VERSIONS: روسيا اليوم NOTICIAS FREEVIDEO ИНОТВ RTД
live

Schedule Where to Watch 

breakingnews
Go to main page   Community   Forums   Top News   Georgia-Russia wrangle: who’s right?  
   
Georgia-Russia wrangle: who’s right?
andrew 18 September, 2008, 23:16 DEAR DAVID, NARCOTICS THATS FUNNY, I AM A FATHER OF 3 WHO OWNS A HOUSE OUT IN THE COUNTRY,AND LIVES IN PENNSYLVANIA. DID YOU KNOW OUR DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT TO BE IS BLACK.YA I KNOW THAT STEROID GUY IN CALIFORNIA WORKED YOU OVER.WHERE ARE YOU FROM,I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW.OH AND ANOTHER THING PUTIN IS PRIME MINISTER/PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA.
quote
0
Cheburashka 19 September, 2008, 01:33 by the way. just to specify about conflicts from my previous post. **Chechnya was an internal matter** i was talking about armed engagements beyond own's borders.
quote
0
Californian 19 September, 2008, 04:36 Well Obama is up in the polls and most Americans are supporting Russia on this one. Win-win for me. Poor Saakashvili, spent so much time forging those tapes, and they ended up doing jack s*** for McCain. And Palin's anti-Russian comments are getting laughed at. As Russians say "Americantsui Prosuypayutsya". Indeed, we are waking up and voting for Obama over McJoke and Cheney in Skirt. Now onto my favorite poster here - Marzipan! Actually he shares a spot with Sevodnya_Net, but Sevodnya_Net has been largely silent recently, I wonder why. Maybe next time he'll pick a better issue to confront Russia on then a just war that Russia clearly and mercifully won. First I'd like to mention my earlier exchange with Marzipan, where I said that if Estonian police use anything above rubber bullets against Russian protestors, Russia may intervene, to which Marzipan pointed out that the Estonian police did not fire rubber bullets, and then I qouted the International Herald saying that the Estonian Police (Eesti Piggies) did use rubber bullets. Marzipan has yet to acknowledge his mistake, but he boldly commits another one! Marzipan, after typing "Wrong" in response to my correct comment, had this to say: "Unfortunately, negotiations and compromise with Russia, with the aim in view of getting Russian forces out of Georgian territory, is pointless, as sensible negotiations never seem to work with Russia. The only way Russian troop withdrawals might be achieved is by the West putting diplomatic pressure onto Russia." Umm Marzipan - have you heard of the Six Point Peace Plan NEGOTIATED by Sarkozy, that has gotten Russian Troops to leave parts of Georgia? Also, do you not realize that Putting Diplomatic Pressure actually means negotiating? You cannot put Diplomatic Pressure on Russia without NEGOTIATING! So in short to paraphrase Marzipan: "It's pointless to negotiate with Russia, therefore Europe should negotiate with Russia". Estonian education at it's finest! Good show Marzipan! Bravo! Thank you for once again proving me correct. Andrew - you do realize that claiming that I'm the one on steroids while typing in ALL CAPS kinda discredits you, right? Californian 1. Redneck Andrew 0. Cantemir - hi. This is RT. The SciFi website can be googled and found, and that's where you make alternative reality posts. That or Fox News/CNN/Sky News. This is for actual news. Thank you. Marzipan earlier claimed that the Red Army's disputed occupation of Estonia was repressive. However Estonia's Army undisputed occupation of Iraq is not repressive. It's called "shut the f*** up, I'm right, you are wrong and don't use common sense against me!" Nice try Marzipan, no cigar. Che Burashka: "1) killing Native Americans to take over their land" Californians apologized, heck we even let Native American Casinos rip us off. "2) capturing blacks and bringing them to NA as slaves" Californians have actuall affirmative action system that works. "3) illegally invading Iraq under false pretense" Californians voted against the Iraqi Invasion. We agree with you on all three. Just saying.
quote
0
Cantemir 19 September, 2008, 07:35 "Cantemir pointed out: ".bring Earth under the direct control of the reptilian ORION EMPIRE. " Congratulations to RT forum: it took a while, but David Icke has finally found you. If Sam's reading this: now THAT's what I call reality lol !!" Sevodnia_Net, my friend. You do well to congratulate RT forum and perhaps those that moderate it because that's what a true dialog is all about: allowing a large spectrum of opinions to be expressed as long as they keep at least a minimum of decency attached. I bet you that my comments, the one that you are aware of and several others on different nicknames, would have been barred as too radical and off the roof on many sites from the so called "democratic countries". Let's just get along my friend. You are entitled to have your opinions, and I am entitled to mine. Have a great day!
quote
0
Marzipan6 19 September, 2008, 10:30 Nikita writes, “Baltic troops have no business to do in Iraq.” What he apparently means is that for reasons he does not specify, he really, really dislikes seeing Baltic troops in Iraq, They actually do have business in Iraq for exactly as long as the Iraqi government and their own governments together want them to be there. The day after one or another of those parties no longer wishe for them to be there, they will have no business there. Nikita then waxes lyrical: “You sound like a Soviet propagandist, I can hear Soviets claiming that they occupy the Baltics to boost Baltic capacity to defend themselves. Their reasoning was the same as yours.” No it wasn’t. My reasoning is, that foreign troops have a right to be in a country only if the legitimate governments of both parties agree for them to be there. Estonia agreed to allow a limited number of Soviet troops to be based in its country in 1939, but Moscow quickly exceeded that number by an enormous amount until its troops constituted a full 10% of the country’s own population. Moscow then used those troops to overthrow Estonia’s legitimate government, to destroy the sovereignty of the country altogether and to institute a generations-long reign of terror against its civilian population. Unlike in Iraq, there was no terrorist threat or justification for Moscow’s initial invasion, and also unlike in Iraq, not even the slightest pretence to thereafter re-establish the Baltics’ sovereignty. Moscow’s reasoning from 1939 to 1991 in respect of Estonia and the Baltics was, “We want those countries for our own; we want to destroy them forever as sovereign nations, and because we can do it, we will.” That couldn’t possibly be any more different to the Baltics’ basis for being in Iraq.
quote
0
Neilly-08 19 September, 2008, 15:43 The answer to the question is both countries are at fault but Russia bears most of the responsibility. Georgia should never have launched an attack on South Ossettia knowing full well it would provoke Russia which killed 133 civillians and not over 2,000 originally reported by the Russian Media. But most importantly Russia is also responsible for invading Georgia and violating International Law by illegally moving there millitary forces into Georgia itself. When people ask who has the most to loose the answer is Russia who is already isolated. I recall several weeks ago when a summit took place with Asian Leaders Russia looking for support didn't even get any. Russia even got criticised by China of all people for using millitary force. Russia has now made itself more isolated and irrelevant than ever before. Not even during the Cold War was Russia ever isolated like this. Even though I have a huge amount of respect for Russian heritage, culture and tradition. If Russia wants to be a true superpower it must stop living in the past and look to the future. It also must stop fraudulent elections, political oppression, corruption and fundamentally modernise the economy. If they do not it is ordinary Russian people that will suffer the consequences.
quote
0
Farmer 19 September, 2008, 17:24 Neilly answers their own question but truly ' Whom has the most to loose? ' The answer is the South Osettians losing their entire culture, their Future for God's sakes!. Entire generation! Compare it to the native americans being wiped off the face of the earth save 1 or 2, I ask you to think Neilly, and close your eyes to the junk you have taken in - Who has the most to loose? Russia is being run roughshod over because she saved the South Osettians and all whom would have then followed that path that was laid. please give peace a chance! you said- "When people ask who has the most to loose the answer is Russia who is already isolated. I recall several weeks ago when a summit took place with Asian Leaders Russia looking for support didn't even get any.
quote
0
vlad 19 September, 2008, 17:39 Even though Russia did go into Georgian territory it does not mean they broke international law, simply because it was Georgia that attacked a part of it's country that is populated by mostly Russian citizens, It was Georgians that broke international law, Russia simply steped in and did what they promised to Georgia for over a decade if Georgia was to attack, and for having to go into Georgia is simply militairly required sstrategy, you cant just go into a zone and secure it if there are forces being supplied from outside of the area, you must prevent the aggresors use of navy, air and other forms of attack/defence.
quote
0
Kotic 19 September, 2008, 18:54 Neilly-08, after having read your post sep 18 19:43, it seems your condition is one of two! Let me elaborate. You either have mad-cow disease or you have smoked something good and hardcore! Where did you get the stuff? I`d love to try some too!
quote
0
Sevodnya_Net 19 September, 2008, 19:05 "Let's just get along my friend. You are entitled to have your opinions, and I am entitled to mine. Have a great day!" Did I say otherwise? I bow to no one in my admiration for RT's forum which, with one or two little hiccups, is as democratic as any. I'm just surprised that the reptile theory hasn't reared its scaly head in these hallowed pages before, that's all, as just about every other world view seems to have. Have a great day yourself :-)
quote
0
Steve 19 September, 2008, 20:48 Remember this one? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taVW8Kv2HcQ
quote
0
Californian 19 September, 2008, 23:28 Meanwhile Rice continues to utter the words that Russia is isolated, while Russian trade budget (i.e. relations with other countries) increases. Keep saying it Condi, maybe one day you'll go mad and we'll all dance with joy. "Russians how dare you defend your own citizens and take away money from my hedge fund! European leaders, take money away from your hedge funds to isolated Russia!" Rice anyone? Neilly - it is very important to get your facts straight. The Russian Media initially claimed 2,000 casualties, not killed, but casualties, which are known to include killed and MISSING and even wounded sometimes. Russia wanted de facto, not de jure recognition from China and the rest of the Asian countries and that's exactly what Russia got. China ciriticized the United States a great deal more then they did Russia. In the Kosovo case China has expressed "Grave Concern" whereas in the South Ossetian case, it has just expressed "Concern". Would you rather be gravely injured or just injured? China's not known for sharp rhetoric. As for Asian leaders since you mentioned them: Indonesia backs the Medvedev-Sarkozy six point peace plan (not the one Saakashvili wanted). Kazakstan and Tajikistan, support Russian Peacekeepers in S. Ossetia and Abkhazia. Vietnam, Kyrgystan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam called for further study. Japan is the only Asian country who blasted Russia over the issue, the other are either de facto pro-Russia, adopted the neutral approach, or adopted a wait and see approach. In short Russia got what it wanted, de facto support and no de jure condemnations. Did you really expect for China to recognize South Ossetia? Marzipan then tries to mind read, and fails, anyone surprised? """Moscow’s reasoning from 1939 to 1991 in respect of Estonia and the Baltics was, “We want those countries for our own; we want to destroy them forever as sovereign nations, and because we can do it, we will.” """ So in order to destroy them as countries, Moscow named them Estonian S.S.R. Lithuanian S.S.R. and Latvian S.S.R. because if you want to destroy something as a country - you make it into an independent state, that's part of a larger country, according to Marzipan's logic. Not like Independent States will ask for recognition, like Kosovo, Abkhazia, South Ossetia. Marzipan - the proud product of Estonian Education at it's finest!
quote
0
Marzipan6 20 September, 2008, 01:59 Californian, after apparently a thoughtful moment, wrote, “Umm Marzipan - have you heard of the Six Point Peace Plan NEGOTIATED by Sarkozy, that has gotten Russian Troops to leave parts of Georgia? Also, do you not realize that Putting Diplomatic Pressure actually means negotiating? You cannot put Diplomatic Pressure on Russia without NEGOTIATING!" Yes, I certainly have heard of Sarkozy’s efforts. I’ve also widely heard the following, extracts of which I quote from an AFP report: “French President Nicolas Sarkozy sought Monday to ramp up pressure on Russia to withdraw more troops from Georgia in a trip to Moscow and Tbilisi exactly a month after the neighbours went to war. Russia's President Dmitry Medvedev has come under fire for not honouring the terms of the truce, in particular from the United States, which is not as reliant as some European nations on Russian oil and gas supplies…. ‘I am hopeful that the French president's visit to Moscow. will clarify the six-point (peace) plan,’ German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Sunday. ‘We, as the European Union, want to continue contacts (with Moscow). At the same time it's not possible that a six-point plan that we have developed together is not respected,’ she said. Western countries have said Russia is in breach of the accord, urging Moscow to pull out immediately, and have strongly condemned Medvedev's move on August 26 to unilaterally recognise the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.” In Californian’s opinion, apparently “negotiation” is synonymous with “diplomatic pressure. This is a very impoverished view. While it is true that diplomatic pressure may be a part of negotiations, it is just as true that diplomatic pressure may be applied by unilateral declarations quite apart from negotiations. More to the point, it is also true that negotiations can proceed without any diplomatic pressure at all. But seldom if ever in the case of Russia. As I had said previously, sensible negotiations never seem to work with Russia. By that I was not only referring to the negotiation process itself, but also to the fact that even after a negotiated outcome has been reached, it is anyone’s guess whether Russia will actually implement it. Time and again throughout its painful and pain-causing history, Russia has demonstrated that it views treaties and agreements not as an instrument to genuinely regulate bilateral relations going forward, but as a ruse to throw others off balance and mislead them so as to better take advantage of them. Californian then breaks out into celebration: “So in short to paraphrase Marzipan: ‘It's pointless to negotiate with Russia, therefore Europe should negotiate with Russia.’ Estonian education at it's finest! Good show Marzipan! Bravo! Thank you for once again proving me correct.” Californian flatters me. It’s very hard to prove him correct, and I readily admit it falls beyond my modest abilities to do so. Not only is it impossible to show that his notion of “negotiation = diplomatic pressure” is right, but the whole underlying premise of his response to me is also hopelessly mistaken. It he reads again my original post of September 18, 13:04 he will notice that I suggested Georgia should negotiate with the people of its breakaway regions, not with Russia.
quote
0
George 20 September, 2008, 10:37 There is lot of people here calling Russia the "AGGRESSOR"! I am just thinking, what will be the point of Russia invading another country as small and insignificant as Georgia and destroying its foreign relations with other countries? And do so just for a couple of weeks? US army is occupying Iraq and Afghanistan for nearly six years and they are doing so for a reason (no it's not Weapons of Mass Destruction and it's not 9/11 either) "OIL" So tell me! Why???
quote
0
Marzipan6 20 September, 2008, 12:09 Californian writes, “So in order to destroy them as countries, Moscow named them Estonian S.S.R. Lithuanian S.S.R. and Latvian S.S.R. because if you want to destroy something as a country - you make it into an independent state, that's part of a larger country, according to Marzipan's logic.” I hoped there would be a day when I could read one of Californian’s posts, and say that he is almost right. This is that day. To destroy a country as a sovereign nation in the family of sovereign nations, you destroy their nationhood, formally transfer control over them to a foreign country, kill every one of their government members you can lay hands on, disband their armed forces, police and leaders of society and send most of them to die of cold and starvation in Siberia, send about ten percent of their civilian population, from babes in arms to 90 year-olds to the same fate from which most of them never returned, and then overflood their land with an even greater number of foreigners who know nothing of their language, their ways or their values, and move steadily towards making the foreign colonists into the majority population group of the country. You also ethnically cleanse the country’s internal border regions completely, make them off-limits to the locals, and reserve these exclusively for foreign colonists. In the meantime, you roll back the language of the land and make sure that most education does not happen in that language but in the language of the conquerors. You cut back on the production of local language books, magazines and newspapers in favour of those of the colonists. Very soon, a local person cannot even conduct the simplest business in his own town in his own language. You impoverish them economically and reduce their standard of living to a pittance in comparison to what it used to be, you physically cut them off from the rest of the world, and you make sure that the most important administrative position even within their borders belongs to one of the foreign conquerors. You then environmentally devastate the land and threaten to destroy its ecology altogether with harebrained schemes drawn up not in its capital, but in Moscow. And you establish a police state within its borders so that everyone is terrorised into silent submission. Oh, and you give the place a new name. Perhaps something grand like the “Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic,” but even that name is a complete lie. Because ? Throughout the occupation years for all practical purposes the place wasn’t Estonian, it was Russian. ? “Soviet” refers to a council and implies collaborative decision-making. But there was no collaborative decision-making in Estonia, only a dictatorship operated from Moscow and extended to Estonia through hand-picked Moscow satraps backed up by the terror apparatus of the KGB – even in Russia, the so-called Supreme Soviet had no power or influence, but was simply a show-piece which hardly ever even met, and then only to rubber-stamp the dictator’s wishes. ? “Socialism” refers to the public collective ownership of economic resources, but in practice there was no public ownership of anything, just the comprehensive assigning of the ownership of just about everything to the whims of the Moscow dictatorship. And ? A “republic” is a state in which the sovereignty resides in the people and the legislative and administrative powers are lodged in officers elected by them. But in Estonia as elsewhere in the Soviet Union, the very, very last thing that the people had was sovereignty, and “elections” were a sham and a farce from beginning to end. So as you can see, Californian was almost right – do destroy the Baltics as countries, you do call them the Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian SSR, and make them part of a bigger country, and no longer themselves. But Californian was only almost right, not completely right. Because he went on to say in the best traditions of Soviet double-speak that despite all the foregoing, they somehow still turn out to be “independent states”. During the occupation years, the Baltics had no opportunity for independent thought, decision or action anywhere. Not at home, not within the SU, and certainly not on the world scene. They were what they themselves and the West always recognized them to be – oppressed and occupied countries in the great Prison of Nations.
quote
0
Californian 20 September, 2008, 19:19 Marzipan continues to make everyone laugh: "In Californian’s opinion, apparently “negotiation” is synonymous with “diplomatic pressure. This is a very impoverished view. While it is true that diplomatic pressure may be a part of negotiations, it is just as true that diplomatic pressure may be applied by unilateral declarations quite apart from negotiations. More to the point, it is also true that negotiations can proceed without any diplomatic pressure at all. But seldom if ever in the case of Russia." Earlier he said never, now he says "seldom if ever" next he'll say "not usually". Marzipan is inconsistent with Marzipan! As for the first point, in order to be successful a negotiation must have the ability to be enforced, at the very least by diplomatic pressure. Only a Buffoon like Marzipan fails to get it. As for Diplomatic Pressure applied by Unilateral Action - Marzipan, here's a fun fact: over 90% of the time it fails miserably! We are no longer living in the era of the super-power, so Uniteral Diplomatic Pressure will fail even more often today. When has Unilateral Diplomatic Pressure succeeded? Failed epically in Kosovo. "he will notice that I suggested Georgia should negotiate with the people of its breakaway regions, not with Russia. " Ok, Georgians bombarded South Ossetia and don't have strong ties to Abkhazia either. What World do you live in Marzipan? The breakaway regions won't negotiate with Georgia when Russia protects them and gives them a better standard of living, unless Georgia is able to do the same. Instead Saakashvili uses rocket launchers against them. Who do you want to be with, the guy who bails you out of trouble or the guy who punches you in the face? Marzipan fails to see the difference. Estonian education FTW! As for Marzipan's other post, I should have realized I have to spoon feed my point to him, otherwise he just doesn't get it. 1. By naming Estonia - Estonian S.S.R. instead of integrating it with Russia, the Communists have preserved, not destroyed Estonian nationhood. 2. The Russian Empire, admitted Finland and Poland (after acquiring them via conquest when everyone was doing the same) gave them autonomous status. Thus these were the first two to rebel against Russia. 3. Having seen such precedence, the Communists knew that by granting Estonian S.S.R. such a title, they are preserving, not destroying their nationhood. 4. For failing to get this Marzipan and Estonian education get a "Dunce" cap. Now I know where Bush got educated.
quote
0
Marzipan6 21 September, 2008, 02:06 Californian loves to nit-pick so as to avoid addressing substantial issues. He quite skates over Soviet Russia’s determined and violent half-century of attempts to destroy forever Baltic nationhood, and zeroes in on whether, according to me, negotiations with Russia “never” or only “seldom if ever” work. Really deep stuff, that. But even in his nit-picking, Californian manages to misquote me. On September 18, 10:38 I wrote that negotiations “never seem to work with Russia,” and on September 20, 05:59 that negotiations without diplomatic pressure “seldom if ever work)in the case of Russia.” Californian misquotes fragments of these two statements, finds some deep discrepancy between them (!!?), and then uses it as a ruse to avoid facing the realities of both Soviet and post-Soviet Russian aggression. Which, I suppose, is the way to go if you can’t really deal with the actual topic at hand. Californian then throws some more dust in the air by claiming that I am naively suggesting that after its military action, Georgia should negotiate with Abkhazians and South Ossetians. He has reference to my post of September 18, 13:34 where I had written: “The very last way that Georgia can get South Ossetia and Abkhazia back was/is via military force. That was true both before its military action and it remains true now. The only way Georgia could or can restore its territorial integrity is through negotiations and compromise with the people of those regions. Unfortunately, negotiations and compromise with Russia, with the aim in view of getting Russian forces out of Georgian territory, is pointless, as sensible negotiations never seem to work with Russia.” In that post I was actually arguing for negotiations in place of military action. Theoretically that still is the way to go, but the fact of the initial Georgian mistake, and Russia’s subsequent complication of the issue through its involvement, now makes even that highly unlikely to produce results. But there really is no alternative, short of agreeing that the territories are now permanently lost. Lastly, Californian thinks there is some virtue in Soviet Moscow grandly naming occupied Estonia the “Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic”, and not integrating it with Russia. Russia is big on show and pretence, Californian. It thinks that pretence of legality equals legality, or that pretence of independence equals independence. Communists might have named occupied Estonia exactly however grandly they liked. The reality, though, was that it was absorbing the country into Russia in every way there is – economically, socially, politically, ethnically, linguistically, culturally, totally. Had the Soviet entity lasted for another fifty years, on the basis of already existing trends perhaps 20% or less of the people in Estonia would still be Estonians, the Estonian language would have all but died out, so would Estonian values and culture – as would any opportunity for Estonia to ever recover from the national death Russia would have imposed upon it. Estonia would be Russia, call it whatever you please, and would have been just as Estonian as Karelia is Karelian – and it, too, was given a very grand name in March of 1940: the Karelo-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic. But that pretence was too much for even Moscow to maintain, and in July 1956 it was unceremoniously simply incorporated into Russia. Today Karelia is simply a decrepit, russified disaster of a place, and could not stand in greater contrast to Finland, a part of which it once was.
quote
0
Sevodnya_Net 21 September, 2008, 14:16 Russia is, it would seem, to disallow OSCE monitors onto South Ossetian territory (hope it's consulted with the independent South Ossetian government before doing this - please: keep the laughter down at the back of the room). Honestly, I sometimes wonder if we need news media at all to inform us of Russia's actions. This was such a predictable development. It looks as though we may have to rely on Russian human rights groups unofficial monitoring of what is going on there - not that that is any bad thing perhaps. There is evidence that "re-inforcements" from Russia had indeed entered S. Ossetian territory by 7 August, before the final Georgian assault. Eye-witness accounts from several Russian military personnel have unwittingly revealed information attained on the ground from that period which heavily suggests that detachments had moved through the Roki tunnel BEFORE the shelling of Tskhinvali. I suspect also that part of the reason for the US's tough rhetoric is that they know fine well from their own covert reconnaissance of the region certain details which rather complicate the received wisdom that Georgia simply carried out an unprovoked assault.
quote
0
Soar 21 September, 2008, 23:06 I have just seen Sakashavilli on the BBC World Service programme "Hard Talk" accussing the BBC of being the voice of Putin. Does he expect all English speaking media to be Fox News? The Financial Times has been steadfastly sceptical of the Georgian position. Does this make it a tool of corrupt Siloviki factions running the Kremlin? (It published articles from both Governments for heaven's sake). RT is clearly on one side but the facts seem consistent with most major non US news sources. There should be more on the US personnel in Georgia. It appears that many of them are not US government troops but mercenaries from Blackwater paid for by the Georgian government. Claims of NATO training are perhaps exagarrated but Blackwater works with US Government permission.
quote
0
Regular_John 22 September, 2008, 13:40 Russia keeps stating its concern that Georgia may be re-arming with the USA’s help. There are no UN sanctions that prevent Georgia re-arming as a sovereign Nation it’s their right. Russia at the same time parades its military through the capital of South Ossetia which is after all a Republic recognised only by Russia and Nicaragua. A so called Nation that has no economy and it appears to have no citizens as Russia had been handing out Russian citizenship like “scratch cards” to who ever wanted it for the last few years a tactic employed to undermine Georgia’s sovereignty over the region. Not the sort of thing one might expect from a so called “peace-keeper.” Russia has promised to rebuild South Ossetia and is pumping in 400 million dollars. But how will this impact the people on the ground well a typical example is the old Jewish women who’s home was sadly destroyed The not so generous Russians have promised this poor woman 2000 dollars compensation which she is yet to receive what the hell is she supposed to do with this miserable sum this won’t rebuild her home or furnish it. No doubt most of this so called aid will go into setting up military bases. And the people? Well they can sort themselves out can’t they!
quote
0
next back 1 2 … 18 19 20 21 22 … 33 34
POST COMMENT

By posting your comment, you agree to abide by our posting rules


CAPTCHA
On Air Talent RT mobile Corporate profile Job opportunities Partners Закупки Press releases Advertise with RT All RT sites

Legal disclaimer Feedback Contact us © Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV-Novosti”, 2005–2012. All rights reserved.