Russophobia

[Angelo]

"Irresponsible arms transfers by countries including the UK, USA, Russia, China, Germany and France have provided the armed group with a huge and lethal arsenal.

For years, weapons of war have been freely flowing into Iraq. Slack controls over Iraqi military stockpiles and endemic corruption by successive Iraqi governments have added to the problem."

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/how-isis-islamic-state-isil-got-its-weapons-iraq-syria

So how would Russia have armed ISIS when they supported the Syrian state?

It would be like saying the British state armed the IRA because it armed the RUC/UDR.

[dublin7]

Good to see boundaries have been set. I think everyone would agree using nuclear weapons is crossing a line

Watched a programme on this recently actually, the point of the show wasn't actually so as the bombs were to finish off the Japanese but to stop the Russian advance that was coming to East Asia and stop another de facto set of satellites. I genuinely never had thought of that until then.

I wouldn't have thought that either. For me I was always thought it was done to save American lives. The invasions of the japanese islands one at time was costing them huge numbers of lives and dropping the atomic bombs was a way of ending the war quickly without risking more Americans

[Angelo]

Good to see boundaries have been set. I think everyone would agree using nuclear weapons is crossing a line

Watched a programme on this recently actually, the point of the show wasn't actually so as the bombs were to finish off the Japanese but to stop the Russian advance that was coming to East Asia and stop another de facto set of satellites. I genuinely never had thought of that until then.

I wouldn't have thought that either. For me I was always thought it was done to save American lives. The invasions of the japanese islands one at time was costing them huge numbers of lives and dropping the atomic bombs was a way of ending the war quickly without risking more Americans

I've read it all now, a lad justifying the dropping of atomic bombs on cities. Nearly quarter of a million people killed - almost all civilians.

[five points]

Good to see boundaries have been set. I think everyone would agree using nuclear weapons is crossing a line

Watched a programme on this recently actually, the point of the show wasn't actually so as the bombs were to finish off the Japanese but to stop the Russian advance that was coming to East Asia and stop another de facto set of satellites. I genuinely never had thought of that until then.

I wouldn't have thought that either. For me I was always thought it was done to save American lives. The invasions of the japanese islands one at time was costing them huge numbers of lives and dropping the atomic bombs was a way of ending the war quickly without risking more Americans

I've read it all now, a lad justifying the dropping of atomic bombs on cities. Nearly quarter of a million people killed - almost all civilians.

He's not justifying it. Just explaining the Americans' logic.

[Angelo]

Good to see boundaries have been set. I think everyone would agree using nuclear weapons is crossing a line

Watched a programme on this recently actually, the point of the show wasn't actually so as the bombs were to finish off the Japanese but to stop the Russian advance that was coming to East Asia and stop another de facto set of satellites. I genuinely never had thought of that until then.

I wouldn't have thought that either. For me I was always thought it was done to save American lives. The invasions of the japanese islands one at time was costing them huge numbers of lives and dropping the atomic bombs was a way of ending the war quickly without risking more Americans

I've read it all now, a lad justifying the dropping of atomic bombs on cities. Nearly quarter of a million people killed - almost all civilians.

He's not justifying it. Just explaining the Americans' logic.

If you're explaining the logic of dropping a bomb that kills over 200k civivilans then you are justifying it. There is no logic to explain it or justify it. It was one of the greatest atrocities the world has even seen and was done with the knowledge it was going to kill hundreds of thousands of innocents.

[five points]

If you're explaining the logic of dropping a bomb that kills over 200k civivilans then you are justifying it. There is no logic to explain it or justify it. It was one of the greatest atrocities the world has even seen and was done with the knowledge it was going to kill hundreds of thousands of innocents.

Don't be silly. History teachers often have to explain to students why for example Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812 or Hitler did likewise in 1941. Doing so does not on any level constitute justification.

[Angelo]

If you're explaining the logic of dropping a bomb that kills over 200k civivilans then you are justifying it. There is no logic to explain it or justify it. It was one of the greatest atrocities the world has even seen and was done with the knowledge it was going to kill hundreds of thousands of innocents.

Don't be silly. History teachers often have to explain to students why for example Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812 or Hitler did likewise in 1941. Doing so does not on any level constitute justification.

There is no explaining or justifying the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki like dublin7 attempted to do.

[five points]

There is no explaining or justifying the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki like dublin7 attempted to do.

Of course there is an explanation, and probably a number of them, for both. They didn't just happen spontaneously.  Same with for example the Holocaust. Explanation is not justification.

[dublin7]

There is no explaining or justifying the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki like dublin7 attempted to do.

Of course there is an explanation, and probably a number of them, for both. They didn't just happen spontaneously.  Same with for example the Holocaust. Explanation is not justification.

I appreciate what your doing FP, but there's no need. You and I both know I simply said why I think the American's dropped the atomic bombs.

From reading Milltowns posts/quotes earlier Angelo was losing his argument with Milltown/Amnesty International and rather than accept defeat he reached out for this as a tangent to deflect away from the original argument

Can Milltown confirm if Angelo has accepted Amnesty Internationals claims on Russia?

[johnnycool]

I'll say one thing. It grinds my gears when the yanks claim to be the first in everything, including the space race. i once saw a sign at a baseball game near the concession stand claiming that John Glenn ate the first meal in space, when in fact Gagarin beat him to it the previous year. The USSR got a string of firsts in the space race:

• First artificial satellite
• First living thing in space
• First man in space
• First woman in space
• First spacewalk
• First lunar landing of a probe
• First lunar rover
• First space station

Plus the continuous development of the most reliable space launch vehicle.

And yes, US foreign policy has been a disgrace over the years. Democratic governments toppled and dictators put in their place at the first sign of nationalizing the oil industry (unless you're a NATO member, in which case you don't get the "freedom" treatment). US democracy is in a mess and can unravel if Biden doesn't grow a pair and fix it by nuking the Senate filibuster and pushing through statehood for DC and PR, and expanding the supreme court.

America talks the talk on democracy but isn't so good at walking the walk. The UK is the same, they haven't had a government elected by the popular vote for decades. Countries like Ireland, for all their faults, have governments that actually represent the majority of voters and are less prone to making rash decisions like Brexit or electing an unqualified reality TV star to the highest office.

As for Russia, the Russian people are the ones I feel sorry for. They've lived under autocrats through the time of the Tsars only to have another set of dictators take over in the form of the Bolsheviks. The west had an opportunity to bring Russia into the fold in the 1990s with the end of the cold war, put them into some sort of special trading relationship with the EU or something. And NATO should have been wound up. Instead NATO's borders were pushed into former Soviet territories and GW Bush, for some unfathomable reason, decided to put a "missile defense shield" in Eastern Europe. It was like a reverse of the Cuban missile crisis, and it got scant media coverage in the west. No wonder Putin's hand was strengthened. The doves in Moscow were made to look like fools and the hawks have had a free run ever since. Nowadays they feed the Russian people a completely distorted view of the outside world.

Putin is a tyrant, but he's ultimately a product of western policy.

So much truth in this but like all self serving "empires" the Russians, American's, Chinese and formerly the Brits manipulate/create these political crisis to suit their own needs.

The Russian money funneling into London allowed them to leverage it to push for Brexit which certainly will harm GB and to a lesser extent the EU.

The Middle East is very much a proxy battlefield, let alone Yemen for the Western powers. Maybe sleepy Joe threatening to ban weapon sales into Saudi can take the heat out of it, but don't worry, the Brits and French will keep arming the Saudi to the hilt.

At the same time you'd think the Russians would stop using novichok as it's a bit too obvious at this stage..

In short, they're all a shower of cúnts.

[Angelo]

There is no explaining or justifying the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki like dublin7 attempted to do.

Of course there is an explanation, and probably a number of them, for both. They didn't just happen spontaneously.  Same with for example the Holocaust. Explanation is not justification.

I appreciate what your doing FP, but there's no need. You and I both know I simply said why I think the American's dropped the atomic bombs.

From reading Milltowns posts/quotes earlier Angelo was losing his argument with Milltown/Amnesty International and rather than accept defeat he reached out for this as a tangent to deflect away from the original argument

Can Milltown confirm if Angelo has accepted Amnesty Internationals claims on Russia?

Why would you care what I accept if you have me on ignore, Princess?

[dec]

At the same time you'd think the Russians would stop using novichok as it's a bit too obvious at this stage..

I think that is the point, they are sending a message.

[Angelo]

The usual Western Propaganda regarding Russia is alive and well. You'd never have any of the Western states taking out political rivals and intelligence officers at all.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-24957365

A confined spaces expert who gave evidence at the inquest of dead M16 agent Gareth Williams, has questioned suggestions that the spy's death was accidental.

Peter Faulding, who was asked to see if he could escape a padlocked sports bag like the one Gareth Williams was found in, said that he could lock himself in the bag - but was unable to put the padlock on.

He told BBC Radio 5 live's Phil Williams that there was no DNA traces on the padlock or outside of the bag, and that Gareth's "foetal position" and "calm manner" indicated that his body was placed into the bag after his death.

However this week the Metropolitan Police said an evidence review had found "it was more probable" no other person was present when he died in his London flat.

The West are very quick to dabble in speculation and accusations when its Russia. Not so quick on their own clean up jobs.

[Milltown Row2]

"Irresponsible arms transfers by countries including the UK, USA, Russia, China, Germany and France have provided the armed group with a huge and lethal arsenal.

For years, weapons of war have been freely flowing into Iraq. Slack controls over Iraqi military stockpiles and endemic corruption by successive Iraqi governments have added to the problem."

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/how-isis-islamic-state-isil-got-its-weapons-iraq-syria

So how would Russia have armed ISIS when they supported the Syrian state?

It would be like saying the British state armed the IRA because it armed the RUC/UDR.

If you are saying Amnesty International are wrong that's fine, like I said I'm just linking you information from a respected source worldwide, you on the other hand haven't disproved it and are starting to talk shite about the ra!

Stick to the topic and don't bring the Ra into it 

[north_antrim_hound]

The  bombing of children and civilians in Aleppo and supporting the Assad regime finished me with Russia. To put it down to a proxy war where everyone is involved is ludicrous, the only intense bombing by USA there was against ISIS in the north helping the Kurds. Syria has demonstrated what a monster Putin really is.