|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 5:51:54 GMT
Back to the evil US controlling everything again! It is obvious to you because you want to see it. Your post begs a number questions? When did the US gain control of the Swiss judiciary? Also, when did the US gain control militarily and politically of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Mongolia and China which share great lengths of the Russian border to surround it? Furthermore, the likes of Poland and the Baltic states have every right to join NATO (which again you falsely call the US) for self defence considering the 'not so distant' history. Especially with what is/has happened in Ukraine and Russia claiming to be looking at the legality of the Baltic states actions when they claimed independence. Also, your comment about being unable to prove it because the media doesn't say what you claim, they must be lying. That is fantastic, who needs evidence! Surely you can find a random website written by somebody with no evidence other than made up stuff to back your point? Has the Guardian joined the rest of the corporate media in denying your US conspiracy theory? So the U.S. are not responsible for imperialist meddling in Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Libya, Yemen - to name but a few in recent times? Not responsible for the drone strikes in defiance of all international law? Not responsible for the NSA and global illegal surveillance? Not responsible for rendition, torture, Guantanamo Bay, black-ops sites? Not responsible for military personnel in 130 countries and 900 military bases on foreign soil? The U.S. don't spend $610 billion a year on their military - more than every other country in the world combined? The depth and scale of your myopia is staggering.
I can't deal with this level of stupidity, I can't believe in it. I can only presume you need the comfort of a sanitised worldview where the U.S. & the U.K. are the good guys. Enjoy it - I know from experience there is no arguing with it. His, Hers, Mine, Most People chap. This is just a load of old blokes who run an organisation who took a lot of bribes and their day in the sun has come to an end. This obsession with the Americans you have is rather unhealthy.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 9:06:51 GMT
That's all very interesting, and some amazing figures on us forces . But f*ck all to do with Fifa. Your Definitely adding 2 and 2 together and coming up with a moon landing conspiracy It isn't a direct link its true - but it demonstrates the reach and scope of their operations - this is a nation that bugged the telephone of the German chancellor and was hiding the fact that drone strikes were being launched from Rammstein airbase. You conflate the moon landing conspiracy with my suspicion that this abrupt U.S. led interest into corruption at FIFA has motives that transcend law enforcement. Why is that so hard to believe? The U.S. relies on dodgy payments to some very dubious people to facilitate its operations overseas. The U.S. views Russia as a threat and works tirelessly to isolate them within the international community - the World Cup was a PR coup for the Russians and at the very least it seems the U.S. intends to take the shine off it. Interestingly the corporate media has picked up the strapline (fed to them by U.S. prosecutors) that 2018 is a "World Cup of fraud". As this plays out we'll see what their real motives are. its always POSSIBLE they are on the level for once - it would make a refreshing change.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 9:12:26 GMT
So the U.S. are not responsible for imperialist meddling in Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Libya, Yemen - to name but a few in recent times? Not responsible for the drone strikes in defiance of all international law? Not responsible for the NSA and global illegal surveillance? Not responsible for rendition, torture, Guantanamo Bay, black-ops sites? Not responsible for military personnel in 130 countries and 900 military bases on foreign soil? The U.S. don't spend $610 billion a year on their military - more than every other country in the world combined? The depth and scale of your myopia is staggering.
I can't deal with this level of stupidity, I can't believe in it. I can only presume you need the comfort of a sanitised worldview where the U.S. & the U.K. are the good guys. Enjoy it - I know from experience there is no arguing with it. His, Hers, Mine, Most People chap. This is just a load of old blokes who run an organisation who took a lot of bribes and their day in the sun has come to an end. This obsession with the Americans you have is rather unhealthy. You really imagine that where the World Cup goes is not political? That's just naïve. FIFA has real political and financial impact.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 9:29:18 GMT
So as a conspiracy then is it not more likely that if the us knew about Fifa corruption that they would have helped or pushed the dodgy side of the organisation almost making sure Russia got it, so that when the shit hit the fan they would be in the limelight. Rather than letting Fifa get on with it and then try and do something
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 9:31:30 GMT
His, Hers, Mine, Most People chap. This is just a load of old blokes who run an organisation who took a lot of bribes and their day in the sun has come to an end. This obsession with the Americans you have is rather unhealthy. You really imagine that where the World Cup goes is not political? That's just naïve. FIFA has real political and financial impact. There are political advantages for sure I get that. But the financial advantages outweigh these. Its a corrupt organisation. Russia will have the world cup, people will say its going to be crap, it will be fine and the world will go on. Same with Qatar. Im not over the moon the Russians were awarded it but its not going to effect Russia's political power. They will still be strong and stand alone as they always have. You just keep going on and on and on and on about the Americans having different motives for investigating the bidding process. If it can be proved that it was illegal then great, I'm all for it. I'm glad someone is willing to go up against FIFA.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 9:44:55 GMT
You really imagine that where the World Cup goes is not political? That's just naïve. FIFA has real political and financial impact. There are political advantages for sure I get that. But the financial advantages outweigh these. Its a corrupt organisation. Russia will have the world cup, people will say its going to be crap, it will be fine and the world will go on. Same with Qatar. Im not over the moon the Russians were awarded it but its not going to effect Russia's political power. They will still be strong and stand alone as they always have. You just keep going on and on and on and on about the Americans having different motives for investigating the bidding process. If it can be proved that it was illegal then great, I'm all for it. I'm glad someone is willing to go up against FIFA. fair enough - and who will shed tears for Sepp? Not me. But the power dynamics are important. If FIFA's administration ends up being dominated by U.S. friendly appointees then we'll never have a World Cup in Russia again - or anywhere else they don't approve of. That just replaces private corruption with state sponsored corruption - of the two I think I prefer the former, at least everyone knew the score. I may be paranoid about the U.S. but at least I am with the global mainstream for once. A Gallup poll concluded that the U.S. was overwhelmingly seen as the biggest threat to world peace around the world (24%) Pakistan were next on 8% and China 6%. interestingly the U.S, Canada, and Australia were seen as the places people most wanted to live. www.wingia.com/en/services/about_the_end_of_year_survey/global_results/7/33/
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 10:02:38 GMT
So as a conspiracy then is it not more likely that if the us knew about Fifa corruption that they would have helped or pushed the dodgy side of the organisation almost making sure Russia got it, so that when the shit hit the fan they would be in the limelight. Rather than letting Fifa get on with it and then try and do something Well that's a good point. When looking at U.S. behaviour historically - they usually develop a sudden interest in 'democracy' and 'humanitarian' interventions when regimes get uppity about Oil (Iraq, Libya) or are perceived as even a minor threat to their interests. I suspect the U.S. felt that FIFA was beyond influencing - the World Cup bidding had so many players and so much money that it was simply cheaper, easier and more effective to agitate for regime change, which would have the side bonus of potentially unseating the Russian's World Cup bid. FIFA has been corrupt since and probably before Joao Havelange's 24 year reign which goes back to 1974. The U.S. expressed no interest in corruption at FIFA when they were awarded the world cup in 94 - do we seriously imagine it wasn't happening? Now in the run up to the first ever Russian World Cup suddenly they will talk of nothing else but corruption. Coincidence? I doubt it!
|
|
|
Post by Marked Ox on Sept 29, 2015 10:19:18 GMT
Back to the evil US controlling everything again! It is obvious to you because you want to see it. Your post begs a number questions? When did the US gain control of the Swiss judiciary? Also, when did the US gain control militarily and politically of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Mongolia and China which share great lengths of the Russian border to surround it? Furthermore, the likes of Poland and the Baltic states have every right to join NATO (which again you falsely call the US) for self defence considering the 'not so distant' history. Especially with what is/has happened in Ukraine and Russia claiming to be looking at the legality of the Baltic states actions when they claimed independence. Also, your comment about being unable to prove it because the media doesn't say what you claim, they must be lying. That is fantastic, who needs evidence! Surely you can find a random website written by somebody with no evidence other than made up stuff to back your point? Has the Guardian joined the rest of the corporate media in denying your US conspiracy theory? So the U.S. are not responsible for imperialist meddling in Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Libya, Yemen - to name but a few in recent times? Not responsible for the drone strikes in defiance of all international law? Not responsible for the NSA and global illegal surveillance? Not responsible for rendition, torture, Guantanamo Bay, black-ops sites? Not responsible for military personnel in 130 countries and 900 military bases on foreign soil? The U.S. don't spend $610 billion a year on their military - more than every other country in the world combined? The depth and scale of your myopia is staggering. I can't deal with this level of stupidity, I can't believe in it. I can only presume you need the comfort of a sanitised worldview where the U.S. & the U.K. are the good guys. Enjoy it - I know from experience there is no arguing with it. Again you make claims, they get challenged and so rather than answer the questions posed you just make more claims. Can you please ANSWER the questions asked?
|
|
|
Post by Maurice Earp on Sept 29, 2015 13:18:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 13:42:49 GMT
The real question is not who falls but who ascends. That will be much more illuminating.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 13:53:10 GMT
So the U.S. are not responsible for imperialist meddling in Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Libya, Yemen - to name but a few in recent times? Not responsible for the drone strikes in defiance of all international law? Not responsible for the NSA and global illegal surveillance? Not responsible for rendition, torture, Guantanamo Bay, black-ops sites? Not responsible for military personnel in 130 countries and 900 military bases on foreign soil? The U.S. don't spend $610 billion a year on their military - more than every other country in the world combined? The depth and scale of your myopia is staggering. I can't deal with this level of stupidity, I can't believe in it. I can only presume you need the comfort of a sanitised worldview where the U.S. & the U.K. are the good guys. Enjoy it - I know from experience there is no arguing with it. Again you make claims, they get challenged and so rather than answer the questions posed you just make more claims. Can you please ANSWER the questions asked? People accuse me of patronising them - which I rarely do. I insult opinions honestly and I sometimes insult people directly - depends... So I'll be honest with you. the effort required to get you from where you are - to anywhere near the truth is just too much. I would need to go into the history of NATO, the concept of spheres of influence, the role of the intelligence services, the corporate media (of course including The Guardian), etc etc You have just enough knowledge to frame a question - but nowhere near enough to justify the time I would need to spend answering it.
|
|
|
Post by Marked Ox on Sept 29, 2015 14:19:29 GMT
Again you make claims, they get challenged and so rather than answer the questions posed you just make more claims. Can you please ANSWER the questions asked? People accuse me of patronising them - which I rarely do. I insult opinions honestly and I sometimes insult people directly - depends... So I'll be honest with you. the effort required to get you from where you are - to anywhere near the truth is just too much. I would need to go into the history of NATO, the concept of spheres of influence, the role of the intelligence services, the corporate media (of course including The Guardian), etc etc You have just enough knowledge to frame a question - but nowhere near enough to justify the time I would need to spend answering it. I'll be honest as well. You make up your 'truth' (the US is the great Satan) and have just enough knowledge to use selected information whilst ignoring vast swathes of contradictory information to meet your needs. When challenged, you just make more claims and can't answer the points challenged. So again two simple questions directly linked from your previous claims: When did the US gain control of the Swiss Judiciary? When did the US gain political and military control of Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Belarus and China?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 14:44:31 GMT
People accuse me of patronising them - which I rarely do. I insult opinions honestly and I sometimes insult people directly - depends... So I'll be honest with you. the effort required to get you from where you are - to anywhere near the truth is just too much. I would need to go into the history of NATO, the concept of spheres of influence, the role of the intelligence services, the corporate media (of course including The Guardian), etc etc You have just enough knowledge to frame a question - but nowhere near enough to justify the time I would need to spend answering it. I'll be honest as well. You make up your 'truth' (the US is the great Satan) and have just enough knowledge to use selected information whilst ignoring vast swathes of contradictory information to meet your needs. When challenged, you just make more claims and can't answer the points challenged. So again two simple questions directly linked from your previous claims: When did the US gain control of the Swiss Judiciary? When did the US gain political and military control of Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Belarus and China? lets deal with those if you must. You took the term 'surrounding' literally which is just wilfully dumb. The U.S. is quite obviously engaged in military activities both directly and indirectly within the sphere of influence of Russia. To put it another way, what do you think the world's reaction would be if Russian arms, covert ops and troops were busy in Mexico and Canada? Ukraine and Syria are a whole lot closer to Moscow than they are to Washington DC. By attempting to topple Assad in Syria the U.S. is attempting to deprive the Russians of their warm water port in Tartus and a key regional ally. The U.S. is fermenting rebellion in a non-aligned state like Ukraine to facilitate an aggressive and provocative expansion of NATO right on Russia's border. This is in breach of undertakings made by the U.S. as part of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. I never called the U.S. the "great satan" - I simply note their vast military budget (a matter of public record - not a claim), their intelligence gathering capability and those of their allies (exposed by Edward Snowden and others), their military operations and bases (also matters of public record) and their past history of imperialistic meddling which goes back to the aftermath of WWII (which is BASIC history) On that basis I look at their involvement in FIFA with scepticism as any student of history and current affairs would. If you have a mountain of evidence to prove the purity of their intentions then present it. HINT: Links to reports in the corporate media won't cut it. I'm touched by your faith in the Swiss Judiciary - but no undue pressure needs to be applied here, the U.S. has a legitimate case I'm sure - the real question is why now and what happens next.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 14:57:23 GMT
What do u think the Russians are doing with their daily fly pasts on British and American airspace ? Why are we having to launch fighter jets to escort them back out of the interest zones just outside our air space, and launch war ships to escort them when they approach British waters. That's not Russia testing our systems though ? I suppose us having troops in the Ukraine , who have been invaded by Russia both publicly and undercover of pro Russia fighters, who conveniently have very expensive weaponry and skills trying to cause their own rebellion is the us trying to provoke them ! Rather than help defend them?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 15:29:04 GMT
What do u think the Russians are doing with their daily fly pasts on British and American airspace ? Why are we having to launch fighter jets to escort them back out of the interest zones just outside our air space, and launch war ships to escort them when they approach British waters. That's not Russia testing our systems though ? I suppose us having troops in the Ukraine , who have been invaded by Russia both publicly and undercover of pro Russia fighters, who conveniently have very expensive weaponry and skills trying to cause their own rebellion is the us trying to provoke them ! Rather than help defend them? Are you seriously suggesting that Russia would provoke a military confrontation with the U.S. and her allies? A nation with but a fraction of their military capability and budget? That's absurd. Russia is unquestionably securing its position in Ukraine but its response has been far more measured than anything one could reasonably have expected from the U.S. I am no apologist for Russia or the U.S. - but of the two, the U.S. has clearly been more aggressive in more arenas than any other nation on earth since WWII. When the Russian's meddled in Cuba the U.S. threatened a nuclear holocaust - lets not forget that.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 15:43:16 GMT
When has the USA recently forcibly taken full control of foreign territory, with no other reason than they wanted it. Russia are provoking things, why keep flying bombers to the edge of British airspace, otherwise. Or sending submarines into norways waters.
|
|
|
Post by Marked Ox on Sept 29, 2015 16:09:13 GMT
I'll be honest as well. You make up your 'truth' (the US is the great Satan) and have just enough knowledge to use selected information whilst ignoring vast swathes of contradictory information to meet your needs. When challenged, you just make more claims and can't answer the points challenged. So again two simple questions directly linked from your previous claims: When did the US gain control of the Swiss Judiciary? When did the US gain political and military control of Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Belarus and China? lets deal with those if you must. You took the term 'surrounding' literally which is just wilfully dumb. The U.S. is quite obviously engaged in military activities both directly and indirectly within the sphere of influence of Russia. To put it another way, what do you think the world's reaction would be if Russian arms, covert ops and troops were busy in Mexico and Canada? Ukraine and Syria are a whole lot closer to Moscow than they are to Washington DC. By attempting to topple Assad in Syria the U.S. is attempting to deprive the Russians of their warm water port in Tartus and a key regional ally. The U.S. is fermenting rebellion in a non-aligned state like Ukraine to facilitate an aggressive and provocative expansion of NATO right on Russia's border. This is in breach of undertakings made by the U.S. as part of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. I never called the U.S. the "great satan" - I simply note their vast military budget (a matter of public record - not a claim), their intelligence gathering capability and those of their allies (exposed by Edward Snowden and others), their military operations and bases (also matters of public record) and their past history of imperialistic meddling which goes back to the aftermath of WWII (which is BASIC history) On that basis I look at their involvement in FIFA with scepticism as any student of history and current affairs would. If you have a mountain of evidence to prove the purity of their intentions then present it. HINT: Links to reports in the corporate media won't cut it. I'm touched by your faith in the Swiss Judiciary - but no undue pressure needs to be applied here, the U.S. has a legitimate case I'm sure - the real question is why now and what happens next. Firstly, thank you for actually attempting to answer the questions rather than bringing further claims up. You used an evocative word in 'surrounding' and considering NATO countries total only a small portion of the Russian border it is a significant point. Russia will also be operating against the US in militarily terms such as using cyber warfare as will China, as will China and Russia against each other. It is what most nation states do against each other, all of them Russia, US, China and many others. By the way the Russians are experts at covert ops and intelligence operations(Litvinenko) but you never mention them. China have made cyber attacks for industrial secrets and attacks on other countries' Govt institutions. They are all at it and yes including the US. You also again ignore the point that the democratically elected Govt's of Poland, the Baltic states etc asked to join NATO as is their right. The US didn't force them. Why do you think they did that? Could it be due to Russia invading them in the past and recent incidents such as Georgia, do you think? Why are they not allowed to develop their own strategy to defend themselves as far smaller nations against Russian threats/influence after independence? Or do they have to stay under the yoke of the Russians and they have no say in the matter? The Syrian war started by Sunni Muslims rising up against Assad regime(Shi'a Muslims), nothing to do with the US. So you think it was wrong for the US to try to support* the Free Syrian Army (moderate Sunnis) which has happened long after the conflict started? I note you don't criticise Russia for supporting Assad where he has used chemical weapons and barrel bombs on civilians. * That support involves military training of a few hundred soldiers (as it has nothing short of shambolic) and bombing Daesh and other extreme Islamic Groups' targets(ironically Sunnis and enemies of Assad). Russia is directly supplying weapons and now building an airbase to support Assad. Again with Ukraine. Firstly, it was over Ukraine signing an agreement with the EU, not NATO. Ukrainians themselves overthrew their Govt not the US after considerable political (including the poisoning of an opposition leader to their preferred candidate) and economic interference by Russia. Russia has further directly acted by stealing the Crimea and providing troops/ up to date weapons (light and heavy) to the rebels. Please explain what the US have done to ferment rebellion? Why are you not decrying Russia or China as much as the US (as you seem to defend them by always taking their side against the US)? They both have vast military budgets, extensive intelligence gathering capabilities (the Russians are renowned for this) and those of their allies, large military operations & many bases, and imperialistic meddling/invasions since the aftermath of WWII. My point has never been that the US has pure intentions which has been made plenty of times. My point is your myopic focus on the US whilst utterly ignoring other countries such as Russia, China doing the same. They are all at it, all as bad as each other. As for the Swiss and US judiciaries going after FIFA now will be because, I suggest, the evidence has become available. Particularly, Chuck Blazer was turned by the authorities so they had direct access to build a case. I'm guessing that this provided information that suggested wrongdoing in FIFA which is under Swiss jurisdiction, hence the Swiss Judiciary becoming involved. Not some geopolitical game play.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 16:15:07 GMT
When has the USA recently forcibly taken full control of foreign territory, with no other reason than they wanted it. Russia are provoking things, why keep flying bombers to the edge of British airspace, otherwise. Or sending submarines into norways waters.
Depends what you mean by "full control"
I would say that an illegal invasion, the removal of a sovereign government, the installation of a puppet regime, the imposition of military bases, the favourable negotiation of oil franchises and the training and supply of that nations army is control enough.
So Iraq would be one example.
But just to make this point beyond any doubt, since the end of World War II, there have been 248 armed conflicts in 153 locations around the world. The United States launched 201 overseas military operations between the end of World War II and 2001, and since then, others, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. Do the maths - who is the biggest warmonger?
Here are some nice graphs - I know you like graphs;
The first graph is from 2013, the second 2011.
now yellows in all seriousness - who do you think is the bigger threat here? A stray submarine in Norway or a military budget that bests the ENTIRE WORLD.
Now all we need is MarkedOx to turn up with his "mountain" of contradictory evidence. Not that he ever supplies any.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 16:21:21 GMT
You call it war mongering, some would call it protecting free will and fighting injustice. Countries are putting troops in Africa still to protect people from genoside (f*ck knows how that's spelt). Like markedox said the USA has probably benefited in certain situations, but that has also come at a massive cost to them in both money and lives of its service personnel . It's not ww2 any more ,your enemy don't wear the same uniform, who are you to decide if innocent people should be protect by a world super power, u say we should help out Syrian refugees, but the USA shouldnt get involved in trying to make their country safe so they could stay there ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 16:58:37 GMT
No doubt - but does this diminish in any way what the U.S. does? Does it not in fact reinforce my scepticism about their motives in exposing FIFA - an option they have declined to exercise for forty odd years despite the fact that it was an open secret that FIFA was corrupt? Why does the U.S.and the corporate media suddenly get exercised about FIFA now - with a Russian World Cup on the way? Hell of a coincidence isn't it? But the U.S. had already agreed with Russia that they wouldn't join NATO - an agreement they reneged on. Contrary to the verbal promise made to Gorbachev which secured German reunification, NATO expanded to the east. In 1999, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland were welcomed into the alliance. Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia joined in 2004. At the April 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, the United States supported inviting Georgia and Ukraine to join the alliance. In May 2008, the EU concurred, thus knowingly crossing Russia’s “red line”. That is wilfully provocative - how do you think the building of a Russian military / economic alliance would play on the borders of the U.S? its unthinkable as well you know. if you want to invoke history then it is the U.S. that does the lion share of invading countries - not Russia. Wikileaks has proved U.S. intent towards a Syrian rebellion long before the uprising with captured telegrams- they have since poured billions of dollars into arming various Islamist extremist groups against Assad.
Syria is a strategic partner to Russia and has an obvious vested interest in propping up Assad - by facilitating civil war which was their intention from the outset the U.S. were happy to shatter an entire nation in order to deny a rival an ally within their legitimate sphere of influence.
their actions have nothing whatsoever to do with your simplistic goodies and baddies notions about Syria. Now there is the risk on an all out proxy war that could be the preamble for WWIII. I am not supporting Assad - but we need a peace process in Syria - not an ongoing military escalation, both the U.S. and Russia must stop arming factions in the civil war.
^ this is absolutely ridiculous ^ the U.S government has made no secret of its military and "non-military" aid to Syrian rebels - how effective it has been is an open question. Billions of dollars have been spent however. The EU concurred that the Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO - clearly provocative. This is the trouble with you i'm afraid - you accept every narrative offered by the mainstream media as truth. What do you actually know about that rebellion? Who funded it? Who carried it out?
You've not thought about any of this at all have you? I have.
www.globalresearch.ca/washington-was-behind-ukraine-coup-obama-admits-that-us-brokered-a-deal-in-support-of-regime-change/5429142
To nothing like the same extent - which is obvious to anyone willing to look.
They are not as bad as eachother. None of them are angels granted, but to conflate them as equals is simplistic nonsense. In terms of money spent, the revealed capability of their intelligence gathering, military capability, bases, operations and revealed intentions they are far worse. This is so obvious it should barely need explaining - now unless you can show me a comparable basis of evaluation for the Russians or anyone else your arguments will ring hollow and pointless.
LOLLOLLOL!!!! That is a good one.
Evidence that perhaps might not have become available had they not gone looking for what they already knew was there? That's a cracker!
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 17:11:42 GMT
But the U.S. had already agreed with Russia that they wouldn't join NATO - an agreement they reneged on.
Bit like when Russia agreed that Ukraine could have Crimea and reneged on it !
Russian special forces are fighting in Ukraine under the disguise of armed Rebels, not that much different to USA and uk special forces operations in Syria ? Yet one is is defending its self and the others are trying to gain further interests? Next you will be telling us Russia are protecting their little neighbours .
Evidence that perhaps might not have become available had they not gone looking for what they already knew was there?
Bit like sir Jimmy, widely know or suspected what was happening over decades, but not until 1 person came forward and lifted the lid on it does the full scale of what had gone on come out. Was there a us conspiracy there as well ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 17:26:08 GMT
You call it war mongering, some would call it protecting free will and fighting injustice. Countries are putting troops in Africa still to protect people from genoside (f*ck knows how that's spelt). Like markedox said the USA has probably benefited in certain situations, but that has also come at a massive cost to them in both money and lives of its service personnel . It's not ww2 any more ,your enemy don't wear the same uniform, who are you to decide if innocent people should be protect by a world super power, u say we should help out Syrian refugees, but the USA shouldnt get involved in trying to make their country safe so they could stay there ? Well lets look at a few recent examples of the U.S. defending freedom and democracy. Libya: The country has descended into anarchy - 300,000 refugees have been displaced and it is now one of the most lawless and dangerous nations in the world. Iraq: Country shattered, ISIS created, 1 million+ dead, 1.5 million refugees displaced internally, 100,000 on the move to other countries. Yemen: American weapons and expertise are aiding Saudi Arabian operations and War Crimes in Yemen, creating a humanitarian catastrophe with millions at risk of starvation. Syria: U.S. incitement and support of Sunni Islamist factions has dragged the country into all out civil war - 3 million have left Syria with 6.5 million internally displaced refugees. Afghanistan: Taliban back and stronger than ever - immense distrust now between Afghan people and western nations, a shade under 100,000 people dead. the moral of the story is this - When NATO and the U.S. come to defend democracy in your country - LEAVE WHILE YOU STILL CAN!!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 17:28:39 GMT
What does that have to do with...anything?
Anyway it was (and is) of course a cover up maintained by the British establishment.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 17:32:06 GMT
But the U.S. had already agreed with Russia that they wouldn't join NATO - an agreement they reneged on. Bit like when Russia agreed that Ukraine could have Crimea and reneged on it !
Russian special forces are fighting in Ukraine under the disguise of armed Rebels, not that much different to USA and uk special forces operations in Syria ? Yet one is is defending its self and the others are trying to gain further interests? Next you will be telling us Russia are protecting their little neighbours . Evidence that perhaps might not have become available had they not gone looking for what they already knew was there? Bit like sir Jimmy, widely know or suspected what was happening over decades, but not until 1 person came forward and lifted the lid on it does the full scale of what had gone on come out. Was there a us conspiracy there as well ? So you expect the Russians alone to honour agreements AFTER they are betrayed? The U.S. has advanced a military and economic alliance to Russia's borders and you expect the Russians to do nothing?
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 17:32:38 GMT
That is also down to the fact that you can't train an army in a few months, and a country needs to work together to sort them selves out. The taliban were a match for elite uk and USA forces , no real surprise when they were asked to with draw that the local forces couldn't compete. Iraq has so many factions fighting each other that you will struggle to bring that country under control, even saddam struggled. Not sure many Iraqi's would have rather he stayed in charge though.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 17:35:24 GMT
What does that have to do with...anything? Anyway it was (and is) of course a cover up maintained by the British establishment. Hahaha . I give up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 17:44:10 GMT
yeah you always give up yellows and resort to silly playground banter when you have no ground whatsoever left to stand on.
sad that you don't have the moral fibre to admit that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 17:46:08 GMT
That is also down to the fact that you can't train an army in a few months, and a country needs to work together to sort them selves out. The taliban were a match for elite uk and USA forces , no real surprise when they were asked to with draw that the local forces couldn't compete. Iraq has so many factions fighting each other that you will struggle to bring that country under control, even saddam struggled. Not sure many Iraqi's would have rather he stayed in charge though. asked to withdraw!!!!!!!!!?two belters tonight in this thread!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2015 17:49:48 GMT
Sounds familiar . I've not run away, your just impossible to have a rational argument against.
|
|
|
Post by Marked Ox on Sept 30, 2015 12:58:22 GMT
No doubt - but does this diminish in any way what the U.S. does? Does it not in fact reinforce my scepticism about their motives in exposing FIFA - an option they have declined to exercise for forty odd years despite the fact that it was an open secret that FIFA was corrupt? Why does the U.S.and the corporate media suddenly get exercised about FIFA now - with a Russian World Cup on the way? Hell of a coincidence isn't it? But the U.S. had already agreed with Russia that they wouldn't join NATO - an agreement they reneged on. Contrary to the verbal promise made to Gorbachev which secured German reunification, NATO expanded to the east. In 1999, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland were welcomed into the alliance. Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia joined in 2004. At the April 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, the United States supported inviting Georgia and Ukraine to join the alliance. In May 2008, the EU concurred, thus knowingly crossing Russia’s “red line”. That is wilfully provocative - how do you think the building of a Russian military / economic alliance would play on the borders of the U.S? its unthinkable as well you know. if you want to invoke history then it is the U.S. that does the lion share of invading countries - not Russia. Wikileaks has proved U.S. intent towards a Syrian rebellion long before the uprising with captured telegrams- they have since poured billions of dollars into arming various Islamist extremist groups against Assad.
Syria is a strategic partner to Russia and has an obvious vested interest in propping up Assad - by facilitating civil war which was their intention from the outset the U.S. were happy to shatter an entire nation in order to deny a rival an ally within their legitimate sphere of influence.
their actions have nothing whatsoever to do with your simplistic goodies and baddies notions about Syria. Now there is the risk on an all out proxy war that could be the preamble for WWIII. I am not supporting Assad - but we need a peace process in Syria - not an ongoing military escalation, both the U.S. and Russia must stop arming factions in the civil war.
^ this is absolutely ridiculous ^ the U.S government has made no secret of its military and "non-military" aid to Syrian rebels - how effective it has been is an open question. Billions of dollars have been spent however. The EU concurred that the Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO - clearly provocative. This is the trouble with you i'm afraid - you accept every narrative offered by the mainstream media as truth. What do you actually know about that rebellion? Who funded it? Who carried it out?
You've not thought about any of this at all have you? I have.
www.globalresearch.ca/washington-was-behind-ukraine-coup-obama-admits-that-us-brokered-a-deal-in-support-of-regime-change/5429142
To nothing like the same extent - which is obvious to anyone willing to look.
They are not as bad as eachother. None of them are angels granted, but to conflate them as equals is simplistic nonsense. In terms of money spent, the revealed capability of their intelligence gathering, military capability, bases, operations and revealed intentions they are far worse. This is so obvious it should barely need explaining - now unless you can show me a comparable basis of evaluation for the Russians or anyone else your arguments will ring hollow and pointless.
LOLLOLLOL!!!! That is a good one.
Evidence that perhaps might not have become available had they not gone looking for what they already knew was there? That's a cracker!
So again the US is the great evil blah, blah, blah. I can't take you seriously when you dismiss the deaths, destruction of infrastructure and homes, dislocation and subjugation of peoples in other sovereign countries by Russia and China as not as bad as what the US have done. You are so myopic about the evil US that you have become an apologist for the Russians. They are all as bad as each other, its just you dismissing/downplaying the actions of Russia and China as somehow lesser yet misery, persecution, destruction and death followed. Also, why aren't the SOVEREIGN STATES of Poland, the Baltic States, and other ex-Warsaw pact countries allowed to determine their own destiny and try to get security from Russian aggression and political meddling/threats by choosing to join NATO (considering 20th century history between the various countries and Russia)? Or do these countries have to role over and do whatever Russia want? You can't have it both ways with the US either,on one hand accusing them of interfering in other countries and then accuse them of not interfering by failing to stop the above countries joining NATO! Also, I assume you have official documentation regarding the comparison of various Military/Intelligence capabilities and intentions for the US, Russia and China(the largest standing army in the world by the way) to make such a definite statement on the subject. So why don't you publish these documents to prove your point as it will be interesting to compare Cyber-Warfare capabilities. Or is it Mr Myopic looking at the subject again?! As for FIFA comment, that is the best you can do? Without doubt, Mr Myopic striking again.
|
|