North Korea Fired Missile Over Japan

'Say something often enough and the gullible plebs will eventually believe it.' Or do you have any evidence or examples of his tyranny?

 

Ehm ... this is something impudent now, because in meantime it is the case the US starts wars and then expects that all follow the US! How was it again after 9/11 please? No doubt, we all were willing after this incredible awful terror act, but the US asked for help! How was in 2003 with Iraq again? the US demanded to follow them and those 2 bigger one who said "No" to this criminal act of the USA were then being accused to be whatever evil!

 

If you can't read or if you are not pleased with the content, then don't tell such rubbish of "I have no ideas" please!

I clearly gave an option, but you don't like it in your stubborn mind who wants only to accept a military attack ... not surprising!

 

Tyranny is of course exaggerated ... but full democratic and full free it isn't.

Yeltsin's Russia was a total mess and chaos. Putin has reestablished order with all hardness in every situation of life and without regard for human life, property and freedom of speech. It is not some usual order, but it is basically the old one. The late Soviet state had built on the use of the many to punish the few who are in opposition. This system is now largely restored with Putin ... with the difference that some people have become inconceivably rich - including Putin himself, which has not yet spanned everywhere.

A good example is Freedom of press...

The reputated organization "Reporters Without Borders" (which both West and East equally criticized!) accused the Russian government under Putin in 2005 substantial restrictions on press freedom; The working conditions for Russian journalists deteriorated alarmingly. Violence is the "most serious threat to freedom of the press". According to the organization, Russian television is controlled and heavily censored by groups close to the government and also by the domestic secret service (the FSB and the FAB SI). A number of independent newspapers had also been forced to give up since 2005 due to high fines. By issuing state orders for advertisements, newspapers dealing with the war in Chechnya were actually extorted.
The expansion of state control over the press continued after the founding of Rossiya Sevodnja in December 2013. In 2014 independent media under state pressure also lost both the staff and the range of coverage: Lenta.ru lost the chief editor and 39 others Journalists and image editors, the job "The Week" of the presenter Marianna Maximovskaya on Ren TV was dropped, while the TV program "Doschd" lost the access to cable television without giving any reason. As of 2016, the foreign financial participation in a relevant media company could amount to a maximum of 20%.
The Internet was initially regarded as the comparatively free media in Russia. However, it was always under heavy state supervision. The secret service FSB can read the entire mail traffic in, to and from Russia - without judicial approval - and follow the Internet activities of the users in real time. The providers had to bear the acquisition costs for the monitoring systems. Bloggers with more than 3,000 readers also have to be registered as "news media".

Nationwide TV Channel and their owners who rule what is how broadcast:

- First channel (the state is majority owner)
- Rossija (part of the state media holding WGTRK)
- NTW (majority owned by state-controlled Gazprom-Media)
- Ren TV (controlled by the bank Rossija
- STS (owner: STS Media, the Alfa Group Michail Fridmans and the Swedish Modern Times Group own approximately 50%, 25% are anonymous investors, 9% are owned by a Russian capital investment company)
- TNT (owner Gasprom-Media)
RBK (owners' media company RBK, which in turn belongs to the state oil company Rosneft)

 

.

 

Now you show me a TV channel or a politician openly talking about some unfair acquisition of some US politician but Trump who is generally been hammered by US media since the very first day of his electoral campaign. Or show me media or politicians openly talking about unfair acquisition in UK, or in Germany, or in any other countries with "free press".

And in case you assume "Rain" does not broadcasts:
https://tvrain.ru/schedule/2017-08-31/

On top of that STS and TNT do not have any news broadcasts at all, and others are not purely news channels, except for RBK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossiya_Bank - the one that you claim owns Ren-TV is not a state owned bank, despite the name.
And ACTUALLY it is owned by https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Национальная_Медиа_Группа - a joint holding of that said bank and few corporations.

Still, a good effort and indeed shows that mainstream media in RF is influenced by corporations that go to toe with government. Does not means abroad situation is that much different. Not everything state owned is directly state controlled and not everything state controlled is in direct ownership of state. As I said - give me examples of politicians or media exposing acts of corruption of high rank politicians in other countries which you consider being ones posessing "free press".

 

A full understandable reaction of you to the idiotic claim that WW-1 would have been won only by the British and the French... because the Russian efforts and losses were huge too!

The German defeat had three main reasons:

1.
The war in the United States... This gave rise to such an overwhelming material and personal superiority that Germany could no longer successfully defend herself militarily because of the other circumstances. After the revolution broke out in Russia and the Bolsheviks agreed to the peace treaty, Germany had even temporarily gained the superiority of the people and also in some material things, such as, Artillery! It was not until the Americans arrived that it was no longer the case!

2.
Whether war, sports, politics or whatever ... the loser has also lost because he has made mistakes. Here it is no different ...
It started with a big stupidity among the Germans! The so-called "Schlieffen plan" was a masterpiece of military tactics, but why did it fail and caused the so called "Miracle of the river Marne"?
General Schlieffen himself had more than impressively warned against weakening the left wing of the advancing German troops during the pre-war years, no matter why! And what did the German commander in a critical and decisive phase of the advance? He withdrew from the left wing a few divisions and sent them to the East to defend the Russian offensive in East Prussia! Perfect ... and woops a gap arose with the German troops and exactly there in this gap the French troops brought in parts by the Parisian taxis attacked and the "Miracle of the river Marne" happened.
But also the German High Command and, above all, the new Chief General Falkenhayn showed serious mistakes later. His whole concept was simply idiotic, because that said "predominantly defensive and the enemy bleed out ... as long as for every dead German soldiers 2-3 Allied soldiers die, everything is OK"! Apart as brutal it for some sounds (war is hell!) he prevented with it an important victory which was possible to achieve at Verdun ... but because he did not want to conquer the city at all, only to bleed out the French there. Not only does any serious historian say that the loss of Verdun would have caused a very bad blow to France at this stage of war, also many German Generals had been in a violent dispute with Falkenhay about it, because they saw it as much as the historians today ... one of them was the commanding General of the Army Corps in this area - the Son and Crown Prince of the German Emperor!

3.
In principle, actually a sub-point of 2.) ... but since in itself very important point and so rated as point and main reason number 3 ... the idiotic naval warfare and the consequences!
Sure, the Royal Navy was superior to the German Navy, but not as overwhelming as some people say it. The Royal Navy had made a very effective blockade against Germany, the consequences of which also contributed significantly to the German defeat. The German incompetence here originated directly from the Kaiser, since he prevented the effective use of the strong German battleship fleet. Why? He was afraid to lose his expensive and large battle ships and cruisers in a defeat at a great sea battle! The German Naval high command was not able to oppose their Emperor here often enough. Even the biggest Sea battle happened at least in 1916 - Jutland - it ended in a German tactical victory, but in a strategic and decisive defeat! Never ever sailed the fleet in such a strength out after it... because the high damages afraid the Emperor to risk the loss again! Even the High See fleet of Germany was not able to defeat the Royal Navy, they were able to attack the blockade and make it lesser strong to get supplies from outside.
On the other hand had Germany with the submarines a sledge hammer to defeat Britain totally... but they made the full unlimited submarine warfare too late in full order. They stopped it after Lusitania incident but had to do it further in 1915 and 1916 to get the result towards British Mainland as what the British blocked brought to them in the end!
Sure ... this sounds hard and I will for sure here not start a sub-discussion if this was valid to do, but it is fact that the Brits were before no angels in merchant war too and there were good reasons to do it this way.

 

But in Russia it is state controlled... and in reverse, show me any Russian news who blamed Putin for the bad things he did too ... or even report about them in a way that he could have make a mistake?

 

Charming but I already edited this comment after decided to not exactly start that kind of conversation in this thread. Have no idea why it kept showing deleted text.

 

Better system: No two countries with active McDonalds franchises have ever gone to war.

 

I already gave you one such example and asked you to give me some. You so far didn't. I so far can add:
Journalist Pozner, works on first channel in own talk show on First Channel. Pretty critical towards government, by the way.


Sorry for a bit of editing with second video, but it at least has the direct part of one of his interviews where he directly criticises that Putin himself at first made official statement about absence of any RF military in Crimea - and then Putin himself recognised their presence shortly after - that is during crimean events. And he points at that now government officially talks about absence of RF military in east of Ukraine, and that credibility of such statement is already sabotaged by events in Crimea.

And you know that I - so far at least - insist on that there are no RF military in east of Ukraine, but never the less - Pozner's critic is pretty logical. And open.



Now again, any of your examples..?

 

Ok....what are warnings if you're not man enough to follow through with them? Do you know HOW MANY CLEAR WARNINGS we've given them? Do we need to cite you all the previous presidents that told NK to cut this **** out?

Pass me whatever you're smoking. That **** is strong

 

What is about the internet controlling?

Anyway ... the problem is very good explained by Alexei Simonov, head of the Fund for the Defense of Glasnost (openness) in Moscow and Author Peter Pomerantsev:

"Russia actually has a modern media landscape, it is even 90 per cent privately organized. But whoever wants to make money with media is best silent on politics, because their representation is almost completely controlled by Putin's state. Nationwide broadcasters like Rossija, ORT, NTW or the news channel Westi-24 overpower the audience with a long-term fire of entertainment and hidden propaganda....
Television is no longer the mirror but the "manufacturer" of reality. Politics is presented as a "large-scale reality show" so that Putin and the government are shown in good light as possible. Russia's top criminal prosecutor, Alexander Bastrykin, demanded that the Russian authorities in the future be able to ban extremist content in media without a court decision. The authors then have to prove that their material is not extremist .... which is a reversal of the principle of the guilt of innocence, according to where the guilt must be proved and not that someone must prove his innocence.Control is also exercised through the ownership structures. Gazprom Media (including NTW, Echo Moskwy), the largest media holding company in Russia, formally belongs to the private sector, but is, of course, part of the state-controlled gas giant Gazprom. The Magnate of Al-Usmanov owns the former Soviet government newspaper Izvestia."

At the core is a more indirect check from above and interestingly, many criticisms which are made against the Western MSM also apply to the Russian media too!

 

I was talking about the end of the war in response to a pathetic American jingoistic comment that the Americans "finished" WW1. They contributed but as Russia was out of the war by then the victory can be largely ascribed to British and French forces. Of course this was simplistic but not nearly as simplistic as the utter bilge I was countering. You will see that in WW2 I fully acknowledged the Russian role in finishing the war.

 

Here's another suggestion, which I have offered in other threads about North Korea --

WHERE did North Korea shoot the missile? They fired it over JAPAN and not at Guam! Remember that, because it may be 'key' in what happens next!

Why? Ask yourself, "What one thing do the North Koreans, the Chinese, AND the South Koreans have in common?" All of them HATE Japan with an intensity and a breadth that we in "the West" have a hard time comprehending, as a result of everything the Japanese did to China and Korea (which was unified until after WWII) during the first half of the 20th-century.

I theorize that if North Korea attacked Japan (based on some made-up excuse), China would give NK at least tacit support, and many in South Korea would actually admire Kim Jong-un for it! Think about it.... And what could Japan do? What would the U. S. do, knowing that China would back Kim's 'play'...? Would the U. S. go to an all-out nuclear war, or even an all-out conventional war for Japan? Are you SURE...?

The wild-card is Trump, who, so far, has done little but talk about all the undisclosed, undefined things he says are "on the table", along with chest-thumping gush about "fire and fury". Is it possible that the 'back-office' phone calls right now between Trump and Xi Jinping go something like this... "OK, Donald, here it is... you do NOTHING against North Korea, or, we turn them loose on Japan!" .

 

Although there is some truth in what you say about Asian attitudes to Japan, it is pretty clear that this would not be in China's interests. Japan's sovereignty was clearly violated and sovereignty is a central tenet in the CCPs attitude to world affairs. Any war would be disastrous to the survival of the Chinese regime. Trump knows this which is why the game of chicken is even more complicated.

 

it has nothing to do with japan sovereignty, ballistic missile has very high altitude, it would be similar as low orbit satellite passing through japan. don't think china will involve in the war, but even they do it wont be disastrous for china CCP(they already done that in 50s), so not sure what you mean

 

Exceptionally, I have once again ... at least in parts to disagree with you

Of course warnings have their limit and then the tainted action must come ... otherwise you make yourself a clown!

B U T
That is why should be very careful with warnings and as well the words of warnings and how you war ... otherwise, you are forced to act won't be rated as an idiot, who's warnings are not more then hot air
No one with a brain in his head puts a military victory of the US here into question if NK is fighting alone without China ... but the question is how high the US losses are and whether these are acceptable .... because it will not be like a military walking in the Iraq 2003!
And that is precisely the problem here ... because thanks to McMasters is now someone in the White House to whom I trust and who also knows what war is and what the war with NK here ultimately means. Since Trump has been holding back so far and does not spread a new BS on Twitter as far as NK is concerned, I'm assuming that he is listening to General McMasters!
McMasters is a tank officer and has won a glorious battle as a captain in 1991, and he also has my deep respect as an expert. Unfortunately I can not find the source, but a few years ago he was asked for a documentary about the Korean War in the 1950s as an expert about a tank war in Korea today. McMasters said clearly that it is not comparable to Iraq and is much more difficult because of the landscape!

 

Do I need to find you opposition bloggers..? Besides, not only government of RF tries to apply internet censorship in recent few years, it appears to be more than just a politicial measure. And it DOES rises an opposition to that:

Driven even our neo-nazi and anarchists to crawl out of whatever holes they were sitting in for last fifteen years.

https://lenta.ru/news/2016/12/12/127001/
https://life.ru/t/технологии/881976/roskomnadzor_zablokiroval_sam_siebia
...and hackers - actual ones, the existing ones - from time to time manage to get webpage of Ros-com-nadzor (Russian communications watch) to block itself.

So I rather say that we do speak against internet control. What about you?



And as for the rest of your comment - well, where are your examples of media of yours or in USA or in any other country with "free press" giving government the criticism you think our media should be giving?

 

But if we look at recent events, missile launches from NK come after UN sanctions

 

A collapse of world trade would follow in the event of a war with China. That would cause massive destruction to the Chinese economy which would threaten the existence of the CCP in China. Chinese authoritarianism is built on rising living standards. The CCP need to keep that happening. Xenophobia may work in the short term but it would quickly lose its use as a tool of subjugating the Chinese people as their living standards are inevitably devastated. All Chinese soft power which is immense in places like Africa, would be undermined by China refusing to acknowledge the sovereignty of Japan. China has already decide that if NK push it too far they will abandon NK as their international trade is more important even than stability on their NE border. China needs the international community and this lies at the heart of Trumps approach which is rational. I do worry about narcissist Trump overplaying his hand though as he shares the characteristics of the armchair thugs in America who cry nuke 'em when Kim rattles his cage.

 

I know, I understood. I redacted the post but forum lagged. Please, both consider this conversation solved.

 

I know, you are an active soldier and I am a retired one and soldiers don't like diplomats and their law blabbering really

But...
Because there is still status of war since 1950 with cease fire since 1953 and because the complete war against NK in the 1950's was a UN mission, the UN is also responsible here at least. But you and I and all other with some brain know that UN security council is only a comedy show if serious interests of one permanent member are threaten by a hard resolution.

Anyway ... the US had a golden chance passed away to have a reason or to show with military the mad midget and garden dwarf the limit ... why the hack didn't the US anti missile units there shot down this f***ing missile when it enters Japanese Air Space?
Are they not able to do it in reality or did someone on the radar screen sleep or whatever else?

 

I understand your point. But history tells us one thing:
We issue sanctions, they blow something up.
Doing a risk assessment we ask ourselves..."Is this working?"

 

If North Korea directly attacks Japan - Russian Federation will likely step for it. Despite all disputes of past and ongoing - RF and Japan are trade parthners, and fail of business in Japan due to war will create an economic shockwave that my country does not needs.

On top of that - Federation's government openly stated that will oppose agression in region, regardless of it's source. Hence if North Korea attack Japan - it will be opposed by RF.