A Russian patriot (my friend) speaks...

[BURKE89]

So, Vaughn:

War in Iraq has began. Who in America supports this war? What is the Nationalist...?

Here in Russia main part of population is against this war, only some mad liberals support Bush's politic. Even mainstream newspapers had malevolent reaction on American casualties; the titles of articles in newspapers were like "Now USA will reconize what is Chechnenian war looks like". Western media was so ironical speaking about problems of the Russian army in Chechnya. But that war was on Russian territory, so we couldn't use bombs and rockets there, in 1995 Groznyy was one of the best city-fortress after WW2, Russian army had to fight against Chechenians (brilliant guerilla troops, in fact Chechenian and Karabah army are only two effective armies in Caucaus region) in mountains covered by forests - the best landscape for guerilla warfare. So, what we got now in Iraq? Americans in fact had no true experience of cityfight and guerilla war, American army was not ready for close combat even with army that is much weaker. The other problem is that Americans depend too much on technology.

So, Pat (Buchanan) was truly right in his article. Those imperialistic tendencies will kill America as they killed USSR.

Bright lad, as well as my Russian friend...

Vaughn

[DanM]

... in response to A Russian patriot  (my friend) speaks..., posted by BURKE89 on Mar 30, 2003

I gotta agree with the other posts. All I see is an angry guy with very dark hopes and predictions. Maybe he is a bright lad, but I really do not see proof for it in this post. Sorry.

Now lets look at some of his statements.

Your friend said, "Who in America supports this war?"

Last time I checked, national opinion polls showed 78% of Americans support the war. Of course there is a margin of error of plus or minus 4%.

Your friend said, "Western media was so ironical speaking about problems of the Russian army in Chechnya. But that war was on Russian territory, so we couldn't use bombs and rockets there, in 1995 Groznyy was one of the best city-fortress after WW2, Russian army had to fight against Chechenians (brilliant guerilla troops, in fact Chechenian and Karabah army are only two effective armies in Caucaus region) in mountains covered by forests - the best landscape for guerilla warfare. "

Well that was a mouthful. As for the "restraint" shown by the Russian Army, lets just go on the internet and look up pictures of Grozny after the Russian army seized it. Call me crazy, but all of that rubble was not strictly the result of messy Chechens. The Russian army used heavy artillery bombardment for an extended period of time on "Russian territory" and "Russian citizens". As for the Western media being so "ironical", it had to do with things like Russian draft dodgers, the poor state of training of Russian recruits, lack of consistent payment of wages to troops, brutal treatment of the civilian population, etc. We faulted the Russian government for its brutal war that severely punished the Chechen civilians and we faulted the Russian government of its poor care of its own soldiers.

No one is questioning the intelligence or bravery of individual Russian soldiers. I have nothing but respect for the Russian fighting man. Its only that the military and civilian leadership in Russia failed these brave men terribly. These guys were not given a real chance to win. They were just thrown in a meat grinder with little training or leadership. Yes the Chechens are good fighters and no one is disputing that fact. We only dispute the contention that the Russian army, in its current form, is comparable to the American army. That is where I think your friend's comparion of Iraq the Chechnya has trouble holding up. Until the Russian leadership addresses problems with soldiers pay, logistics, training and morale, there really is no comparison between our two armed forces. Sorry.

Your friend said, "Americans in fact had no true experience of cityfight and guerilla war, American army was not ready for close combat even with army that is much weaker."

What is his basis for making such absolute statements about the military readiness of the American military. Is he armed with anything other than a few Russian newspaper articles? What can your friend tell us about American training, equipment or tactics with regards to American Army capabilities with respect to cityfighting? What does he see as our specific weaknesses? Does he have any suggestions on how these weaknesses can be improved? Although everyone is entitled to an opinion, your friend's opinion seems to be grounded more in a negative bias towards the USA than in facts. Just my opinion. : )

As for American technology, I think any soldier would love to benefit from the support our guys receive. Once again, just my opinion.

I am not saying all these things to tweak you, I am just trying to point out how your friend's argument seems more emotional than factual. As for his feelings, I think they are pretty clear.

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: A Russian patriot  (my friend) speak..., posted by DanM on Mar 31, 2003

for your cogent response, DanM.

I agree with many things you've said; but, I've but, 3-hours of sleep -prior to border-checks (Mexico)- so, manana... for a counter-arguement.

Disgruntled, exhausted, tired... tax-paying - AMERICAN.

[DanM]

... in response to Thank you..., posted by BURKE89 on Apr 4, 2003

and get some sleep when you can. : )

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: A Russian patriot  (my friend) speak..., posted by DanM on Mar 31, 2003

is mis-directed - DanM.

He's a Russian, who doesn't speak our tounge as well as you (he didn't insult & gives a realistic evaluation of our abilities. Oil good ... Empire bad).

I can't speak for a young Russian doctor; however, he didn't insult our nation nor its soldiers. Yes, because he respects America's early institutions, very, very much. Yes -again-, the Russian soldier and "Vet" has been treated horribly; but, this isn't a new concept - nor mentioned in his "simple paragraph."

Yet, you played upon that theme to no end.

Kinda odd...

Why?

[DanM]

... in response to Your anger..., posted by BURKE89 on Apr 1, 2003

Although many things over the past 2 months have angered me, I promise you that your friend's statements did not anger me. I answered specific points of his post with my own opinions. After reading my post two more times, I do not see the anger that you mentioned. I simply pointed out the inconsistencies in some of the statements and commented on an apparent emotional bias that was perceived by many. Check the other posts in the thread if you do not believe me.

As for playing upon some theme to no end, I am at a loss. I understand you are trying to refute my response to the original post and I understand that talking about my "anger" is an easy and convenient way to do so. I just don't think you are on track. Your accusation of anger seems more like an emotional response akin to name calling than a reasonable discussion of points and counter points.

I completely agree he did not give a realistic evaluation of our abilities, but he sure did speak with a lot of certainty and confidence when he talked about the problems our military would face and the deficiencies of our armed forces. If, as you say, he was misunderstood, then you should have clarified the post for us instead of just telling us how much you agreed with him. Kinda odd to me that you didn’t do that. : )

Yes I know the concept of mistreated Russian soldiers is not a new one. Been around for several hundred years that I know of. Maybe more. It was relevant to my point, however, of saying that a direct comparison between the abilities of the American and Russian armies is not accurate. That is why I introduced the topic.

Please read my post again, because I really would like to understand the basis of your view of my "angry" post described in the title of your response to my post.

[Scaught]

... in response to A Russian patriot  (my friend) speaks..., posted by BURKE89 on Mar 30, 2003

It sounds like your friend wishes our destruction and failure to free the Iraqis from the brutal dictatorship. He would take delight in another Vietnam for us. He's certainly entitled to his dark opinion. With friends like that, who needs enemies or the U.N.?

We are in Iraq to effect a regime change. We want a regime that will not sponsor terrorism and create weapons of mass destruction. Look for conspiracies, if you must, but that's the bottom line. The Iraqis will have a shot to be like us-- have democracy. They will have one good shot at joining the modern western civilization of 2003. If I were a typical Iraqi (but not a Baath party butcher), I would thank god for this invasion. But if they aren't ready for democracy, they and the world must realize that a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity came their way on a silver platter marked with their initials and they blew it. If they insist on continuing to be barbarians, fine, very lovely in a politically correct world in which no one is wrong and no one is right and the world is all grey; however, the barbarians won't be allowed to exist anymore armed with chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. If it is imperialistic to insist that countries not sponsor terrorism, then we need a lot more imperialism in the world. Tons more. We need imperialism in every nook and cranny of this world.

After we deal with Iraq (give us at least a couple months to bring the Baath Party to its knees), Russia can stand by on the sidelines and watch us effect regime changes in Iran, North Korea, and other rogue nations. They can root for the terrorists while we clean house. Our allies will reap the rewards-- that means Russia can have a few gristly scraps from the table, which is what they've earned.

The Russian military by all accounts is a complete joke. They equipped Iraq-- to Iraq's detriment. Russian-made passe crap is getting blown away daily by the U.S. forces. The Russians after a decade, could never operationally figure out how to fight the stone age Afghanis. We cleaned their clocks in a few weeks and overthrew the government. They had better make peace with the folks in Grozny, because that's what you have to do when your military is a joke.

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: An American patriot responds..., posted by Scaught on Mar 30, 2003

Scaught,

My mate, you might be right, is concerned with his own nation - as I with mine - U.S.A.

I take Washington's axioms to heart - very deeply.

Yet, I don't wish to slam our values down their Arab gullets - do you?

Vaughn

[DanM]

... in response to Re: Re: An American patriot responds..., posted by BURKE89 on Mar 30, 2003

What are Arab values? How are we displacing these values by removing a brutal dictator whose hero was Joseph Stalin?

I don't think Arab values support throwing civillians into a woodchipper in an effort to terrorize its own population. I don't think Arab values support droping battery acid from helecopters onto protesters. I don't think Arab values support the use of chemical and biological weapons upon the citizens of ones own country. I don't think Arab values are personified by such a brutal dictator or his thugs. I give the Arabs a lot more credit than that. The Arab culture contains all the good and bad possibilities within the spectrum of human behavior.

By opposing a sadistic dictator, we are not opposing the Arab culture. We are only protecting ourselves and trying to help give these people a voice in their own destiny. We are saying that a representative government can give the Arab culture more ways to express the positive sides of itself. No one is saying they have to eat McDonalds, watch MTV or even be our friend. We just want these people to have a voice in their own government, because we believe this will be a more humane and constructive government.

Please elaborate on how our removal of Sadam equates to our slamming our values down their gullet. Maybe I am missing something here. At the very least, I would appreciate your clarification.

Thanks.

[Scaught]

... in response to Re: Re: An American patriot responds..., posted by BURKE89 on Mar 30, 2003

I am totally with you-- I know that "slamming our values down their gullets" won't work. They will have an opportunity for democracy, but I certainly do expect them to completely blow it. But as long as the new regimes don't produce weapons of mass destruction, they'll have nothing to worry about from us, and we'll leave them alone. They can live in the middle ages for as long as they wish, as long as their weapons stay from the time of the middle ages, as well.

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: Re: Re: An American patriot responds..., posted by Scaught on Mar 31, 2003

is their own choice - not ours, in the slighest.

So, Scaught, I agree with you... almost.

I fear a scenario similar to what the gents in Serbia, in 1914, created. Basic logic doesn't dictate: a secular and brutal leader in charge of three distinct, and proud nationalities to "play nice."

I smell, well, a couple of hundred thousand refugees from our conquest (neat). In reality: I think a sound portion of Iraqui immigration would be sound, yet...

PS. Do read Eric S. Margolis ( He's a nice Jewish fellow, unlike myself). However, I can't find a more talented lad (writer) anywhere, regarding the entire region (He has been associated with the 'sane' Arab anti-coms & balanced folks... for years).

Goggle the lad...

Regards, Vaughnn

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: Re: Re: An American patriot responds..., posted by Scaught on Mar 31, 2003

[This message has been edited by BURKE89]

Improper tenor...

[micha1]

... in response to A Russian patriot  (my friend) speaks..., posted by BURKE89 on Mar 30, 2003

Vaughn,
got to agree with you, somewhat,
while I was thinking to myself that, if I did remember what I was thought in my sociology class, a long time
ago, that social change can't be planned in backroom or boiler room, organize changes, fabricated changes...etc..
are what they are, organize and fabricated.
Real social change, you never know when they will start and when they will finish.
The best example I can give here, to my friend from the south of the 45th.
One night, an age lady, who was very tired having work all day, decided to sit in a seat of bus, where she was
not supposed to.
And all hell broke loose, nothing could stop what she had started.
She had not plan this and was the last person, anyone would have pick to turn  a country around.
This,  after all the supposed to be heavyweight and mighty had broken their fingernails and never made a dent
in the shield of segregation.

This why, I am scare like hell, when someone thinks that he can bring democracy, to a country.
the same way, one  brings flowers to the lady of the house when invited for dinner.

Perhaps, your man Pat, would do a good job, who knows.
May be, he'll get his chance again.  He must have learn something from the last time.

This is after Hilary leaves the White House, in 2012.

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: A Russian patriot  (my friend) speak..., posted by micha1 on Mar 30, 2003

Patrick's monetary scenario: is 00000000000000.01 against anyone. It's principle: right or wrong.

It's a Nader concept ( I hate that SOB, but I respect his courage to fight the "machine," -Patrick cost Bush... four states, too). Of course, nobody would tell you that, either. However, it happened!

Now, this 'Hilary' stuff in 3042......  Well, they have  4,000 times more $$$$$$$$$ than us 'evil' lads. At least, less than the 25,000 times of Bush - more than PAT - last time around!

Vaughn

PS. We have no $. So, help us!!!

[Frank O]

... in response to A Russian patriot  (my friend) speaks..., posted by BURKE89 on Mar 30, 2003

They were at war with Afghanistan for who knows how long & couldn't finish them off. We did it in what a couple of weeks or months? Saddam I don't think will be around in 2 weeks. He could possibly already be dead or close to it. Even if he is healthy as an ox he WILL be out VERY soon. Man we haven't even been at war 2 WEEKS!!! Amazing how quickly people raise their standards when it comes to us. I think many foreigners are HOPING we'll fail. Aint' gonna happen. You can bank on that.