Russia Uses Electronic Warfare on Swedish Air Traffic Control While US Tells Poland No to NATO

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: MrSpad

no duh, how else do you compete? but i get what your saying. NATO strengthened its alliance with former soviet states to increase security. but don't you see how this is seen as hostile action to Russians? NATO isn't exactly a sleepy puppy. they have no problems starting wars to get a leg up*cough ukraine! cough**cough georgia! cough*.

and what do you mean finish it off for good? they did. after the soviet union fell Russian assets were bought up by westerners for next to nothing. this in the modern world is considered getting "finished off". the reason Putin is always called a kleptomaniac is because he took those assets back by force.

After the USSR the West backed the Russian economy, it created aid programs to keep its defense industry and nuclear industry afloat (this one just ended a year ago). It brought Russia into NATO in all but membership which it did not want because it did not like the idea of sharing power and all members having an equal say. It brought trade to Russia through the G8. The entire expansion of NATO was never opposed by Russia because Russia did not see NATO as a threat any longer. And lets face it NATO was on its last legs before Putin gave it a reason to exist, defense spending slashed and massive disarmament.

And Putin has nationalized private companies in Russia but, they have all been owned by Russian who did not support him.

Russia does not consider the former Soviet states as real nations. Putin treats them like Russia owns them. And being tied through threats to Russia's slow economic progress while the nations who when with the West were booming finally became enough and they started moving away from Russia. Some in Central Asia have moved toward China. China loves to exploit Russia'r problems with the West. Which is why they have become one of Ukraine's biggest supporters. Russia just swallows that because it has no choice.

a reply to: MrSpad

sounds like conjecture to me. NATO claims Russia doesnt wanna be in NATO. Russia claims it has no problem with being in NATO but NATO never asked.

dude i dont care. Russians who didnt support him or westerners. he did the right thing.

cool opinion. Russia just wants partners. yeah its gonna make threats. threats are a valid tactic. none of this would have ever happened if it wasn't for the west. Russia didnt destabilize ukraine. Russia didnt ask to be sanctioned. Russia didnt force the georgian army to attack ossetia(even though they like to claim they did). every time the US sanctions and/or declares war on a country they just twist the story a little bit and you all just eat it up.

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
why did russia annex crimea? why did russia even have to go into georgia? do you ever ask these questions? or did you just make a belief up and you follow that?

Why don't you - in your own words - say why Russia did these two things that greatly antagonised a smaller and militarily weak neighbour. Greed, nationalism, control, spite, jealousy, envy etc... Which one was it.

a reply to: paraphi

south ossetia was attacked by NATO backed Georgian troops.

and Ukraine is pretty simple dude. if i have to link the video of oleg tsarov talking about the US's plans for Ukraine before midan one more time i might pop. no one antagonized Ukraine, they want war with russia not the other way around. why the # would a country want war on its border? i get being ignorant but being illogical, there's no excuse.

russia giving up crimea is like the united states giving up Mexico to the russians. yeah its not their property but they cant just hand it over. it doesnt work like that. and from the view point of the Russians NATO is being aggressive and taking bordering countries into their alliance. which they are. lets just have russia take canada and mexico and see how safe americans feel.

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
south ossetia was attacked by NATO backed Georgian troops.

Back in the real world and away from revisionism... South Ossetia was a part of Georgia and Russian backed separatists were tackled by Georgia. Russia intervened and BINGO, South Ossetia was cut out of Georgia. Same type of thing happened in Ukraine, but did not quite work with the East Ukraine, but the overt invasion of Crimea was good enough.

why the # would a country want war on its border? i get being ignorant but being illogical, there's no excuse.

Why indeed. Russia needs to find more peaceful ways to co-exist.

**removed tasteless remarks**

a reply to: paraphi

south ossetia was already an autonomous state. and its still is part of Georgia. there were no separatists there. like wtf are you talking about? there were Russian troops stationed there.

same type of thing happened in east Ukraine? you mean a coup? go to youtube search for oleg tsarov its the first video that pops up.

i ask you again. why would Russia create a war with an ally right on its own border?

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
why did russia even have to go into georgia?

They went into Georgia using the same lies / tactics they used when they went into Ukraine, Moldova, Chechnya and Armenia. Putin will never give up power unless he can hand pick his successor and only for the reason of hiding his corruption. Putin needs an external enemy to blame to distract the Russian people.

Secondly Russia is not surrounded and people used the very same lie with Iran. Putin bitching about NATO is a distraction and nothing more. Even more so considering the US and Russia share a border. Something pro russians always seem to overlook when pushing the anti west rhetoric. They also overlook the fact Putin didnt bitch about NATO until recently and for the sole purpose of creating an external distraction for internal consumption. This is reinforced by Putin trying to blame the panama leak as coming from the US with the sole purpose of targeting Putin.

Russia using electronic warfare to intentionally disrupt another countries civilian air traffic control should be met with sanctions as well as a warning that another attack like that would be considered an act of war.

God knows if the tables were reversed Putin would let slip the dogs of war.

a reply to: Xcathdra

the russian people know putin is corrupt. we arent dummies like the Americans guy. he doesnt need to distract anyone from anything. were undestractable.

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: Xcathdra

the russian people know putin is corrupt. we arent dummies like the Americans guy. he doesnt need to distract anyone from anything. were undestractable.

/Sets up the indestructible dinner table and adds chairs for the March Hare, Mad Hatter and the animals of farthing woods.

Contrary to popular belief Russia can be defeated... The Mongols proved that when they captured / occupied Moscow. Had it not been for Hitler starting a 2 front war and the US lend lease to Russia I think the Nazis would have been able to pull it off. You guys are mistaking bad decisions made by the generals as Russia being unconquerable.

That's a dangerous mindset. So is attacking civilian infrastructure.

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
south ossetia was already an autonomous state. and its still is part of Georgia. there were no separatists there. like wtf are you talking about? there were Russian troops stationed there.

I do not know what sources you are using to form your worldview, but you are very wrong.

The intervention by Russia to support separatists caused the Russia-Georgian War in 2008. The result was South Ossetia (and Abkhazia) being cut out of Georgia and Russia recognising them as "independent" states. No one else recognises South Ossetia as an independent state except Venezuela and Nicaragua and (surprise) Hamas!

Like the Georgian military had any real chance against Russia.

a reply to: Xcathdra

so you admit this is about conquering russia.

a reply to: paraphi

you know who else recognizes south ossetia as an independent state? the people that live there. and i dont care who recognizes them or doesn't. the Georgian army rolled in there and slaughtered peaceful civilians.

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
you know who else recognizes south ossetia as an independent state? the people that live there. and i dont care who recognizes them or doesn't. the Georgian army rolled in there and slaughtered peaceful civilians.

Russia had no reason to intervene in Georgia and used the “protection of separatists” sympathetic to Russia as a pretext. It was all about punishing Georgia for shunning Russia, just like Russia punished Ukraine. Notice that in the souring of relations Russia gained land.

Also note that following Russia’s intervention and the forced withdrawal of outnumbered Georgians, the South Ossetia and Abkhazia “governments” initiated a programme of forced evictions of native Georgians, a policy that Russia repeatedly uses to remove future dissent, as in Crimea.

"Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) group that has previously been linked to the Russian military intelligence agency, Spetsnaz GRU."

Who wrote this, a standup comedian reeducated to agitprop?

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: Xcathdra

so you admit this is about conquering russia.

Nope because its not. The delusion that the US / West want to conquer Russia belongs to paranoid Putin. What I said was Russia has in fact been conquered in the past and that current warfare is not the same as Napoleon or Hitler. The invincibility Russia talks about is based on out of date information and that error in their thinking is compounded by out of date thinking.

Russia is not worth conquering.

a reply to: paraphi

Like Crimea and Kaliningrad?

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: Xcathdra

so you admit this is about conquering russia.

Nope because its not. The delusion that the US / West want to conquer Russia belongs to paranoid Putin. What I said was Russia has in fact been conquered in the past and that current warfare is not the same as Napoleon or Hitler. The invincibility Russia talks about is based on out of date information and that error in their thinking is compounded by out of date thinking.

Russia is not worth conquering.

Sorry it has everything about conquering Russia. There is a reason why American companies such as Monsanto is banned in the East but not the West. It is called Regime change and Western influence. It is called Opening the borders up just like Opuim war against China. Don't be foolish. It isn't an army conflict rather and land and resource struggle.

a reply to: makemap

Yeah no.. it has nothing to do with the delusion people have about the US conquering Russia. What I do see is Russia being a failure, just like the USSR and the leadership needing someone to blame other than themselves.


History is your friend.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: makemap

Yeah no.. it has nothing to do with the delusion people have about the US conquering Russia. What I do see is Russia being a failure, just like the USSR and the leadership needing someone to blame other than themselves.


History is your friend.

Two evils do not make a right. If Russia is a failure then why is their army still standing?
It isn't the US that is planning to conquer Russia, its the land grabbers. Just like how US is losing the war on lands with Farmer suicides.