One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
U. S. Targeted !
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
Feb 26, 2019 02:11:30   #
zillaorange
 
Putin has listed his targets in the U. S. !

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 03:35:02   #
proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
 
zillaorange wrote:
Putin has listed his targets in the U. S. !


Who are the targets????

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 05:28:38   #
Texas Truth Loc: Behind Enemy Lines
 
proud republican wrote:
Who are the targets????


Probably all the conservative voices on OPP. nothing but trouble makers. I will be in ze bunker.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2019 07:22:20   #
zillaorange
 
proud republican wrote:
Who are the targets????


So far, the Pentagon, Camp David, Jim Creek, Washington state, Fort Richie, Maryland & McClellen California. It's Yahoo's Home Page Lead Story !

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:31:28   #
buffalo Loc: Texas
 
zillaorange wrote:
Putin has listed his targets in the U. S. !


Well, well what should we expect from Russia when the build-up of NATO military arms systems and installations, particularly from the US, in Eastern Europe on its doorstep targeting Russian installations with missiles and in general more sanctions?

Now, tell me again who the aggressors are with regard to US/Russian relations? The US, through NATO, puts weapons systems right up to Russia's western front door, the US instigated and financed a c**pe in the Ukraine against its democratically elected pro-Russian government and installs a pro-western government right on Russia's front door and when Russia moved to protect the overwhelming pro-Russian population of Crimea and in particular Sevastapol's port on the Black Sea, which is Russia's only year round open port, western media brands Russia as the aggressor and the US instigates sanctions.

What would the US do if Russia instigated a c**pe against the Mexiacan or Canadian governments and installed a pro-Russian government in either country then put missiles on their borders pointed at the US, imposed sanctions against the US, then told the rest of the world it was for defense against any US aggression?

Now, who is the aggressor? It’s Washington - and its aggressive policies - that’s made Europe and indeed the world in general less secure, not Moscow.

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:42:05   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
zillaorange wrote:
So far, the Pentagon, Camp David, Jim Creek, Washington state, Fort Richie, Maryland & McClellen California. It's Yahoo's Home Page Lead Story !


Yahoo? Really? Russia has had virtually every city targeted for 500+years. Duh!! And we have had them targeted for the same time. Once again, Duh! Just ONE of our subs could take out most of the world. The stupidity of this "article" and this "news" is mind numbing.

People are getting rich off of these types of headlines because i***ts buy into the drama!

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:45:51   #
Rose42
 
zillaorange wrote:
So far, the Pentagon, Camp David, Jim Creek, Washington state, Fort Richie, Maryland & McClellen California. It's Yahoo's Home Page Lead Story !


The Russians have pointed missiles at key targets in the US for many years. The US knows most of those targets. We've done the same to them for many years and they know many of our targets.

This is nothing new. They and we also move about nuclear subs that have missiles pointed at various targets. Mutually assured destruction is what has kept both sides from launching.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2019 11:40:30   #
buffalo Loc: Texas
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
Yahoo? Really? Russia has had virtually every city targeted for 500+years. Duh!! And we have had them targeted for the same time. Once again, Duh! Just ONE of our subs could take out most of the world. The stupidity of this "article" and this "news" is mind numbing.

People are getting rich off of these types of headlines because i***ts buy into the drama!


Military industrial corporations, their stockholders, and Wall Street banksters have been getting richer for years promoting this propaganda.

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 11:55:05   #
buffalo Loc: Texas
 
Let’s think back to 1990. Back then, as the old Cold war ended, progressives quite rightly enthused about the so-called ‘peace dividend’. Taxpayer money wasted on weapons could now be spent on more worthwhile things such as hospitals, health CARE, schools, infrasrtucture, etc. But NATO - unlike the Warsaw Pact - didn’t disband, on the contrary, it expanded to Russia’s borders.

Countries that didn’t want to join the NATO club were targeted with sanctions (Belarus) - or sanctions and bombing (Yugoslavia). In 1999, NATO - established as a defensive military alliance in 1949 - not only broke international law when it attacked the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, but also contravened Article One of its own constitution which states: “The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”

What was that line in the USEUCOM report about violating numerous agreements and international law?

Russia was fine as long as it was acquiescing in all of this, but as soon as it began to stand up for itself and try and defend its own legitimate interests, the Cold War was quickly "rekindled" by the US and its NATO allies. As OpEder John Wight put it in a 2016 article on the demonization of Putin: “All this baloney about Putin having expansionist aims is an attempt to throw a smokescreen over the West’s own expansionist agenda in Eastern Europe with the goal of throwing a cordon sanitaire around Russia in pursuit of a cold war agenda.”

When the staunchly pro-US government in Georgia pounded South Ossetia in August 2008 and Russia responded to protect ethnic Russian citizens, it was Russia who was portrayed as the aggressor in the neocon media.

Likewise in Ukraine in 2014/15 when a State Department/EU “regime change” operation to topple a democratically elected pro-Russian government and replace it with a staunchly pro-US, pro-EU, anti-Russian one, took place.

What happened in eastern Ukraine and Crimea after the regime change in Kiev was not Russian aggression but the response to US/EU aggression against Russia.

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 12:04:28   #
zillaorange
 
buffalo wrote:
Well, well what should we expect from Russia when the build-up of NATO military arms systems and installations, particularly from the US, in Eastern Europe on its doorstep targeting Russian installations with missiles and in general more sanctions?

Now, tell me again who the aggressors are with regard to US/Russian relations? The US, through NATO, puts weapons systems right up to Russia's western front door, the US instigated and financed a c**pe in the Ukraine against its democratically elected pro-Russian government and installs a pro-western government right on Russia's front door and when Russia moved to protect the overwhelming pro-Russian population of Crimea and in particular Sevastapol's port on the Black Sea, which is Russia's only year round open port, western media brands Russia as the aggressor and the US instigates sanctions.

What would the US do if Russia instigated a c**pe against the Mexiacan or Canadian governments and installed a pro-Russian government in either country then put missiles on their borders pointed at the US, imposed sanctions against the US, then told the rest of the world it was for defense against any US aggression?

Now, who is the aggressor? It’s Washington - and its aggressive policies - that’s made Europe and indeed the world in general less secure, not Moscow.
Well, well what should we expect from Russia when ... (show quote)


The Rusks broke the treaty by developing hypersonic missles ! We supposed to sit on our duffs, doing NOTHING, while they develpoe & deploy new weapons ??? Give me a break !!!

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 12:11:27   #
zillaorange
 
Figured you'd fall back & praise the U. N. ! Read the reports about the blue helmets activities ! Then tell me we should abide their dicta ! Trump has put the NATO participants to get their asses in gear. Until they're up to par, the U.S. is the ONLY POWER capable of holding off the Russians.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2019 12:25:25   #
zillaorange
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
Yahoo? Really? Russia has had virtually every city targeted for 500+years. Duh!! And we have had them targeted for the same time. Once again, Duh! Just ONE of our subs could take out most of the world. The stupidity of this "article" and this "news" is mind numbing.

People are getting rich off of these types of headlines because i***ts buy into the drama!


500 years ? What the hell are you smoking ? The U. S. has been around 230 yrs. Putin's refering to the situation as the, "New Cuban Missile Crisis" !!! It's obvious where your loyalties lies, & it ain't the U. S. !!

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 12:36:43   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
buffalo wrote:
Military industrial corporations, their stockholders, and Wall Street banksters have been getting richer for years promoting this propaganda.


I'll say. And thanks for not pointing out that it hasn't been 500years!

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 12:38:06   #
zillaorange
 
buffalo wrote:
Let’s think back to 1990. Back then, as the old Cold war ended, progressives quite rightly enthused about the so-called ‘peace dividend’. Taxpayer money wasted on weapons could now be spent on more worthwhile things such as hospitals, health CARE, schools, infrasrtucture, etc. But NATO - unlike the Warsaw Pact - didn’t disband, on the contrary, it expanded to Russia’s borders.

Countries that didn’t want to join the NATO club were targeted with sanctions (Belarus) - or sanctions and bombing (Yugoslavia). In 1999, NATO - established as a defensive military alliance in 1949 - not only broke international law when it attacked the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, but also contravened Article One of its own constitution which states: “The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”

What was that line in the USEUCOM report about violating numerous agreements and international law?

Russia was fine as long as it was acquiescing in all of this, but as soon as it began to stand up for itself and try and defend its own legitimate interests, the Cold War was quickly "rekindled" by the US and its NATO allies. As OpEder John Wight put it in a 2016 article on the demonization of Putin: “All this baloney about Putin having expansionist aims is an attempt to throw a smokescreen over the West’s own expansionist agenda in Eastern Europe with the goal of throwing a cordon sanitaire around Russia in pursuit of a cold war agenda.”

When the staunchly pro-US government in Georgia pounded South Ossetia in August 2008 and Russia responded to protect ethnic Russian citizens, it was Russia who was portrayed as the aggressor in the neocon media.

Likewise in Ukraine in 2014/15 when a State Department/EU “regime change” operation to topple a democratically elected pro-Russian government and replace it with a staunchly pro-US, pro-EU, anti-Russian one, took place.

What happened in eastern Ukraine and Crimea after the regime change in Kiev was not Russian aggression but the response to US/EU aggression against Russia.
Let’s think back to 1990. Back then, as the old Co... (show quote)


Guess you weren't around for the 1st missile crisis, I remember it well ! I know all about M.A.D. & it has held the wolves, U. S. ,U. S. S, R. ( now Russia) & the Chinese at bay. It's a completely different situation when the Putin announces on Russian T. V. that the situation HAS ESCALATED !

Reply
Feb 26, 2019 12:38:23   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
zillaorange wrote:
500 years ? What the hell are you smoking ? The U. S. has been around 230 yrs. Putin's refering to the situation as the, "New Cuban Missile Crisis" !!! It's obvious where your loyalties lies, & it ain't the U. S. !!


What are you smoking to actually think this was anything but a typo? Get real.

You have zero clue about my loyalties. And to be honest, I just think you are too ignorant.

Reply
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.