Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

Red Chief wrote::shock:
Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia are outside borders of US. Apparently you have problem not only with English but with Geography too.

I knew American kids were bad at geography, but RC having to explain to eh the above is ridiculous.

C'mon eh - man up and count the numbers killed by the US outside her territorial borders since 1945 to date, give references for your figures so we can double check.

RC - I predict he'll come up with another excuse for not counting, or try and blame you for something totally unrelated in a vain attempt to change the subject. Note how he is squirming in the Religion forum - the the extent that he's invented a new religion!

Cheers,
Shafique

personally i dont see this as a major problem. If you have nothing to hide then you wouldnt be too worried.

But people must understand that this is nothing personal for those involved and as a Brit i would hope we do the same.

I dont think its about racial profiling and im sure if it was revealed properly we would find that it probably includes all other races and countries too.

Tomorrow marks the 10yr anniversary of a new age of terrorism which is directed at the innocent ppl, of all walks of life wether it be US, UK or GCC or any other country for that matter!

What happened to this world?? we all inhabit the same planet but yet cannot be friendly with our neighbours.

I for one am ashamed to have lived during this dark century!

symmetric wrote:ntal racist comments. You think Aborigines are the ugliest people in the world, and you're absolutely racist towards Black people, and now an ugly comment on the Asians.

Whose next??

Thanks a lot sym ! I saw windbag and skipped that post, and now you made me read it ! lol

The example of windbag is that of a whoppie cushion, all you need to do is press it a little for it to start farting out drivel !

M412tyn wrote:personally i dont see this as a major problem. If you have nothing to hide then you wouldnt be too worried.

But people must understand that this is nothing personal for those involved and as a Brit i would hope we do the same.

I dont think its about racial profiling and im sure if it was revealed properly we would find that it probably includes all other races and countries too.

Tomorrow marks the 10yr anniversary of a new age of terrorism which is directed at the innocent ppl, of all walks of life wether it be US, UK or GCC or any other country for that matter!

What happened to this world?? we all inhabit the same planet but yet cannot be friendly with our neighbours.

I for one am ashamed to have lived during this dark century!

Someone who has some clarity!!!!! I'm sure the UK gets a bit "tense" every year on 7/7. Unfortunately some people can't figure out that the world changed on 9/11, not just the US. It just comes down to people who are raised with the belief that entitlement is something they own.

Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia are outside borders of US. Apparently you have problem not only with English but with Geography too.

So we do count France's fighting in Algeria as a war or internal conflict?

For your information, it was a huge operation master minded by the US, and aided by their "friends" from all over the world, including Saudi Arabian money, Pakistani Military know-how etc.

Ok, so for my information, how many CIA trainers were sent to Pakistan?

Why would anti-American Afghan Arabs train alongside the 'Zionist' CIA?

How does the total number of CIA field agents/trainers compare with the number of Pakistani military trainers that also trained the Afghans?

Does the fact that we were training people who would become the Northern Alliance lend any credibility that the US was training different groups of people than the Pakistanis (who did not train the Northern Alliance but apparently stuck with people of Pashtun descent)?

Who were the Taliban members we trained? Any famous ones I should know about?

This is for those who think that the US was the aggressor during time of wars, possibly a bit of reading will help put things in perspective.

World War I

When war broke out in Europe in August 1914, Americans opposed the involvement of U.S. troops, and President Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924) declared the country's neutrality. But as the fighting continued and the German tactics threatened civilian lives, Americans began siding with the Allies.

After the sinking of the passenger liner SS Lusitania, Germany adopted restricted submarine warfare. But early in 1917 Germany again began attacking unarmed ships, this time American cargo boats, goading the United States into the war. Meantime, German U-boats were positioning to cut off shipping to and from Britain, in an effort to force the power to surrender. Tensions between the United States and Germany peaked when the British intercepted, decoded, and turned over to President Wilson a telegram Germany had sent to its ambassador in Mexico. The so-called "Zimmermann note," which originated in the office of German foreign minister Arthur Zimmermann (1864-1940), urged the German officials in Mexico to persuade the Mexican government into war with the United States-in order to reconquer lost territory in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. The message was published in the United States in early March. One month later, on April 6, 1917, the U.S. Congress declared war on Germany after President Wilson had asserted that "the world must be made safe for democracy."

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/why-did-th ... z1XYb4iNvg

World War 2

It is a popular misconception among Americans [and apparently many peoplethat the US voluntarily entered WW2, at least against the Germans. In fact, the US didn't. The US entered the general war as a result of the attack on Pearl Harbor. But the US entered against Japan and did not, repeat not, declare war on Germany. However, a few days after Pearl Harbor, Hitler declared war on the US, thereby putting an end to the US dilemma. After a meeting between Churchill and Roosevelt, it was agreed that the British and Americans would have a "Germany first" policy. Whether the Americans would have declared war on Germany had not Hitler made the decision for them is one of the great unanswered questions of history. The US had, of course, been completely isolationist prior to 7 December 1941 - Roosevelt's Lend-Lease program had got through Congress by one, repeat one, vote. The answer is that yes, probably the US would have entered the war against Germany, but possibly not on the scale that it did, and almost certainly not with Germany being given priority over Japan. But nobody will ever know for sure.

U.S. interests had been attacked. U.S. ships were attacked in the Atlantic when Germans didn't like U.S. supplies being sold to England in support of their efforts to defend Europe while Germany was making its plans to gain control of all of Europe as a first step in control of the world. BTW, the League of Nations had placed sanctions against Germany that was intended to prevent buildup of a German military after the end of WW1. That's why the U.S. was involved in the Atlantic. U.S. interests were attacked in the Pacific when Japan was trying to gain control of all islands in the Pacific.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_did_the_U ... z1XYgEbQht

The military history of the United States during World War II covers the involvement of the United States during World War II. The Empire of Japan declared war on the United States of America on 7 December 1941, immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor on the same day. On 11 December 1941, Germany and Italy also declared war on the United States. Until that time, the United States had maintained neutrality, although it had, since March that same year, supplied the Allies with war materiel through the Lend-Lease Act. During the war over 16 million Americans served in the United States military.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_h ... rld_War_II

Korean War

Americans became involved in the Korean conflict when the United Nations (UN), only five years old, called upon member countries to give military support to South Korea, which had been invaded by troops from Communist-ruled North Korea on June 25, 1950. The United Nations considered the invasion to be a violation of international peace and called on the Communists to withdraw. When they did not, 16 countries sent troops and some 40 countries sent supplies and military equipment to the aid of the South Korean armies. About 90 percent of the UN aid came from the United States. But North Korea received aid too-the Chinese sent troops and the Soviet Union provided equipment for them to sustain the war, which lasted until July 27, 1953. After three years of fighting, an armistice was called, but a formal peace treaty was never drawn up between the neighboring countries, prompting the United States to maintain military forces in South Korea in an effort to discourage any further acts of aggression from the north.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/why-did-th ... z1XYcyIffN

Vietnam War

Vietnam War The Vietnam War was the longest war ever fought by the United States. It lasted more than 15 years, from 1959 to 1975. It was also the first war that the United States lost.

WHY THE WAR WAS FOUGHT The United States entered the war to stop the spread of Communism in Southeast Asia. American leaders feared that Communist forces would gain control of Vietnam. After that, nation after nation might fall to Communism. Communism is a political and economic system that the United States strongly opposed. Vietnam had been split in half in 1954, after fighting a war to gain independence from France. When French forces withdrew, Vietnamese Communists gained control of North Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh was the leader of the North Vietnamese Communists. South Vietnam had a non-Communist government. This government was weak. But the United States supported it in order to keep the Communists from taking control of all of Vietnam.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_did_the_U ... z1XYdg1udT

You will note that the US joined allies in wars. Joined as in there were other countries involved - get it?

Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if Hilter won? Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if communism succeeded?

-- Sat Sep 10, 2011 6:23 pm --

desertdudeshj wrote:

event horizon wrote:I don't understand your point, there were few CIA operatives in Pakistan during the Afghan-Soviet War. For whatever few peasants the CIA trained, the Pakistanis trained, funded, armed and equipped several orders of magnitude more men than the United States would have been capable of.

All with the blessings of big daddy USA

2 48,250,000 China: Mao Zedong's regime. (incl. famine) 1949-76 : Not an international conflict
3 20,000,000 USSR: Stalin's regime (incl. WW2-era atrocities) 1924-53 ** Not an international conflict
4 *
5 *
6 *
7 *
8 2,800,000 Korean War 1950-53
9 2,700,000 2nd Indochina War (incl. Laos & Cambodia) 1960-75
10 2,500,000 Chinese Civil War 1945-49 Not an international conflict
11 2,100,000 German Expulsions after WW2 1945-47 Not an international conflict
12 1,900,000 Second Sudanese Civil War 1983- Not an international conflict
13 1,700,000 Congolese Civil War 1998- Not an international conflict
14 1,650,000 Cambodia: Khmer Rouge Regime 1975-79 Not an international conflict
15 1,400,000 Afghanistan: Civil War 1980- Not an international conflict, although the date is wrong
15 1,400,000 Ethiopian Civil Wars 1962-92 Not an international conflict
17 *
18 1,250,000 East Pakistan: Massacres 1971 Not an international conflict
19 1,000,000 Iran-Iraq War 1980-88
19 1,000,000 Nigeria: Biafran revolt 1967-70 Not an international conflict
21 800,000 Mozambique: Civil War 1976-92 Not an international conflict
21 800,000 Rwandan Massacres 1994 Not an international conflict
23 650,000 French-Algerian War 1954-62
24 600,000 First Indochina War 1945-54
25 500,000 India-Pakistan Partition 1947
25 500,000 Indonesia: Massacre of Communists 1965-67 Not an international conflict
25 500,000 Angolan Civil War 1975-94 Not an international conflict
25 500,000 First Sudanese Civil War 1955-72 Not an international conflict
25 *
30 *
31 350,000 Somalia: Civil War 1991- Not an international conflict
? Unknown North Korea: Communist Regime 1948- Not an international conflict

The US did that all by itself??? The US just went in and invaded all those countries?? You should do your homework before putting up stats.

Its always some boogeyman or the other that the poor ol US is fighting. Wheter it be Communism or Terror, wonder whats next ? Witches !

Oh but thats right, its too broke to even invade a 7 Eleven at the moment.

Bora Bora wrote:Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if Hilter won?

Hitler was desrtoied by those communists. They did the main job. The US contribution in the war in Europe was little, less than 10%.

Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if communism succeeded?

No we could not. We know only what happend after collaps of that communism. US commits 3 wars at the same time: Afghanistan, Iraq and Lybia. Who is the agressor after that? The reply is obvious.

The Russian winter and Hitler's weakening the German offensive by splitting the military's forces to attack three separate targets, Stalingrad, Leningrad and Moscow, did the main job of defeating the Germans.

Btw, French-Algerian war, internal conflict or not?

BM is not racist. She is my good friend, and I can vouch for her that she harbors no racialist sentiments! She is naughty and has an abrasive sense of humor; she throws out these remarks about various races, and then I am sure has a good laugh as people come out smoking and furious. She definitely makes DF come alive! I love her and her posts here

EH, you are not even funny anymore; you are just pathetic. I'll give you a famous name, you can ask your handlers about him: Engineer Gulbadin Hekmatyar, a Pushtun warlord in Afghanistan, trained by the CIA, having a following of many hundreds of thousands of cannon fodder. Once the darling of the West, now a sworn enemy (if he has not taken another somersault already).

I was aware of him prior to you 'throwing' his name out. Actually, if you're barely aware of Hekmatyar you should have known he was a rival with the Taliban until the recent invasion - his forces fought against the Taliban during the civil war.

But regardless, the general rule is that the people the US armed were generally the folks who became the Northern Alliance. The Pakistanis effectively created the Taliban to suppress Pashtun nationalist movements in Afghanistan so they could better control the country.

There is no Taliban or al-Qaeda big shot I'm aware of who was trained by CIA trainers. That's a fact that is not disputed and cannot be.

Also, a quick read up on him reveals he received no training from the CIA. What he did receive was funds from the ISI originating from the US government.

In other words, none of this 'warrior trained in the martial arts of terrorism' business.

["Red Chief"]

Bora Bora wrote:Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if Hilter won?

Hitler was desrtoied by those communists. They did the main job. The US contribution in the war in Europe was little, less than 10%.

Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if communism succeeded?

Communists?? Are you saying that Russia did it all by itself??

Russia:

Crimean War-1853/1856 against Britain and France. [Russia Lost]
Russo-Japanese War-1904/1905 against Japan. [Russia Lost]

WW1-Against Germany [Russia Won]

The Winter War Russia and Finland 1939 - 1940 [Russia Lost]

Soviet Union (Russia):
WW2-Against Germany & Japan [Soviet Union Won]

Korean War/Vietnam War-Supplied Jets, Tanks, Artillery, Missiles (SAMs), Small Arms, Ammunition, Ordinance, Patrol Boats, Fuels, Communication Systems, Technicians, etc. [Soviet Union collapsed]

Let's add to the above:

Russo-Japanese War
Russia-Georgia War
Russia-Chechnya (Twice) (most recent)
Declared war with Turkey 1914
Declared war with Bulgaria 1915

I'd say Russia has had a hand in quite a few wars itself.

No we could not. We know only what happend after collaps of that communism. US commits 3 wars at the same time: Afghanistan, Iraq and Lybia. Who is an agressor after that? The reply is obvious.

I believe the US followed Russia in Afghanistan. I'm sure Russia showed no agression with Chechnya.

I know communism is something that is close to your heart RC.

-- Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:00 pm --

desertdudeshj wrote:Its always some boogeyman or the other that the poor ol US is fighting. Wheter it be Communism or Terror, wonder whats next ? Witches !

Oh but thats right, its too broke to even invade a 7 Eleven at the moment.

................and what reasons did other countries have to go to or get involved with other countries in a war?? What exactly is Pakistan fighting setting off bombs in India??

Bora Bora wrote:

["Red Chief"]

Bora Bora wrote:Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if Hilter won?

Hitler was desrtoied by those communists. They did the main job. The US contribution in the war in Europe was little, less than 10%.

Could you imagine what kind of world it would be if communism succeeded?

Communists?? Are you saying that Russia did it all by itself??

Russia:

Crimean War-1853/1856 against Britain and France. [Russia Lost]
Russo-Japanese War-1904/1905 against Japan. [Russia Lost]

WW1-Against Germany [Russia Won]

The Winter War Russia and Finland 1939 - 1940 [Russia Lost]

Soviet Union (Russia):
WW2-Against Germany & Japan [Soviet Union Won]

Korean War/Vietnam War-Supplied Jets, Tanks, Artillery, Missiles (SAMs), Small Arms, Ammunition, Ordinance, Patrol Boats, Fuels, Communication Systems, Technicians, etc. [Soviet Union collapsed]

Let's add to the above:

Russo-Japanese War
Russia-Georgia War
Russia-Chechnya (Twice) (most recent)
Declared war with Turkey 1914
Declared war with Bulgaria 1915

I'd say Russia has had a hand in quite a few wars itself.

No we could not. We know only what happend after collaps of that communism. US commits 3 wars at the same time: Afghanistan, Iraq and Lybia. Who is an agressor after that? The reply is obvious.

I believe the US followed Russia in Afghanistan. I'm sure Russia showed no agression with Chechnya.

I know communism is something that is close to your heart RC.

-- Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:00 pm --

desertdudeshj wrote:Its always some boogeyman or the other that the poor ol US is fighting. Wheter it be Communism or Terror, wonder whats next ? Witches !

Oh but thats right, its too broke to even invade a 7 Eleven at the moment.

................and what reasons did other countries have to go to or get involved with other countries in a war?? What exactly is Pakistan fighting setting off bombs in India??

Bora, you lost everything starting from Creamean war. Why did not you mention Napoleon, who had been defeated a little bit earlier?

I was talking about recent events just after collaps of "communism". The world without it is definitely not better or safer place.

event horizon wrote:I was aware of him prior to you 'throwing' his name out. Actually, if you're barely aware of Hekmatyar you should have known he was a rival with the Taliban until the recent invasion - his forces fought against the Taliban during the civil war.

But regardless, the general rule is that the people the US armed were generally the folks who became the Northern Alliance. The Pakistanis effectively created the Taliban to suppress Pashtun nationalist movements in Afghanistan so they could better control the country.

There is no Taliban or al-Qaeda big shot I'm aware of who was trained by CIA trainers. That's a fact that is not disputed and cannot be.

Also, a quick read up on him reveals he received no training from the CIA. What he did receive was funds from the ISI originating from the US government.

In other words, none of this 'warrior trained in the martial arts of terrorism' business.

My friend, isn't this how you shadow warriors operate? Nothing is what it seems. BTW, I am sure you are aware of what the word Taliban means= students. They are too young to have been part of the actual Mujahideen, but their creators definitely were. The ISI of Pakistan, which did all the dirty work for the US, is another very shadowy organization, and was hand in glove with the CIA, and for all that we know, still is. Many higher leaders among the Taliban were actually Mujahideen fighters. Mulla Omar, the Supreme Leader of the Taliban, was a Mujahideen. In fact he is said to have lost one eye and 2 or 3 fingers of one hand in fighting with the Russian Army.
As for your dismissive remarks about Afghan 'peasants', I read an SAS (the elite British Commando Unit) Instructor training these Afgahn 'peasants', say at the time that he had never seen such fighters in his life, and he felt sorry for the enemy against such people.
Hematyar is not from the Northern Alliance. He is a Pashtun.

event horizon wrote:The Russian winter and Hitler's weakening the German offensive by splitting the military's forces to attack three separate targets, Stalingrad, Leningrad and Moscow.

Wow, Horizon has a problem with History too. I know that there is no cntradiction for you that events around Moscow happend in 1941 but around Stalingrad in 1942-43.

Did you learn any subject in your secondary school properly?

I just wonder what would have happend with Soviet Union if field-marshals Hudarian, von Manstein and Model had taken advice of our poor student. US would have had nothing to do the next 45 years.

Really? Are we really using sites such as wiki for info - which is not verified and just posted by Joe Bloggs! Please.

9/11 changed the face of trust, security, humanity forever. Those whining about profiling should ask themselves exactly why certain people get picked out? Did it happen before then? er no.

In the UK we dealt with terrorists for decades in the form of the IRA, who were some of the nastiest scum put on this earth.

It would be wonderful to have a world living in peace, but certain factions have been at war for centuries. Man has always had bloodlust, greed and the need to fight - things will never change.

zonker wrote:BM is not racist. She is my good friend, and I can vouch for her that she harbors no racialist sentiments! She is naughty and has an abrasive sense of humor; she throws out these remarks about various races, and then I am sure has a good laugh as people come out smoking and furious. She definitely makes DF come alive! I love her and her posts here

Zonker, now you've done it! Did you stop to consider my reputation as a racist bigot when you made that post?
I have worked tirelessly to gain that stance on DF and now you've revealed that you and me are best friends away from DF! BM friends with a Pakistani! Dear God! Whatever next

-- Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:03 pm --

symmetric wrote:Very typical of you BM, the usual judgmental racist comments. You think Aborigines are the ugliest people in the world, and you're absolutely racist towards Black people, and now an ugly comment on the Asians.

Whose next??

Thanks for the laugh first thing on a Monday morning Sym! Yes, I often wonder why Asians slag the West off when most of the time they all appear to want to be white. Look at sunshine, an overweight Asian who claims to be English and the munchkin with his anti American posts who would give his right arm to gain entry to Canada.
Yes and I still think Aborigines are the most unfortunate looking people on this earth
But I've never wished death to anyone! Unlike you Sym who said on more than one occasion that you wished death to all Jews. Now don't come back at me and say that was in the past and you don't want it mentioned again because you are not fooling anyone. A person harbouring as such deep hatred as you can not switch it off overnight.
So...I've got a long way to go before I get as low as you Sym.

It wasn't a laugh BM, it was extreme anger that you almost broke your teeth from pressing on it so hard

I couldn't careless about your thoughts toward Jews, in fact you should understand that among the Middle Eastern societies/cultures, calling someone a Jew resembles the worst insult ever - Lesson 1

If you enjoy degrading complete nations, but favor the Jews, then there are also plentyyyy of nations in this world who picture the Jews as the most contemptible creatures ever. Israel is surrounded between those millions, and to ensure its survival, it has to feed on their blood, which is your justification after all for their violent occupation of Palestine : )

symmetric wrote:It wasn't a laugh BM, it was extreme anger that you almost broke your teeth from pressing on it so hard

I couldn't careless about your thoughts toward Jews, in fact you should understand that among the Middle Eastern societies/cultures, calling someone a Jew resembles the worst insult ever - Lesson 1

If you enjoy degrading complete nations, but favor the Jews, then there are also plentyyyy of nations in this world who picture the Jews as the most contemptible creatures ever. Israel is surrounded between those millions, and to ensure its survival, it has to feed on their blood, which is your justification after all for their violent occupation of Palestine : )

I see you are unable to surpress your hatred to all Jews Sym. You have to be a peaceful person to be able to keep the pretence up Sym. You are failing.
So calling someone a Jew is the worst insult ever? Is it really? Well all I can say to that is that I wouldn't insult the Jews by calling you one.

As for calling someone a "Jew" being the worst insult, its something very common, in all (ANCIENT+MODERN)Middle Eastern cultures, including my very own Emarati and Persian culture. You cannot fight an ancient and very popular/common thing that is deeply rooted among native nations of the Middle East.

You already know it BM, if not then *SNAP* stop being a naive person.
Need not to call me anything, whatever you say is of no value to me.

You're English after all, not an ethnic Hebraic, which is of no value to me EITHER ways.

red chief wrote:Did you learn any subject in your secondary school properly?

Are you even trying to dispute that Military Doctrine 101 is to concentrate forces on a single target rather than have them break off and attack multiple separate targets?

Please, enlighten me on your vast repository on military science. I'll throw the popcorn in the microwave and await a display of RC's von Clausewitz's like tactical brilliance.

While we're talking about proper schooling, give me the attrition rates between German and Soviet forces of every major battle in the Eastern campaign. I think you'll find the Germans, on average, could inflict five Soviet kills for every one of their losses. But the overall campaign was just 1:2. So, please RC, I'll await your explanation for why the Germans were able to kill more Soviets in battle but the total attrition rate was far less impressive.

If not the Russian winter, where the did German side suffer 5 million casualties, because the battles don't add up to that.

zonker wrote:My friend, isn't this how you shadow warriors operate? Nothing is what it seems. BTW, I am sure you are aware of what the word Taliban means= students. They are too young to have been part of the actual Mujahideen, but their creators definitely were.

Just save me the time of reading your posts by simply stating you have no idea what you are/were talking about and were simply speaking out of your back end.

zonker wrote:Many higher leaders among the Taliban were actually Mujahideen fighters. Mulla Omar, the Supreme Leader of the Taliban, was a Mujahideen.

I see how you contradicted yourself in the very same post.

I'll ask this one more time then I'll be done wasting my time with a dimwit:

Which 'holy warriors' from the Afghan-Soviet war that the United States 'trained' or funded are now or were high ranking Taliban and al-Qaeda members?

zonker wrote:Hematyar is not from the Northern Alliance. He is a Pashtun.

1) I had just explained that your one example was not the norm - most of the people the US was in contact with would go on to become the Northern Alliance

2) The US never 'trained' Hekmatyar, which makes your highlighting this individual so particularly stupid.

3) Hekmatyar was not a member of the Taliban. Do you get this yet? You previously claimed the US trained people who would form the Taliban years later. Your one example of an Afghan warlord doesn't even meet your criteria when you were asked to give an example.

The late Robin Cook was quite clear on this issue - and as he was the UK Foreign Secretary and therefore party to state secrets etc, his words carry a lot of credibility.:

Osama bin Laden is no more a true representative of Islam than General Mladic, who commanded the Serbian forces, could be held up as an example of Christianity. After all, it is written in the Qur'an that we were made into different peoples not that we might despise each other, but that we might understand each other.

Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/jul/0 ... evelopment

Robin Cook was a left wing nutjob whose other statements were equally absurd.

Why a British government minister knows 'the truth' and everyone else is muzzled boggles the mind.

He's repeating the discredited mantra that the US armed all the Afghan fighters rather than speaking as an authority with insight knowledge.

But never mind, don't let the circumstances of the quote prevent one from believing it. Your utter stupidity never ceases to amaze me.

Now perhaps Zonker and RC can actually get around to generating an adequate response to my posts or perhaps we can chalk them up as two more casualties of 'common belief' before facts and analysis.

was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.

Wow. A damnable assertion. The US trained 'thousands' of Arabs and not one shred of evidence except in Robin Cook's now rotting mind?

Yeah, ok.

Horizon, have you washed your underpants after previous confusion with Stalingrad and Moscow? I'm going to make a few more kicks.

He-he, It seems that you are one of those armechair scientists, whom we killed in millions in 1812 and 1941-1945.

It seems that all of them had no idea that winter in Russia are always severe, or thought that it was possible to destroy Russia or even Soviet Union in one Blitzkrieg like Poland, France and BEF.

About death parity rate it was severe only in 1941, when unexperienced Red Army had made a fighting retreat during a few months with many encirclements.

In 1942 the situation was improved drastically.

The bloodest battle in the modern history (Battle of Stalingrad) shows pretty similar military losses (The battle took place between 23 August 1942 and 2 February 1943.):

Nazi:
est. 750,000 killed, missing or wounded
91,000 captured

SU:
478,741 killed or missing
650,878 wounded and sick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stalingrad

Well. The pearls are over. You'd better go to school again to fill the white spots in your education. You need systematic learning instead of googling in vein.

It seems that all of them had no idea that winter in Russia are always severe, or thought that it was possible to destroy Russia or even Soviet Union in one Blitzkrieg like Poland, France and BEF.

Either that or the tank divisions entering the Soviet Union penetrated Russian lines so quickly the supply lines couldn't catch up.

About death parity rate it was severe only in 1941, when unexperienced Red Army had made a fighting retreat during a few months with many encirclements.

Woah, the Battle of Kursk, which Hitler went against his Generals's wishes and ordered the Germans to advance into heavily fortified Russian lines, had an attrition rate of 1:4 in favor of the Germans.

I previously said the German/Soviet attrition rate in conventional battles was about 1:5. I'm beginning to think the numbers are actually better for the Germans.

As for Stalingrad, are you presenting that in favor of what I previously said about the Russian winter or against?

Considering Wikipedia writes, "[a]s the Russian winter set in, the 6th Army weakened rapidly from cold, starvation and ongoing Soviet attacks", which is the source of your casualty figures, I assume you take the reasons for the German defeat as accurate.

Now, as for conventional battles between Soviet and German forces, do you dispute the huge attrition rate in almost all battles between German and Soviet forces?

Horizon, it's your job to prove something, not mine. On the other hand for refuting your statement one example is enough. I made an example with the bloodest battle in the modern history, which shows very close losses. Sorry I don't have enough time to discuss every single episode of the WWII.

About winter is the funnest excuse I have ever heard. It was the second winter for German's troops in Russia. They shoud have been more prepared if they hadn't been stupid.

The problem was not the winter but invasion to Russia, the war that was not possible to win.

Just one more example "Operation Bagration".

Compared to other battles, this was by far the greatest Soviet victory in numerical terms. The Red Army liberated a vast amount of Soviet territory (whose population had suffered greatly under the German occupation). The advancing Soviets found cities destroyed, villages depopulated, and much of the population killed, or deported by the occupiers. In order to show the outside world the magnitude of the victory, some 50,000 German prisoners, taken from the encirclement east of Minsk, were paraded through Moscow: even marching quickly and twenty abreast, they took 90 minutes to pass. In a symbolic gesture the streets were washed down afterward.[citation needed]

The German army never recovered from the materiel and manpower losses sustained during this time, having lost about a quarter of its Eastern Front manpower, similar to the percentage of loss at Stalingrad (about 20 full divisions). These losses included many experienced soldiers, NCOs and other officers, which at this stage of the war the Wehrmacht could not replace. The operation was also notable for the number of German generals lost: nine were killed, including two corps commanders; 22 captured, including four corps commanders; Major-General Hahn, commander of 197th Infantry Division disappeared on 24 June, while Lieutenant-Generals Zutavern and Philipp of the 18th Panzergrenadier and 134th Infantry Divisions committed suicide.

Overall, the near-total annihilation of Army Group Centre was very costly for the Germans. Exact German losses are unknown, but newer research indicates around 400,000 overall casualties.[a] Soviet losses were also substantial, with 180,040 killed and missing, 590,848 wounded, together with 2,957 tanks, 2,447 artillery pieces, and 822 aircraft also lost.[details][7]

The offensive cut off Army Group North and Army Group North Ukraine from each other, and weakened them as resources were diverted to the central sector. This forced both Army Groups to withdraw from Soviet territory much more quickly when faced with the following Soviet offensives in their sectors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bagration

symmetric wrote:As for calling someone a "Jew" being the worst insult, its something very common, in all (ANCIENT+MODERN)Middle Eastern cultures, including my very own Emarati and Persian culture. You cannot fight an ancient and very popular/common thing that is deeply rooted among native nations of the Middle East.

You already know it BM, if not then *SNAP* stop being a naive person.
Need not to call me anything, whatever you say is of no value to me.

You're English after all, not an ethnic Hebraic, which is of no value to me EITHER ways.

I don't remember calling you any names Sym, but correct me if I'm wrong and I've never wished death on any of your relatives. How would you feel if I posted that I wished your family was wiped out? I don't think I am naive and I thank God I'm not anything like you, which is a hate filled person.
I know quite a few Arabs actually and thankfully they aren't like you.
How many other faces have you got Sym?

event horizon wrote:Either that or the tank divisions entering the Soviet Union penetrated Russian lines so quickly the supply lines couldn't catch up.

LOL ! The spin never ceases to amuse.

On the other hand for refuting your statement one example is enough.

Please try and act like you're familiar with averages.

I'll repeat what I said lost the war for the Germans:

1) Splitting the military forces to attack three separate targets

2) Russian winters often killed just as many German forces (or more) as the Soviets could

Horizon, it's your job to prove something

Which is? You're not trying to dispute what I said about point #1, are you?

Point #2 can be easily confirmed.

And a look at the battles between the Soviets and Germans can easily confirm that the German-Soviet attrition rate was greater than 1:2, proving that German military losses from non-hostile incidents were a major factor.

There is nothing easy or free at least in Dubai. Confirm if you can. I offered you only two battles with combined German losses more than 1 250 000 and pretty similar losses from Soviet side. Sorry there were not many so bloody battles with losses more that 1 000 000 even on the Eastern Front.

Once more you lame excuse about Russian winter is not acceptable. This event has happend every single year for last 1000 years or even more. I don't know why it was a surprise that it happend in 1812, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945 as well.

By the way, Hitler attacked the Soviet Union on 23d of June 1941. Just for your inf. it was and is summer, not winter, in the Nothern Hemisphere. So what on the earth did winter have in common with Blitzkrieg?