December 17, 2017, 08:27:31 AM

Author Topic: Bronies meet and greet  (Read 19867 times)

Online Life Improvement

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2498

Offline Aurata

  • Expert Waygook
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Gender: Male
  • Je regrette rien
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #101 on: January 13, 2017, 08:11:32 AM »
How is the EU a CIA project? To which extent? My reading of history is the EU grew out of the European Coal and Steel Community. At which point did the CIA become involved? What historical document support that claim?

Quote
The European Union always was a CIA project, as Brexiteers discover
Telegraph 27 April

It was Washington that drove European integration in the late 1940s, and funded it covertly under the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon administrations.

While irritated at times, the US has relied on the EU ever since as the anchor to American regional interests alongside NATO....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/04/27/the-european-union-always-was-a-cia-project-as-brexiteers-discov/
Imagine your Korea...

Offline TorontoToronto

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 112
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #102 on: January 13, 2017, 10:04:10 PM »
So, in post war Europe, where US interests were for Europe to set aside political and economic differences and ally against the USSR so the US doesn't have to return to Europe in 10 years and fight another war, it used whatever tools it could, including the CIA, to tweek European cohesion and support Europeans who shared that vision?

To cut to the chase, you're committing the genetic fallacy:

"a conclusion is suggested based solely on someone's or something's history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context"

For example, the EU, as I noted, grew out of a coal union. It would be silly to most, maybe not to you, to suggest the EU is a project of Big Coal. It was, sure, 60 years ago. It is something very different today. That the CIA funded and encouraged those with a pan European view THEN does not imply they do so TODAY.

So an EU WAS a project of the CIA. Yes. Agreed. The EU is still a project? Claim. Evidence?




« Last Edit: January 13, 2017, 10:23:09 PM by TorontoToronto »

Offline Aurata

  • Expert Waygook
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Gender: Male
  • Je regrette rien
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #103 on: January 14, 2017, 12:21:12 AM »
So, in post war Europe, where US interests were for Europe to set aside political and economic differences and ally against the USSR so the US doesn't have to return to Europe in 10 years and fight another war, it used whatever tools it could, including the CIA, to tweek European cohesion and support Europeans who shared that vision?

To cut to the chase, you're committing the genetic fallacy:

"a conclusion is suggested based solely on someone's or something's history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context"

For example, the EU, as I noted, grew out of a coal union. It would be silly to most, maybe not to you, to suggest the EU is a project of Big Coal. It was, sure, 60 years ago. It is something very different today. That the CIA funded and encouraged those with a pan European view THEN does not imply they do so TODAY.

So an EU WAS a project of the CIA. Yes. Agreed. The EU is still a project? Claim. Evidence?

You got completely destroyed there Toronto-boy  :laugh:

Its all about coal?? Lol. You're almost as naïve as life improvement.

But to respond to your illogical assertion...

Why would the US, having committed so much to making a federal Europe under their guiding hand,  suddenly abandon its project?

If, as you now suddenly claim, that having committed so much to their goal, the US just suddenly walked away one day.. why then did Obama fly into London in a frenzy and order England to stay in the EU?
Why is it that whenever the process of "ever closer union" hit an obstacle, a US president- no matter the post-holders name or party affiliation- would intervene and in no uncertain terms tell the Europeans to hurry up and speed up the process of unification into one state?

Don't you see the trend here? Increasing concentration of power into the hands of ever fewer people and the gradual removal of the democratic underpinning of the west. The EU is run by five unelected "presidents". It is a rubber-stamping sham, there is nothing democratic about it.

The result of EU tyanny is already clear. You have only to look at the  massive asset and property bubbles that have hit the EU in the past decade. The banking crises and large-scale unemployment (e.g. over 50% youth unemployment in Greece, spain and Portugal), as well as a lack of border contriols resulting in Europe being swamped by massive numbers of economic migrants and refugees from a hostile culture.

something for you to read:

Quote
Richard J. Aldrich (1997), OSS, CIA and European unity: The American committee on United Europe, 1948-60, Diplomacy & Statecraft,8(1), pp. 184-227

https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/people/aldrich/publications/oss_cia_united_europe_eec_eu.pdf

excerpts:

Quote
“The use of covert operations for the specific promotion of European unity has attracted little scholarly attention and remains poorly understood. … the discreet injection of over three million dollars between 1949 and 1960, mostly from US government sources, was central to efforts to drum up mass support for the Schuman Plan, the European Defence Community and a European Assembly with sovereign powers. This covert contribution never formed less than half the European Movement’s budget and, after 1952, probably two-thirds. Simultaneously they sought to undermine the staunch resistance of the British Labour government to federalist ideas…. It is also particularly striking that the same small band of senior officials, many of them from the Western [note: this means US] intelligence community, were central in supporting the three most important transnational elite groups emerging in the 1950s: the European Movement, the Bilderberg Group and Jean Monnet’s Action Committee for a United States of Europe [ACUE]. Finally, at a time when some British antifederalists saw a continued ‘special relationship’ with the United States as an alternative to (perhaps even a refuge from) European federalism, it is ironic that some European federalist initiatives should have been sustained with American support.”

Imagine your Korea...

Offline TorontoToronto

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 112
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #104 on: January 14, 2017, 01:21:31 AM »
Hand waving questions on your part are not evidence of a claim or an illogical assertion (like your obvious genetic fallacy). Where did I claim the USA just walked away or has no on going interest in a united Europe? The USA has an interest in a united Canada. A united India.  Even a united China. Having to staff 1 embassy vs 10 embassies. Having 1 nation to negotiate trade deals and defense agreements with versus 10 countries. The free trade friendly governments of the USA over the last decades actually take the view that single, large prosperous nations help the USA, not hinder it.

I'm questioning your vague claims about the extent of the CIA's current role in assuring the EU does not dissolve further. You can keep throwing links for something we both agree with, the USA had an interest post war in fostering a united Europe. It used a variety of means, including funds from the CIA, to back groups that advocated for such.

But, again, I'll ask. Specially what evidence is there the CIA is involved in maintaining the union? To what extent?

Offline Aurata

  • Expert Waygook
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Gender: Male
  • Je regrette rien
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #105 on: January 14, 2017, 07:02:38 PM »
not evidence of a claim or an illogical assertion

You tried to make out that American meddling in Europe's politics was a thing of the past. Your non-logic was in assuming that after having committed vast resources to creating the EU (an organization spawned by, and under their own control) ..that they would suddenly decide to be honest fellows, hold their hands up and walk away, sometime in the recent past when -conveniently- we cannot access classified documents.

Quote
The USA has an interest in a united Canada. A united India.  Even a united China. Having to staff 1 embassy vs 10 embassies. Having 1 nation to negotiate trade deals and defense agreements with versus 10 countries.

Lol you think the overriding factor is to save on embassy building costs?

Quote
The free trade friendly governments of the USA over the last decades actually take the view that single, large prosperous nations help the USA, not hinder it.

Pretty far behind in this debate aren't we? You are as naïve as a baby spring lamb.

its not about generously encouraging unity in foreign nations. Its about control.


Washington has been, and is, on a mission to assert American hegemony over the globe. They aren't about making friends with prosperous independent nations, they seek to bring them under their control.

For this reason Washington and the CIA created any number of international umbrella organs- from the EU to NATO- to serve as tools of American dominance. To serve American interests. To allow Washington to project its aggression around the world. To form "coallitions" that justify its wars of aggression. To become vassal states that dare not step out of line with US foreign policy. You see America does not respect other independent nations. Either they agree to do whatever the US wants, or they are enemies. it really is that simple. That is the policy Washington has followed, formally laid down in the Wolfowitz doctrine. This maniacal drive to world domination aka globalism got a boost with the dissolution of the USSR in 91. From then on, Washington saw no obstacle standing in its way. It could make wars on a whim, it could operate without interference from any other superpower, it could mould the world in its own image.

By creating the EU, they have robbed the varied nations of Europe of sovereignty and democracy and subordinated them to Washington. When was the last time you saw the EU differ from Washington in terms of foreign policy? It is too late for those EU member states, now, to act in their own interest or have their own fp. They have lost sovereignty, they are slave states to the central banks. To be looted by them. Greece has been asset-stripped. So was Ireland. No country that gives up its own currency, laws and state bank can be said to be sovereign. They are at the mercy of the elites.They are dictated to by Brussels, a rubber-stamping operation without any democratic function whatsoever.

The fact that the EU is dictated to by Washington is evident in the synchronization of EU foreign policy with Washington. For example after Russian actions in Georgia, all EU member states suddenly followed Washington in imposing sanctions. They did the same over Crimea. And in any number of other decisions, the EI has acted against its own interest but in the interests of Washington.

How is it in the interests of Europe to provoke a war with Russia? Russia could take over western Europe in their lunch break, using conventional weapons alone. Yet Europe has  been consistently forced to toe the line and follow the crazy agressions of Washington, wether it be in the middle east or anywhere else. To its own detriment. The situation has gotten so ludicrous that even EU leaders are unsettled.

Quote
Juncker: We can’t let EU relations with Russia be dictated by US

Europe must improve its relationship with Russia, and should not let this be something decided by Washington, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said on Thursday (8 October).

The European Union joined the United States in imposing sanctions on Russia last year...

EU sanctions are up for renewal at the end of this year, and so far the bloc has taken a united line on maintaining them, even though some member states are being hit hard, including by Russian counter-sanctions on Western food imports
https://www.euractiv.com/section/europe-s-east/news/juncker-we-can-t-let-eu-relations-with-russia-be-dictated-by-us/







Imagine your Korea...

Online hippo

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 134
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #106 on: January 15, 2017, 05:06:56 PM »
Aurata,

I do not think any government entity has ever been organized enough to pull off the sort of grand plans you talk about.  The talk of "secret" "globalist" plans bring up mental imagery of world leaders or financiers, etc. sitting in a room plotting stuff out.

In reality, isn't more likely that all large political entities have always sought to increase their influence to yes, "control," other nations and prevent alternative examples for other peoples to follow (the Domino theory).  But it just usually seems like people follow whatever they nation states, etc. their interests to be.

Before the United States, Britain was the dominant global empire.  They tried to gain as much power over the globe as possible.  The Global Wars of the 20th century made the United States the most powerful empire in the history of the world, controlling over half of the world's wealth at the end of WW2. But this was not planned out so much as a combination of planning and reacting to world events.   Of course, the U.S. has acted to suppress democracy (e.g. Chile)--and support it (e.g. West Germany) depending on what they perceive to be in their interest). These things never have a moral component except as window dressing for justification.  Do political states ever act in accordance with moral principals?  For states, morality is just justification, window dressing for actions.

While you are right that the United States has been particularly aggressive toward Russia since 1991, expanding NATO despite promises to do so and acting against Putin in a past Russia election, but this is not a grand conspiracy, as you make it sound like, using undefined words like "secret" and "globalists."  (These words might be very different things to different people.) What do you expect a power with as much strength as the U.S. do in this situation?  Any power with this amount of influence would try to increase their influence.  If Russia, Britain, etc., etc. had developed the same massive military structure, they would do the same thing. 

That being said, it is good to be critical of the US.  The wars in the Middle East, denial of climate change, etc.  They deserve more criticism than other powers because they are the most powerful.  Also, who can trust any nation state with the surveillance and military apparatus of the United States?

Countries allied with the United States are not necessarily puppets.  They--or at least the most powerful in their countries--are pursuing what they perceive to be their interests.


« Last Edit: January 15, 2017, 05:11:14 PM by hippo »

Offline Aurata

  • Expert Waygook
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Gender: Male
  • Je regrette rien
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #107 on: January 15, 2017, 08:41:45 PM »
I do not think any government entity has ever been organized enough to pull off the sort of grand plans you talk about.  The talk of "secret" "globalist" plans bring up mental imagery of world leaders or financiers, etc. sitting in a room plotting stuff out.


sigh.... you need to think more.

Conspiracies are the norm, not a rare outlandish concept.

Like propaganda, secretive conspiracies to topple governments and murder politicians are as old as civilization itself.

Ancient Rome was chock full of conspiracies- some that happened, some that were uncovered and thwarted. Look up Catiline, the Roman senator who conspired with malcontent aristocrats to try and overthrow the sate. His plot was uncovered by Cicero.

Look up the gunpowder plot. When a band of conspirators tried to kill King James 1.

Look up  the pazzi conspiracy. When Pope Sixtus IV tried to wrest power from the Medici family by assassination and then takeover of the city government.

Look up the July 20 plot. When a group of Hitlers commanders tried to assassinate him and take over Berlins supreme command headquarters.

Look up the Newburgh conspiracy. The Lincoln assassination conspiracy.


It is a constant of history that humans tend to form groups with similar objectives and then use force or machination, wether open or secret, to achieve their aims, usually by eliminating those who oppose them.

Human nature hasn't suddenly changed, politicians are not now angelic. Power corrupts as it always has. The only difference now is that the technological ability to deceive, propagandize and conspire is greater than ever before.


 
Quote
The Global Wars of the 20th century made the United States the most powerful empire in the history of the world

America is an empire? lol. That's new. What do they own? Guam? Hawaii?

Quote
  Do political states ever act in accordance with moral principals? 

Principles.

I believe they do at times, and that America has in the past, yes. But to act on moral principle means you first have to have a guiding morality, and the west has been shedding its historic moral underpinning for quite some time already.

The current US political establishment is obviously corrupt and devoid of any guiding principle beyond self enrichment and amassing power.

Quote
What do you expect a power with as much strength as the U.S. do in this situation?

To act fairly and responsibly like they did in the past.

Quote
Any power with this amount of influence would try to increase their influence.

Real power is inclusive, not exclusive. It accrues power by consensus not dictatorship. America is hated around the world now because their foreign policy consists of forcing other countries to do whatever they want, not respecting and working with other nations. Do you see the difference?

Quote
  If Russia, Britain, etc., etc. had developed the same massive military structure, they would do the same thing.
 

Not necessarily. It depends on the ruling philosophy behind the government.

Russia could have taken over Ukraine in its tea-break. Did it do so? No.it could invade and take western Europe in a very short time, without too much hassle. Has it done so? No. Communism is dead, the driving force has gone.

Israel could own half of the middle east already, if it had decided to invade. It has never stepped foot outside its borders, it has voluntarily returned territory won.


So what, I hear you ask, is the ethos behind US aggression?

While they do a lot by stealth or deception via their media propaganda, their goals really are no secret, it is plainly stated in the Wolfowitz doctrine, it was stated by Bush. American global hegemony via globalism. A new world order. The neo-cons are a sort of religious cult that believes Americans are the indispensable people, with a right to dominate the world.
The elites, with their special interest groups, the military-industrial complex, the agro-chemical businesses, the multinational corporations want to make the world their exclusive playground. They want to eliminate national governments and bring the world under one centralised power structure (with them in control, of course). They want to run the show.

The US political establishment has been hiacked by the oligarchs, as upper-powerful elite that want to take over the globe and reduce the common man to the status of a dumbed-down worker drone, a slave doing their bidding.
Imagine your Korea...

Offline MayorHaggar

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3045
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #108 on: January 15, 2017, 09:20:55 PM »
You're right comrade, the US has indeed been hijacked by Russian oligarchs.

Online hippo

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 134
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #109 on: January 16, 2017, 03:34:41 PM »
I concede that I stupidly used the word principal/principle wrong.

Also, I rambled a lot as I was writing as a way to procrastinate.

You have world affairs figured out so well in such a clear, even binary way. Please explain how the neo-conservatives were able to take over such complicated agencies with often contradictory aims after Bush took office.  Not to mention getting enough bipartisan support to enact their policies.  Seemingly little to no continuity in policy.  A drastic change brought about by a kind of "religious" political "cult."

What were the values that the US used to have? 
« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 03:39:49 PM by hippo »

Offline maximmm

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1457
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #110 on: January 16, 2017, 08:26:59 PM »
You're right comrade, the US has indeed been hijacked by Russian oligarchs.

Not only that - but they've also hijacked waygook!  :shocked:

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #111 on: January 17, 2017, 10:14:54 AM »
You're right comrade, the US has indeed been hijacked by Russian oligarchs.
Really? How so?

If Putin really did start backing Trump since 2011, as that "dossier" claims, then Putin has to be either the greatest Political Scientist ever (and a psychic to challenge Ms Cleo) or utterly insane. I love the logic- Putin thought the guy with the best chance of winning was the guy he allegedly had video of paying prostitutes to urinate on beds. Yeah, that makes total sense.

The only hijacking that has taken place is the NeoCon/NeoLib War Party that has taken our country into Iraq, seeks the utter destruction of Russia, and conjures up bugaboo after bugaboo for us to attack, invade, and most importantly, purchase weapons to defeat.

I'm glad you've fallen for their propaganda and their agenda. Let's go drone strike some Yemeni children and try to provoke a war in the Baltics.

Offline Ptolemy

  • Super Waygook
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #112 on: January 17, 2017, 11:53:33 AM »
Regarding "hijacking", a more accurate understanding is that the US has been hijacked (controlled) by the legal entities known as corporations.

It's not really a country anymore, just one big corporation. Since a corporation mindlessly chooses the decision that maximizes profits, it is quite easy for other countries to "hijack" the US via their corporations, by temping them with short-term profits (even though it destroys American citizen's own long-term best interests).

CN has been doing this for decades, the US has been doing it to themselves, perhaps RU is now doing it too? But the central issue is internal; the US vs themselves.

Offline MayorHaggar

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3045
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #113 on: January 17, 2017, 01:19:18 PM »
You're right comrade, the US has indeed been hijacked by Russian oligarchs.
Really? How so?

If Putin really did start backing Trump since 2011, as that "dossier" claims, then Putin has to be either the greatest Political Scientist ever (and a psychic to challenge Ms Cleo) or utterly insane. I love the logic- Putin thought the guy with the best chance of winning was the guy he allegedly had video of paying prostitutes to urinate on beds. Yeah, that makes total sense.

The only hijacking that has taken place is the NeoCon/NeoLib War Party that has taken our country into Iraq, seeks the utter destruction of Russia, and conjures up bugaboo after bugaboo for us to attack, invade, and most importantly, purchase weapons to defeat.

I'm glad you've fallen for their propaganda and their agenda. Let's go drone strike some Yemeni children and try to provoke a war in the Baltics.

Ok so you think Korea is the greatest country on Earth, you hate America, and you think an anti-American dictator is pretty good.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #114 on: January 17, 2017, 02:08:31 PM »

Ok so you think Korea is the greatest country on Earth, you hate America, and you think an anti-American dictator is pretty good.

I do not think Korea is the greatest country on Earth. Never have said it and I don't believe it. For one thing, I haven't been to every country on Earth or know enough to assume such a thing. Not agreeing with every hysterical judgment passed on this place does not mean you think it's the greatest place on Earth.

As for America, I'm no great fan of Trump, but I think the Trump Hysteria is ridiculous. I agree with some of Trump's general concepts even though I find him personally questionable. Not liking the NeoCon/NeoLib War Party is not the same thing as hating America and millions of Americans on the left and right share the same view as do millions who think this whole Russia craze is ridiculous. Good on Trump for at least questioning the whole MIC and reevaluating the American Empire and worrying more about America's borders, American jobs, and trade deals that benefit America rather than global corporate elites.

Seems to me the people that hate America are those that think we should clear everything with China first, sit back and watch jobs get outsourced, support a non-neutral primary that tipped the scales against Bernie Sanders, refuse to accept our electoral process, and push into confrontation with the second-greatest nuclear power in the world.

In other words, I think Korea should look out for Korea first, America should look out for America first, the UK should look out for the UK first, and Russia should look out for Russia first, at least as long as the global order does not seem to be operating with people's best interests in mind.

Putin is not anti-American insofar as he is not seeking to destroy America but rather maintain Russia's status. Is Putin plotting WWIII against America? Hardly. Back in the early 2000s Russia was looking to cooperate with America, particularly in fighting terror. It's only when America started walking NATO up to Russia's doorstep and supporting the overthrow of the legitimately elected pro-Russian President of Ukraine that Putin objected, as was right for him to do. Russia wants to sell us natural gas, not destroy us.

On the other hand we have posters who think foreigners are right and Koreans are wrong and that Koreans should put the needs and concerns of foreigners above those of Koreans; people who think the U.S. should pay more attention to refugees, corporations that outsource, and illegal immigrants than Americans; think Britons should take their orders from Brussels instead of 10 Downing St.; and that Russia should let NATO and the U.S. walk all over it because they have a more authoritarian and commanding form of government (which is generally how the Russians like things). 

My view is consistent. Can you say that the NeoCon/NeoLib world order is the same when it comes to values of progress, self-determination, and representation?

Offline MayorHaggar

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3045
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #115 on: January 17, 2017, 03:43:33 PM »
So to reiterate you hate America and want to destroy NATO just because it upsets Putin, and because Trump likes pee-pee.

We saw this kind of fascism-friendly BS in the West in the 1930's and it's not going to turn out any better this time.

« Last Edit: January 17, 2017, 03:45:28 PM by MayorHaggar »

Offline maximmm

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1457
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #116 on: January 17, 2017, 04:04:22 PM »
So to reiterate you hate America and want to destroy NATO just because it upsets Putin, and because Trump likes pee-pee.

We saw this kind of fascism-friendly BS in the West in the 1930's and it's not going to turn out any better this time.



Did you even read the post above?  Or are your reading comprehension skills that inadequate?




Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3823
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #117 on: January 17, 2017, 04:26:41 PM »
So to reiterate you hate America and want to destroy NATO just because it upsets Putin, and because Trump likes pee-pee.

We saw this kind of fascism-friendly BS in the West in the 1930's and it's not going to turn out any better this time.



Not moving NATO up to Latvia or Georgia (and giving them the power to engage us in full-on war with Russia) is not the same as wanting to destroy NATO or hating America. That's the same logic as saying to a British person in 1912 "You must hate the UK because you don't want to ally with Serbia and give them the power to drag us into war against Germany."

We saw the same kind of MIC imperialist war cabal in Japan in the 1930s that was on a collision course with a sleeping giant and hopefully we avoided that.

Do you really think Putin is about to blitzkrieg across Poland and into East Berlin? Are you out of your mind?

Then again, you actually believe the pee allegations, which have zero corroborating evidence, not to mention key elements of that dossier have been debunked and the whole thing has turned into a debacle for Buzzfeed. But hey, why let the truth get in the way of anti-Trump hysteria.

I'm no huge fan of Trump, but my goodness, people have just lost it when it comes to reflexively disagreeing with him simply because he is Trump.

Offline Aurata

  • Expert Waygook
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Gender: Male
  • Je regrette rien
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #118 on: January 17, 2017, 07:34:50 PM »
explain how the neo-conservatives were able to take over such complicated agencies with often contradictory aims after Bush took office.  Not to mention getting enough bipartisan support to enact their policies.  Seemingly little to no continuity in policy.

They infiltrated both parties. Globalists are everywhere- heads of industry, media, agribusiness, banks ....the lot.

What the elites are working toward transcends something so minor as party affiliation. The aim is US global hegemony. And there is a secret element to it, because ..its only because the Wolfowitz doctrine was leaked that we know what the neocon policy toward the world is.

Quote
What did America's values used to be?

They used to include a belief in democracy.

In recent years American freedoms have been seriously eroded at home.

Abroad, they now show a similar contempt for democracy as they topple democratically elected governments and replace them with puppet leaders who will look after US interests.

They used to believe in being a benevolent superpower.

A benevolent superpower would foster democracy in other nations, not try to enslave and subordinate them to US interests.

They ignore human rights violations in all kinds of countries, yet target entirely peaceful regimes simply for the crime of being independent and not kowtowing to US demands.

They used to act responsibly.

Needlessly making an enemy out of a nuclear-armed regional power, just because the minority ruling elite want to make billions out of defense contracts... is not acting responsibly: it is bringing the world to the edge of nuclear annihilation.

They should seek to make friends and allies, not make enemies and invent threats. Which is all the mischiefmakers in Washington do all day.

We got a very interesting few years ahead. The globalists will do everything they can to either neutralize Trump or bring him into the fold.

At the moment they're trying to pressure him into joining their plan of making conflict with Russia.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2017, 07:47:10 PM by Aurata »
Imagine your Korea...

Online hippo

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Posts: 134
  • Gender: Male
Re: Russia vs USA
« Reply #119 on: January 17, 2017, 07:52:10 PM »