srbknight 925 Posted July 16, 2015 I don't understand any of that. :confused:Don't be absurd. The current Russian Gov. and their manipulated press doesn't equal at all to what Russia is. But yes, I actually love Russia and its incredible history and culture (I already said a few times, that's why I created this thread). You cry for press lol mate look at main western press they are all 99% under government control we don't talk here about my government we choose them for ruling a country what do you want Crazy Zhyrinovski for Russian next president or maybe Navalny that has a great criminal history ! to be honest look what pro-western government in Ukraine did with country before 2014 the country was be success at any aspects now look them bunch of land without profits ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted July 17, 2015 Just checked it, the data is from the english wikipedia:"The number of Serb civilian deaths is disputed—Croatia claims that 214 were killed, while Serbian sources cite 1,192 civilians killed or missing. During and after the offensive, 150,000–200,000 Serbs—or nearly the entire Serb population of the area formerly held by the ARSK—fled and a variety of crimes were committed against the remaining civilians there." (no linked source) "The evacuation and following mass-exodus of the Serbs from the RSK led to a significant humanitarian crisis. In August 1995, the UN estimated that only 3,500 Serbs remained in Kordun and Banovina (former Sector North) and 2,000 remained in Lika and Northern Dalmatia (former Sector South), while more than 150,000 had fled to Yugoslavia, and between 10,000 and 15,000 had arrived in the Banja Luka area.[133] The number of Serb refugees was reported to be as many as 200,000 by the international media[177] and international organizations.[178] Also, 21,000 Bosniak refugees from the former APWB fled to Croatia.[133] After Operation Storm, the Republika Srpska ordered the expulsion of all Croats and Bosniaks from the Banja Luka area,[179] and 22,000 refugees fled to Croatia by the end of August." (linked sources available) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm We slowly turn this thread into a pure Balkan discussion :eek: Yes civilians were killed during Operation storm, however the Serbian claims are completely out of proportion. The Croatian estimate is internationaly viewed as much closer to the truth. The investigations by the Den Hague tribunal also place the number of civilian deaths in a region close to the Croatian estimate. The number of civilian deaths has been described as very low when compared to the scale of the Operation. US forces killed far more civilians in similiar circumstances. Indeed, most civilians fled the Krajina region during OP Storm this has multiple reasons. 1. 5 years of propaganda painted the Croatian military as a horde of bloodthirsty Ustasha nazis hell bend on killing every person of serb nationallity. 2. When the Front collapsed on the first day of OP Storm (not just a part, all of it) the Krajina command issued an order that everybody was to flee the Krajina immediately. Naturally their high command was the first to follow it's own order. 3. After 5 years of war almost every male person older than 16 had been involved in the war, and in very many cases also in war crimes. They knew very well what they had been doing in Bosnia and to Croatian villages and towns inside artillery range. Most families feared retribution and arrests and therefore decided to flee. Serb civilians on the run were actually more harmed by their own army than by the Croatian one. A Serb tank battalion crushed a refugee coloumn under its tracks in a desperate attempt to reach a bridge before beeing cut off. Pursuing Croatian forces couldn't believe what they saw. There is a Youtube video of that crushed coloumn. Soon will be the 20 anniversary of OP storm, that might be a good moment to open a Balkan thread since it will more or less mark 20 years since the end of the war. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 17, 2015 main western press they are all 99% under government control What? Let's see... US NY Times (privately owned) Washington Post (privately owned: by Jeff Bezos, the same as Amazon) Wall Street Journal (privately owned: News Corp) USA Today (privately owned: Gannett Company) CNN (privately owned: Time Warner Inc.) Time Magazine (privately owned: Time Inc) FOX (privately owned: 21st Century Fox) ABC (privately owned: Disney Media Networks) CBS (privately owned: CBS Corporation) NBC (privately owned: Comcast) UK The Guardian (privately owned: Scott Trust Limited) Financial Times (privately owned: Pearson PLC) BBC (state owned) The Daily Telegraph (privately owned: Press Holdings) Sky (privately owned: Sky plc) ITV (privately owned: ITV plc) France Le Monde (La Vie-Le Monde Group) Le Figaro (privately owned: Dassault Group) TF1 (privately owned: Bouygues) France 2 (state owned) Canal+ (privately owned: Vivendi) Germany RTL (privately owned: Bertelsmann SE & Co. KGaA) Der Spiegel (privately owned: Rudolf Augstein) Das Erste (state owned) ZDF (state owned) Tele 5 (privately owned: TMG GmbH) Sky Deutschland (privately owned: Sky Deutschland AG) Italy Mediaset Premium (privately owned: Mediaset) RAI (state owned) Sky Italia (privately owned: BSKYB) Corriere della Sera (privately owned: RCS MediaGroup) La Repubblica (privately owned:Gruppo Editoriale L'Espresso) La7 (privately owned: Telecom Italy) La Stampa (privately owned: FIAT S.p.A, yeah the ones of the cars) Spain La Sexta / Antena 3 (privately owned: Atresmedia) Telecinco / Cuatro (privately owned: Mediaset España) El PaÃs (privately owned: PRISA) El Mundo (privately owned: RCS MediaGroup) La Vanguardia (privately owned: Godo Group) TVE (state owned) Now if you want, we can compare it with the main Russian Media :j:: RT, Former Russia Today (state owned) TASS, former Itar TASS (state owned) Rossiya Segodnya, Former RIA Novosti (state owned) Sputnik News (state owned) Gazprom-Media (privately owned: Gazprom) Russia 1 / 2 / 24 (state owned) Moskva 24 (state owned) Rossiyskaya Gazeta (state owned) Moskovskiye Novosti (state owned) Pravda (privately owned: Communist Party of the RF) So no the Western Media is not controlled by the Govs, unlike the Russian media. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
srbknight 925 Posted July 17, 2015 What? Let's see... US NY Times (privately owned) Washington Post (privately owned: by Jeff Bezos, the same as Amazon) Wall Street Journal (privately owned: News Corp) USA Today (privately owned: Gannett Company) CNN (privately owned: Time Warner Inc.) Time Magazine (privately owned: Time Inc) FOX (privately owned: 21st Century Fox) ABC (privately owned: Disney Media Networks) CBS (privately owned: CBS Corporation) NBC (privately owned: Comcast) UK The Guardian (privately owned: Scott Trust Limited) Financial Times (privately owned: Pearson PLC) BBC (state owned) The Daily Telegraph (privately owned: Press Holdings) Sky (privately owned: Sky plc) ITV (privately owned: ITV plc) France Le Monde (La Vie-Le Monde Group) Le Figaro (privately owned: Dassault Group) TF1 (privately owned: Bouygues) France 2 (state owned) Canal+ (privately owned: Vivendi) Germany RTL (privately owned: Bertelsmann SE & Co. KGaA) Der Spiegel (privately owned: Rudolf Augstein) Das Erste (state owned) ZDF (state owned) Tele 5 (privately owned: TMG GmbH) Sky Deutschland (privately owned: Sky Deutschland AG) Italy Mediaset Premium (privately owned: Mediaset) RAI (state owned) Sky Italia (privately owned: BSKYB) Corriere della Sera (privately owned: RCS MediaGroup) La Repubblica (privately owned:Gruppo Editoriale L'Espresso) La7 (privately owned: Telecom Italy) La Stampa (privately owned: FIAT S.p.A, yeah the ones of the cars) Spain La Sexta / Antena 3 (privately owned: Atresmedia) Telecinco / Cuatro (privately owned: Mediaset España) El PaÃs (privately owned: PRISA) El Mundo (privately owned: RCS MediaGroup) La Vanguardia (privately owned: Godo Group) TVE (state owned) Now if you want, we can compare it with the main Russian Media :j:: RT, Former Russia Today (state owned) TASS, former Itar TASS (state owned) Rossiya Segodnya, Former RIA Novosti (state owned) Sputnik News (state owned) Gazprom-Media (privately owned: Gazprom) Russia 1 / 2 / 24 (state owned) Moskva 24 (state owned) Rossiyskaya Gazeta (state owned) Moskovskiye Novosti (state owned) Pravda (privately owned: Communist Party of the RF) So no the Western Media is not controlled by the Govs, unlike the Russian media. You are really typical Russophobic dude man you are armed with Anti-Russian sentiment arguments like always you can't change yourself to watch another way look this man are you really lazy to understand who is behind US media owners and who are their owners?? Answer: The main owners are same people that you can see in State Department ! P.S. NY Times are owned by known people of American administration ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) You are really typical Russophobic dude man you are armed with Anti-Russian sentiment arguments Again, you are confusing the current Russian Gov. and its controlled media with Russia. It's quite a big and sad mistake. It seems that you don't care much about Russia itself, only about Putin's "Russia". I'm starting to understand why my Russian friends distrust and dislike so much the Serbian immigrants in Russia. who are their owners?? Answer: The main owners are same people that you can see in State Department !P.S. NY Times are owned by known people of American administration ! Do you have names? Proof? Anything? Or it's another product of your imagination? Which US administration are you refering? Obama? G. W. Bush? Bill Clinton? Do all of them owned the NY Times and the rest of US Media? BTW every time that the US Gov changes, do all the US media owners change too? Because your "argument" is really weak if not. According to you that applies also to all the other Western nations. Edited July 17, 2015 by MistyRonin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_lukin 16 Posted July 17, 2015 simple cursory analysis: The New York Times Publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger - a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation from 1939 to 1957 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 17, 2015 simple cursory analysis:The New York Times Publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger - a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation from 1939 to 1957 Ok, you have my attention. What is the conclusion of your analysis? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_lukin 16 Posted July 17, 2015 What is the conclusion of your analysis? It would be naive to believe that there is a independent major media. All major media owned by the state, and the state in close cooperation with the bankers, it's obvious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) It would be naive to believe that there is a independent major media. All major media owned by the state, and the state in close cooperation with the bankers, it's obvious. What? That is really far fetched, to not say absurd. Your conclusion it's true in Russia, and in other authoritarian regimes. In true democracies things work differently. Bankers/Corporations/Holdings may own certain media, and may use them to gain influence in the population or in the Gov. There's always different of that groups conflicting against each other, as well as with other lobbies (that can be from any nature: religious, LGBT, anti-racism, pro-weapons, etc.), each one usually with different media supporting them. Hence you have a lot of public interests colliding to get the attention of the major population to make it to the Parliament. So the media is truly independent. But no, the state don't own all the major media. In fact that's quite a ridiculous statement that prove that you know nothing about democracy. Edited July 17, 2015 by MistyRonin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beastcat 14 Posted July 17, 2015 Now if you want, we can compare it with the main Russian Media :j:: RT, Former Russia Today (state owned) TASS, former Itar TASS (state owned) Rossiya Segodnya, Former RIA Novosti (state owned) Sputnik News (state owned) Gazprom-Media (privately owned: Gazprom) Russia 1 / 2 / 24 (state owned) Moskva 24 (state owned) Rossiyskaya Gazeta (state owned) Moskovskiye Novosti (state owned) Pravda (privately owned: Communist Party of the RF) So no the Western Media is not controlled by the Govs, unlike the Russian media. I'm pretty sure Gazprom counts as state owned as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted July 17, 2015 Indeed it does. Also most f the smaller media isowned by the state or people close to Putin. There are very few independent news outlets in Russia. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
srbknight 925 Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) Indeed it does. Also most f the smaller media isowned by the state or people close to Putin. There are very few independent news outlets in Russia. Moscow times financed by West Radio Free Europe financed by West ---------- Post added at 15:40 ---------- Previous post was at 15:36 ---------- Again, you are confusing the current Russian Gov. and its controlled media with Russia. It's quite a big and sad mistake. It seems that you don't care much about Russia itself, only about Putin's "Russia". I'm starting to understand why my Russian friends distrust and dislike so much the Serbian immigrants in Russia. Do you have names? Proof? Anything? Or it's another product of your imagination? Which US administration are you refering? Obama? G. W. Bush? Bill Clinton? Do all of them owned the NY Times and the rest of US Media? BTW every time that the US Gov changes, do all the US media owners change too? Because your "argument" is really weak if not. According to you that applies also to all the other Western nations. lol man i don't care what couple brainwashed "guys" think about me or my nation Putin Russia lol OBAMAS USA or ANGELA MERKEL EU wth? US GOVERNMENT NEVER CHANGE THEM Known names of presidents of US are Clinton Bush Clinton Bush Bush "obama xD" now again Bush Clinton ! now i can understand why over 75% of Russians will vote for PUTIN again !!! http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/16/politics/obama-putin-iran-nuclear-deal/ Edited July 17, 2015 by SRBKnight Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 17, 2015 lol man i don't care what couple brainwashed "guys" think about me or my nation Putin Russia lol OBAMAS USA or ANGELA MERKEL EU wth? Wasn't your nation supposed to be Serbia? You should probably clarify yourself. :confused: US GOVERNMENT NEVER CHANGE THEM Known names of presidents of US are Clinton Bush Clinton Bush Bush "obama xD" now again Bush Clinton ! now i can understand why over 75% of Russians will vote for PUTIN again !!! Of the ones you mentioned, there's only two Bush presidents (father and son). As today only one Clinton and one Obama. So according to you Bush, Clinton and Obama have the same ideology? And share the same interests? :icon_lol: And you dare to call someone else "brainwashed" :jump_clap: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaOk 112 Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) There is definitely bad movement in EU and USA too, but at least "we" have free press and no troll factories. People shouldnt stuck under one club and get delusional. Open your eyes and be free like a bird, people are the same everywhere. Edited July 17, 2015 by SaOk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_lukin 16 Posted July 17, 2015 Well, as usual, "our democracy is the most democratic, you are slaves of the totalitarian regime, we are good, you bad." :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
srbknight 925 Posted July 17, 2015 Wasn't your nation supposed to be Serbia? You should probably clarify yourself. :confused:Of the ones you mentioned, there's only two Bush presidents (father and son). As today only one Clinton and one Obama. So according to you Bush, Clinton and Obama have the same ideology? And share the same interests? :icon_lol: And you dare to call someone else "brainwashed" :jump_clap: My nationality was Serbian and now my homeland Serbia and Russia you mention that couple dudes have opinion about Serbian "immigrants" We all have job here and we are not immigrants enjoy in life dude !! Yes i can start with you now about brainwashing Who is today CANDIDATE for the US president pls ?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted July 17, 2015 If you immigrated into Russa then yes, you are an immigrant.... Actually there are quite a few potential candidates for the US presidency. Not sure what you are talking about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 18, 2015 (edited) Who is today CANDIDATE for the US president pls ?? No one. Both parties have to do the primary elections to decide who will be their candidate. You should probably read a bit about how presidential candidates are chosen in the U.S.A. In any case, you were talking about presidents not "possible candidates". Russia you mention that couple dudes have opinion about Serbian "immigrants" We all have job here and we are not immigrants enjoy in life dude !! Check your English. Immigrant is who lives in a country that is not his own for a long time, or permanently. Even if he has been living there for 80 years. That you have a job, is implicit, how else would you get a visa to live in Russia? So as long as you don't live in Serbia (your home country) you are an immigrant. Wiktionary: immigrant (plural immigrants)1. A person who comes to a country from another country in order to permanently settle there. Merriam Webster immigrant a : a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence Wikipedia Immigration is the movement of people into a country to which they are not native in order to settle there, especially as permanent residents or future citizens. Edited July 18, 2015 by MistyRonin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Degman 73 Posted July 18, 2015 Serbian "immigrants" We all have job here and we are not immigrants And now classic .. You are delusional. FPDR Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oxmox 73 Posted July 18, 2015 Russian Militants Declared A New ISIS 'State' In Russia's North Caucasus The Islamic State group announced the creation of its northernmost province this week, after accepting a formal pledge of allegiance from former al Qaeda militants in the North Caucasus region of Russia. An Islamic State wilayat, or province, in the autonomous republics of the country’s south may seem far-fetched, but the militant group has been preparing to announce its branch in the Caucasus for months. With the addition of what it calls Wilayat Qawqaz, or Caucasus Province, in a heavily Muslim region of Russia, the group formerly known as either ISIL or ISIS has now declared it has provinces in nine countries outside Iraq and Syria. The creation of a province in the area will help additional fighters make their way to Iraq and Syria, experts said. http://www.ibtimes.com/how-russian-militants-declared-new-isis-state-russias-north-caucasus-1984613 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_lukin 16 Posted July 18, 2015 And now classic .. You are delusional. FPDR Legally, yes, but in fact all the Orthodox Slavs considered as the Russian, unlike neighboring Muslim states. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 18, 2015 Legally, yes, but in fact all the Orthodox Slavs considered as the Russian, unlike neighboring Muslim states. What do you mean? Immigrant in English simply means what I copied above. It does not have anything to do with race, religion, nor anything else. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_lukin 16 Posted July 18, 2015 What do you mean?Immigrant in English simply means what I copied above. It does not have anything to do with race, religion, nor anything else. What is written above, and mean Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted July 18, 2015 What is written above, and mean Hah I asked because I didn't understand what you wrote above. If you would be so kind to clarify it for me. I feel it's gonna be interesting :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_lukin 16 Posted July 18, 2015 Hah I asked because I didn't understand what you wrote above. If you would be so kind to clarify it for me. I feel it's gonna be interesting :) I have written in simple English, it is not clear? attitude to the Orthodox Slavs, and in particular the Serbs in Russia as "our guys" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
