the BREAKING NEWS debate thread

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-27 12:16pm

Have the Russian sources mentioned at all the jammers they supplied to the Iraqis HIDDEN IN FOOD SHIPMENST to Iraq? Or that there are technicians there still showing the Iraqis how to use and repair these GPS jammers or is that not newsworthy in Russia?

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-03-27 12:21pm

Stravo wrote:Have the Russian sources mentioned at all the jammers they supplied to the Iraqis HIDDEN IN FOOD SHIPMENST to Iraq? Or that there are technicians there still showing the Iraqis how to use and repair these GPS jammers or is that not newsworthy in Russia?

Russians lying? No! Say it ain't so!

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-03-27 01:02pm

Axis Kast wrote:
The fuck they are, you consider retracted stories of captured cities better coverage?
More than I want to listen to shit entitled, “War in Iraq: War on the People” that discusses everything in terms of a massive Coalition blunder. It’s nothing more than a comprehensive denial of everything on CNN.

Quotes from todays Russian analyses:

the shock of the first days of war among the coalition troops, when they expected an easy trek across Iraq but encountered stiff resistance, is now wearing off. They are now being "absorbed" into the war. Now the coalition actions are becoming more coherent and adequate. The coalition command is gradually taking the initiative away from the Iraqis, which is in part due to the reliance of the Iraqi command on inflexible defensive tactics.

Now the main tactical move of the US troops is to use their aerial and ground reconnaissance forces to test the Iraqi defenses, to open them up and, without entering direct close combat, to deliver maximum damage using artillery and ground attack aircraft. The coalition has finally stopped pointlessly moving around in convoys, as was characteristic of the first three days of the ground war.

The tactics allowed for increased combat effectiveness and considerably increased losses of the Iraqi side. Due to such attacks by the coalition during the previous night and today's early morning the Iraqis have lost 250 troops killed and up to 500 wounded. Up to 10 Iraqi tanks were destroyed and up to three Iraqi artillery batteries were suppressed.

Shove your unsubstantiated claims of "nothing but a CNN basher". Provide some proof or fuck off.

Idiot, you earlier claimed you don't trust foreign news. If the French are just repeating what's said on CNN, you don't trust CNN either.
No. I don’t trust the Russian news. So what news should I watch or trust? You’re asking me to pick and choose.

The FUCK I'm asking you to pick and choose! Show me were I ask such a thing. Nor does my position suggest you "pick and chose" either. Our debate is clearly getting fragmented in your head, so refer to http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 678#393678 for what I'm "asking you to do".

You're so insecure to want no exposure to media which is on the other side of the war. Why, afraid you'll change your mind? Too scared to read some negatives on the US invasion of Iraq? Grow a pair.
The fact that I’ve watched French coverage dispels this little fallacy.

But you refuse to follow anything but 5 news organisations, all of which are from pro-war countries (USA, Australia and Britain). No fallacy, you need to grow a pair.

Not wanting to listen to Russian negation doesn’t mean I lack objectivity.

I love the way you've changed this from "I mistrust foreign news" to "just that Russian site". Priceless.

I’ve got plenty of exposure to the “other side” via editorials and opinions on this board. If I want news I know is going to take an utterly different and preordained slant, I jump around to the sites Vympel posts from. But more often than not, they host disappointing claptrap.

What a jingoistic little chicken. I'm actually glad you don't visit sites like http://english.aljazeera.net/, the ease and speed which you change opinions, there's a small risk you'd end up an Islamic fanatic. Chicken shit.

Focus Axis! The backpeddle was in your claim "they were executed" to "fears they were executed".
FOX just confirmed it. They are being executed.

Link?

Concession accepted. And it is NOT the only difference, CNN does NOT report everything Al Jazeera reports, and vice versa. Stop being such an insecure little chicken.
I don’t get Al-Jazeera you fucking idiot.

You get the Internet right? http://english.aljazeera.net/ You'll have to be patient if you find the courage to visit, they're down more often than up as far as I can see [chicken shits like you who can't hack different opinions are brining the site down].

Argh you imbecile! Judge a news sources coverage of the war on its coverage of the war ! Jeeeeeeeeeesuuuuuusssss!!!
Coverage of the war includes coverage of the consequences. The French are all-around less fucking comprehensive. Stop trying to make me out as some kind of jingoist freak for one minute. I’m embarrassed for you. You can’t see past your own bias.

Relate the timing and content of an article published months before this war on 91 Gulf War Syndrome, to that sources coverage of this war. If you can do that in a meaningful way, I'll paint your house for nothing.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-03-27 01:04pm

Axis Kast wrote:What a great comeback. You've sure convinced me. Idiot.

No matter what your position, I think you've got to acknowledge that the Russian sources are painting an extremely bleak picture. All they seem to be doing is commenting on how CNN, FOX, and BBC are wrong. It's just discussion of how badly - as opposed to how well - the action in Iraq is going. They approach it from an opposite angle and then offer nothing but analysis painted by colorful words demeaning the Coalition approach.

Fuck off, little chicken.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-03-27 01:04pm

Stravo wrote:Have the Russian sources mentioned at all the jammers they supplied to the Iraqis HIDDEN IN FOOD SHIPMENST to Iraq? Or that there are technicians there still showing the Iraqis how to use and repair these GPS jammers or is that not newsworthy in Russia?

Source? Link?

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-27 02:20pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Stravo wrote:Have the Russian sources mentioned at all the jammers they supplied to the Iraqis HIDDEN IN FOOD SHIPMENST to Iraq? Or that there are technicians there still showing the Iraqis how to use and repair these GPS jammers or is that not newsworthy in Russia?
Source? Link?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81 ... 4.shtml

NOW, can YOU provide a Russian source or link on this story.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-03-27 02:24pm

Stravo wrote:NOW, can YOU provide a Russian source or link on this story.

Priceless!

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-03-27 03:03pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Axis Kast wrote:What a great comeback. You've sure convinced me. Idiot.

No matter what your position, I think you've got to acknowledge that the Russian sources are painting an extremely bleak picture. All they seem to be doing is commenting on how CNN, FOX, and BBC are wrong. It's just discussion of how badly - as opposed to how well - the action in Iraq is going. They approach it from an opposite angle and then offer nothing but analysis painted by colorful words demeaning the Coalition approach.
Fuck off, little chicken.

*cluck cluck cluck* you little bitch boy! what the fuck kind of response it that? Oh no! someone is making a political comment, "quickly batman! get the can of can of insulting comment spray from your utility belt!

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-03-27 04:17pm

Shove your unsubstantiated claims of "nothing but a CNN basher". Provide some proof or fuck off.

Words like “finally starting to” and “more coherent and adequate” imply a change of position. The Russians are just covering all their bases – even if they’ve been forced to admit that not all facets of the campaign in Iraq are going badly. That doesn’t however make up for the fact that 90% of www.iraqwar.ru is written by somebody whose obvious intention is to paint poorly the prosecution of this war.

But you refuse to follow anything but 5 news organisations, all of which are from pro-war countries (USA, Australia and Britain). No fallacy, you need to grow a pair.

That’s right. I refuse to follow – yet that doesn’t mean I refuse to keep my eyes open. I do from time to time take articles or commentary from al-Jazeera, the French television channels, or other sources. Hell, I even stop by www.iraqwar.ru every now and again just to see the latest bit of propagandic speculation.

I love the way you've changed this from "I mistrust foreign news" to "just that Russian site". Priceless.

But I don’t mistrust foreign news. I do watch or read the BBC output. I just mistrust the Russian coverage – and that of al-Jazeera as well.

What a jingoistic little chicken. I'm actually glad you don't visit sites like http://english.aljazeera.net/, the ease and speed which you change opinions, there's a small risk you'd end up an Islamic fanatic. Chicken shit.

Oh, I’ve read articles from al-Jazeera. I just don’t turn to them first or often.

Link?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82285,00.html

You get the Internet right? http://english.aljazeera.net/ You'll have to be patient if you find the courage to visit, they're down more often than up as far as I can see [chicken shits like you who can't hack different opinions are brining the site down].

Chickenshits like me? Upset over different opinions? I’m not the one getting all bent out of shape here.

Relate the timing and content of an article published months before this war on 91 Gulf War Syndrome, to that sources coverage of this war. If you can do that in a meaningful way, I'll paint your house for nothing.

Coverage of war must be comprehensive. That includes discussion of the history, reality, and future consequences of the given situation. Before I watch the war, I want to know what brought us to this point and what kind of results an invasion might bring. One problem about which I needed to be aware when considering whether or not to support this war was the Gulf War syndrome and the possibility that American troops would leave this theater and develop another series of debilitating illnesses. Naturally, I watched coverage of both former soldiers and current researchers. It was my experience that French coverage was both less detailed and came far later as compared to CNN or FOX news, both of whom ran their own interviews as well.

Oh, and you can use lacquer on the facade. I don’t need paint, but thanks for asking. And watch the damn walkway. I don’t need you glopping varnish all over it.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » 2003-03-27 04:20pm

Do those hackers of Al-Jazeera realize that what they are doing is illegal, and under proposed legislation, they could be branded as terrorists?

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-03-27 04:59pm

Ted wrote:Do those hackers of Al-Jazeera realize that what they are doing is illegal, and under proposed legislation, they could be branded as terrorists?

Don't think they care.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-03-27 05:24pm

theski wrote:Hackers replace Al-jazeera web site with American flaghttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Mar27.html

jegs2 wrote:
Ted wrote:Do those hackers of Al-Jazeera realize that what they are doing is illegal, and under proposed legislation, they could be branded as terrorists?
Don't think they care.

it fills my heart with pride....or maybe it doesn't, regardless, what the hell did they expect? you'd think when they opened the english language site in the middle of a war, the'd have their act together in respect for security. Shit, they have had 2 days of denial of service attacks and now this. [red foreman] dumbasses! [/red foreman]

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-03-28 06:49am

Stravo wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81917,00.html

Fox News claims it has 'confirmed' the reports. Nothing in the link to show it has.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Mar24.html

The same claims and reports of Ari Fleicher being 'concerned'.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/200 ... 180735.htm

The same stuff- Ari is still concerned, and the Russians still deny it.

http://www.woai.com/news/local/story.as ... 5D69E37AE7

This time the White House is doing the confirming. Don't know how, of course.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq ... 67,00.html

White House claims 'credible evidence', Russia still denying.

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServe ... 8313101874

Need to subscribe. Though I'm sure Ari is still expressing concern, saying they have 'credible evidence' and Putin is still denying.

http://www.useu.be/Categories/GlobalAff ... nArms.html

Same old.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/20030 ... 3934.shtml

Still the same. Stravo, BoredShirtless asked you for PROOF of jammers supplied to Iraq "HIDDEN IN FOOD SHIPMENTS", not a single one of those articles makes these claims (I used the words 'food' and 'tech' as a search), nor do they provide proof. Ari is 'concerned' and the Russians deny it- again, and again, and again, each article repeating itself verbatim- each having all gotten these 'concerns' from the same source- and the very conference with the White House spokesman makes neither of these claims- the 'technician' claim coming from of course an unamed 'US official'.

NOW, can YOU provide a Russian source or link on this story.

Sure can: http://www.russiajournal.com/news/cnews ... l?nd=36244

and this, from the same site's ticker.

WASHINGTON - The State Department protested that Russian companies sold sensitive military equipment to Iraq in the run-up to U.S.-led war against Saddam Hussein's regime.

One Russian firm is helping the Iraqi military deploy electronic jamming equipment against U.S. planes and bombs, while two other Russian firms have sold antitank missiles and thousands of night-vision goggles in violation of United Nations sanctions, The Washington Post reported in Sunday editions.

The State Department said Sunday it had raised the issue with senior levels of the Russian government a number of times, particularly over the past two weeks because the equipment could pose a direct threat to coalition forces. Moscow's response has been unsatisfactory, the State Department said.

The Post identified two of the firms as KBP Tula and Aviaconversiya, a Moscow-based company, saying that KBP supplied antitank guided missiles and Aviaconversiya provided the jamming devices.

Established a decade ago, Aviaconversiya develops and produces jammers to suppress different kinds radio systems, including the global positioning system guidance gear used in aircraft and bombs.

GPS receivers rely on signals from orbiting satellites.

The U.S. government last year imposed sanctions on KBP for allegedly selling antitank weapons to Syria. KBP's laser-guided Kornet-E anti-tank missiles are designed to destroy armored vehicles and tanks at a distance of up to 6,000 yards

(question- why can't Syria have ATGMs?)

Difference between US and Russian side? Absolutely zero, at this point.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2003-03-28 09:02am

I wanna add a bit about the latest western reports...
They said: "Iraq executed prisoners of war" Blair was quick to say it aloud.
Now that it turned out to be bullshit, and Iraq representatives are quite angry with such lies, because they said even before this that they will use the Geneve convention rules.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-03-28 09:55am

Stas Bush wrote:I wanna add a bit about the latest western reports...
They said: "Iraq executed prisoners of war" Blair was quick to say it aloud.
Now that it turned out to be BS, and Iraq representatives are quite angry with such lies, because they said even before this that they will use the Geneve convention rules.

Who said it was BS?

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-03-28 10:00am

Stas Bush wrote:I wanna add a bit about the latest western reports...
They said: "Iraq executed prisoners of war" Blair was quick to say it aloud.
Now that it turned out to be bullshit, and Iraq representatives are quite angry with such lies, because they said even before this that they will use the Geneve convention rules.

And i guess in 1991 the pilots who were captured by Iraqi did not get beaten by Saddam`s RGs

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-03-28 12:11pm

Montcalm wrote:
Stas Bush wrote:I wanna add a bit about the latest western reports...
They said: "Iraq executed prisoners of war" Blair was quick to say it aloud.
Now that it turned out to be bullshit, and Iraq representatives are quite angry with such lies, because they said even before this that they will use the Geneve convention rules.
And i guess in 1991 the pilots who were captured by Iraqi did not get beaten by Saddam`s RGs

And I guess the Iraqi government did not hold a fucking press conference and announce that Coalition forces will be treated as mercenaries and soldiers of fortune, not enemy soldiers...

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-28 12:16pm

Stas Bush wrote:I wanna add a bit about the latest western reports...
They said: "Iraq executed prisoners of war" Blair was quick to say it aloud.
Now that it turned out to be bullshit, and Iraq representatives are quite angry with such lies, because they said even before this that they will use the Geneve convention rules.

Uhm, showing POWs during interrogation and for propaganda reasons is against the Geneva convention.

But, it is NOT against the convention to show people surrendering, as the western media has done. Plus, those are private news outlets, not government sponsored television.

And you are mistaken if you believe the Iraqis to follow the Geneva convention.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-28 12:18pm

SirNitram wrote:
Montcalm wrote:
Stas Bush wrote:I wanna add a bit about the latest western reports...
They said: "Iraq executed prisoners of war" Blair was quick to say it aloud.
Now that it turned out to be bullshit, and Iraq representatives are quite angry with such lies, because they said even before this that they will use the Geneve convention rules.
And i guess in 1991 the pilots who were captured by Iraqi did not get beaten by Saddam`s RGs
And I guess the Iraqi government did not hold a fucking press conference and announce that Coalition forces will be treated as mercenaries and soldiers of fortune, not enemy soldiers...

Nor pretend to surrender and then open fire, or hold Iraqi conscript's families hostage, or hide behind civilians, hospitals, and mosques...

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-03-28 12:35pm

Tortue is a regular affair. The Chinese practiced it on our pilots in April, 2001.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2003-03-28 12:44pm

Nathan F

Uhm, showing POWs during interrogation and for propaganda reasons is against the Geneva convention.
But, it is NOT against the convention to show people surrendering, as the western media has done. Plus, those are private news outlets, not government sponsored television.

Oh yes. Showing a man under a gun is fine. Showing a man in the room is not. What?

And you are mistaken if you believe the Iraqis to follow the Geneva convention.

Unless they are idiots, they will follow.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-03-28 12:47pm

Stas Bush wrote:
Enforcer Talen wrote:yahoo mentioned they are using children as human sheilds.
Bullshit, they just fire from civilian areas, but nothing more.

And this is different from using civilians as shields how???

NOTE: This isn't a debate on the authenticity of Yahoo!'s report, just Stas Bush's reply to it.

Saw this after I hit Preview...

Stas Bush wrote:Unless they are idiots, they will follow [the Geneva Convention].

Or maybe they just don't care about it?

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2003-03-28 12:59pm

RogueIce,
if they don't care bout the Geneva and want the whole world turn on them: they are idiots.

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2003-03-28 01:01pm

Stas Bush wrote:
Oh yes. Showing a man under a gun is fine. Showing a man in the room is not. What?

No, Iraq has show video of the POWs being asked questions.......name, rank, serial number, ect.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-03-28 01:18pm

Stas Bush wrote:RogueIce,
if they don't care bout the Geneva and want the whole world turn on them: they are idiots.

They're already losing. They don't have much to lose. WHat they can hope for is some kind of PR victory, in showing how it wasn't easy for the Americans to win.

Plus, there's always the revenge factor. If you can't stop them from kicking your ass, you can always shoot the POWs and leave a mess for their comrades to find.

Kinda like the fear of terrorists hitting a soldier's family, which is why they didn't show the names of some pilots and SpecOps guys in Afghanistan and in the 91 Gulf War.