Mithra Posted March 15, 2007 #1 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Gates prepares for a large-scale war with Iran, North Korea, China and Russia US Defense Minister Robert Gates called for increasing US army in order to be ready for a large-scale operation. North Korea, Iran, Russia and China are listed among potential enemies. “We don't know what's going to develop in places like Russia and China, in North Korea, in Iran and elsewhere,” the Pentagon head said at US Senate Armed Services Committee hearings. He supported increasing military expenditures, as it will allow increasing the number of “free detachments.” The statements seemingly shocked Americans. The current Pentagon head, who worked for the CIA almost 30 years, was considered to be quite a pragmatic person, who apparently was quite sober about the relations with Russia. Quite recently he was speculating on about necessity and usefulness of restoring the bygone Russian authority, Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper (Russia) says. Meanwhile, Mayak Radio believes that it does not necessarily mean that the Pentagon chief called directly for preparing to a war with Russia. Gates meant that Americans should get ready not only to fighting terrorism, but to large-scale military operations with mass regular armies like Chinese or Russian ones. http://www.regnum.ru/english/779971.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmpressStarXVII Posted March 15, 2007 #2 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Oh yeah, we're definately prepared to fight 3 or 4 countries at one time. Get ready for the draft boys and girls. I never realized Russia and China were problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__Kratos__ Posted March 15, 2007 #3 Share Posted March 15, 2007 You'd honestly think that if Gates said that, it would be on more news sites then just some off the wall ones on a google search... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithra Posted March 15, 2007 Author #4 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Karatos its not about being in all over news, think of it in this way its a Russian federal news agency covering news from Russia and neighboring countries. Wich means that if it was Russian then it might be abit dangerous if they saw that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithra Posted March 15, 2007 Author #5 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Even if he said that I dont think they would announce it in CNN it would be a panic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Manfred Posted March 15, 2007 #6 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Bye America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugen Posted March 15, 2007 #7 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I would like to see how USA can fight with 4 military superpowers at the same time without nuking them.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashigaru Posted March 15, 2007 #8 Share Posted March 15, 2007 4 superpowers? There's China and Russia but who are the other 2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coughymachine Posted March 15, 2007 #9 Share Posted March 15, 2007 You'd honestly think that if Gates said that, it would be on more news sites then just some off the wall ones on a google search... It wouldn't surprise me one bit if this was true. Gates has a got previous where the Russians (or perhaps, more accurately, the Soviets) are concerned; in the late 70's, as head of the CIA, he was intimately involved in ploughing $ billions into the mujahideen. This actually began prior to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and was done knowing that it would increase the probability of a such an invasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thammyb Posted March 15, 2007 #10 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Even if he said that I dont think they would announce it in CNN it would be a panic psssst mithra hey ^^ . ps on news they also sometimes makes mistake well alot they can say what ever they want and put image etc so we belive but mostly news lies for money but ^^ if america goes away is better cose if you can see the most violonce religion is christian look america got bush on cose in america there are christians fundenmalist 60% of the population brrrr. (pagan pagan pagan) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugen Posted March 15, 2007 #11 Share Posted March 15, 2007 4 superpowers? There's China and Russia but who are the other 2? Its the first line of the topic. And its foolish to think Iran arent military advanced, Iran is most powerful military in M.E. We produce our own rockets, tanks and now even submarines and jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashigaru Posted March 15, 2007 #12 Share Posted March 15, 2007 (edited) North Korea maybe but definitely not Iran and their 10 camel-power tanks. Edited March 15, 2007 by Ashigaru Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mekorig Posted March 15, 2007 #13 Share Posted March 15, 2007 North Korea maybe but definitely not Iran and their 10 camel-power tanks. Ashigaru, make a little more research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bathory Posted March 15, 2007 #14 Share Posted March 15, 2007 And its foolish to think Iran arent military advanced, Iran is most powerful military in M.E. We produce our own rockets, tanks and now even submarines and jets. lol scary soviet era knock offs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlimited Posted March 15, 2007 #15 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Oh yeah, we're definately prepared to fight 3 or 4 countries at one time. Get ready for the draft boys and girls. I never realized Russia and China were problems. Russia and China are sided with Iran..hence prepare for a draft.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aztec Warrior Posted March 15, 2007 #16 Share Posted March 15, 2007 4 superpowers? There's China and Russia but who are the other 2? Didn't you know that Iran is a superpower...without nukes. Its the first line of the topic. And its foolish to think Iran arent military advanced, Iran is most powerful military in M.E. We produce our own rockets, tanks and now even submarines and jets. They said the same thing about Iraq.....4th largest army....blah..blah...blah... North Korea maybe but definitely not Iran and their 10 camel-power tanks. They have more than ten. Probably 15 or 20. Ashigaru, make a little more research. That is called sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugen Posted March 15, 2007 #17 Share Posted March 15, 2007 North Korea maybe but definitely not Iran and their 10 camel-power tanks. No no, camel-power tanks are yesterdays technology, now we have these: Our anti-air defense: Our navy: Our air force: Fear us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyGTS Posted March 15, 2007 #18 Share Posted March 15, 2007 the dirt bike would be fun.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercar Posted March 15, 2007 #19 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Oh yeah, we're definately prepared to fight 3 or 4 countries at one time. Get ready for the draft boys and girls. I never realized Russia and China were problems. That's because Russia and China aren't problems. REGNUM.RU is not a credible source. Didn't anyone here know the North Korean stand-off has been resolved: Feb. 13 (Bloomberg) -- North Korea pledged to end its pursuit of nuclear weapons in exchange for energy aid and promises from the U.S. and Japan for steps to normalize relations. Under the agreement, North Korea will shut down its Yongbyon nuclear reactor within 60 days, at which time it will receive the equivalent of 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil in energy aid. Implementation of the agreement would begin "a month from now,'' said Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator. "It's not the end of the process, it's the beginning,'' he said in Beijing. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in Washington the U.S. expects North Korea to "seal the Yongbyon nuclear facility for the purpose of abandonment'' and eventually to disclose its full program and disable all related installations. The deal, if it holds, would defuse a global crisis touched off by North Korea's Oct. 9 detonation of a nuclear device. At the same time, its terms -- exchanging tangible aid to the communist state for promises of good behavior -- mirror a 1994 agreement that failed to keep North Korea from continuing to develop nuclear weapons in secret. The official North Korean news agency described the accord late today in Asia as North Korea's "temporary suspension of the operation of its nuclear facilities,'' according to the English translation of its story. The North Korean account went on to say that the North Korean government and the U.S. had agreed to talks "aimed at opening full diplomatic ties.'' `No Nuclear Technology' President George W. Bush's spokesman, Tony Snow, was specific today in Washington that the U.S. views the agreement as a first step aimed at abolishing North Korea's nuclear capability. "When this is concluded, there will be no nuclear technology in North Korea, period,'' Snow told reporters. "They're making commitments here,'' Snow said of the North Koreans, and "there's considerably more leverage'' because six countries agreed to the arrangement, he added. The deal is "a sea-change in policy from Washington,'' said Paul French, the Shanghai-based author of "North Korea: Paranoid Peninsula.'' Bush's administration had argued that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il needed to shut down his program before it was willing to bargain. "Up until now the line has been, `Get rid of your nuclear program or we'll do nasty things to you, like freeze your bank accounts,'' French said. "Unless you're going to do some kind of engagement, you're going nowhere.'' Bolton Rebuffed Rice rejected criticism from John Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, that the agreement "contradicts fundamental premises'' of Bush's approach to North Korea during the past six years. She said the accord was consistent with Bush's effort to build a multinational solution to improving security in North Asia. Envoys from the U.S., North Korea, Japan, South Korea, China and Russia spent five days in Beijing hammering out a schedule to revive a September 2005 declaration that promised energy assistance and security guarantees to a non-nuclear North Korea. Rice said she and other foreign ministers of the group would meet after the 60-day initial period involving Yongbyon. It would be her first meeting with a North Korean counterpart, she said. The agreement signed today calls for North Korea to shut down and seal the Yongbyon plant for the purpose of "eventual abandonment.'' This includes a reprocessing facility from which the country made enough fuel for several atomic weapons, according to the CIA. The agreement makes no mention of the fate of the weapons Kim may already possess. Hill said the issue of North Korea's existing stockpiles will be dealt with at future meetings of "working groups'' established under the agreement. He said North Korea would be required to make a full declaration of its fissile materials. Inspectors to Return North Korea also agreed to allow officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect and monitor the Yongbyon facility. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Strangelove Posted March 15, 2007 #20 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Its the first line of the topic. And its foolish to think Iran arent military advanced, Iran is most powerful military in M.E. We produce our own rockets, tanks and now even submarines and jets. You've got soviet knock-offs for your entire armed-forces. Having the best military in the Middle East is about as good as having the best human-rights record in the middle east... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mekorig Posted March 15, 2007 #21 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Well, yes and no. While its true that most Iranian produced military material is copies of soviet equipment, most of the most modern of the Iranian produced material is equivalent to the most modern russian equipment right now. Even, they bought new equipment to Rusia and China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Strangelove Posted March 15, 2007 #22 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Well, yes and no. While its true that most Iranian produced military material is copies of soviet equipment, most of the most modern of the Iranian produced material is equivalent to the most modern russian equipment right now. Even, they bought new equipment to Rusia and China. My point still stands. Having the best military in the Middle East is just as good as having the best human rights record in the middle east... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spurious George Posted March 15, 2007 #23 Share Posted March 15, 2007 You've got soviet knock-offs for your entire armed-forces. Having the best military in the Middle East is about as good as having the best human-rights record in the middle east... LOL Classic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__Kratos__ Posted March 15, 2007 #24 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Karatos its not about being in all over news, think of it in this way its a Russian federal news agency covering news from Russia and neighboring countries. Wich means that if it was Russian then it might be abit dangerous if they saw that way. Actually yeah it is. A handful of Russians being mad is a bit different then the Russian government being mad. If these words would have been really spoken, Russia would have undoubtly spoke up. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if this was true. Got any sources to show this article is true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coughymachine Posted March 15, 2007 #25 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Got any sources to show this article is true? No, but if I had claimed it was true, I would have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now