO is sure to inflame the situation even further. So now we have a situation where Ukraine may, in the next few months, attempt to make nuclear weapons, next door to a hostile Russia. It may not be easy. Ukraine does get about half its energy from atomic power, and has the largest nuclear power facility in Europe. The uranium they received up tp now from Russia to power the plants is low grade. Ukraine has now nuclear enrichment facilities, but its possible they could construct "dirty bombs". Ukraine DOES have biological weapons facilities that handled weaponized pathogens used by the Russians. Its possible they may still have some of these pathogens at the facilites.
Also there is the question as to whether or not Ukraine actually did surrender every nuclear weapon it had, I.E. the possibility that there may still be some "loose nukes" somewhere in Ukraine. During the breakup of the Soviet union, there were some sales of nuclear materials on the black market, this is documented. So even if Ukriane does not posses actual weapons, they may have weapons grade materials.
As a result, we may be moving into a very dangerous period in world history.
originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: JeanPaul
Fascists with nukes. What could go wrong?
I guess we will have to wait and see what Putin does.
MOSCOW-For the West, the downing one year ago of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 underlined the brutality of Moscow's hybrid intervention in eastern Ukraine. In Russia, the downing is still living large on television screens, blamed squarely on the Ukrainians-with the possible connivance of Western secret services.
Within hours of the crash on July 17, 2014, Russian state television began to spew a jumble of explanations for the tragedy, all of which fingered Kiev and absolved Russia and pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine of guilt.
Theories included an attack from a Ukrainian fighter jet, a Ukrainian surface-to-air missile, or a botched attempt to kill President Vladimir Putin, whose presidential plane had passed near Ukraine hours earlier. Such stories still abound, with some embellishments.
"Everyone believes that Ukraine is responsible, and that has not changed," said Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin political commentator based in Moscow who has lately proposed that the U.S. helped plan the shoot down. That is why, he says, no U.S. citizens were on board. "In the U.S. they know the truth, but they will never tell it."
In fact, there was one American among the 298 crash victims.
The ability of Russians and Westerners to see such different realities over the Malaysia Airlines catastrophe exposes a fallacy of U.S. policy toward Russia since the end of the Cold War.
After the rise of the Internet and the fall of the Berlin Wall 25 years ago, the West assumed that Russians and Westerners would naturally come to believe the same things. Free access to information would, like the free hand of capitalism, "propel the world toward common beliefs and ways of life," said Sam Greene, director of the Russian Institute at King's College London.
"Now we're finding out that's not quite true," Mr. Greene said. "There's a whole reassessment going on now about what to do about it."
Russia hasn't censored its Internet nearly as much as China, so Russians still enjoy mostly unfettered access to information from outside the country, albeit often not in their native language.
How Mr. Putin got Russians to ignore those sources and believe a state-run media that has a tradition of mendacity says a lot about how little Russia has changed since the end of the Cold War-and how some primitive Soviet-era propaganda strategies remain effective.
It also serves as a warning to the West that relations with Russia, now at a post-Cold-War nadir, could stay that way for some time. Boris Nemtsov, a Putin critic and former deputy prime minister who was gunned down outside the Kremlin early this year, said in an interview before his death that anti-American myths and resentment are widespread and would likely linger even if Mr. Putin steps down after his current term expires in 2018, or the term after that, in 2024.
"Putin has eaten the brains of a whole generation of Russians," he said. "I think it will remain this way at least until he leaves."
After the CEO of France's Total oil company-a rare ally of Russia in a time of multiplying economic sanctions and international isolation-was killed when his plane slammed into a snowplow operated by a drunken driver at a Moscow airport, Kremlin commentators suggested the CIA had assassinated him.
In the U.S. and Europe, officials are discussing possible counter-propaganda strategies, but none look easy as Mr. Putin has taken control of all major television and newspapers since his rise to power.
The Kremlin has meanwhile selectively blocked some websites and funds a host of others, making the search for objective Russian news confusing. In the past year Moscow opposition news services have revealed how the government pays beehives of bloggers-so-called trolls-who write under numerous Facebook accounts and identities on newspaper message boards.
Their comments don't support the Kremlin line as much as attack Western news reporting as biased, suggesting that the truth is unknowable. The mélange of misinformation and conspiracy theory makes any conclusion about world events seem questionable or a matter of opinion.
Television, meanwhile, is a more-focused instrument for persuasion, said Mr. Greene at King's College. Last year public opinion polls showed that fewer than 5% of Russians thought that Russia or Russian-backed rebels had shot down the Malaysia Airlines flight. The vast majority blamed the Ukraine military.
The rest of the world has largely assigned blame to Russia or Russia-backed rebels.
The putative assassination of Mr. Putin was one of the first theories circulated over Russia's main state-controlled television station, the First Channel. A commentator explained that Mr. Putin, who was flying home that day from a summit in South America, had flown near the Polish capital of Warsaw about 45 minutes before the doomed Malaysian flight.
The Ukraine military appeared to mix the planes up, shooting down the Malaysia flight by accident, said the commentator, citing a confidential source in Russia's Federal Transport Agency. Mr. Putin landed safely.
Simultaneously, the same channel put forward another theory, suggesting a poorly trained Ukrainian missile crew shot down the airliner by mistake-as had happened in 2001, when a Russian passenger plane exploded over the Black Sea, killing all 78 on board.
First Channel ran old footage from that catastrophe, showing a Ukrainian leader at the time falsely denying responsibility. [Kiev admitted days later that one of its errant missiles was probably to blame.]
The network also interviewed a supposed military expert as saying pro-Russian rebels today didn't have a missile that could reach a passenger airliner at cruising altitude.
"Only Ukrainian troops could have destroyed the civilian airliner," Igor Korotchenko, a Russian defense commentator, pronounced the day of the crash on First Channel.
Today the main debate in Russia is whether a Ukrainian missile shot down the airliner or a Ukrainian fighter jet. The day after the downing, state television aired a Russia Defense Department briefing in which a senior officer suggested that a Ukrainian Su-25 shot down the flight. Ukraine denied it, and pointed out that the Su-25, which was designed to destroy tanks, was built with an unpressurized cockpit and cannot fly high enough to have reached the airliner.
The next day, the managers of Russia's Wikipedia said there was a flurry of attempts to edit its article about the Su-25, trying to change it to say that the plane could fly at higher altitudes.
originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: JeanPaul
Fascists with nukes. What could go wrong?
I guess we will have to wait and see what Putin does.
originally posted by: Xeven
originally posted by: MrSpad
Russian forces have 3 huge problems First 75% of them are one year conscripts which means most of Russia reserve are former 1 year conscripts. Completely worthless until they have has some real training. Second low morale Russian Troops leave Unit to avoid Ukraine And third corruption at every level leading to terrible things like this 23 Soldiers die in barracks collapse Honestly by the time this is over nobody is going to volunteer to be in Russia's Army War in Ukraine ruined reforms
Yep Putin has screwed the Russian people. Russia could have progressed and done well but Putin has ensured it will be a long long time before they are trusted and allowed to play monopoly with the big kids again.
originally posted by: JeanPaul
originally posted by: Xeven
originally posted by: MrSpad
Russian forces have 3 huge problems First 75% of them are one year conscripts which means most of Russia reserve are former 1 year conscripts. Completely worthless until they have has some real training. Second low morale Russian Troops leave Unit to avoid Ukraine And third corruption at every level leading to terrible things like this 23 Soldiers die in barracks collapse Honestly by the time this is over nobody is going to volunteer to be in Russia's Army War in Ukraine ruined reforms
Yep Putin has screwed the Russian people. Russia could have progressed and done well but Putin has ensured it will be a long long time before they are trusted and allowed to play monopoly with the big kids again.
Lol, there I was thinking it was the post Soviet pillage of Russia's public assets that sent them back 50 years.
The transition was rushed. It was done wrong, probably on purpose with western influence.
Russia should have slowly introduced market reforms. Much like Deng in China. Hell, if they weren't such paranoid authoritarian Leninists the USSR would probably still be around. Much like China's communist party.