Thread: Russia's allies and pals

Where is the irony?

Are there any televisions or newspapers in American or Canada that aren't government controlled and censored, or have people not watched the news there for the past 30 years?

http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/papers/1991/91120407.html

You can just go to projectcensored.org to see a list of the (inter)national stories that only make it into one or two papers before they are censored from the newswire.

Russia has nothing against Iraq. We are just trivial trade partners. Why not?

Russia has some financial interests with oil companies in Iraq, and has a debt still owed to them for weapons sold to the government in the late 1980's. (please note that USA also sold weapons to Iraq when they were at war with Iran in the early-mid 1980's) That is part of the reason they are opposed to this current war, but mainly because it violates international law by invading a sovereign country.

Originally Posted by z80

Are there any televisions or newspapers in American or Canada that aren't government controlled and censored, or have people not watched the news there for the past 30 years?

http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/papers/1991/91120407.html

Well, here in Canada, the CBC is an excellent government TV station and although even it will have some censoring, they tend to show an almost objective view of things. They criticize the government, even mock and make satirical remarks about them. The government here isn't the same kind of controlling government you have known. And by the way, I was only 5 years old when that story happened. I didn't tend to pay much attention to news back then.

Sounds like our ABC. They are govonment owned, but are often critical of the govonment.

Our ABC is Disney-owned. They aren't a government but they have a magic kingdom.

Well I dont know whats going on with this war thing anymore, all of the propergander has completely confused me

after what I have just seen tonight, America is the most corrupt nation on earth. They really do just want Iraq for it's oil and the kick start it could give to the american economy.

What you saw?

Just wondering, Is "what you saw" correct sentense? I'd say "What did you see?"

No, it's not proper English. I was just repeating what he said in the first sentence though, not asking a separate question. But ok:

z80: What did you see last night?

Originally Posted by Tu-160

Just wondering, Is "what you saw" correct sentense? I'd say "What did you see?"

I'd say "What have you seen?"

Unless you specify the time, like Mike did in the correction.

Н-да, согласен.

Just crap about the only companies that will be doing any rebuilding in Iraq are American companies, ie, the fire fighting building reconstruction, right down to the fact that the yanks will put in CDMA mobile phone technology insted of gsm because CDMA technology benifits America more, where gsm benifts Europe more. Oh, all around that area of the world gsm is used, not crapy usless cdma.

Oh, yes. The five companies who were allowed to bid on a $911m contract for putting out oil fires in Iraq were all US companies that contributed money to the GOP. So who won? A subsidiary of Halliburton (the company Dick Cheney used to run before he begrudgingly gave up his shares in it during the campaign--something a vice presidential candidate would be legally required to do all along). Draw your own conclusions.

The thing about GSM (and all the other racist scapegoating that is going on now with France) is such a joke. The Congressman who proposed that even spelled out the word GSM in its original French name to evoke anti-Gallic sentiment from the populace. Fortunately, polls consistently indicate that the majority does not care about this French boycotting nonsense. There is also another piece of legislation you might want to look at involving the French catering company that has an 8 year contract with the US marines and how Congress is determining whether to nullify it to send a message to their country. That message is, "We are a bunch of stupid, jingoist a@@@@les that you shouldn't do business with."

Originally Posted by z80

after what I have just seen tonight, America is the most corrupt nation on earth. They really do just want Iraq for it's oil and the kick start it could give to the american economy.

I agree that America has its own agenda in this war but you can't really blame the US alone as almost every country does this, not necessarily by going to war, but by similar means.

I think the idea of America only caring about its economic interests is bull****. It cares about weapons of mass destruction. If Saddam got hold of a nuclear weapon the world would be a much more dangerous place. This action is to prevent such a thing happening. Why don't they do anything about N. Korea? Because N. Korea already possesses these weapons and you can't do anything except diplomacy once they have them, as with Israel.

As for Jacques Chirac, don't get me started on him. He completely undermined the UN. I don't care whether on not he would veto the resolution, but saying that he would no matter what made the UN an impossible route for the US.

And the comments about free press - I think you may have confused the West with Iraq! News companies are allowed to show any footage that is legal, and government owned/subsidised companies are no more biased towards the government than other companies, if the BBC (the company known as "saddam's friend" for no good reason as far as I can tell - I would call them "the truth's best friend")is anything to go by. You should see Arabic TV!

What about the press? Iraqis were not allowed to run indepenent presses, yes, but they have always been able to watch and read things like CNN, or listen to BBC radio. The state-owned papers basically just included AP newswire stories without editing them in any way. Their internet access was also not censored (except pornography, which is understandable in a Muslim country).

And there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever Saddam has or can acquire nuclear weapons. Those claims Powell and the White House made about Iraq purchasing plutonium from an African nation later turned out to be completely untrue. In fact, almost all of the "evidence" the White House has given is pure speculation mixed with paranoia.

As for the BBC, it is my favorite source of information but even I have noticed a certain amount of anti-war bias in their reporting.