Russian Plan for War

And here's a snippet:

In recent weeks the Russian security forces have been calling up medical personnel to military bases, picking up men of military age wherever they can find them and shipping them off for basic training. Russia is engaged in a huge war mobilization. Last week there were at least four major ballistic missile tests. Last month Russian bombers probed our air defenses off Alaska. At present the Russians are engaged in joint naval exercises with the Chinese -- who are also mobilizing their forces because of a dispute with Taiwan.

The mobilizations in Russia and China are not being matched by the United States. As in the period immediately after World War II, we believe in peace and friendship with Russia. Our officials see the crisis in Dagestan and Chechnya as further proof that Russia is disintegrating. But is the Russian civil war crisis a set-up? Has it been created by the Russian secret police and Interior Ministry as a diversion to mask war mobilizations against the West? Consider the surprising statements made last week by a Russian general, Aleksandr Lebed, in an interview with the French newspaper, Le Figaro. Lebed suggested that the terrorist bombings in Russia were "the result of an agreement between central authorities and (Chechen leader) Basayev."

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), October 05, 1999

Answers

The pieces continue to fall in place. Y2K may simply be the coup-de-grace.

-- Nabi (nabi7@yahoo.com), October 05, 1999.

The main thing that bothers me about this is that there may be equally looney theories about US preparations for war going around in Russia.

-- Ned (entaylor@cloudnet.com), October 05, 1999.

I wish Nyquist had include some current information on the state of the Russian civil defense sytem. It is an astounding program.

In a prosperous country this level of expense would be closely scrutinized by all concerned. But in Russia of all places with no money to make the payroll for soldiers, coal miners, teachers, etc, they spend fabulous sums of money to expand an already excessively healthy civil defense program.

Don't our elected officials and career Fed employees in Washington, D.C. think this is even a little bit strange?

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), October 05, 1999.

Well, Ned, since you classify Nyquist's theories as "looney," why don't you give us some facts that would support that argument?

Since Nyquist has based his arguments on statements by former Russian intelligence officials, your facts would need to be at least as creditable.

Don't have any facts?

-- de (delewis@XOUTinetone.net), October 05, 1999.

IMO Nyquists theory is overblown. See Interview with Anthony Sutton

-- (@ .), October 05, 1999.

We all hope his theory is overblown. In talking to Nyquist, he hopes his understanding of the facts are wrong too. Here is the question, are you willing to take the risk? And secondly, what theory fits the facts as we know them? Is Russia planning for war or not? That is the question.

The underlying question has always been: Are the communists controlled by the elitists of our world or the NWO crowd? I believe the answer is no. I believe the communists have their own agenda for world dominion. Good people disagree on this point. We will all soon know....

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), October 05, 1999.

"Last month Russian bombers probed our air defenses off Alaska." So what does this and all the other "mobilization" activities prove? Fact is BB, these activities happen so frequently I wish I had a nickel every time they did one of these. This doesn't prove anything, just that Nyquist knows jack.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 05, 1999.

Maria, Do you watch football?

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), October 05, 1999.

This will be the fourth or fifth time for me to ask Maria this question....

Maria, please tell me what would cause you to feel concern that Russia might be poised to attack America? Please explain what you would consider credible warning signs.

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), October 05, 1999.

BB:

I think Lebed has the potential to become a powerful dictator.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), October 05, 1999.

Mumsie, I'll answer you when Nabi appologizes to me. He said I couldn't read when in fact it turned out he couldn't read or he doesn't know the difference between a ship and a sub.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 06, 1999.

Maria,

I second Mumsie's request. And an apology from Nabi has nothing to do with answering other peoples' questions.

My central question is, where Nyquist is getting this information. If it is true then it is significant and disquieting (barring any counter-explanation from Maria as to why activating military medical personnel and conscripting new recruits is perfectly normal in Russia). But what are his sources? He never cites any.

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), October 06, 1999.

Look I posted my opinion many times on the things I look for as threats without getting into classified specifics. You guys scoff at everything I write. I only remember Robert supporting my point of view in one thread. So, why should I answer Mumsie? How would that benefit me or her or you? You would continue to tear apart my words and reduce to name calling. Anita would chime in that I'm following the rules of disinformation and mumsie would continue to believe what she believed before we started the discussion. What good would come out of that? Why do I *owe* Mumsie or you any answer at all?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 06, 1999.

Maria, you present yourself as one with inside knowledge, and on that basis, you have made light of the concern of some regarding what they see as precursor warning signs that Russia is mobilizing for war and planning to attack America. Your reason/excuse for not sharing your opinion regarding what you would see as reasons for concern are that it would compromise classified secure information, but this does not really fly. You have gone on the offense as a diversion. This gives the basic impression that you really are not who you say you are, and in fact, may just be a pure troll. I had taken you at face value up until now, but your response will be telling.

And yes, what does Nabi have to do with my asking you a question? Do you refuse to perform at your job because a co-worker annoyed you? That would go over like a lead balloon with your superiors.

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), October 06, 1999.

<< You guys scoff at everything I write. . . . You would continue to tear apart my words and reduce to name calling. >>

Actually, Maria, I was responding to your scoffing at Nyquist's analysis and then refusing to honor Mumsie's request for your own reasoning. It seems that if you have reasons for disagreeing with Nyquist then you would lead with those reasons rather than your sarcasm.

I realize that you have taken some fire on this forum but it hasn't been from me, nor Mumsie if I reckon correctly. I'm genuinely interested in your perspective. Nyquist has what appears to be some very serious information that could gravely affect all of our lives. You say he's full of horse hockey and that your credentials and past experience give your opinion some weight. Well I'd like to know just why you disagree with him. I don't know enough about it either way to flame you.

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), October 06, 1999.

Mumsie, the other factors need to be fixed. I've mentioned them many times on this forum, go look them up. They would need to fix their economy and do something about their "image".

David you are correct you haven't launched any flames at me but you are incorrect in that Mumsie has. I stated this before also, Nyquist has no history. He may see what's happening today but has no clue about the past. He would understand a great deal more if he saw the trends before he jumps to his conclusions. Try this on my rebuttal to Nyquist:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001F1A

or this:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001FFy

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 07, 1999.