North Korea shells the South, South retaliates

[Baff1 0]

I doubt if they could be any more brainwashed than you are. American children are as heavily indoctrinated as they come. All that flag worshipping in class and talk about democracy...

As far as I can tell, it's not the state they fear will kill them. It's Americans.

Certainly the state encourages this, but then your state encourages you to fear commies and muslims.

The parallels are obvious.

In the end it isn't difficult to brainwash people.

You just tell them what they want to hear.

How their culture is superior. how their political system is superior.

How they are superior.

How free they are.

How foreigners are dangerous mindless killers bent on their destruction.

Works every time.

You don't have to threaten to kill people to make them believe this. Everybody already wants to.

The brainwashing in Nk that struck me the most was that everybody has a state provided radio in every room. You can turn it down but you can't turn it off!

Brainwashed or not, people are still people. They still think what they think, they still believe what they believe and they are still capable of intelligent and diagnostic thought.

They have rocket scientists too. They aren't stupid.

Despite for example that the only reason I drink Coca Cola is because I have been brainwashed by advertising. I still enjoy it.

I quite imagine that like most fo the rest of us, being brainwashed isn't a major inhibition to North Koreans enjoying life.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Baff1

[celery 8]

I doubt if they could be any more brainwashed than you are. American children are as heavily indoctrinated as they come. All that flag worshipping in class and talk about democracy...

Trololololol.

[Tonci87 163]

Let me tell you something Baff. I´am from Croatia, a former communist Country, now I´m living in Germany. I can safely say that i know both sides of the commies vs. the western world stuff. And I can safely say that the people in the western world aren´t really indoctrinated. Maybe they are ignorant, but not brainwashed. In NK its different. They ARE Brainwashed. Half a Century of Brainwashing..... to an extend even Stalin Mao and Hitler could only imagine. What i want to say is that you shouldn´t even try to compare the People in NK to the rest of the World

[CW001 10]

http://axisofeviltour.com/nk-trip1.htm

Well, I thought this was a good read on the subject of NK.

[Big Mac 19]

I doubt if they could be any more brainwashed than you are. American children are as heavily indoctrinated as they come. All that flag worshipping in class and talk about democracy...

As far as I can tell, it's not the state they fear will kill them. It's Americans.

Certainly the state encourages this, but then your state encourages you to fear commies and muslims.

The parallels are obvious.

In the end it isn't difficult to brainwash people.

You just tell them what they want to hear.

How their culture is superior. how their political system is superior.

How they are superior.

How free they are.

How foreigners are dangerous mindless killers bent on their destruction.

Works every time.

You don't have to threaten to kill people to make them believe this. Everybody already wants to.

The brainwashing in Nk that struck me the most was that everybody has a state provided radio in every room. You can turn it down but you can't turn it off!

Brainwashed or not, people are still people. They still think what they think, they still believe what they believe and they are still capable of intelligent and diagnostic thought.

They have rocket scientists too. They aren't stupid.

Despite for example that the only reason I drink Coca Cola is because I have been brainwashed by advertising. I still enjoy it.

I quite imagine that like most fo the rest of us, being brainwashed isn't a major inhibition to North Koreans enjoying life.

And there you go trolling again instead of being a man and admitting when you're wrong... Edited November 28, 2010 by Big Mac

[Baff1 0]

If you have nothing to add mate, the best thing to do is add nothing.

Thanks for the post CW, that was a good read. Mass games is on my list of things to see before I die.

Assuming Pyongyang is still standing for the next one of course.

Those animated screens are simply astounding. 50,000 school kids holding up flash cards.

Thats communism for you.

Each child a pixel!

Edited November 28, 2010 by Baff1

[Big Mac 19]

If you have nothing to add mate, the best thing to do is add nothing.

If all you're going to do is attack me and other Americans because you've been proven wrong then its best if you don't post at all...

[Baff1 0]

You've attacked me and North Koreans in every single post you have made in this thread.

As I see it, If you are man enough to dish it out, you are man enough to be on the receiving end of it too.

I'm not sure what you've proven to me.

I don't feel any differently about the quality of the evidence that suggests which side fired first and I don't feel that the population of North Korea are starving in any way.

Nor do I feel you have provided me any proof or indeed anything even approaching proof for these two statements if that is what you are alluding to.

(My apologies if you are refering to something else).

I've just been watching the news coverage of the South Korean leaders speech and it's left me with the feeling that once again this will all blow over. The North Koreans are making threatening noises as per usual and the U.S. fleet is doing live firing drills.

It just seems like business as usual again.

It's like watching Israel and co at eachother throats all the time. Business as usual. A load of new headlines that catch the worlds attention again, but never any solutions. just an ongoing stalemate.

It's my opinion that should this ever turn into a full on war that the most sensible solution for the U.S. would be to pre-emptively drop an atom bomb on them. I just think they are all too fanatical to give up without causing immense damage otherwise.

I think that as much as they are all nutjobs they must realise that this is a strong possiblity with the U.S. involved and hence nothing more is going to happen for a while.

Unless during these exercises some hot head or numbnuts makes a massive mistake I suppose.

I also can't make up my mind whether China's desire for de-escalation is a more sensible one than SK and the U.S.'s show of strength. I think there is sound reasoning for both.

One thing is for sure, if a war breaks out there, I don't want to see my own troops deployed to it this time. I don't think we are ready for it and I don't think it's an area of particular intrest to us.

On the diplomatic front, assuming no war is in the offing, I think this is pretty good for America. They will be winners out of this fracas. SK has been pretty close to kicking them out over the years. I think they will be enjoying more SK domestic political support and perhaps even Japanese support for housing their troops there (and in Okinawa) than they have been in some time.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Baff1

[Big Mac 19]

You've attacked me and North Koreans in every single post you have made in this thread.

As I see it, If you are man enough to dish it out, you are man enough to be on the receiving end of it too.

What else did you expect? Did you really think anyone was going to take you seriously when you defend a country like NK? I personally think you don't believe 90% of what you post and you do it only because you're a troll who's looking to get a rise out of people instead of having a intelligent debate..

[binkster 0]

I doubt if they could be any more brainwashed than you are. American children are as heavily indoctrinated as they come. All that flag worshipping in class and talk about democracy...

As far as I can tell, it's not the state they fear will kill them. It's Americans.

Certainly the state encourages this, but then your state encourages you to fear commies and muslims.The parallels are obvious.

In the end it isn't difficult to brainwash people.

You just tell them what they want to hear.

How their culture is superior. how their political system is superior.

How they are superior.

How free they are.

How foreigners are dangerous mindless killers bent on their destruction.

Works every time.

You don't have to threaten to kill people to make them believe this. Everybody already wants to.

The brainwashing in Nk that struck me the most was that everybody has a state provided radio in every room. You can turn it down but you can't turn it off!

Brainwashed or not, people are still people. They still think what they think, they still believe what they believe and they are still capable of intelligent and diagnostic thought.

They have rocket scientists too. They aren't stupid.

Despite for example that the only reason I drink Coca Cola is because I have been brainwashed by advertising. I still enjoy it.

I quite imagine that like most fo the rest of us, being brainwashed isn't a major inhibition to North Koreans enjoying life.

Im American and as I went through "Public School" I dont remember being taught to fear Communist and Muslims...

1st through 3rd grade we were taught the National Anthem and The Pledge of Allegiance. In learning this there was no politics lol... We just were taught to memorize it.

If I remember right we were taught the different types of government structures demc... Communism... ect...

We were taught about Freedom and how a Communist government opposed that. For example, Utopia would be the perfect Communist government but Utopia Never happens.

Our government nor our teachers never taught us to fear muslims. There are plenty of racist/stereotypes because of what has happen in the past.

Sounds to me you have been brainwashed to hate Americans. Our government isnt perfect but whos is? I sure would choose Democracy over Communism but then again democracy isnt perfect either.

[spooky lynx 73]

Currently defeat of NK regime isn't appreciated much: US will lose one of the most effective way to sell arms in East Asian region because of 'mad communist dictator', SK will became bankrupt after reunion with its northern relative (too much money is needed to bring North's economy and infrastructure to modern standarts). Having constant enemy is the best way to have military bases, trade arms and remain 'elder brother that will defend you all from that northern fanatics'. I doubt much that SK's economy will be able to provide those who live in the North with all social benefits that have Koreans in the South. Southern Korea is not ready for this.

[Big Mac 19]

Currently defeat of NK regime isn't appreciated much: US will lose one of the most effective way to sell arms in East Asian region because of 'mad communist dictator', SK will became bankrupt after reunion with its northern relative (too much money is needed to bring North's economy and infrastructure to modern standarts). Having constant enemy is the best way to have military bases, trade arms and remain 'elder brother that will defend you all from that northern fanatics'. I doubt much that SK's economy will be able to provide those who live in the North with all social benefits that have Koreans in the South. Southern Korea is not ready for this.

One question, why would we need to keep NK there to sell weapons? Most of the weaponry SK and Japan use they build themselves and even if they didn't that doesn't mean they'd stop buying from us if they didn't have NK to contend with, because that leaves two very big countries; China and Russia. Still to sell weapons to a country doesn't mean they need to have an aggressive neighbor. Some countries just like to have a well oiled army, because a well oiled army means you have respect on the international scene.

You say that having a constant enemy is the best way to keep a military base in someone else's country. We still have bases in Germany, Italy, and the UK but the cold war is over and has been for nearly 20 years.

As for being "big bro" I think you have it wrong. Naturally a yes or no from the the US on something can have a large impact on the decision making the SK government but in the end the choice is theirs; not ours.

Oh and Spooky if you were living in a small country who had to be on constant watch for an invasion wouldn't you want some serious back up from a country that's way bigger? The SKs like most countries are divided on many issues and one of them in the presence of American troops in SK, but if the NKs came rolling across the DMZ they'd want our help and need our help.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Big Mac

[-Snafu- 78]

In 1945, Britain still sourced it's external food requirements from the Commonwealth countries, not Europe.

in 1955 rationing had absolutely nothing to do with available food supply any more than it did in 1940, it did not take Europe 10 years to agriculturally recover and the Commonwealths infrastructure was never destroyed.

In WW2, the problem was not the availability of food supply, it was getting it here past all the Uboats and also.. paying for it.

The U.K.'s trade dependancy on Europe is a relatively modern occourance. Food dependancy in particular is a new one brought on by EU regulation.

There was no famine in the UK during WW2, but all it would have taken was a crop failure at that time and there would have been.

There was quite a serious food crisis in post war Europe and you will find it mentioned in almost any general history of WW2. You underestimate the damage caused by WW2. Continental Europe became a battleground where millions of people died (labour shortage) and production was very adversely effected.

In 1939 the UK had to bring in 70% of its food from overseas but the push for agricultural production meant that this could be brought down to the bare minimum (Source: Storm of War by Andrew Roberts). At this moment I am looking at a Cabinet report from April 1945 where the colonies and dominions were suffering food shortages of their own. I don't have my hands on the necessary documents but it seems to me that Brazil, the US and Argentina were more important than the empire during the war and immediate post-war period as food producers. (Source: REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 1945 FOR THE DOMINIONS, INDIA, BURMA AND THE COLONIES AND MANDATED TERRITORIES)

With agricultural production in Europe ruined supplies were brought across from the Atlantic but many rations in the German urban centres were well below 1,000 calories per day. Only in 1948 did food rations begin to improve. (Source: The Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze) Indeed, a Cabinet report produced in February 1945 stated that, 'Of the chief foods only wheat will be available in abundance. Meat, canned fish, fats, sugar and dairy produce (butter, cheese, canned milk and milk powder) will, in face of increasing demands, be in shorter supply than ever before.' (Source: WORLD FOOD SUPPLIES, 1945. MEMORANDUM BY THE MINISTER OF FOOD)

It really did take years for the world to recover post-1945. The post-war period was quite bloody despite the lack of a war. Still, I am at a loss as to why this is being discussed as it has no relation to the famine in the DPRK.

My observations on the sources of the NK famine come from the interviews I have seen given by North Koreans.

There are interviews of people who say the opposite. These are just individual perspectives, however, and do not give you a big picture. The life of a party member in Pyongyang is completely different to that of a rural farmer. I would appreciate it if you could post these interviews.

I haven't read any studies.

Why not? They are pretty interesting and useful.

I listened to people who had reason to know, and what they said was making sense. Given that it broadly mirrored what I had learnt of the Ukrainian and Ethopian famines and what you have just told me about the Irish one.

It 'makes sense' despite the fact you openly admit your knowledge of the DPRK is limited? As with WW2 these events that are not directly comparable.

Bearing in mind the state of political repression in North Korea, the fact that they were openly allowed to criticise the NK government (who they described as "we") as the greatest factor in this, and that this part of the interview was not censored by the state, leads me to believe that what they said was probably true.

They have no reason to lie other than fear of state reprisal and clearly the state of NK offers none for this subject and openly recognises it's mistakes. Despite whatever studies you may have read, I truely believe that the people best positioned to understand the causes of the that famine where those people it happened to.

The DPRK openly admitted they were in the middle of a famine in 1996 in order to receive food aid from the world (including ROK). They are still quite reliant on food aid to this day.

With great respect, studies conducted by NK's enemies, SK and America into this are probably the most bias and least credable ones I could imaginably expect to read.

In what way are the authors of these studies the DPRKs enemies?

Also the ones with the least available information to base their judgements on. Nk is not reknowned for it's co-operation with enemy intelligence agencies.

I am not sure what these international studies have to do with intelligence agencies. Perhaps you can shed some light on this?

I would also concur that the NK government was not willing to give up the level of control it has over it's country in return for foreign food relief. But then.. neither was Churchill.

They received, in fact still receiving, food aid from other nations. Loosening political control was not a condition to be met to receive aid.

They are proper commies. All in it together.

Evidently not as you say below.

The urbanites certainly get better treatment than the peasants. Living in Pyonyang is a privildge. They have a class system, peasant class, academic class, military class etc.

But I will hold with my observation. There is no obvious signs of long term malnitrition in North Koreans. No physical deformities. Rickets etc. Not in the cities and not in the villages. As bad the famine was, it clearly didn't last too long. If you look at pictures of Ethiopians for example they are often all bow legged and hobbled. Their famine must have been much more severe.

Your observation is based on nothing but a few interviews. As you said earlier information is not readily available so I am surprised as to how you can come to this conclusion.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Snafu

[KEVINMGXP 20]

@Snafu

go Snafu :D the only reason i still read this is because of the counter post all over and over :rolleyes:

[Rovka 14]

Perhaps an idea to close down this thread? As far as I can tell to what I've seen happening here, this is beginning to look like a 'wrong-right' childish accusation show. Aren't there already too many wars yet? Do people really have to fight amongst themselves, due to sabre-rattling of political nature?

In the end the bottomline is: We can fit and hiss all we want on this forum, or elsewhere, but that isn't going to change a thing about any situation, be it in past, present, or the future. How ridiculous is this: Feeding a forum-war about a a potential war.. *face-plant*

[moleman657 10]

This may have already been said (I didn't have time to read all 14 pages of this thread), but in the documents released by Wikileaks there was one that stated that China wanted a unified Korea under the control of the South.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea

[Tonci87 163]

Now this is interesting. Maybe NK will stop the Bull shit when there isn´t China to back them up

[nodunit 397]

Maybe, I wonder how the jong family will take this and wether or not the leader will take action again the US or china, hopefully not a "if I'm going down you are going down with me"

[wipman 1]

Hi, i think that the North Korea's leaders and high rank military officers had to knew already about the "ideas" or wishes of the chinese republic; they deal and talk with each other and im sure that they talk in the same way and with the same language that the good fellas, cursing... swearing... and speaking as franlky as they can without reach the threat border.

Someone remembers Henry Kissinger taking off his shoe and hitting the table in the middle of a public audience on the U.N.?, imagine how this kind of people reach agreements and how they talk with each other when there isn't any camera in front.

Nothing of this is new and it's well known on certain circles.

About NK vs SK... i doubt that the NK's leaders want to enter in war because they know that they're alone and their only getaway seems to be a forward getaway creating a small escalate on the zone don't wanting to go to an open war and being sure that the rest of the players "on the game" don't gonna/want to be the ones who throw the first rock. Assuming this as true... all what i can do is send my condolences to the familys of the two dead Marines on the NK's strike. Let's C ya

[spooky lynx 73]

One question, why would we need to keep NK there to sell weapons? Most of the weaponry SK and Japan use they build themselves and even if they didn't that doesn't mean they'd stop buying from us if they didn't have NK to contend with, because that leaves two very big countries; China and Russia. Still to sell weapons to a country doesn't mean they need to have an aggressive neighbor. Some countries just like to have a well oiled army, because a well oiled army means you have respect on the international scene.

The huge difference is in amounts of selling: while there's some mad commie regime with ballistic missiles next door, the amount of arms trade will much greater than somewhere in more peaceful region. That's the answer to your question. Some countries like to have well equipped army, you're right. But some of them buy and upgrade weapons when they have ability and others have to do it more often because there is 'axis of evil' country nearby.

You say that having a constant enemy is the best way to keep a military base in someone else's country. We still have bases in Germany, Italy, and the UK but the cold war is over and has been for nearly 20 years.

Countries you mentioned are members of NATO, like US. BTW, I have no idea why new military bases (incl. Anti-missile) in east european countries are planned as they won't provide any help neither in 'war with terrorism' nor in war with Iran. And yes, formally cold war is over so I don't know the reason why all that bases are still exist. Russia withdrew all its forces from Europe and disbanded all bases but why USA doesn't do the same? Oh, don't answer to this, because new offtopic holywar will start:)

As for being "big bro" I think you have it wrong. Naturally a yes or no from the the US on something can have a large impact on the decision making the SK government but in the end the choice is theirs; not ours.

Oh sure theirs:rolleyes: I fully believe in it.

Oh and Spooky if you were living in a small country who had to be on constant watch for an invasion wouldn't you want some serious back up from a country that's way bigger? The SKs like most countries are divided on many issues and one of them in the presence of American troops in SK, but if the NKs came rolling across the DMZ they'd want our help and need our help.

Well, Israel is among the countries that has very unfriendly neighbours who would like to 'throw the jews into the sea'. But did it ever ask for military help to another countries or for establishing foreign military bases as back up?

[vilas 477]

Someone remembers Henry Kissinger taking off his shoe and hitting the table in the middle of a public audience on the U.N.?,

Nikita Chrooshchov ;)

Well, Israel is among the countries that has very unfriendly neighbours who would like to 'throw the jews into the sea'. But did it ever ask for military help to another countries or for establishing foreign military bases as back up?

but whole US foreign politics shows that no need to put US base in Israel , just all US foreign actions in this areas are to protect Israel

Edited December 1, 2010 by vilas

[spooky lynx 73]

but whole US foreign politics shows that no need to put US base in Israel , just all US foreign actions in this areas are to protect Israel

I can say the same about SK, Japan, all European countries. But there's no significant decrease of military bases in them.

Edited December 1, 2010 by Spooky Lynx

[vilas 477]

BigMac and some Americans (not only in this topic) show that they not see that propaganda is on both sides

i also lived in communist country,not dictatorship like NK

but i know what i had seen in west movies (how horrible is our life) and my parents laughing seeing such movies

i remember some scenes from McGyver, when he was in east block as undercover, hahahaha,

or now young people say bullshit like "everyone was keeping toothbrush in pocket cause could be arrested anytime"

propaganda works both sides

for one side they show "look , ugly dictator, starvation" from other side you see people living in poor conditions, but not worse than homeless people on streets of capitalistic states, with health care etc.

i don't know about NK everyday life, i know that in my country it was not as bad as your movies show it and your propaganda do not show :

- free of charge flat in many cases

- free of charge education

- free of charge medicine

why propaganda not show this ? cause propaganda is in the rich hands, when you make another country system fall - you will sell there your products and have low payed employees (saying that you came to bring freedom)

why such McGyver or other spy-like movies won't show you my childhood ?

many of you had to work hard since 15, enlist 17 loosing all young time in life

i enjoyed playing footbal with friends , i was going to mountains from Employers Holidays Found

i get with my mother free flat , after my father left family and we had no money

if i was living with my mother in your "freedom" we would die on street

why your propaganda not show this ?

cause you all have such people on the street thinking it is normal - not something evil to fight

maybe in NK situation is bad, but when i see homeless people , shooting in Oakland, Columbine, Sicko, unemployed than who have worse life ? who need action to help ?

third world , but why noone attack liberal-capitalist governments in other Asia/Africa/LatinAmerican countries, where poverty is majority ?

go and attack those governments , than NK in next order

in NK there can be evil regime, but what is difference comparing to people living in other "free" countries armed with M113 and M16 ?

favelas ? Africans without medicine and single pill, water, people in Sierra Leone (if i remember correctly)

propaganda is on both sides, when i watch TV i see how TV changes and twist informations

i know that 2 channels can show opposite informations

on one channel man A is bad mad hunter of man B, on other channel man B is bad and A is good and victim

do media - owned by the rich, big companies, concerns , governments - will tell truth ? or will tell just what is useful to reach goal of owner

what people think about "bad regime" of my country looking from 20 years perspective ?

for 47% - better now politically among them only 24% satisfied with economical situation and changes

for 16 % - worse now and completely not satisfied

for 30% - the same

so... when you look at profits of society - only quoter see significant profits

so people are brainwashed by communism, or see unemployment, corruption, gangs, criminal acts, homeless, worse medical treatment, worse condition of work/job, lack of safety... etc.

what will show such US report about my country ? few young rich people satisfied working in corporation ??? or maybe man who cheated, made big money and says now "he can build company and develop it"

will they show waiting in long queue to doctor, and doctor say "i have limit for money, i cannot help you" ? will it show dying man cause ambulance had no money on fuel ? will it show burglar free cause payed money to judge ? will it show queue for low junk-job ?

TV, propaganda - do not believe all you see, be skeptical not ignorant, no matter if TV is from NK regime or US company - it can both twist information, change it,

i believe more in those what some people here said = for noone this war is profit, keeping enemy, showing muscles = pay attention, get UN money, SK also should be less provocative (as it was told few times to provoke by excersizes )

cause it can look like in Cold War

"no , we not invade other territory, it is false accusation" and few days later U2 plane shot down on territory of USSR

Edited December 1, 2010 by vilas

[Big Mac 19]

The huge difference is in amounts of selling: while there's some mad commie regime with ballistic missiles next door, the amount of arms trade will much greater than somewhere in more peaceful region. That's the answer to your question. Some countries like to have well equipped army, you're right. But some of them buy and upgrade weapons when they have ability and others have to do it more often because there is 'axis of evil' country nearby.

As I already stated the majority of their weapons are not bought anymore. They may still buy missiles and bombs, but the amount would not change unless war broke out.

Countries you mentioned are members of NATO, like US. BTW, I have no idea why new military bases (incl. Anti-missile) in east european countries are planned as they won't provide any help neither in 'war with terrorism' nor in war with Iran. And yes, formally cold war is over so I don't know the reason why all that bases are still exist. Russia withdrew all its forces from Europe and disbanded all bases but why USA doesn't do the same? Oh, don't answer to this, because new offtopic holywar will start

You ask why we're building ABM bases in eastern europe. Maybe it has to do with Russia trading a communist dictatorship for a ultra-nationalist one. Maybe it's because Russia is invading countries that are in the process of gaining full membership into NATO. Maybe it's because of something that has nothing to do with what I just listed. In short I don't know nor do I care. I don't fully agree with the ABM bases, but at the same time I also know that ABMs provide a balance of power which in all honestly is a lot better than what you had to deal with during the cold war which was tactical nukes ready to strike in the event of a Russian launch.

BTW Russia didn't withdraw it was kicked out there's a difference. Learn your history.

Oh sure theirs I fully believe in it.

Considering since the end of the cold war the US has downsized it's role in SK and turned over primary security of the JSA and the DMZ to the SKs you should believe in it.

Well, Israel is among the countries that has very unfriendly neighbours who would like to 'throw the jews into the sea'. But did it ever ask for military help to another countries or for establishing foreign military bases as back up?

That's comparing apples to oranges friend. We don't have a formal alliance with Israel that we have with SK.

I can say the same about SK, Japan, all European countries. But there's no significant decrease of military bases in them.

Wrong buddy. We have an alliance with all of those nations and we are downsizing our combat forces in europe, but quite frankly a lot of americans much rather keep what combat forces we have there since russia is invading countries such as georgia who are allies of the US and because it's a very nice posting. I personally think it's worth the expense given the behavior of your country. As I said before with your country's track record you do not need to be trying to claim a moral high ground over NATO or America. Edited December 2, 2010 by Big Mac

[vilas 477]

ooo you say about Russia invading Georgia

now even in Poland we know that we were cheated by propaganda and TV, and it was Georgia who first attacked using military (i not say about separatist movement in Osetia)

i put my long post to some of US to understand that TV can lie

now i see you say that Russia attacked Georgia first ? it was Georgia who attacked Osetia first , when Osetia said it wants to join Russia

Poland was also active politically, now we know - we were cheated by informations given by mainstream liberal media , cause it was Georgia who shot first bullet, not Russia who answered

there are even YT movies with famous journalist who say that his report was twisted upside down for political pro-US reasons (that journalist was always anti-Russian, so if he defends Russia - it must be something really serious )

Georgia attacked Osetia (who was separative), but whole Poland was informed by TV that Russia attacked Georgia, in 2008 we had opposite informations from media

just like "Serbs killed Albanians" and "oops , sorrry, one word was missing, Serbs killed BY Albanians", BY make difference , BY is matter of TV propaganda

Edited December 2, 2010 by vilas