http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=8_WfZxDGJJ8
http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=0mTSP7TS0y4

Spend pair minutes to view this...

It cant be mate ;) but can only be a cold war be sure about that

yep you right xenon i dont think that U.S.A or Estearn Europe will accept a clear war..
It's another cold war.

Russian propaganda smells.

Agree with Xenon

Hard to say which side is right. I guess this video is made up as well....

So on a russian TV some noname guy that can speak english claims it's ALL Georgia's fault and Russians come to the country as the saviours.. sounds the same as when they ran into Czechoslovakia, they also claimed themselves the saviours.
Sorry, not THAT dumb. I don't know where the truth lies, but it's definately not that clear.

PS: I don't see a 3rdWW coming soon.

i don't think so :D

i dont know

It has already begun, and is still in progress.

dont shit your pants kids

i dont think a world war is likely any time soon

i mean look at it, if the russians werent dumb enough to start a world war during the cold war, why would they be now? especially since they have a dictatorship, why would those guys who are in charge of russia start a war if that could only mean they would lose their power (cause obviously they couldnt beat america in a war)

and to me the only other country that would be anywhere near capable of starting a world war is china (+north korea)

+Iran / all islam regions are a threat.

Hope Obama doesn't fuck it up.. Like Bush did.

if u know anything about militaries, then u know all those muslim countries are a joke

even put together

what do you think why they need to retreat to coward warfare like terrorism? cause they know they have no chance against the west in a conventional war with their shitty regular armies

and by the way, the only muslim countries with armies that are at least half decent compared to america/england/france are pakistan and turkey, much more than iran

I think it is obvious that Russia can beat anyone, in an open war. Just if they have the will.
Look it up in the history.
And stop watching American action movies. ;)

i think youre confusing something

just because russia has enough nuclear weapons to blow up the whole world doesnt mean they can beat america in a war

That is exactly what I dont mean.

then what exactly do you mean?

and russia has never shown great skill in fighting wars, the only thing they always did was rely on their huge resources and man power, and on their weather

look how they failed in afghanistan for example?

they couldnt invade afghanistan in years, whereas america ran over it in a few weeks

Both situations in Afghanistan aren’t called an open war. And no nation can "win" in this conflict, and anyone who will try will fail!
What I am sure of is that the whole world would be in "great ass" if Russia did not take part in its history.(just think where you would guys be and your siblings) Examples: The Napoleon war, WW2, Golden Horde. In the last two examples The Russians had some great battles where they showed their skill. (Don’t know much about the Napoleon period)
If not looking too far in the past. In South Ossetia the Russian army showed how mobile they can be and what force they have. The Georgian army scattered in the first 24 hours.

I can’t really remember any open war, where America showed their great skill. Oh, maybe they showed great skill in their “terrorist” act against Japan (WW2)

Georgia? You must be kidding. You can't say that when you have set of one of the most powerfull armies in the world versus a GEORGIA??

Russians have a good military force, _BUT_ they lack the skill to command it. They have alot of problems with their gear for examble their submarines. 20 kill by halon gas? eh.. Even in their own exercise they accept 5% casualities of their own. They are careless because human life is so cheap for them..

"Russians have a good military force, _BUT_ they lack the skill to command it. They have alot of problems with their gear for examble their submarines. 20 kill by halon gas? eh.. Even in their own exercise they accept 5% casualities of their own. They are careless because human life is so cheap for them.."

thats exactly the point

i agree 100% with X-MAS-

apparently there is also people who have a clue around here :)

Russia didn't prove to be good at fighting wars, just at defending... Since they are undefated but lost a war with a much larger army against Finland, if I am right.

Whereas the Americans are having big trouble and Afghanistan isn't stable at all. The Taliban are gaining control over it again. Same will happen in Irak. My answer was to the guy, who thinks, Russia is strong at attacking, they are NOT!
Hope America will stop playing world police (which they fuck up each time) and concentrate on their own problems.

oh come on germany would have totally destroyed russia in ww2

the russians could only win this 1) cause germany was fighting everyone else at the same time 2) with their weather 3) with their man power 4) with their resources (both their own ones and the supplies by america)

doesnt have to do with skill..... i cant think of a single battle in world war 2 where russia didnt lose way more soldiers than the germans
neither when the wehrmacht was attacking, nor when the red army was

even in stalingrad where they surrounded and totally destroyed the 6th german army, they still had more casualties than the other side...

WOW the georgian army.... you gotta be kidding me

WW2 was a hard time for Russia, and they really did not have many supplies. Short of weaponry, ammunition, food. They had to meet face to face with a more powerful force. Of course they had great casualties, when defending. And when attacking they only had big casualties when taking Berlin.
Facing a much more powerful enemy, Russia did not surrender like the major part of Europe. They fought for their country and died for it.

In the war against Napoleon, this was the only way to defeat the enemy, what Russia surely did.

"WW2 was a hard time for Russia, and they really did not have many supplies."

thats bullshit.... just shows u obviously have no clue, cause by the end of ww3 the soviet forces were equipped in LOADS by america

"Facing a much more powerful enemy, Russia did not surrender like the major part of Europe. They fought for their country and died for it."

how were the germans, or to be exact the Heeresgruppe Ost of the Wehrmacht, much more powerful?

god u really have no clue what youre talking about

and napoleon was beaten 90% by the weather in russia

the only thing the russians did was burn down their own capital and hide behind the ural lol

now thats some great attacking skill

It's hard for countries like Finland and Poland which are located so near to Russian influence. We have to make sure our defence is on a good base. NATO can't help us for shit and I think it's not a good idea to join it.. We Finns are good on our own. We have faught Russians in WW2 and I think that gave a lesson to both sides. We are not like Georgia where you can just walk in and take what you want.

I don't really understand why Poland is part of NATO... Missle shield just adds problems for international relationships and I doubt it works too well, cause it's easy to be destroyed by airforce and Poland can't protect it well enough against Russian airforce.

Well honestly, the Russians don't know how to attack, that's true. But Finland wouldn't be too difficult anymore. Russia has learned it's lesson I guess. Since they don't care about casualties, it shouldn't be too hard to beat Finnland. Their technology and manpower simply exceeds yours. If they don't do the same misstakes again, you couldn't do a shit against Russia.
But the contracts protect Finland, the EU would have to do something. And Russia against EU is another story :) And I'm 100% sure, the USA would offer their help more than once, simply to beat Russia.
Anyway, this is too hypthetical and nobody really knows, what I know, Russia wouldn't attack Finland nor Poland.

Well honestly, the set wouldn't be the same than it was last time. We wouldn't have to fight Russians _ALONE_ Yes, last time we were alone.

EU is not an union where you can count on, look what happend with Georgia.. -_- (I know they are not part of EU) only they got was statements that said "Russians have to retreat immideately".

EU and NATO are just big clumpsy giants in the sea, they can't do shit without zillion meetings first. ;;

Russians are not motivated and they suffer lack of moral (100 years of communism made the trick) they never had a chance to believe that tomorrow things could have been better. No religion, only slavery and death! ;)

US And europe will not allow this happened

@Sanix
"Since they are undefated but lost a war with a much larger army against Finland, if I am right." - No, you are wrong, USSR won that war eventually

@Chiv
"In South Ossetia the Russian army showed how mobile they can be and what force they have. The Georgian army scattered in the first 24 hours." - Actually Georgia did a nice damage to russians while they failed to get any significant success except occupying several georgian towns and robing the whole country. And not that they showed any great mobility.

@nicknamessuck
"i cant think of a single battle in world war 2 where russia didnt lose way more soldiers than the germans" Bagration, Lvov-Sandomierz , actually after Kursk germans failed to win any significant battle even while defending

@X-MAS
"NATO can't help us for shit " - wow I bet NATO is the only thing that can save you if a conflict between you and Russian ever happens

Actually comparing napoleonic wars (and even ww2) with modern warfare is completely wrong. Biggest joke is saying "russians lack morale" - just look at a war with Georgia how the whole country stood for Putin and wished to burn down whole Georgia while nobody would ever care about some 30 sq.km of Southern Osetia a week before that. Not like americans who occupied Afghanistan/Iraq in a week and just lost 50 soldiers and 1 tank and nowadays half of the country says "Bush is a fool, we've lost that war". Russians have asian authoritarian mentality - they would be happy to die for their ruler for some 30 sq.km.

Yes, USSR won that war. But the real winner was Finland. We really didin't lose that much of our ground and for every dead Finn there were 10 dead commies. The point is; we are one of the most advanced technology countries in the world, we have democracy and we are WEALTHY. Are you?

"Biggest joke is saying "russians lack morale" - just look at a war with Georgia how the whole country stood for Putin and wished to burn down whole Georgia while nobody would ever care about some 30 sq.km of Southern Osetia a week before that. "

You really don't know what moral means? Moral doesn't mean motivation. Get a dictionary book before you post.

I really doubt that NATO would do anything, you guys were talking about mobile armies and Russian military force is one of the mobiliest force in the world.. If the would wan't to destroy a country, it would be matter of hours. :/ And that is where NATO and EU fail. They are ruled by bureaucrats and everyone who lives in a western country, knows how slow it can be. - _ - a

@Sanix
You are missing the point, if the EU pretends to be an union where you can trust on and think your safe. Why they didin't help Georgia? Georgia and EU have discussed for a long time about their partnership and that when Georgia could join EU. Think about it... They are not that good after all.. - - ;;

To me, Russians look like they are extreamly lazy and lack the motivation (read BelarusPower motivation, _NOT_ moral) they have the biggest resources in the world and still their gross domestic product index show that their are in #53??

@X-MAS "EU is not an union where you can count on, look what happend with Georgia.. -_- (I know they are not part of EU)" - that's because Georgia isn't a part of EU

Well Putin does some nice brainwishing with his media control. And he created an image of himself, which the reasons really like (like he would be one of them). In fact, this guy is destroying the democracy they've built up since the communism. I mean come on, he is not president anymore but still in control. The new president is like a puppet controlled by Putin. The Russians seem to know this but don't care. They who care, disappear somehow.
If the Asian mentality is good, I don't know. It's probably good for large countries such as Russia and China, where a life counts nothing.

@X-MAS
BelarusPower said it correctly, if a country is not part of the EU, there's no real action needed. Sounds hard but it's like this. Russia would never dare to attack a country of the EU. This would mean a 3rd world war. But more likely, Russia against the EU and the USA.

"@nicknamessuck
"i cant think of a single battle in world war 2 where russia didnt lose way more soldiers than the germans" Bagration, Lvov-Sandomierz , actually after Kursk germans failed to win any significant battle even while defending"

yea well i didnt say the germans won any significant battles after kursk or stalingrad, i only said i cant think of a battle (no matter who won it) where the soviets didnt have higher casualties

@X-MAS
yeah, luckily for you russians decided to stay with their primary terms and not bringing you communism. I'm very glad of your democracy, wealth and technologies but I've never said Belarus is any way better than Finland.

No I don't get what moral and motivation means , explain please what is it and in a what way russians lack it, i'm sure they would always go for their authority which is one of their biggest advantages and actually Russia is 11th by gdp

I highly doubt Russia has mobile army (just their caucasian 54th army is most battle-worthy and anyways it didn't show anything in Georgia) but still how can FInland can stay alone if you have just 100 tanks, no airforce etc? NATO would surely help , and what help to Georgia did you expect? Nuclear strike over Moscow or drop a tank army in Tbilisi in 24 hours? Discussing partnership and being a part of NATO is a big difference.

@x-mas
It's difficult to compare Finnland with Russia. I mean I could compare Switzerland and Finnland. We are wealthier than you ;). Simply because we are small and neutral (means we don't give a shit about wars). Russia is huge and there are a lot of different cultures within the same country, which makes everything difficult. In my country, it just works, because we are wealthy.
It's hard to say, if you can rule such a huge country with different cultures without media influence and kind of a dictatorship.
Well Georgia is not part of the EU. Discussions mean nothing as you could see. But I totally agree with the point of slowness. EU is damn small because there are too many opinions and burocracy.

+1 agree with Sanix

you just all don't want to get it ? america will win anyways because of they pay so much money to have the best sience ? no, but because of they got good technolagy russia might have in secret better weapons wich iam sure off but america wait's becauese if let's say they lose the war against or even win the war against russia china how is pretty sneaky will make and end at russia how is weak or at america so there are 3 country's how schould be looking good for eachother as theyre the oponents of eachother.If you ask me I will say the chinese have the biggest chance to survive a war against america. technolagy is important but something why more important is the will of the people .I mean america won the war from easy because not much people wanted to really fight they just wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein but getting Iran will be hard for Americaas the most iranians do not care to offer them for theyre country and theyre believe.

agree

ofc it can be world war again...

i think it will be world war again around 150 years

It;s cant be third world war.. i dont belive in that , but in war's yes of course... ;)