Polish Defence Shield

[fka dagest]

BBC

Poland and the US have reached an agreement in principle to install a controversial American missile defence system on Polish soil.

In return for hosting part of the shield, the US has said it will help bolster Poland's air defences.

The US wants to install interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic.

Russia opposes the project, saying it would destabilise global security and undermine its own nuclear deterrent.

In October, Russian President Vladimir Putin compared the plans to the Cuban missile crisis of the 1960s, which saw the US and Soviet Union go to the brink of nuclear war.

Russia has threatened to point missiles at Europe if the US positions elements of the new missile shield near its borders.

America wants to install 10 interceptor missiles to protect against possible attack by what it calls rogue states, such as Iran and North Korea.

So, when the US gets bored with installing Latin American "tin pot" military dictators, spraying chemicals on coca growers or re-ordering the Middle East according to its own whims it resorts to upsetting Europe again. Will there ever be an end to the "Evil Empire"?

[bucksred]

or it could just be a defence shield against Putin's resurgent Russia (Who has considerable previous against Eastern Europe), the Peoples Republic of China (the percentage increase in their defence spending higher than the whole of NATO, including the US, put together-and they aint fighting any wars), or maybe Iran, with their illustrious leaders oft repeated threat to wipe the state of Israel off the map).

Evil Empire? Napoleons, Hitlers, Stalins, Mugabe's, Amin's, Pol Pot's, Aminjehad's, and bin Ladens ideas for the world. now THEY are evil empires

Nah, the currently trendy Anti US bashing is really quite funny. it really is.

Funny how the other evil empires and ideaologies and politics never are evil eh?

[fka dagest]

Anyone else got a record like this?

The US record

I don't see anything funny about this list of countries bombed since 1945

China 1945-46

Korea 1950-53

China 1950-53

Guatemala 1954

Indonesia 1958

Cuba 1959-60

Guatemala 1960

Belgian Congo 1964

Guatemala 1964

Dominican Republic 1965-66

Peru 1965

Laos 1964-73

Vietnam 1961-73

Cambodia 1969-70

Guatemala 1967-69

Lebanon 1982-84

Grenada 1983-84

Libya 1986

El Salvador 1981-92

Nicaragua 1981-90

Libya 1986

Iran 1987-88

Libya 1989

Panama 1989-90

Iraq 1991-2002

Kuwait 1991

Somalia 1992-94

Croatia 1994 (of Serbs at Krajina)

Bosnia 1995

Iran 1998 (airliner)

Sudan 1998

Afghanistan 1998

Yugoslavia 1999

Afghanistan 2001-02

Anti-Americanism or a realistic appraisal of recent history?

Have you forgotten all the WMD lies already Bucks?

[bucksred]

Anyone else got a record like this?

The US record

I don't see anything funny about this list of countries bombed since 1945

China 1945-46

Korea 1950-53

China 1950-53

Guatemala 1954

Indonesia 1958

Cuba 1959-60

Guatemala 1960

Belgian Congo 1964

Guatemala 1964

Dominican Republic 1965-66

Peru 1965

Laos 1964-73

Vietnam 1961-73

Cambodia 1969-70

Guatemala 1967-69

Lebanon 1982-84

Grenada 1983-84

Libya 1986

El Salvador 1981-92

Nicaragua 1981-90

Libya 1986

Iran 1987-88

Libya 1989

Panama 1989-90

Iraq 1991-2002

Kuwait 1991

Somalia 1992-94

Croatia 1994 (of Serbs at Krajina)

Bosnia 1995

Iran 1998 (airliner)

Sudan 1998

Afghanistan 1998

Yugoslavia 1999

Afghanistan 2001-02

Anti-Americanism or a realistic appraisal of recent history?

Have you forgotten all the WMD lies already Bucks?

most of those attacks have been entirely justified. the only ones I agree with you on ar3e the S American ones where our ami cousins are bang out of line.

And Belgian Congo 1964, as an African, I think I'd know about US raisd on my countries borders.

While we are on the subject of invasions

how about S Korea 1951,

Tibet late 50's

Kashmir 60's

Vietnam, seventies & eighties

R Amur ,60's & 70's

Tienamen Square

Those wonderous Peoples Republic of China folks, not to mention their support for Pol Pot, Mugabe, for example

Russia's brutal subjugation of Eastern Europe, of which some highlights you may to comment on E Berlin 1953, Poland 1953, Hungary 1956, Poland 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968, Chechnya eighties, the illegal two occupations of the Baltic states, the occupation of Afghanistan. all in the cause of "self defence" or fraternal friendship"

their support of such choice African democrats like Mengistu. their support for regimes in Senegal, Guinea, Angola, which led to major human rights abuses, and to a war which STILL rumbles on in Angola.

all large countries whoever they are can and will do anything to increase, or protect their status. The US is no different, and a hell of a lot less unpleasant than the communist inspired regimes of the Soviet Union, and Peoples Republic of China

I suppose you are one of those who beleive the Inner German border was put up by the Yanks to stop downtrodden workers esacaping to the East German workers paradise? Got news for you young man. I've been there, aint no mgs, mines or dogs on the Western frontier, they were all in the communist East.

Get off your high horse about America. If you got a better idea how to deal with Reds, Nazis, Fascists, religious fanatics, and just plain ordinary despots, it would actually be interesting to hear it. If it wasnt for America, AKA the Evil Empire, we'd all be in shit. they helped beat all those empires..

[fka dagest]

Bucks you always seem to assume I'm some sort of old socialist hankering after the old Soviet days - I'm not.

I don't believe the Soviet Union was particularly pleasant, but I hear that many older Russian's hanker after the old days.

Besides the Soviet Union is finished and The Chinese state resembles a Capitalist sate more than they do a Communist one.

Of course the US needs a new bogey-man to frighten its citizens into meek compliance. The loose label "terrorist" is bandied about as a convenient catch-all term for anyone who doesn't do what the US tells them.

The US has always practised a mercenary, selfish international policy. It has always been a "rogue state". When it wasn't busy exterminating native American Indians it was stealing large chunks of Mexican territory. And of course it provoked the languishing Spanish into a war in 1898 after which it helped itself to the Philippines.

I don't think the invasion of Vietnam was justified. And over 5 million dead Vietnamese was despicable not to mention the after-effects of Agent Orange effecting today's population and even some US vets. And it's worth remembering it was the North Vietnamese who finished off the US's ally Pol Pot after he'd finished executing people with glasses.

To this day I don't know why the US bombed the Serbs instead of anyone else given that the Croats perpetrated their own massacres and KLA were hardly innocent.

Anyway, speaking of today the installation of the new missile defence system in Poland is a blatant provocation to the Russians, whom I suppose are being punished for having the temerity to sell some weapons to Chavez. This will make a Europe a more dangerous place and I for one won't hold back criticising the US for fear of being labeled "anti-American" in a jingoistic fashion.

With regard to the 1964 bombings, info on the net is sparse, but as usual there was an insipid "Communist" justification.

1964 bombing

The whole Afghanistan and Iraq debacle (over 1 million dead) is not a new feature of US foreign policy but entirely typical.

[bucksred]

Bucks you always seem to assume I'm some sort of old socialist hankering after the old Soviet days - I'm not.

I don't believe the Soviet Union was particularly pleasant, but I hear that many older Russian's hanker after the old days.

Besides the Soviet Union is finished and The Chinese state resembles a Capitalist sate more than they do a Communist one.

Of course the US needs a new bogey-man to frighten its citizens into meek compliance. The loose label "terrorist" is bandied about as a convenient catch-all term for anyone who doesn't do what the US tells them.

The US has always practised a mercenary, selfish international policy. It has always been a "rogue state". When it wasn't busy exterminating native American Indians it was stealing large chunks of Mexican territory. And of course it provoked the languishing Spanish into a war in 1898 after which it helped itself to the Philippines.

I don't think the invasion of Vietnam was justified. And over 5 million dead Vietnamese was despicable not to mention the after-effects of Agent Orange effecting today's population and even some US vets. And it's worth remembering it was the North Vietnamese who finished off the US's ally Pol Pot after he'd finished executing people with glasses.

To this day I don't know why the US bombed the Serbs instead of anyone else given that the Croats perpetrated their own massacres and KLA were hardly innocent.

Anyway, speaking of today the installation of the new missile defence system in Poland is a blatant provocation to the Russians, whom I suppose are being punished for having the temerity to sell some weapons to Chavez. This will make a Europe a more dangerous place and I for one won't hold back criticising the US for fear of being labeled "anti-American" in a jingoistic fashion.

With regard to the 1964 bombings, info on the net is sparse, but as usual there was an insipid "Communist" justification.

1964 bombing

The whole Afghanistan and Iraq debacle (over 1 million dead) is not a new feature of US foreign policy but entirely typical.

Like I say, come down off your anti American high horse. I'd agree with you that they have a very simplistic world view, which frequently adversely affects their decision making, and their national characteristic is for heavy handed retaliation/action/responses, but I refer you to the fact they helped defeat the German, Austrian & Turkish empires in WW1, helped the Allies destroy Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and militaristic Japan in WW2, and their determination to face Communism down, beat that evil empire, too. Putin,s Russia, like the Czars and Soviets before him have EXACTLY the same attititude towards everyone as our Ami allies do. As does China, a superpower long before the European empires, and headed that way again. Neither have scruples about the projection and use of political and military power, and neither are in anyway approaching democracy as practiced in the West, Japan, and Australia, and indeed are showing marked signs of rolling back democracy. Wether you like the US governments policies or not, they are put to a vote every 4-5 years, or indeed the Average Americans views on life, reflected in that vote

They've tried isolationism, taking out the European Empires after WW2, and restored 8 European states sovreignty, and freedom to them. That wasn't Britain, France or the rest of the rag bag shower. we helped the US, for our own self interest, as does France. The Dutch, Danes, Norwegians, and Poles also assist, because they know appeasement does not work, unlike the rag bag of Socialist/Green/reformed communist governments round Europe.

The political system in the UK and USA allow strong government, whereas PR as practiced in mainland europe totally paralyses theirs. quick example, as part of the SPD/Green coalition last time, the Germans decided to close down their nuclear power programme (About 25 of their power) and only Green sustainable replacements can be built, with the result Germany will be even more dependant on Russian Gas, than ever, which of course Putin is using as an economic and political weapon

and right now America is the only country prepared to fight extremist Wahabist and other Muslim murderous extremists. as far as those who hold left of centre views, all the worlds problems are America and Israel's. South Africa and Rhodesia, completed the lefts axis of evil till 1980, and 1991 respectively.

And no I'm not saying you are Socialist, what I'm saying is that you (as some one who's natural view is left leaning) have swallowed their bog standard anti American bias, whilst ignoring that many other countries have human rights records much much worse. Its always the easy option attack America, its all their fault. No it aint, many other states do the same. Open your mind, truly open your mind to the evil in the world. Beleive me a hell of a lot of it is not American. Whats going on in Kenya right now aint American made, neither is Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe.

I have still in all my years yet to hear someone who is not from the centre right, or right wing, openly condemn the Soviet invasion of Hungary and Czechoslovakia, whilst attacking with gusto the Anglo French Suez invasion, or the Vietnam war ad nauseum, or much closer to my heart, the Russo Cuban invasion of Angola, whilst strongly attacking the nasty racist South African counter offensive into said Angola.

Never heard the left leaning intellectuals condemn KGB, FSB, or the Chinese version torture and brutality (or their fellow travellers. The CIO in Zimbabwe is trained by China and North Korea

always bleating about CIA though.

and if the terrorists get through, the left are first to blame Americans. Leave extremism to thrive, and it will attack a system which it regards as weak. The US beleive's in not letting it thrive. We in Britain do, and we have around 100 people either in jail, or awaiting trial for serious terror offences

Life is never fair.

[Gazred]

A bit idealistic, but how many nations and governments on this planet can place ticks next to any/some/all of these : Seven Blunders of the World

[Mr Mosquito]

A bit idealistic, but how many nations and governments on this planet can place ticks next to any/some/all of these : Seven Blunders of the World

Gazred, a quite brilliant post and link. The seven blunders - now eight are:

Wealth without work

Pleasure without conscience

Knowledge without character

Commerce without morality

Science without humanity

Worship without sacrifice

Politics without principle

Rights without responsibilities

....no wonder India has avoided major war - even with Pakistan - given their adherence to Gandi's moral and ethical viewpoints.

As for the former Soviet military's suspicions of Western Europe, can we really be surprised given that they lost some 25 million souls following the NAZI German invasion of their country ?????!!!!! The Russian military were totally humiliated by the Germans at the beginning of WWII. If I was a Russian military commander I would also be prepared to take no chances with the West.

[The ghost of Justin Fashanu]

India avoiding a major war with Pakistan? What kind of fantasy world are you living in, Gobbers? How about the wars of 1947, 1965, 1971 (600,000 troups against 500,000 troops) or the Siachen conflict?

As for your beloved Russians losing around 25 million lives - this could be more to do with Stalin executing a hell of a lot of his top military commanders pre-WW2 and also being unprepared for the invasion. It also quite adequately shows the value of life in a communist regime where men were sent to their slaughter to further their commanders' standing in the communist party.

[Barrs Court Red]

Gazred, a quite brilliant post and link. The seven blunders - now eight are:

Wealth without work

Pleasure without conscience

Knowledge without character

Commerce without morality

Science without humanity

Worship without sacrifice

Politics without principle

Rights without responsibilities

....no wonder India has avoided major war - even with Pakistan - given their adherence to Gandi's moral and ethical viewpoints.

As for the former Soviet military's suspicions of Western Europe, can we really be surprised given that they lost some 25 million souls following the NAZI German invasion of their country ?????!!!!! The Russian military were totally humiliated by the Germans at the beginning of WWII. If I was a Russian military commander I would also be prepared to take no chances with the West.

They've also been humiliated in Afghanistan and Chechnya, they really don't have a great record do they!

[Mr Mosquito]

They've also been humiliated in Afghanistan and Chechnya, they really don't have a great record do they!

The Americans were humiliated in Vietnam and they're becoming bogged down in Afghanistan as are we - YET AGAIN !!! You don't hear much about India starting conflicts barring perhaps Sri Lanka that is. Surprising considering that India has the world's second biggest population. There's a lot to be said for Ghandi and his teachings.

[Mr Mosquito]

India avoiding a major war with Pakistan? What kind of fantasy world are you living in, Gobbers? How about the wars of 1947, 1965, 1971 (600,000 troups against 500,000 troops) or the Siachen conflict?

As for your beloved Russians losing around 25 million lives - this could be more to do with Stalin executing a hell of a lot of his top military commanders pre-WW2 and also being unprepared for the invasion. It also quite adequately shows the value of life in a communist regime where men were sent to their slaughter to further their commanders' standing in the communist party.

1947 was the break up of British India. Millions of Hindus and Muslims were killed in communal riots following the partitioning - note these were riots and not actual war between India and Pakistan. With massive population movements there was always going to be trouble over this. As for the wars since they've been quite minor considering the huge military forces involved on both sides.

As for the USSR being unprepared for invasion, they did have a massive army and airforce in readiness but they had only recently signed a non-aggression pact with Germany. The USSR's elite divisions were stationed in the East in readiness for an attack from Japan. This Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact and an associated economic agreement led the Kremlin hierarchy to believe that their Western borders were safe. I don't think the Russians will ever trust us again especially as Napoleon also invaded Russia just over a hundred years before. No wonder the Russians are so paranoid about us Western Europeans.

[bucksred]

Gazred, a quite brilliant post and link. The seven blunders - now eight are:

....no wonder India has avoided major war - even with Pakistan - given their adherence to Gandi's moral and ethical viewpoints.

As for the former Soviet military's suspicions of Western Europe, can we really be surprised given that they lost some 25 million souls following the NAZI German invasion of their country ?????!!!!! The Russian military were totally humiliated by the Germans at the beginning of WWII. If I was a Russian military commander I would also be prepared to take no chances with the West.

India has fought four wars with Pakistan, with no major quality equipment, they couldnt fight a full scale war. Both countries could now.

As for the USSR being unprepared for invasion, they did have a massive army and airforce in readiness but they had only recently signed a non-aggression pact with Germany. The USSR's elite divisions were stationed in the East in readiness for an attack from Japan. This Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact and an associated economic agreement led the Kremlin hierarchy to believe that their Western borders were safe. I don't think the Russians will ever trust us again especially as Napoleon also invaded Russia just over a hundred years before. No wonder the Russians are so paranoid about us Western Europeans.

Actually the Soviet high command had a fair bit of knowledge, both from the British Enigma people, carefully disguised, and from the Soviet Red Orchestra spy cirle. Uncle Joe CHOSE not to beleive the facts

[Mr Mosquito]

Actually the Soviet high command had a fair bit of knowledge, both from the British Enigma people, carefully disguised, and from the Soviet Red Orchestra spy cirle. Uncle Joe CHOSE not to beleive the facts

Joe Stalin was one of the great figures in world politics in his time, he still remains one of the least known, primarily because of the traditional secrecy surrounding Soviet leaders. His personality and rule were - and still are - highly controversial, opinion ranging from complete, unbridled adulation expressed in the official Soviet press of his day to widespread denunciation as a pathological despot by many in the Western world - including by, it seems, by you Bucks.

A fantastic testament by George W. Simmonds - University of Detroit - to the skill of Joe Stalin can be read below.......

Joe Stalin in World War II

When the German armies attacked the USSR in June 1941, Stalin, after suffering a brief nervous collapse, personally took command of the Soviet armed forces. With the help of a small defence committee (war cabinet), he made all major military, political, and diplomatic decisions throughout the war. He pursued victory with increasing skill, determination, and courage, by staying on in the Kremlin when Hitler's armies stood at the gates of Moscow, ordering a fantastic shifting of industrial plants from European Russia to the East, arranging for lend-lease from the Western powers, selecting more and more first-rate military commanders, and developing increasingly effective military strategy, including the remarkable counteroffensives at Moscow, Stalingrad, and Kursk. He undergirded the strength and morale of his people by fostering their traditional religious and patriotic sentiments, and conducting adroitly the complicated diplomacy from the Teheran conference to Potsdam. Of course, victory could not have been achieved without the patriotism and fortitude of the Russian people, the quality and skill of the Soviet military professionals, the efforts of the USSR's allies, and the enormous political and military miscalculations of Hitler.

Source: http://gi.grolier.com/wwii/wwii_stalin.html

[bucksred]

Joe Stalin was one of the great figures in world politics in his time, he still remains one of the least known, primarily because of the traditional secrecy surrounding Soviet leaders. His personality and rule were - and still are - highly controversial, opinion ranging from complete, unbridled adulation expressed in the official Soviet press of his day to widespread denunciation as a pathological despot by many in the Western world - including by, it seems, by you Bucks.

A fantastic testament by George W. Simmonds - University of Detroit - to the skill of Joe Stalin can be read below.......

Joe Stalin in World War II

When the German armies attacked the USSR in June 1941, Stalin, after suffering a brief nervous collapse, personally took command of the Soviet armed forces. With the help of a small defence committee (war cabinet), he made all major military, political, and diplomatic decisions throughout the war. He pursued victory with increasing skill, determination, and courage, by staying on in the Kremlin when Hitler's armies stood at the gates of Moscow, ordering a fantastic shifting of industrial plants from European Russia to the East, arranging for lend-lease from the Western powers, selecting more and more first-rate military commanders, and developing increasingly effective military strategy, including the remarkable counteroffensives at Moscow, Stalingrad, and Kursk. He undergirded the strength and morale of his people by fostering their traditional religious and patriotic sentiments, and conducting adroitly the complicated diplomacy from the Teheran conference to Potsdam. Of course, victory could not have been achieved without the patriotism and fortitude of the Russian people, the quality and skill of the Soviet military professionals, the efforts of the USSR's allies, and the enormous political and military miscalculations of Hitler.

Source: http://gi.grolier.com/wwii/wwii_stalin.html

Gobbers one of the main reasons the Red Army suffered so many casualties (About 2 million in the opening months of Operation Barbarossa, was Stalins stand and fight to the last man and last round orders, which resulted in the major German forces creating huge pockets in which to quote two of them- Kiev, 750,000 POW's, and at least that again in KIA, and Vyasma, 650,000 POW's. there were at least four other major pockets created, suffering slightly less casualties. at least one General, and his COS Pavlov, were shot by Stalin's orders, for being cut off in the Kiev kesselschlact.

The other main one wasStalin and his sinister NKVD boss Beria, had a purge in 1937, which resulted in the cashiering and/or shooting of 38 out of 40 odd army commanders, and similar purges right across the entire officer corps. One of those shot was Marshal Tuchachevsky, the pioneer of Soviet tank forces, the driving force behind their Airborne troops, and a highly regarded tactician who had brought the Red Army's abilities to the same of the rest of Europe, following their disasterous war with Poland in 1920.

Those arrested and imprisoned include Marshal Rokossovski, who was sent to Siberia. The surviving officers were Communist Party hacks who were utterly useless against the professional leaders of the Wehrmacht, a substantial number of which had not seen combat in the West or Poland, due to high losses amongst junior officers during those campaigns. Marshal Timoshenko, exemplifies the Red Armys officers at the outbreak of war, vain, incompetant, and a personal friend of Stalin. Zhukov, koniev, Chuikov et all were either exiled (Zhukov) or junior officers who survived the purges, the rest. A similar situation existed after July 20 1944, when Hitler purged the Wehrmacht, killing many (Rommel, Von Kliest) sacking many others (Von Manstien, Hoth,) and promoting known Nazis like Model, Freissner, Schorner, Dietrich, Hausser, Kruger, and Stiener,who with the exception of Model (also Hausser & Stiener) were singularly inept officers (Freissner, Schorner) or Nazi Party members, or Waffen SS -Hausser, Steiener, (both ex pre war Wehrmacht generals incidentally) Dietrich and Kruger old party memembers both, or incompetants like Heinrich Himmler.

Zhukov, Koniev, Rokossovski, Chuikov, Rodmistrov, Vatutin, Chernyakovski, WON the independance of the Red Army from Stalin, a situation put right after the war when Zhukov was removed from c in C Red Army, and exiled to GSFG Germany command, and Rokossovski was removed to command the Soviet puppet Polish Army, as he was born in Poland.

Vatutin was killed by Ukrainian partisans, and Chernakovsky was killed in action in East Prussia. Chuikov was later successor to Zhukov, and the only one who prospered was Koniev, a dedicated Party man, unlike the rest who were professional soldiers first, Russians second and Party memebers third- as all good professional soldiers are for their countries (not Russians and Party members obviously)

The German generals sacked by Hitler were among the first officers taken on by the Bundeswehr, unless indicted for war crimes, as most had been competant professional officers sacked by a political fanatic who made his decisions by politcal need, not military competance, something Hitler never learned at all, and Stalin only after Zhukov, had delivered on his promise to stop the fall of Moscow, and liberate Stalingrad.

It took the Red Army until Kursk to have an equivalent class of highly professional, COMPETANT officers and generals, in the numbers needed to fight and win. even after this stage, a half decent German formation could and would tear into the Red Army, as at Fastov, Korsun, Rava Russkaya, Tarnopol, Jassy, and in the Hungarian Puzta in the winter of 1944

[Mr Mosquito]

Gobbers one of the main reasons the Red Army suffered so many casualties (About 2 million in the opening months of Operation Barbarossa, was Stalins stand and fight to the last man and last round orders, which resulted in the major German forces creating huge pockets in which to quote two of them- Kiev, 750,000 POW's, and at least that again in KIA, and Vyasma, 650,000 POW's. there were at least four other major pockets created, suffering slightly less casualties. at least one General, and his COS Pavlov, were shot by Stalin's orders, for being cut off in the Kiev kesselschlact.

bucksred, you write interesting articles but the main point is that Stalin provided leadership. The Western European mainland Continental powers had already collapsed under the German NAZI onslaught. Many thought that the USSR would collapse as well. The USSR very nearly did collapse and without Stalin's leadership they almost certainly would have collapsed and the Soviet population would have been enslaved by the NAZIs.

I prefer to compare and contrast the leadership provided by Stalin to the leadership provided by Prince Charles. Prince Charles is now on a Caribbean yachting holiday while many of the regiments that he's commander in chief of are bogged down fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[bucksred]

bucksred, you write interesting articles but the main point is that Stalin provided leadership. The Western European mainland Continental powers had already collapsed under the German NAZI onslaught. Many thought that the USSR would collapse as well. The USSR very nearly did collapse and without Stalin's leadership they almost certainly would have collapsed and the Soviet population would have been enslaved by the NAZIs.

I prefer to compare and contrast the leadership provided by Stalin to the leadership provided by Prince Charles. Prince Charles is now on a Caribbean yachting holiday while many of the regiments that he's commander in chief of are bogged down fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ah, yeah, there I would agree with you. He has been the only "leader" in Europe over the last century or so. Before him Otto Von Bismarck, and prior to him Wellington.Stalins leadership was real, through his constant unsettling purges. Marshal Zhukov, could have been a credible leader in his own right, which is why Stalin removed him. Hitler and Mussolini, never ever controlled their own countries or peoples to the same degree. Forget the "democracies" in the rest of Europe, Churchill included. Though Churchill did sense the danger of the Soviet state far quicker than anyone bar the Germans

Our so called "leaders" are a bunch of dissolute, incompetent, corrupt, naive w a nkers even seen. The only leadership found these days in any country is in the Armed Forces, especially in Britain & Europe,and you can bet your brass bottom dollar, the political pygmies of any political/religious/national bent, will do their damndest to break that last bastion of leadership, and duty.

[Mr Mosquito]

Ah, yeah, there I would agree with you. He has been the only "leader" in Europe over the last century or so. Before him Otto Von Bismarck, and prior to him Wellington.Stalins leadership was real, through his constant unsettling purges. Marshal Zhukov, could have been a credible leader in his own right, which is why Stalin removed him. Hitler and Mussolini, never ever controlled their own countries or peoples to the same degree. Forget the "democracies" in the rest of Europe, Churchill included. Though Churchill did sense the danger of the Soviet state far quicker than anyone bar the Germans

Our so called "leaders" are a bunch of dissolute, incompetent, corrupt, naive w a nkers even seen. The only leadership found these days in any country is in the Armed Forces, especially in Britain & Europe,and you can bet your brass bottom dollar, the political pygmies of any political/religious/national bent, will do their damndest to break that last bastion of leadership, and duty.

You still don't get it? In 1940 Adolf Hitler claimed that Bristol had been completely destroyed following a night of intensive bombing. On November 2 of 1940, 5,000 incendiary and 10,000 high explosive bombs were dropped on the centre of the old city. On November 24, the entire area that is now Castle Park was destroyed in a bombing raid. During World War 2, 1,299 people in Bristol were killed by German bombing. About 3,000 buildings were destroyed and 90,000 were damaged.

Main stand Ashton Gate circa 1940/41 reduced to rubble by Hitler's airforce......

The Blitz also hit these Bristol Buses during a daylight raid on Broadweir....

In early 1945 Uncle Joe Stalin organised a road race to Hitler's bunker in Berlin. Here are some of those intrepid Red Army road racers charging through the rubble that my Bristolian Grandfather had helped cause in retaliation for the bombing of Bristol and numerous other of our cities.....

[bucksred]

You still don't get it? In 1940 Adolf Hitler claimed that Bristol had been completely destroyed following a night of intensive bombing. On November 2 of 1940, 5,000 incendiary and 10,000 high explosive bombs were dropped on the centre of the old city. On November 24, the entire area that is now Castle Park was destroyed in a bombing raid. During World War 2, 1,299 people in Bristol were killed by German bombing. About 3,000 buildings were destroyed and 90,000 were damaged.

Main stand Ashton Gate circa 1940/41 reduced to rubble by Hitler's airforce......

The Blitz also hit these Bristol Buses during a daylight raid on Broadweir....

In early 1945 Uncle Joe Stalin organised a road race to Hitler's bunker in Berlin. Here are some of those intrepid Red Army road racers charging through the rubble that my Bristolian Grandfather had helped cause in retaliation for the bombing of Bristol and numerous other of our cities.....

WW2 finished nearly 63 years ago Gobbers- times move on. The Reds were our enemy from mid 1947 on, and they were a massive and real threat to freedom, for almost forty years, far longer than the tinpot Nazis before them. They perished too, Russia has risen from those ashes. Possibly to destabilise Europe and us again, who knows right now.

Now we face oblique threats no one in Europe or N America has a scooby how to deal with. I suggest that they look at my countries highly successful war, and South Africas which followed ours as an example how to win, militarily. Pity politicians keep forkin it up every time.

[fka dagest]

WW2 finished nearly 63 years ago Gobbers- times move on. The Reds were our enemy from mid 1947 on, and they were a massive and real threat to freedom, for almost forty years, far longer than the tinpot Nazis before them. They perished too, Russia has risen from those ashes. Possibly to destabilise Europe and us again, who knows right now.

Now we face oblique threats no one in Europe or N America has a scooby how to deal with. I suggest that they look at my countries highly successful war, and South Africas which followed ours as an example how to win, militarily. Pity politicians keep forkin it up every time.

It's the US politicians who are wanting to build the provocative missile site not the Russians.

I'm confused Bucks, on the one hand you say you hate politicians, but on the other you defend the creators of US foreign policy to the hilt.

[Mr Mosquito]

[bucksred]

[Mr Mosquito]

brutality, cynical use of people, blatant empire building and exploitation of the working classes mate,

You've just described the worst excesses of Adam Smith's free market economy in Britain and the Empire during the 19th Century.

........Children working in mines and factories and cleaning chimneys on poverty wages. Young Britains sent abroad to fight and die for an Empire all run for the benefit of an inbred ruling class that the Levellers tried to get rid of in Cromwell's day some 200 years before.

[bucksred]

You've just described the worst excesses of Adam Smith's free market economy in Britain and the Empire during the 19th Century.

........Children working in mines and factories and cleaning chimneys on poverty wages. Young Britains sent abroad to fight and die for an Empire all run for the benefit of an inbred ruling class that the Levellers tried to get rid of in Cromwell's day some 200 years before.

's life mate, cant as the Germans say make omelettes without breaking eggs. Every great country/empire has always done that and always win. thing is you can be a dissident both here and in the US, you cant in Red China, the Soviet empire, Nazi empire, modern Russia, Mugabe Zimbabwe, or in the theological dictatorships of whatever hue. Yesterday the British Empire, today the USA, tomorrow Red China, the day after who knows? We wont care cos we'll be long gone..

the fact we can do this here, or the US, whereas if you were in the Rodina, China, Iran, or Zimbabwe, you wouldnt be able to, speaks volumes about freedom of speech, and our values held. Every African who comes here to better himself understands those values than some brits do. Sad, cos we have ever had rights compared to the rest..

British soldiers (and airmen) bar 1915 to 1918, and 1939 to 1962 have always been volunteers, never pressed men, unlike virtually every other military in modern times (I think Cromwell's lot were also exclusively volunteers?). Not the always the Navy though. They have always had a choice, wether to go and fight, or stay at home. Brits love serving their country, and accept those risks of fighting readily. 's why we're the best military (skint, and under-equipped as ever) in the world, bar none.

there will always be rich men and poor, child labour and excess wealth, slavery and sloth. tis human nature. Just be glad you've never been part of it. and who is to say our wages wont fall, as the industrial behemoth which is Red china, sucks all our employment out to benefit her? She is a after all, a communist state. Her military uniforms and insignia are based on Soviet pattern, as is most of the weaponry and equipment. Don't stop her takin' everyones jobs from all over the world ones as well

like I say, if you got a better idea, I'm interested, but if its revolution you want you can just count me out. seen that, it don't work.

[Mr Mosquito]

Yesterday the British Empire, today the USA, tomorrow Red China, the day after who knows? We wont care cos we'll be long gone..

......dictatorship is here and now in this country - it's called 'European Union Membership'. All three parties are in favour of the European Union - Westminster acts like a one party state of politicians: the Lib-Lab-Con. The parties are run top down and implement the policy of their leaderships, not that of their members. The European Union works by bribing politicians with huge salaries and expenses to vote for Europe, against the best interests of their own voters.

The European Union's 111,000 regulations, when fully enforced, will transform Britain from a free market economy into a Soviet style command economy, closing hundreds of thousands more businesses. They will also control our personal lives far more closely than were those of Soviet citizens. Networks of cameras and databases now record our movements and criminalise us when we can't comply. Persecution is no longer confined to us football supporters and motorists; under the European Union's Corpus Juris our courts have become extensions of government power instead of independent arbiters of justice.

Have you not noticed ??!!! :noexpression:

[bucksred]

......dictatorship is here and now in this country - it's called 'European Union Membership'. All three parties are in favour of the European Union - Westminster acts like a one party state of politicians: the Lib-Lab-Con. The parties are run top down and implement the policy of their leaderships, not that of their members. The European Union works by bribing politicians with huge salaries and expenses to vote for Europe, against the best interests of their own voters.

The European Union's 111,000 regulations, when fully enforced, will transform Britain from a free market economy into a Soviet style command economy, closing hundreds of thousands more businesses. They will also control our personal lives far more closely than were those of Soviet citizens. Networks of cameras and databases now record our movements and criminalise us when we can't comply. Persecution is no longer confined to us football supporters and motorists; under the European Union's Corpus Juris our courts have become extensions of government power instead of independent arbiters of justice.

Have you not noticed ??!!! :noexpression:

Nope, its not. dictatorship is Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Stalin, Kruschev, Breshnev, Andropov, Castro, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, Kim il Sung, Mugabe, Amin, Emperor Bokassa, Saddam Hussein, King Khalid, Ho chi Minh, Napoleon, Galteiri, Pinochet, The Interhamwe, the Janjuweed, the Taleban. THEY are dictators. Thats being ruled by tyrants. Even the worst treatment in this country cant match those of any of the countries above. Besides if you've nowt to hide, whats the worry anyway?

As for the EU, aint disagreeing wi' ya at all. Trouble is most of Europe is governed by Socialists, or worse, in coalitions involving Socialists. Socialists and their fellow travellers beleive in big government (Those 111,000 Regulations you refer to), telling its citizens what to do, what to work at, where to go, how much of its citizens income it will plunder (up to 40% is some EU states, and waste, but that don't include Medical Care deductions and pensions plans. That will garantee huge job losses with 28 to 35 hour working weeks, the average, while getting paid what we do for 39 to 48 hours, on the mainland. Good old China will take those jobs very gratefully, thank you. and many other places.

You want jobs, take less from the people, make them look after themselves in retirement, and to pay for their education. It will soon improve standards. Take responsibility for your own life and future, but they gotta leave you more of the money you earn, not less.

As for surveillance cameras et al, blame your Labour Party, mate, they've overseen this explosion in surveillance, not the EU, Britain, not the EU, is the most watched country in the world outside Russia, and China...just.. by all accounts.

Our legal system works well in isolation. It doesn't share any commonality with mainland European law, it is therefore extremley vulnerable, to abuse from scumbag lawyers and politicians, and to depredations from others. but then again said scumbag lawyers with agendas and Labour Party politicians have sold us down the river-whats new? Been doin' it for the last century or so, why change now?

Life is a bitch, some ya win, most you lose. Would you be any different if you were at the top of the greasy pole? don't think so. Pull up the ladder Jack. good Reds, Browns and one wi' a bit of shite on, do just that!

[Mr Mosquito]

Trouble is most of Europe is governed by Socialists, or worse, in coalitions involving Socialists.

In that case why was it Edward Heath's Tory Party that took us into Europe with Maggie Thatcher and her Tory Capitalists more than willing to keep us in Europe ???!!!!!

Anyway as this thread is about a Polish defence shield, I posted the following originally on my Red Goblin corner of the ziderheads website in answer to Harry May - what do you make of it?.....

Stalin knew that Hitler's ultimate aim was to attack Russia. In 1939, he invited Lord Halifax, the British Foreign Secretary to go to Russia to discuss an alliance against Germany. Britain refused. The British feared Russian Communism, and they believed that the Russian army was too weak to be of any use against Hitler. In August 1939, with war in Poland looming, the British eventually sent a minor official called Reginald Ranfurly Plunckett-Ernle-Erle-Drax. :noexpression: He travelled by slow boat, not by plane. He did not have authority to make any decisions, and had to refer every question back to London. The talks dragged on. The Russians asked if they could send troops into Poland if Hitler invaded. The British refused. The talks broke down.

Then........

Germany and Russia agreed to bury the hatchet; they agreed to bury it in Poland.

BBC TV, Why Appeasement?

On 23 August, 1939, the world was shocked when, suddenly, Russia and Germany signed a 'Non-aggression Pact'. People would have been even more shocked if they had known at the time that, in addition, the two countries had made a number of 'secret protocols' agreeing to 'spheres of influence' in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Poland. It amounted to an agreement to invade and divide the countries of Eastern Europe between them ... with Poland first on the list.

[bucksred]

In that case why was it Edward Heath's Tory Party that took us into Europe with Maggie Thatcher and her Tory Capitalists more than willing to keep us in Europe ???!!!!!

Anyway as this thread is about a Polish defence shield, I posted the following originally on my Red Goblin corner of the ziderheads website in answer to Harry May - what do you make of it?.....

Stalin knew that Hitler's ultimate aim was to attack Russia. In 1939, he invited Lord Halifax, the British Foreign Secretary to go to Russia to discuss an alliance against Germany. Britain refused. The British feared Russian Communism, and they believed that the Russian army was too weak to be of any use against Hitler. In August 1939, with war in Poland looming, the British eventually sent a minor official called Reginald Ranfurly Plunckett-Ernle-Erle-Drax. :noexpression: He travelled by slow boat, not by plane. He did not have authority to make any decisions, and had to refer every question back to London. The talks dragged on. The Russians asked if they could send troops into Poland if Hitler invaded. The British refused. The talks broke down.

Then........

Germany and Russia agreed to bury the hatchet; they agreed to bury it in Poland.

BBC TV, Why Appeasement?

On 23 August, 1939, the world was shocked when, suddenly, Russia and Germany signed a 'Non-aggression Pact'. People would have been even more shocked if they had known at the time that, in addition, the two countries had made a number of 'secret protocols' agreeing to 'spheres of influence' in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Poland. It amounted to an agreement to invade and divide the countries of Eastern Europe between them ... with Poland first on the list.

All true there Gobbers, so ask yourself why Britain and France didn't declare war on the Soviet Union? The British (and France too) knew the Soviets coveted Eastern Poland up to the Curzon line, a line which give or take minor adjustments, is what Stalin stole in September 1939, and to this day marks the Eastern frontier of Poland. all this after the Soviets tried to occupy ALL of the then new state of Poland, only to get smashed at the gates of Warsaw by a heroic defence by the Polish Army. Also completely ignoring numerous anti Nazi Germans pleas to stand up to Hitler, which would allow the anti Nazis the pretence of getting rid of Hitler, not to mention the German General Staff officers who risked all to leak German Operations plans to British sources, including Churchill, and Lord Halifax, and Socialists who spoke to their Labour Party equivalents

I think the US has the 'nads to actually garantee Polish independence, something the British & French of all political hues singularly failed to do, (as their act of penance in agreeing to the territorial grab by Russia), then, and have continued to do so since then.

Ted Heath's government took us into the EEC, and we had a vote on it in 1975, in which I was able to exercise my democratic right for the first time. If I remember rightly the majority voted for what was on offer then. We have never had any other chance to vote on it since. Thatcher would not have taken us into anything like T Bliar and his socialist buddies have happily signed us up to, with out a vote.

and its Socialist governments throughout Europe are the ones who have not given their electorates a chance to vote, the Dutch, Danish, French, Polish, and Irish governments did, or would have had one, had the French, & Dutch, not nixed it. run by right of centre parties.

Ask a German, Finn, or Swede if they had a choice, if they would vote for it....Spain, Italy, Portugal, Belgium, & Greece, as well as most Eastern European countries would vote for it, cos they get huge amounts of wedge out of the corrupt, incompetant EU bueraracy, which is one hell of an incentive to vote for it.

I don't agree with it, and we must have a vote, to decide on where it goes to next. with intelligent debate, not sensationalist rubbish, from politicians and national press. Fact, not fiction. which would be interesting.

[Mr Mosquito]

I don't agree with it, and we must have a vote, to decide on where it goes to next. with intelligent debate, not sensationalist rubbish, from politicians and national press. Fact, not fiction. which would be interesting.

I'm not trying to be sensationalist but the two richest European countries are Norway and Switzerland and neither are members of the European Union. What really worries me is that the leaderships of the Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem parties have been controlled by the European Union for two decades. It is the European Union agenda they implement in Parliament, not our wishes, which is why our votes no longer count.

An example of how we're all losing our hard fought for freedom of speech and expression: At a recent Labour Party conference the Police held an 82 year old man, Walter Woolfgang, and denied him access to the conference under the European Union's "anti terrorist" legislation because he had shouted the word "nonsense" at Jack Straw, who was speaking about Iraq. Terrified that the true nature of the laws Labour have passed on behalf of the European Union was escaping too early, the Labour Party stopped the police and begged the man to return to conference. :noexpression:

[bucksred]

I'm not trying to be sensationalist but the two richest European countries are Norway and Switzerland and neither are members of the European Union. What really worries me is that the leaderships of the Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem parties have been controlled by the European Union for two decades. It is the European Union agenda they implement in Parliament, not our wishes, which is why our votes no longer count.

An example of how we're all losing our hard fought for freedom of speech and expression: At a recent Labour Party conference the Police held an 82 year old man, Walter Woolfgang, and denied him access to the conference under the European Union's "anti terrorist" legislation because he had shouted the word "nonsense" at Jack Straw, who was speaking about Iraq. Terrified that the true nature of the laws Labour have passed on behalf of the European Union was escaping too early, the Labour Party stopped the police and begged the man to return to conference. :noexpression:

Norway & Switzerland are also governed by centre Right governments/coalitions as well. Politicians of all hues sign up to the gravy train. The EU is the biggest gravy train of the lot. Thatcher was the last British politician with any b***ocks at all. she beleived in the nation state, and in individual responsibility. That was her good points. virtually everything else she did is/was reviled or been proved subsequently wrong. Pity as she was right on Europe, and on taking personal responsibility for your life. Labour on the other hand are far too much into Big Brother by half. All to "ensure our safety, and freedoms are not compromised".

Our political views may be different in many ways, but I reckon we aint in too much disagreement about the fundamentals of it all, young Gobbers