(US owned news)
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/15/middleeast/russia-syria-hardware-lister/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/13/middleeast/syria-civil-war/index.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/18/john-bolton-russias-syria-campaign-blurs-obamas-vi/
US owned news lol..... you are a dipshit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_parties_in_Russia#Currently_represented_in_the_State_Duma Russia is basically a one party state with state owned and censored media outlets. The US has two major different ideological parties and all independent news agencies with different and varying political opinions. You can't compare the two. John Bolton and Donald Trump have absolutely no authority, relevance or connection with the present US government whatsoever, pure opinion and entertainment analysis.
Personally I like Turkey's proposal of an international safe-zone in Syria to stop the conflict in at least part of Syria. Russia flying sorties for the Assad Regime's offensive against the rebels is sure to create thousands of more refugees, and displace hundreds of thousands of civilians who understandably don't want to live under his regime, they need somewhere to go.
Ahh the old, Republican vs Democrat charade.
Remember when Bush jr. (republican party nominee) ran against classmate & bonesman Senator John Kerry (Democratic party nominee) in 2004?
Nothing fishy about that at all... We are the cornerstone of democracy for sure. Our government leaders could never lie to us.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/skull-and-bones/
How is CNN not US owned news?
Who owns it if not Americans?
How is CNN not US owned news?
Who owns it if not Americans?
International Safe Zone idea being pushed by American interests by one of the few countries who side with what we are doing in Syria... What would stop all the rebel insurgents we are backing and giving arms to from going and hiding within the safe zone to evade russian airstrikes and syrian ground forces???
The majority of Syria is not under control of the Syrian government, they could barely defend their own capital city before the Russians intervened. There would have to be some sort of multilateral agreement to maintain the status quo.
Still what would stop all the rebel factions... The ones supplied by America, from going and hiding within this safe zone to avoid Russian air strikes and Syrian/Iranian ground forces?
Yeah, I am pretty sure.
U.S. is pretty open about how they are funding and arming rebel factions within syria that are against ISIS and also against Assad & the government of Syria.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/19/us-mideast-crisis-syria-aleppo-idUSKCN0SD16O20151019
"Opposition groups in Syria took a new turn in late 2011, during the Syrian Civil War, as they united to form the Syrian National Council (SNC),[4] which has received significant international support and recognition as a partner for dialogue. The Syrian National Council was recognized or supported in some capacity by at least 17 member states of the United Nations, with three of those (France, United Kingdom and the United States) being permanent members of the Security Council.[5][6][7][8][9][10] The Syrian National Council is considered to be influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood and include many affiliated members. The Islamic Front, a major anti-regime Islamist Sunni militia during the Syrian Civil War, is affiliated with the Syrian National Council."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_opposition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_involvement_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War
Who cares where the weapons are made. Are you saying that the US does not peddle with Soviet guns? Oh...man..im sorry to tell you but the US and everybody else on planet earth only deal with Soviet weapons in conflict zones around the globe. They only get Western weaponry if its 100% sure they are allies forever or if they have asstons of money or if they are stab. Western rebels and poor middle eastern pro-West "allied" countries will never see a single West made gun.
Alex Jones: worlds nuttiest conspiracy nut, Ron Paul, & other far right wing voices)]
This nutcase thought Obama was going to order the Army to invade Texas and put us all in FEMA concentration camps lmao
The US has two major different ideological parties and all independent news agencies with different and varying political opinions.
To be honest. We dont really KNOW, if the Syrian president is actually evil. Sure he is a cunt, but who isnt. I mean the media does try its best to discredit him, but there really is no evidence. And the fact that he is taking Russias assitance proves little. The dude is losing his country to terrorists and Russians(seemingly atleast), offered some solution. I wouldnt be suprised if he even manipulated Russia to make a move, which is actually kinda smart. "If you dont assist another pro-nato country will rise in your borders" would have probably been the point. Playing the ruskies fears.
To be honest. We dont really KNOW, if the Syrian president is actually evil.
During the space race, NASA spent huge amounts of money developing a new type of pen that could function in zero gravity, as the ink would otherwise not flow and the pen would be useless. This was to allow their astronauts to write and take notes reliably in space. American ingenuity at its very best.NASA aswell as Pentagon has from the get go been funneling tax dollars from the public into the private sector.
The Russians used pencils. Because pencils are cheap and still work in space.
During the space race, NASA spent huge amounts of money developing a new type of pen that could function in zero gravity, as the ink would otherwise not flow and the pen would be useless. This was to allow their astronauts to write and take notes reliably in space. American ingenuity at its very best.
The Russians used pencils. Because pencils are cheap and still work in space.
About that, the problem with pencils is that they leave graphite behind and at low gravity this goes into all kinds of critical machinery in the craft, not to mention eyes. Pencils are also flammable and that is a major hazard in space cabins. In any case, both space programs started with pencils then used space pens which they bought from Fisher only a few dollars per unit.
About that, the problem with pencils is that they leave graphite behind and at low gravity this goes into all kinds of critical machinery in the craft, not to mention eyes. Pencils are also flammable and that is a major hazard in space cabins. In any case, both space programs started with pencils then used space pens which they bought from Fisher only a few dollars per unit.on the ISS powerful ventilation (so CO2 does not accumulate around astronaut), so sure all the fine graphite particles will instantly sucked and filtered
Because there were space stations like the ISS in 1965 when the zero-G pen was patentedpretty sure C02 behaved in 1965 just same as modern )) and methods of dealing with them in a confined space similar )
Less vodvka pls
During the space race, NASA spent huge amounts of money developing a new type of pen that could function in zero gravity, as the ink would otherwise not flow and the pen would be useless. This was to allow their astronauts to write and take notes reliably in space. American ingenuity at its very best.http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp
The Russians used pencils. Because pencils are cheap and still work in space.
with the money that the US spends on the democratization of the shitholes around the world, they could build one paradise country on the moon every year. For all who want leave dat shitholes. The problem is that the happy inhabitants of the moon will not bring them profit (for the military industry) and oil.
If oil is replaced with a more efficient energy source do you think all these middle-eastern problems will magically disappear?
Yes we need to profit off of the oil wejust stop claim what usa or any another country here for fix ppls problems and not for heir own goalsbuysteal from all these poor middle-eastern countries ortheirour economy would surely collapse!
There are plenty of reliable countries with large stockpiles of oil all over the world, Russia included. If they don't sell their oil what do they get? They don't have to sell their oil and they don't have to buy foreign weapons. They also don't have to kill each other over ethnic and religious differences but they still do.
If oil is replaced with a more efficient energy source do you think all these middle-eastern problems will magically disappear?
A taste of the moderate opposition.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=78c_1445376835
A taste of the moderate opposition.You shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=78c_1445376835
No those guys are not moderate lol. The US has been bombing them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/08/28/u-s-drone-strikes-batter-jabhat-al-nusra-encouraging-moderates/
That crappy Russian propaganda video is referring to the US condemning Russian bombings in that area. There are Syrians there fighting those Al-Nursa terrorists and Russia doesn't distinguish regular Syrians from terrorist groups and bombed the area indiscriminately.
You shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
They make up the majority of the opposition the media and the West have tried to pass off as the moderate opposition. The "moderate" FSA do not exist. My post stands, your attempt to debunk it has not succeeded and neither has Xant's addition to it. In many cases U.S backed "moderate opposition" end up either fleeing, arming Al-Nusra, IS and other similar groups and then fleeing or just joining them with their U.S supplied weapons.
You shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
Al Nursa, the group in that video used to be part of Al Qaeda. They broke off from Al Qaeda and started attacking them. Originally there was some cooperation and a ceasefire between them and the moderate rebels but they ended up fighting each other so they got put back on the shit-list, there was originally some speculation that they might give up their extreme ideals but that wasn't the case.
If you chose to believe the Russian propaganda that there are only two sides in Syria, the Government and the terrorists then so be it.
Exactly it's clearly a repost of a video from years ago with a redubbed title.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Doesn't look like the same city in the video anymore does it?
Awesome,ToviMurmi is back... Let the entertainment commence! :lol:
Molly didn't shit a brick whenterroristsforeigners came to live in their country, so got bitten by one and became a terrorist themself. It's pretty scary. But alas that's the fate of all LIBERALS
Don't worry Murmi, you and I will be the only 2 sane people in this thread. They wont get my blood! bajfowijhfuwefuibwerufer
I wish the U.S. would just back out of Syria... We'd save a ton of money going forward, We would strengthen ties with Russia, It's the perfect exit strategyI agree completely. My country are also doing air raids in Syria and the only benefactor as far as I can see is military industry and affiliated companies and banks. Especially corporations like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics etc.
We've spent billions of dollars there and have literally received nothing in return. The region did not become more stable, Assad is no closer to being outsed, ISIS was formed, U.S. taxpayers took it up the ass.
This country would be so well funded and have a much stronger economy, if we stopped throwing money at every single problem that arises on the face of the planet.
There are more than two sides. But that doesn't suddenly make them moderate opposition because they aren't IS, AL-Qaeda or CIA trained mercenaries.
If you choose to believe the Western propaganda that there are rebels only consisting of good willed Syrians who want "democracy and freedom" then so be it. ( Ask the Libyans how freedom and democracy is working out for them.)
Just remember what history can teach us. After the CIA had trained and armed jihadi's to overthrow the Soviet Union in Afghanistan (no doubt people like you, Molly, Xant would have been cheering them on), these same jihadi's took it upon themselves to form an organisation to oppose Western imperialism in the ME and opposed American bases in Saudi-Arabia and other places in the M.E. Eventually these jihadi's concocted a plans which saw them launch multiple attacks against the West leading to the deaths of thousands of civilians.
But I'm sure you, Molly and Xant are FINE with it right? Everything is hunky dory, civilians being killed by terrorists we backed was worth it because the big bad soviet union was driven back!.... You guys are living in a propaganda bubble.
Also
Can you quote a source for the original post to see how the information differs between the original post and the repost I plucked from LL, since the article you've posted in response has not disproved anything shown on the post I linked.
You can't base your entire logic around hindsight and speculation, or even compare one thing to another without some kind of proof or connection. Just about everything you said was either some type of fallacy or illogical comparison. I don't think anyone has these unrealistic expectations you assume, if that were the case then coalition airstrikes from several different countries wouldn't have been bombing these various terrorist groups for years now making your entire point and argument complete bullshit.
Let's pretend that the Soviet's weren't responsible for 1.5 million civilian deaths in their invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, let's also pretend that Assad hasn't killed thousands of his own civilians. Let's also pretend that hundreds of thousands of rebels and foreign fighters weren't already fighting against the Soviet Union in the Soviet-Afghan war , and a similar case exists today in Syria against Assad.
Using hindsight we could assume that revolutions are easily hijacked. There are many examples of this throughout history. The Bolsheviks betrayed and murdered the Russian sailors of the Baltic Fleet who were public heroes of the Russian Revolution at Kronstadt. Osama Bin Laden was a mere lieutenant under someone else's command during the Soviet-Afghan war, but continued fighting against other various groups after soviet withdrawal and would later go on to lead the most notorious terrorist group. There are plenty of examples of revolutions and civil wars turning ugly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-rebel_conflict_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Al_Qaeda_breaks_links_with_ISIL_and_al-Nusra_Front_joins_the_fight
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Markada
I agree completely. My country are also doing air raids in Syria and the only benefactor as far as I can see is military industry and affiliated companies and banks. Especially corporations like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics etc.
Without proof or connection? Proof of what? Proof that we've been backing jihadi's and extremists? It's all over the internet and is well documented and even on some levels admitted by our governments. Without proof or connection of what? That there's NO connection between the CIA training of SUNNI EXTREMISTS back in the 80's and the rise of AL-Qaeda including its presence in Syria today? That there's NO connection or proof that the latest CIA attempts to train and arm jihadi's the exact same type of SUNNI EXTREMIST that they had trained and armed back in the 80's will only repeat the same mistakes of the past despite being faced with multiple videos documenting their barbaric conduct? Speculation? No, its a review of past mistakes and poor conduct which has destabilised the region and led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, millions of people. The same mistakes our governments are making today. It's an illogical comparison to compare SUNNI EXTREMISTS with SUNNI EXTREMISTS, or CIA BACKED REBELS WITH CIA BACKED REBELS? It's illogical to assume that these same rebels who've been chanting about the creation of an Islamic state and who've engaged in atrocities against minorities will not benefit the Syrian people? Who the fuck are you? Get your head out of your arse.
And about the so called "coalition airstrikes", IS has expanded and GROWN under their airstrikes, and throughout the years of these apparent airstrikes the U.S have found time to "accidentally" airdrop arms and equipment in IS held areas. As we speak the Iraqi army are uncovering U.S dropped supplies left behind by fleeing IS militants. In all these years of airstrikes we've not even matched what the Russian's have been able to achieve in a matter of weeks.
Also screw your attempted history lesson on the Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan. The groups the CIA empowered in the 80's to overthrow the Soviets were the exact same groups our armed forces have spend over 10 years fighting in Afghanistan, a conflict in which we've spent billions or even trillions engaging in a conflict in which we've killed thousands, many civilians and lost hundreds. If you want to talk about logic, tell me the logic of that?
Yes let's ignore more facts and get even more butthurt that all your assumptions are baseless and don't follow any logical order or chain of events whatsoever. Lol CIA empowerment, that's hilarious. Yes the CIA must have been wearing mind control helmets and forced hundreds of thousands of Muslims to fight against the atheist communists. You are retarded kid.
I'm retarded? You're living in an alternate universe. Also answer my question. Where is the logic in fighting the very same armed groups we empowered, wasting lives and treasure with practically no positive outcome?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Afghanistan
I quote.
"The supplying of billions of dollars in arms to the Afghan mujahideen militants was one of the CIA's longest and most expensive covert operations.[5] The CIA provided assistance to the fundamentalist insurgents through the Pakistani secret services, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), in a program called Operation Cyclone. At least 3 billion in U.S. dollars were funneled into the country to train and equip troops with weapons. Together with similar programs by Saudi Arabia, Britain's MI6 and SAS, Egypt, Iran, and the People's Republic of China,[6] the arms included Stinger missiles, shoulder-fired, antiaircraft weapons that they used against Soviet helicopters. Pakistan's secret service, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), was used as an intermediary for most of these activities to disguise the sources of support for the resistance."
More similarities highlighted in the quoted paragraph which I may add goes to show how LOGICAL my comparisons are.
3% of Denmark's budget is spent on the military. You guys must be breaking the bank over there.My example wasn't about quantity (for which Denmark would be a bad example, thankfully) but to demonstrate how military industry operate internationally. NATO countries buying for example the F-35 are incentivized by Lockheed Martin or BAE Systems for the Euro Fighter, by engaging in long-term agreements investing in local industry for the manufacture of assembly parts. The Danish company Terma has for example collaborated with Lockheed Martin since 1976, on the F-16, C-130 and F-35, for advanced composite structural parts and electronics.
So according to your mixed up fantasy viewpoint of how things work this is somehow relevant or a deciding factor in how a very small percentage of those people who also had a multi-millionaire financing them became a notorious terrorist organization 20 years after the war, and every single Afghan fighting against the Soviets automatically transformed into some kind of super terrorist.
So according to your mixed up fantasy viewpoint of how things work this is somehow relevant or a deciding factor in how a very small percentage of those people who also had a multi-millionaire financing them became a notorious terrorist organization 20 years after the war, and every single Afghan fighting against the Soviets automatically transformed into some kind of super terrorist.through the intervention of the United States now after so many years, Afghanistan has finally become a prosperous, democratic country with a strong economy with a thriving agriculture and industry. And among the population there is no social and religious issues. GOD BLESS USA USA USA USA
through the intervention of the United States now after so many years, Afghanistan has finally become a prosperous, democratic country with a strong economy with a thriving agriculture and industry. And among the population there is no social and religious issues. GOD BLESS USA USA USA USA
Not at all. However after the withdrawal of the Soviet Union the fighting did not end, the bloodshed did not end. The CIA and Pakistan backed elements in Afghanistan continued to wage a war against the Communist government in Afghanistan until its collapse from which the Saudi and Pakistani backed Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan was founded. This Islamic Emirate came to be as a direct consequence of the backing and meddling in Afghanistan's affairs by the U.S and its regional allies just as much as the earlier Communist government came to power with the backing and meddling of the Soviet Union, only Russia didn't see fit to bomb what it had helped to create less than a decade later. Afghanistan existed under a Communist government from 78 through till its fall in 92. A semblance of stability (inspite of the U.S and its allies efforts there) the West and its regional allies have failed to replicate, and yet have thrown endless sums of money away on that could have been better spent modernising their infrastructure and investing in science and education. The peoples of Afghanistan arguably had more freedom under Communist rule than they'd ever had under Islamic rule.
Talking about repeating history, let's just imagine that the Syrian opposition manage to overthrow Assad and take over. How long do you think it will be before the U.S and other NATO states decide to bomb the government that they had helped to bring about? Just as they did in Afghanistan. And tell me, how does that help the Syrian people? How does it bring peace and stability, freedom or democracy to the region and is worth it?
It's funny, because I'm trying to point out some history so that we may learn and yet it's you idiots who are failing to learn from past mistakes who are proponents of the same mistakes who are throwing around insults such as "retard". You fail to see the obvious similarities and comparisons between past and present actions and yet I am the "illogical" one. I'll have to conclude, you're bloody good trolls because that's the only conclusion I can come to after assessing your actions and words while trying to determine what your agenda is on this thread.
The problem with both of your arguments is that they are based on taking a sequence of events out of order to fit your own views without any regard to facts or evidence. Exaggerating and assuming cause and effect scenarios to fit your own twisted view of how things play out is not factual.
If we wanted to go down the route of baseless accusations then we should also assume that Assad's Army is killing civilians because their Russian military advisers Kremlin agents trained them to do so. Russia has a history of murdering civilians in their past wars of Chechnya, Afghanistan and even against their own people in the past. We should throw all logic and facts out the window and assume that because the Kremlin heavily influences and control Assad that this is why they are killing so many Syrian civilians.
In the past Russia we have also seen many terrorists with Russian made weapons. Russian agents must have had something to do with their training since the guns somehow found their way into their hands the Russian government must be a sponsor a terrorism and secretly works to overthrow governments to put their puppet Russian proxy governments in their place.
Instead of throwing around random accusations, why don't you pick out some points that I've made and then argue or refute them? You're making insane sweeping statements without any real substance and then accuse me of doing the same. Up your "game" buddy.
When will Russia learn their lesson defending dictators and supporting regimes that murder civilians!! oh the horor! It must be because of the Kremlin Agents sending weapons everywhere and their secret operations to control puppet leader like Assad.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_involvement_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Economic_importance_and_history_of_arms_sales
Russia needs to control the Syrian government with their Kremlin agents and Mercenaries to make money off of their military industrial complex, proof is here.
You've still failed to debate, argue or refute my points. Instead you're now trying to redirect. I could probably give you numerous examples of the West backing dictators, murderers and despots, but what's the point? Anyone on this forum worth their salt is already aware of this.
Why aren't you decrying Saudi-Arabia's intervention in Yemen? Or its plans to crucify an anti-government protester? Or the Qatari crackdown on protesters? Or Poroshenko's shelling of civilians?
Must be CIA black ops !!! omg!!! they must be using their mind control devices on thousands of poor people who loved their authoritarian dictatorships and peaceful religions.
Why aren't you decrying Saudi-Arabia's intervention in Yemen? Or its plans to crucify an anti-government protester? Or the Qatari and Bahraini crackdown on protesters? Or Poroshenko's shelling of civilians? Or Netanyahu's butchering of the Palestinians, or the U.S's collateral damage?
Xant is much better at trolling than you. I'll give your effort 3/5 stars.
And you think that any country in the world can convince these people that they shouldn't kill each other? It's obviously a security problem for Saudi-Arabia to have an Iranian backed coup government on their boarder with many lawless regions inside the country that operate terrorist training camps.
And by the way the US does try to pressure Saudi Arabia to change their ways, but that doesn't mean they listen or care to listen. Saudi Arabia and Iran are ideological enemies. And Iran has intervened in many conflicts throughout the region and created many enemies themselves.
In Ukraine it goes both ways I guess. Shelling kills civilians and Russian separatists shot down a civilian airliner, both sides are not great here.
Israel doesn't listen to anyone, and I don't blame them.
Ah right, you criticise me for stating Assad is better for Syria than IS, Al-Nusra and other AL-Qaeda affiliates but you defend Saudi-Arabia's actions? I think we're done here.
So it's only trolling if I take things out of context with total disregard to the present situation or sequence of events, it's nice that you at least came to terms with your own standards of retardation.visitors can't see pics , please register or login
I also much prefer Vovka, at least I know he is probably drunk and deeply in love with Putin.
It seems pretty simple to me, if the majority of Syrians thought the same thing they would have sided with him.
Also I don't think the Syrian Army is bad, they are just doing their job in a desperate situation. On top of fighting rebels they are also fighting the scum of the earth who do not have any rules of engagement, so of course civilians are going to be killed in the crossfire. But since the majority of the population didn't back Assad and he chose to fight barbarity with more barbarity it's not logical there will ever be peace as long as he is in power.
If the majority of the population didn't back Assad, how did he manage to stay in power for so long under such conditions? No wartime president would be able to survive a civil war for so long if there was not large amount of grassroots support for its government.
On that note, pro-Syrian and Russian government demonstrations have taken place in different countries.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=426_1445452186
(I'm not aware of the date that these demonstrations initially took place or whether the post has been stolen from another source and renamed but the content in the video pretty much speaks for itself.)
Also if all your bullshit accusations were true then why would the US conduct airstrikes in Syria against ISIS who were largely gaining LOTS of territory and beating the Syrian Army almost everywhere. The US has probably indirectly helped Assad more than they have hurt him so far. If the US wanted Assad gone at all costs it would have been easy to turn a blind eye and let them rampage through Syria when they were on a roll.
Indirectly helped Assad? By DIRECTLY supporting the opposition? My accusations are true.
My neverending love for Putin grows every day
Those sources.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
A video game cargo drop...
Hahahhahha Murmillus goes full retard againvisitors can't see pics , please register or login
Murmillus pulls the good old Tovi maneuver of posting total bullshit, ignoring it when his sources turn out to be a computer game, and just continuing to post total crap.Called it first :P
A real change can not be force by foreign money, weapons and training but only from inner will.
You're not just supporting Saudi-Arabia but you're also supporting their head cutting proxies. You can't get worse than that buddy. You guys can't disprove shit and still throw around the retard word. If you want to find a retard, look yourselves in the mirror.
So when a dictator calls in three foreign powers, Iran, Russia and Lebanon to openly help him attack his own citizens you don't see anything wrong here? You don't see any kind of weakness or desperation?These citizens anyway would have died driving a car bomb so its ok
So when a dictator calls in three foreign powers, Iran, Russia and Lebanon to openly help him attack his own citizens you don't see anything wrong here? You don't see any kind of weakness or desperation?
So it looks like Russia does something right for a change.
the problem with Assad in syria is that he is a christian ruling over a mixed muslim/catholic nation. Religions not not really mix well ever. The cia funding for afghanistan was relevant because we gave them a fuck ton of stinger missles back in the 80s which i guarantee were not used up, and back in the early 2000s it was worried that they would be used to bring down passenger planes or USAF planes. When CIA funds things its not really the training or guns its advanced technology like stinger missles that ends up there to that the terrorists would not normally get access to.
Which is why its important that Russia, Iran, Lebanon, Iraq and others ensure that Saudi-Arabia, the Gulf states, Turkey, NATO members, Israel and others don't have their way in Syria as they did in Libya.
The Wahhabist ideology being peddled from Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan
Oh, the comments on that one...
convert my old friendets
I dont know what the fuck this is
Anyone here like einstein?
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
i know ur secret
convert my old friendets
I dont know what the fuck this is
Even the cruelest Jew has nothing on Putin
You've still yet to respond to how Assad is indirectly benefiting from coalition airstrikes against multiple SUNNI terrorist sects in Syria.
The Russians might be slow and backwards in their ideology and goals and we have our differences, but they are still good Christian folk and when it comes down to it I would rather see them let loose their temper and anger in the Middle-East unopposed then fight side by side with a Muslim against them.
Right.. because it has nothing to do with more than half the country of Syria wanting nothing to do with him. If he is a great leader why do the majority of his own countrymen hate him?
Also, stating that "More than half" of Syria want nothing to do with him is just a made up measure you've pulled from your arse. There's no way to conclusively determine how many Syrians sided with who or for what reason. Surely if more than half of a nation of around 20.2 million people opposed their government it wouldn't last very long, and areas under its control and areas held under its control in such circumstances would not be viable enough for the government to resume day to day services.
Government held areas are still functioning. Rebel held area's aren't.
What's stopping the majority of Syrians from rallying behind him and ending the war? He has all the weapons and equipment he could ever need from Russia and Iran, is it the CIA black ops mind-control devices?
His army could not hold the majority of the vast and sparse areas of Syria, it was simply overstretched and under equipped and under attack from all sides and not strategically viable. The areas mainly still under government control are some of the most populated areas in Syria and again this speaks for itself.
His Army couldn't hold the majority of those places you talk about, that's why he called in Iran, Hezbollah and Russia to save his ass.
So you are crying about western nations arming civilians that are being bombed by their own government, but are cheering on a dictator who has been doing the exact same thing and calls in foreign powers to pervert his own lands and attack his own citizenry because he lacks the mass public support he needs to win the war by himself, makes sense.
A nation called in its allies to support it in its fight against a foreign backed insurgency, conflict by proxy. If over half of Syria supported the opposition, why have so many refugees admitted to fleeing IS and AL-Qaeda, and why does the Syrian opposition need so much support from tens of thousands of foreign fighters. You also forget to realise that when we talk about the Syrian Army, they have lost tens of thousands of SYRIAN born and bread soldiers to forces backed by foreign states filled with foreign fighters.
I don't know where you live, but just imagine a similar scenario unfolding on your doorstep, imagine Russia started backing communist rebels in your country, who would you side with? Your fellow communist sympathising countrymen, or your government that was elected and is run by your fellow countrymen?
It takes one hell of a shitlord in power in the first place to have your own people welcome any kind of foreign intervention in the first place. Dropping bombs on civilians, using chemical weapons, and firing into crowds of civilian protesters tends to upset people on a massive scale.
He's not simply bombing his own people. He's bombing traitors who turned on his government, not because of his brutality but because of their adherence to a strict form of Islam which discriminates against other Islamic sects such as the Alawi sect he belongs to. He's also bombing tens of thousands of non Syrian citizens who were allowed to flood into his country through its vast and porous borders by regional actors with a vendetta against his government. Tens of thousands of fighters who have been armed to the teeth by some of the most powerful and richest nations on this planet, and even some who've been directly trained and funded by the CIA. Under such circumstances he's done bloody well and the Syrian people's support for him steadfast.
They support him because they know they are going to pay the price for defending such a brutal dictator. If the face of the regime changed it would be much more credible, until then it's just a foreign Russian puppet regime that will become a magnet for violence and unrest until it finally collapses.
That's a bullshit narrative which can only be applied to a handful of authoritarian states. That's the kind of narrative that Hollywood films are made of. If anything, prior to the Russian intevention would have been the time for those who fear such a "brutal dictator" to seize the opportunity to overthrow him when he was at his weakest. They didn't. They either stood by him or fled to other countries.
Also refer to my earlier post.
"Maybe you should look up wahhabism. You're clearly out of your depth when it comes to discussing Syria.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism
I quote.
"Wahhabism has been accused of being "a source of global terrorism",[30][31] and for causing disunity in the Muslim community by labeling Muslims who disagreed with the Wahhabi definition of monotheism as apostates[32] (takfir), thus paving the way for their bloodshed."
The masses who do not fall into this category will not give the Syrian government any credibility while Assad is in power, understandably because he has the blood of so many civilians on his hands. Instead of making compromises and passing off leadership to someone else he chose to fight two wars at once and label half of his own countrymen terrorists. That's a rather selfish decision to make.
But the whole "half his citizens, more than half of his citizens" has already been refuted by my previous comments, can't you read boy? You're spouting illogical, idealistic nonsense.
In other news, Qatar have threatened to directly intervene militarily on behalf of a coalition of AL-Qaeda affiliates in Syria (otherwise known as the "moderate opposition"). I dare Qatar to do this. The moment they do the light of the sun will be blocked out by thousands of Iranian ballistic missiles, which would surely turn the dictator led Qatari Island into a giant bomb crater.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/qatar-threatens-military-intervention-in-syria-in-support-of-al-qaeda-rebels/5483674
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34538583
The masses who do not fall into this category will not give the Syrian government any credibility while Assad is in power, understandably because he has the blood of so many civilians on his hands. Instead of making compromises and passing off leadership to someone else he chose to fight two wars at once and label half of his own countrymen terrorists. That's a rather selfish decision to make.just shut up already, and pretend that it all was trolling :o
convert my old friendets
I dont know what the fuck this is
His barbaric acts of indiscriminately targeting civilians have led many people to flock to these extreme groups, these people want revenge any way they can get it, it's also well known and documented that moderate groups fight both the Syrian regime and these extreme militants, isolating these people and keeping Syria divided is going to be the nail in his coffin.
Also globalresearch is a known sham propaganda site ran by a lunatic named Michel Chossudovsky who thinks the United States is using weather control devices to cause climate change and tsunamis.
And where do you get your information from, the so called "Syrian Observatory for Human Rights"? An organisation founded by a man living in a 2 bedroom house in Coventry England?
https://www.rt.com/news/317372-nimrod-kamer-syrian-observatory/
Like, seriously what's wrong with having two bedrooms?The index value of the apartment :o If translate it into plain language for u: he has a herd of 200 sheep in))
He's not simply bombing his own people. He's bombing traitors who turned on his government, not because of his brutality but because of their adherence to a strict form of Islam which discriminates against other Islamic sects such as the Alawi sect he belongs to. He's also bombing tens of thousands of non Syrian citizens who were allowed to flood into his country through its vast and porous borders by regional actors with a vendetta against his government. Tens of thousands of fighters who have been armed to the teeth by some of the most powerful and richest nations on this planet, and even some who've been directly trained and funded by the CIA. Under such circumstances he's done bloody well and the Syrian people's support for him steadfast.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfvwsR7qGys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfvwsR7qGys"Russia Insider", Murmillus' sources keep getting better. :D
Was the Iraqi invasion worth it? Was removing a horrible brutal human being and his depraved regime really worth it? Was doing the wrong thing for the right reasons by using lies really something which improved peoples lives and made the world a better place? I don't think it was worth it. I don't think the trillions wasted, hundreds of thousands killed, millions scattered was worth overthrowing a Middle-Eastern dictator. Yet it seems many of you in this thread alone would do it all over again. You should all smack your heads against a concrete wall and snap out of your fairy tales.Hahahahahh :lol:
Was the Iraqi invasion worth it? Was removing a horrible brutal human being and his depraved regime really worth it? Was doing the wrong thing for the right reasons by using lies really something which improved peoples lives and made the world a better place? I don't think it was worth it. I don't think the trillions wasted, hundreds of thousands killed, millions scattered was worth overthrowing a Middle-Eastern dictator. Yet it seems many of you in this thread alone would do it all over again. You should all smack your heads against a concrete wall and snap out of your fairy tales.
I think what you dont seem to grasp is that it should be vital to kick dictators out of offices. Yeah, we know that kicking Saddam out didnt exactly make things bettter. But we know that now. Did we know that before? No we did not. Lets not also forget that Saddam invaded another country. Like he took Kuwait and the entire Arab League just watched with thumbs on their asses and did nothing while their "honorary member" was being pillaged and annexed. Exactly kicking a dictator out does not always automatically make a rich successful country. It does not work that way at all. With those dictators those countries will never improve and quite often their neibhours get bombed too. What you are claiming is that if the successrate is not 100% there is no point. Let all those dictators stay and rape their own people. "Currently those people are better off that way, they shouldnt resist and we should just watch". #Murmilluslogic
But many people knew that before. I remember interviews from German near east experts back in the day that predicted that removing one asshole will destabilise a region full of assholes. The very same logic was used to answer the question why "we" are not removing dictator X from a random African state when it was convenient.
Our success rate is 0%, I think that speaks for itself...
There are a fuckton of success-stories aswellOh provide a list of three the most awesome success-stories pls
Our success rate is 0%, I think that speaks for itself.
Our success rate has been 0% in the past couple of decades or so and in the middle east. There are a fuckton of success-stories aswell and some revolutions had would have gone lot less bloody if it had Western support. I assume. Never can know those things...
Oh provide a list of three the most awesome success-stories pls
Saudi-Arabia to name an example, yet regardless its people are oppressed and suffer. But many people in Saudi-Arabia aren't suffering
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Russia also supports Saudi Arabia and is trying their best to sell large contracts of weaponry to the country amid dropping weapon sales.
"Our" success rate ? The world doesn't revolve around the US, this isn't "our" conflict to win. They have to sort out their own internal cultural and religious conflicts, and they haven't.
Well the entire Eastern-EU for starters and South-Korea and even in some cases Japan and Vietnam. Does it really matter what I mention here and what my sources are? Your "CIA did it" mindset is so far rooted that you will inevitably just just claim it to be false anyway. Its not like its your fault really. Your brain just thinks that out of default. Human mind is a wierd place isnt it?
Our success rate infers our governments, or collectively NATO member states actions taken in the name of purported humanitarian or democratic reasons. Actions that include overt and covert subversion, corruption, and interference in the affairs of sovereign states.
I wouldn't ever say the same about nations engaged in conflict with one another if those conflicts had not included NATO member states providing assistance in all its forms to one or more parties in said conflict. I don't just say this shit expecting the U.S to take responsibility of the worlds problems, no. I say this shit expecting the U.S and its NATO allies take responsibility for the worlds problems they had a direct hand in helping to bring about.
If you trashed your neighbours house, a third party wouldn't expect your neighbour to pay for the damage and clean up the mess. Instead they would reasonably expect you to pay for the damage and clean it up.
My country, the U.K helped found Saudi-Arabia. The international community, including Russia fail to hold Saudi-Arabia's sponsorship of terrorism to account. Saudi-Arabia being the founding member OPEC and having Russia by its oily balls, plus being a major weapons importer is probably why Russia haven't taken a firmer stance on Saudi-Arabia.
Our success rate infers our governments, or collectively NATO member states actions taken in the name of purported humanitarian or democratic reasons. Actions that include overt and covert subversion, corruption, and interference in the affairs of sovereign states.
I wouldn't ever say the same about nations engaged in conflict with one another if those conflicts had not included NATO member states providing assistance in all its forms to one or more parties in said conflict. I don't just say this shit expecting the U.S to take responsibility of the worlds problems, no. I say this shit expecting the U.S and its NATO allies take responsibility for the worlds problems they had a direct hand in helping to bring about.
If you trashed your neighbours house, a third party wouldn't expect your neighbour to pay for the damage and clean up the mess. Instead they would reasonably expect you to pay for the damage and clean it up.
I'm not sure those bombed in Korea, Japan, Serbia, Vietnam would agree with you. The help sent in Haiti and in Nepal after the earthquake, in south-east asia after the tsunami, this are the real success-story of the West.
I'm not sure those bombed in Korea, Japan, Serbia, Vietnam would agree with you....
The root of the problem is their ethnic/religious civil war. Encouraging them to run a secular government to keep their boarders and resources intact is not some nefarious covert operation, it's common sense and necessary for the state's survival. Corruption is what has plagued the Iraqi government, it is also what became a rallying point for their enemies. This is why the US has distanced itself from the new Iraqi government leaving them to deal with their own problems.
That place is 10X worse than Iraq.but no Communist! success-story at its best
No. If it was, we'd have left Afghanistan years ago. That place is 10X worse than Iraq. We distance ourselves cause our presdent Blundered with the troop withdrawl(to "keep" his promise). That's why he went back on his promise to remove soldiers from Afghanistan, cause if he did, it'd be a massive vacuum.
All for the sake of Politics.
but no Communist! success-story at its best
How to make evereone happy "west edition"
Vietnam won the war so they did as they pleased after it, so all the massacre were done for nothing, as usual when you go against the will of the majority.
Japan was an imperialist country just like Western power (10 millions killed). 29 millions indians were killed by british empire, and a complete wipe-out of native indians by British and Spanish empires.
Balkan situation is still not resolved.
Anyway, I am not saying nothing should be done to prevent genocide. My problems is with the means used to "resolve", aka massive bombing on civilians.
Anyway, I am not saying nothing should be done to prevent genocide. My problems is with the means used to "resolve", aka massive bombing on civilians.
Nobodys mass bombing any civilians. Thats just a load of garbage.funny to hear that from a such biological waste like u :P
Let's compare disease and biological immunizes in the 1600's and 1700's to 20th century genocide. Why don't we bring Ghengis Khan into this while we are at it lmao.Yeah surely the genocide of native indians were just an incident... Anyway, that's not the topic and Western colonial empires killed more than Japan without bringing native indians.
Who is mass bombing civilians to prevent genocide?
International laws and norms, especially when embodied in the UN, have always been laughably impotent and useless. You're the one living in a fantasy if you think we're "returning" to the "laws of the jungle", aka realpolitiks. It never, ever left. You're also retarded if you think any of the main players are "honest" in any of the high-minded, morally sanctioned bullshit they put out on a regular basis. Take the gigantic wooden plank out of your own fucking eye before calling others blind, lol Russian establishment is "honest" about it's motives, go fuck yourself you dumb prick. Poor wittle Russia trying to follow international laws out of good faith, unlike those evil NATO imperialists merely exploiting them for their own ends, god you are a hypocritical moron.
This destabilization in the middle east supposedly caused by NATO meddling won't end until all the wahhabist and salafist bleeding sores all over the muslim world are finally drained of their life giving fluids, i.e their natural resources. Best course of action is to make them obsolete through technology, as much as possible. Where you and I differ is that you think that NATO and the US specifically is the one pulling the strings, the ones who have the Gulf states as outright puppets in their grand machinations. I see them as powerful political entities in their own right, with their own goals and enemies. The world economy is dependent on a steady, continously stable world market for oil and gas for...well, everything. The whole delicate, ephemereal web of economic exchanges crumbles without it. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, and indirectly OPEC through it, have disproportionate political and diplomatic power for only one reason. They have absolutely nothing at all to offer to the world except that one thing. They're the "dealers" and the rest of the developped world are the junkies. Just look at when interests of NATO and interests of these wahhabist bundle of stickss clash, who is it that gives way? Who has more to gain from the "alliance"? These backwards cunts are holding the entire world economy hostage, something that was made clear as long ago as the 70's, when this "alliance" first started gaining real traction.
To summarise. We have some posters on this thread who are proponents and apologists of the Western imperialism and Western backed insurgencies that have directly and indirectly led to the destabilisation of whole regions in the world, which has been directly and indirectly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians and destruction of their nations. Western imperialism that's propped up and aligned itself with brutal dictatorships... Apparently all because they are militarily engaging brutal dictatorships either not aligned with the West or aligned with Russia.
These posters don't seem to understand or want to acknowledge the consequences behind our governments direct and indirect actions and instead run off on emotional hypothesis' or repeat propagandised points repeated by our mainstream media to excuse their support of insurgents and brutal dictatorial regimes our governments are aligned with and assist. This is regardless of our governments poor track record and history of failure in this area and their repeated breaches of international law and the amount of national treasure and human lives wasted on these endeavours, when this money could have been better spent.
National interest and war are dirty games to be played, at least the Russian establishment is honest when discussing its motives behind its actions and at least the Russian establishment have made attempts to comply with international law when NATO states pretend it doesn't exist when they want, and then cite international law when it suits them. Like the U.S's recent criticism of the Chinese government's actions in the South China Sea for example.
The validity and legitimacy of international laws and norms are made or broken depending on the consistency on which they're applied. If the most powerful and military aggressive nation and alliance on earth are not subject to the application of these laws, (The U.S/NATO) then nations like Russia and China will not longer be subject to them either, and we can all then return to the laws of the jungle and the U.N like the League of Nations will be consigned to history.
To summarise. We have some posters on this thread who are proponents and apologists of the Western imperialism and Western backed insurgencies that have directly and indirectly led to the destabilisation of whole regions in the world, which has been directly and indirectly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians and destruction of their nations. Western imperialism that's propped up and aligned itself with brutal dictatorships... Apparently all because they are militarily engaging brutal dictatorships either not aligned with the West or aligned with Russia.
These posters don't seem to understand or want to acknowledge the consequences behind our governments direct and indirect actions and instead run off on emotional hypothesis' or repeat propagandised points repeated by our mainstream media to excuse their support of insurgents and brutal dictatorial regimes our governments are aligned with and assist. This is regardless of our governments poor track record and history of failure in this area and their repeated breaches of international law and the amount of national treasure and human lives wasted on these endeavours, when this money could have been better spent.
National interest and war are dirty games to be played, at least the Russian establishment is honest when discussing its motives behind its actions and at least the Russian establishment have made attempts to comply with international law when NATO states pretend it doesn't exist when they want, and then cite international law when it suits them. Like the U.S's recent criticism of the Chinese government's actions in the South China Sea for example.
The validity and legitimacy of international laws and norms are made or broken depending on the consistency on which they're applied. If the most powerful and military aggressive nation and alliance on earth are not subject to the application of these laws, (The U.S/NATO) then nations like Russia and China will not longer be subject to them either, and we can all then return to the laws of the jungle and the U.N like the League of Nations will be consigned to history.
Yeah surely the genocide of native indians were just an incident... Anyway, that's not the topic and Western colonial empires killed more than Japan without bringing native indians.
War on Japan: Two atomic bombs on cities, plus 900'000 civil killed by firebombing directly aimed at cities. For only 100'000 soldiers killed.
Korean war: 635 tons of bombs including 32'000 tons of napalm. All major city in north Korea were almost completely erased.Vietnam war: Napalm bomb and dumb bomb were used massively, 7,662,000 tons were dropped on Vietnam and Cambodgia. Between 627,000 and 2,000,000 civilian were killed during the Vietnam war.(click to show/hide)
I can not consider so many civil victims a success.
Ukraine is probably the most salient example. You realize all the russian state owned media have claimed a bewildering amount of different, often contradictory reasons for their actions there? From the typical "They are chocolate chip cookies racist trying to exterminate russians", to geopolitical and military arguements for russian access to the black sea, to irrenditist claims that the land is and always has been russian, that Ukraine and ukrainian are artificially constructed identities fomented by evil West to destroy Russia, to etc, etc, all parroted from government officials as well. If the constant and repeated refusal to even aknowledge they were even doing anything there at all wasn't a hint. Tell me Murm, you still think russian army isn't involved? After all, clear and transparent honest russian government said so. You stupid fucking troll.
You are a hypocrite, there are absolutely no major players on the planet that are "clear and transparent" about their actions, especially not Russia. The resources and bureaucracy they put into controlling their own media should make that obvious, but you are a wilfully blind idiot cunt. Fucking KGB propaganda expert is literally their unelected dictator for life, but yeah brah I'm sure the russian government is on the up and up.
So again Russia has stated a position and then acted upon it at a level of transparency the West have failed to replicate even in the U.S with America's supposed most transparent president ever.. (So said Obama..)..
It's a bit rich for you to call me a dumb prick without adequately refuting my points....
...Its just not worth it man. You are like Tovi all over again.
The only thing transparent about Russian intervention is that they are flying air support directly for Assad's ground forces targeting positions that are well-known to be manned by moderate opposition forces, not terrorist groups. Russia is not acting as a mutual beneficiary for the region. The coalition, Iraqi Army and Kurdish forces have already thwarted ISIS movement and expansion, they know exactly where they are, and know exactly what Russia is up to.Its like moderate chechen separatist who took hostage pregnant women and children for the sake of prevailing the democracy.
Saying and doing are two completely different things, Russia is known for saying alot of things and doing the opposite. Russia's definition of a terrorist is anyone who opposed the Assad regime.
Why would we share intel with Russians when they are not willing to join with the 80 other countries who already have a well-established coalition that has kept ISIS in check?
Its like moderate chechen separatist who took hostage pregnant women and children for the sake of prevailing the democracy.
Where did he find the pregnant children?common shit in muslim countries
common shit in muslim countriesWhy am I not surprised you don't know what a "child" means?
you know, not all have first sex is 30 like u :P
So when the russian government lies and misrepresents and obfuscates, it's completely different and understandable, because only an idiot could take their statements at face value. Basically you expect Russia to do this and find it completely understandable. Don't worry, so does everyone else on the planet. The whole point is that their stated declarations and intentions don't match up with their actions. That is practically the definition of dishonesty, and yes it's common in international politics, holy mother Russia and glorious Leader Putin are not exempt.
It doesn't take a genius to know that all the Russian info is pure propaganda. We have satellite imagery proving they are not bombing ISIS positions, after realizing this they changed their tune and recognized the FSA and offered their help lol.
WOOF WOOF WOOF WOF yap WOOF WOOF!!!
I don't write off all of the information I gather from the mainstream media, the way you completely write off all information that comes out of the Russian media or establishment. Your perspective in this matter is clearly only seen through one eye with the other shut.
No point in reading or listening to neo-soviet idiocy from a state-funded and regulated news source. Russians live in a world of self-deception, illusion, ignorance and lies. Maybe there are some major things missing in translation on RT news, but it is maybe 10% fact and 90% manipulation of those facts to suit their own agenda, much like all of your points.
Show me a Russian news agency that is openly critical of Putin and the Russian government.
No point in reading or listening to neo-soviet idiocy from a state-funded and regulated news source. Russians live in a world of self-deception, illusion, ignorance and lies. Maybe there are some major things missing in translation on RT news, but it is maybe 10% fact and 90% manipulation of those facts to suit their own agenda, much like all of your points.There are at least three, or six of them ) have fun :P
Show me a Russian news agency that is openly critical of Putin, Mededev and the Russian government.
I don't write off all of the information I gather from the mainstream media, the way you completely write off all information that comes out of the Russian media or establishment. Your perspective in this matter is clearly only seen through one eye with the other shut. Where as I'm using both of my eyes, both sides of my brain to come to my conclusions.
Like hell you are. You are like the blindest person here. You are another one of those typical Russian propagaded dudes who thinks he has the whole "US imperialistic hegemony" figured out and has a very good worldview. Who watches calmly and thinks he sees the real "truth". Yet your fucked up world view isnt basically shared by anyone on the planet but Russians who watch russian media. And your worldview is something that every Kremlin internettrolls spread for money and claim as "truth". Does that not even make you doubt a little bit that you are a little off course?
You see the big problem here is that all these "Western imperialist actions", you base your worldviews on, can only be detected if one has inside-info. Do you have inside info? No? Where did you get that info than? Russian media? Oh okay...Because we dont base our worldviews on these heavy assumptions like you do. We may see the perspective through only one eye and you with 2, but your second eye is fucking fake.
[...]In my view RT's material is based on 80% truth or a perspective of truth and 20% spin.[...]:lol:
:lol:
Refute it.You're just another deluded self-rightous cunt.
Otherwise the joke's on you.
If RT's reports are largely reports on what many other outlets including Western outlets have reported are they all lying or, what? RT does invite analysts on to its channel to provide their perspective on geopolitical events including what's happening in Syria. Many of these analysts have been covering their subject matter for years and are experts in their own right in the field they specialise in and many of them are analysts from the West NOT Russia. I guess they must be lying too and you, Tibe and whoever know better. I guess when RT reports on something, such as the U.S arming and funding jihadi's in Syria only for the U.S to admit that it's doing so years/months later I guess RT is lying again.. Oh the joke's on you Molly.
There are always agendas afoot, but I for one oppose my current and past governments actions in the Middle-East. You and others supporting your perspective buy in to our own politicians spin about wanting to help people and bomb people for "humanitarian purposes", that's fucking right, BOMB people for HUMANITARIAN reasons. Because we all know bombing is a humanitarian action right? We all know overthrowing a regime and leaving the remaining populace to fend for themselves and become victims to the radical Wahhabi ideology being enforced on them by IS and Al-Qaeda is what is best for them right? And you guys have the gall to call me brainwashed? Lmao.
Refute it.
Otherwise the joke's on you.
If RT's reports are largely reports on what many other outlets including Western outlets have reported are they all lying or, what? RT does invite analysts on to its channel to provide their perspective on geopolitical events including what's happening in Syria. Many of these analysts have been covering their subject matter for years and are experts in their own right in the field they specialise in and many of them are analysts from the West NOT Russia. I guess they must be lying too and you, Tibe and whoever know better. I guess when RT reports on something, such as the U.S arming and funding jihadi's in Syria only for the U.S to admit that it's doing so years/months later I guess RT is lying again.. Oh the joke's on you Molly.
There are always agendas afoot, but I for one oppose my current and past governments actions in the Middle-East. You and others supporting your perspective buy in to our own politicians spin about wanting to help people and bomb people for "humanitarian purposes", that's fucking right, BOMB people for HUMANITARIAN reasons. Because we all know bombing is a humanitarian action right? We all know overthrowing a regime and leaving the remaining populace to fend for themselves and become victims to the radical Wahhabi ideology being enforced on them by IS and Al-Qaeda is what is best for them right? And you guys have the gall to call me brainwashed? Lmao.
I refuted several of your "articles" sometime back.
You ignored it and continued on with your "agenda." If anything, you are totally ignoring any points. Typical russian/Tin Foil hat BS that you always see from the less than ideal societal components.
There are at least three, or six of them ) have fun :P
https://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fruxpert.ru%2F%25D0%25A0%25D1%2583%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D1%2584%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B1%25D1%2581%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B5_%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B1%25D1%2589%25D0%25B5%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25B2%25D0%25B0_%25D0%25B8_%25D0%25A1%25D0%259C%25D0%2598&edit-text=
Likewise you've ignored most of my points. Oh look you're trying to dress me up as a "conspiracy nut" now, way to refute my points brah, way to refute my points. Repeat your past points if they're worth mentioning at all that is.. I'll address them head on.
The reason nobody bothers to refute Murmi or Tovi's bullshit is because they'll just ignore it and come back with more bullshit.Exactly this. It's just a waste of time.
Woof woof woof Murmillus!
Yes, you must do your best to impress Murmillus! It is important that he is impressed!!!
Yes, you must do your best to impress Murmillus! It is important that he is impressed!!!
Yes, you must do your best to impress Murmillus! It is important that he is impressed!!!
Hi zombies, just some links here for you.. I know it might be a little difficult for you to digest the truth of our reality but have a look anyway. It's a bit of a stretch, but you might learn something. (A long stretch.) Enjoy your brains.visitors can't see pics , please register or login
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/30/syria-us-deployment-troops-obama-special-operations
https://www.rt.com/usa/320177-syria-us-troops-obama/
I'm right you're wrong, I'm smart you're stupid. You get the idea. In-fact many of you epitomise why going along with consensus at least in this microcosmic corner of the internet isn't always the right thing to do.
The war on drugs, and terror have some similarities. The harder governments fight against them the stronger they get and both have involved cases of government complicity in the aiding and abetting and transit of.
I am proven right in more ways than one in both of the links above, I guess it's all lies and I'm deluded. Oh dear. :)
I must say, that I have won.No no Murmillus, don't be like that! Post more video games!
American love two things democracy and oil
They tried to introduce the no-fly zone over part of Syrian territory but failed, then tried to declare a part of the territory of Syria as territory conrolled by moderate opossition , but the evil Russian do not believe in a moderate opposition and keep bmbing heir car bombs facility, now they will be put troops precisely where trying to introduce the no-fly zone and to which argued that there is moderate oppositions,
and of course by chance it will oil refineries :P
That video is bullshit.
First shot shows single figure walking down the hill away from the flag, then he starts running all of a sudden.
Then it cuts to another scene... 2 guys standing on hill motionless, evening sky most likely later in the day and then the explosion happens.
Oh, and they alread asked the Russian keeping Russian forces in the distance of their soldiers
lol it's not bullshit it's called a jdam
well done! we got dat damnit flag!
well done! we got dat damnit flag!
Not a missile launch but a missile fart really :lol:
Good find :D
[/spoiler](click to show/hide)
What makes it even better is they worship their missiles like alpha omega in the planet of the apes. :lol: Weird as hellHeh. To be honest you are totally on to something here. Wierd case is that Russians love their armies weapons insanely. Like for a peaceful harmless country, as they claim to be, they do ideolize their armed forces and weapons like no other country on the planet. Just watched some random video of a Russian ship shooting missiles and it was filled with "russia great country, russia stronk comments". Half of the commenters were probably jizzing their pants over the Russian flag while watching that.
Heh. To be honest you are totally on to something here. Wierd case is that Russians love their armies weapons insanely. Like for a peaceful harmless country, as they claim to be, they do ideolize their armed forces and weapons like no other country on the planet. Just watched some random video of a Russian ship shooting missiles and it was filled with "russia great country, russia stronk comments". Half of the commenters were probably jizzing their pants over the Russian flag while watching that.
No no Murmillus, don't be like that! Post more video games!
Yeah. Turns out we are just too blind to the obvious truth and you are the only one here, who sees everything for how it really is with both eyes open. You have have won. Just like the commentsection in RT, you too possess too much knowledge for our tiny brains that have been zombiefied by jews and US imperialistic hegemony propaganda.
Woof woof Murmillus, woof woof woof! Woof woof woo woof!
Pull out your cocks and start doing helicopters because the propagandised zombified mob that clings to this thread have brought out the big guns.
This of course is the Russian establishments transparency I referred to previously. But I guess I was wrong and this video is all lies, everything in it is made up Russian propaganda and all that jizz right brahs? I'm living in a fake reality and I'm deluded and my opponents here you're all keeping it real yeh? Haha.
How can you even argue RT is not a straight Kremlin infowar machine after shit like that? Needs more red arrows to be convincing tbh.
How can you even argue RT is not a straight Kremlin infowar machine after shit like that? Needs more red arrows to be convincing tbh.
No, Murmillus. We are all deluded. You and your friends at RT are the ones who know the real truth(s). Jews and USA are trying to start WW3 to save Wests failing economy and get more oil and Russia is trying to prevent it. As far as im concerned, you are a worldhero just by being a russian Murmillus. God bless the Motherland! Such open honesty and transparency, like the Kremlin has is rare these days because of US worldwide hegemony of terror and deceit.
That's just a self-congratulatory media briefing. It obviously was a media event, just look at the amount of microphones pointed at the speaker.
Granted, it's interesting and refreshing to see some operational level stuff like this. But a prepared explanation of one or two successful operations to the media doesn't really make the whole regime transparent.
The maps in the background and the operation center feel of where it was done doesn't automatically mean that what they said was 100% truthful either.
At most, it's their point of view, and exactly as much as they wanted to say.
Nothing about errors, consequences to civilians, what could be done better or improved or anything like that in there of course. Everything was perfect and the enemy was defeated cleanly is often the message given out but very rarely the reality of war.
Read the abstract of a psychological study about conspiracy theorists a couple of days ago. Yes, there actually are a few studies.
They found out that the more proof for their sources and 'knowledge' about things being flawed or even faulty, the harder they assume you're either some kind of send agent of the big conspiracy or naive, deluded, uneducated, blind 'sheep'.
But of course all those studies either aim at the 'others' or are contract work for government agencies.
Well it's a good thing I never stated that the Russian establishment or ruling elite were 100% transparent, I've just stated they're far more transparent than our own NATO member state governments.
I've yet to see over the years a similar presentation conducted by the "American led" coalition which has supposedly been bombing ISIS for years.
Well it's a good thing I never stated that the Russian establishment or ruling elite were 100% transparent, I've just stated they're far more transparent than our own NATO member state governments. I've yet to see over the years a similar presentation conducted by the "American led" coalition which has supposedly been bombing ISIS for years.
I'm sure you have read the entire text of the law :P(click to show/hide)
OI,
Learn to fucking edit.
On the contrary if anything my accusations of brainwashing, being braindead or deluded only sought to mirror similar accusations laid against myself by a handful of opponents in this thread, including yourself. Now you think after indulging in such name calling you're in a position to try and profile someone for doing the same back? When you make this point, are you talking about yourself? If so well done, you're on the first step to coming to your senses.Where directly in my post did I connect you personaly in a direct manner to my merely information containing post?
[...]
I'm sure you have read the entire text of the law :P
the main problem is that the fact of entering into this list excludes the use of accounting fraud because of the annual financial audits and reporting expenses.
I sure haven't.I think mainly because of the paperwork and the inability to save on taxes by accounting fraud. Some have lost their funding from abroad as Sponsors did not want publicity (foreign agents must to provide sources of funding)
And I don't know what the full weight of their organization being classified as foreign agents would be.
But I have a little creeping suspicion that it's about more than potential accounting fraud being uncovered.
Well, they could have shut down just to keep accounting fraud hidden. It's not entirely outside the realm of possibility and it can be a comforting narrative as well, if you live there.
I think mainly because of the paperwork and the inability to save on taxes by accounting fraud. Some have lost their funding from abroad as Sponsors did not want publicity (foreign agents must to provide sources of funding)
I think mainly because of the paperwork and the inability to save on taxes by accounting fraud. Some have lost their funding from abroad as Sponsors did not want publicity (foreign agents must to provide sources of funding)
Ahh the "foreign agent" law. When I heard about it first,In 1938? The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) :P(click to show/hide)
Bjöööörd, are you heiiirr?
Can yu hear me bjöööörd
visitors can't see pics , please register or loginBjord and angry girl :)
Ahh the "foreign agent" law. When I heard about it first, it sounded similar to jews being stapled in nazi germany. :lol: As much as you might disagree, you have admit the West has somewhat pretty decent economic laws(or atleast used to), yet nobody has this one enforced. Why do you think that is? If it was mainly about catching taxevadors and it worked, im pretty sure the US for example would have instantly taken this law aswell, because they lose billions on tax evasions and accounting frauds.
Personally I think its still mainly about stapling foreign countries enterprises, to atleast discredit them, by making patriots for example avoid them. Ofcourse you may educate me on this. Like I said, I dont know a lot about it.
Where directly in my post did I connect you personaly in a direct manner to my merely information containing post?
If that is the way you read all your news too... oh well, that explains quite a lot.(click to show/hide)
You're just another deluded self-rightous cunt.
Yep, name calling... already feel better now.
Hey guys a conspiracy theory video here... With American politicians who aren't really American politicians (they must be aliens in human suits) and American officers who aren't American officers admitting that they knew they were arming the Syrian opposition including Al-Qaeda affiliates... What a conspiracy thrill right? (The second half of the video sucks don't blame me for it, but the first half is mostly documented real footage of interviews and hearings.)Refer to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIpM-sjhjsU
(click to show/hide)
ISIS convoy with oil(click to show/hide)
...
Spends more money on US military than any other president or world leader spends on their army in the history of mankind, then refuses to use it.
...
you talk about the case when under false pretenses US moved their troops to destroy the president of the country, state, and country has become a breeding ground for terrorism?(click to show/hide)
There's a reason David Cameron in the UK doesn't get a huge amount of support for involvement in Syria. People are fed up after Iraq and Afghanistan. No one wants to be involved in yet another shit storm in the middle east and don't see it as our place. Particularly after the bull shit justifications for Iraq. The sad thing is Syria and fighting ISIS is actually a far better reason to involve ourselves there than the mythical WMDs.
Oh you mean the president who invaded and wiped out Kuwait from the world map and was already despised and hated by the majority of the Middle-East and the Arabic League? The guy, who if actually did have nukes, would have not even thought for a second to actually use them. You do realise if Iraq actually got nukes, Saddam could have been potentially free to do whatever the hell he wants in the Middle-East?Oh you mean the president who took power tanks to the complicity of CIA.
Writing in his memoirs of the 1963 coup, long time OSS and CIA intelligence analyst Harry Rositzke presented it as an example of one on which they had good intelligence in contrast to others that caught the agency by surprise. The overthrow "was forecast in exact detail by CIA agents." "Agents in the Ba’th Party headquarters in Baghdad had for years kept Washington au courant on the party’s personnel and organization, its secret communications and sources of funds, and its penetrations of military and civilian hierarchies in several countries....CIA sources were in a perfect position to follow each step of Ba’th preparations for the Iraqi coup, which focused on making contacts with military and civilian leaders in Baghdad. The CIA’s major source, in an ideal catbird seat, reported the exact time of the coup and provided a list of the new cabinet members....To call an upcoming coup requires the CIA to have sources within the group of plotters. Yet, from a diplomatic point of view, having secret contacts with plotters implies at least unofficial complicity in the plot."
A review of thousands of declassified government documents and interviews with former U.S. policymakers shows that U.S. provided intelligence and logistical support, which played a role in arming Iraq in its war with Iran. Under the Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations, the U.S. authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous dual-use technology (items with both military and civilian applications), including chemicals which can be used in manufacturing of pesticides or chemical weapons and live viruses and bacteria, such as anthrax and bubonic plague used in medicine and the manufacture of vaccines or weaponized for use in biological weapons.http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm)
A report of the U.S. Senate's Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs concluded that the U.S. under the successive presidential administrations sold materials including anthrax, and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992. The chairman of the Senate committee, Don Riegle, said: "The executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licenses for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think it's a devastating record."[10] According to several former officials, the State and Commerce departments promoted trade in such items as a way to boost U.S. exports and acquire political leverage over Hussein.[11]
And who's action were finally considered unacceptable when he was not serving western interest anymore. Welcome to the land of "human rights are our business when we have interests"
But anyway, I don't care if it had been a military dictator (could also have been nasserist or communist one who knows) or some fanatic instead, let them have what they want and then be pissed off at what they choose or happy with it. It is not our concern.
On the other thread you were saying "why should the west reform their religion?", I'm telling you "why should the west reform their governement?"
Lol I am not the one crying "Saddam was a bad guy, US was right to destitute him."
They've really been crying wolf a lot.
And now the problem is in their own backyard:
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
There's a reason David Cameron in the UK doesn't get a huge amount of support for involvement in Syria. People are fed up after Iraq and Afghanistan. No one wants to be involved in yet another shit storm in the middle east and don't see it as our place. Particularly after the bull shit justifications for Iraq. The sad thing is Syria and fighting ISIS is actually a far better reason to involve ourselves there than the mythical WMDs.Yet, this is so stupid. These people who are so adamantly against "western involvement" have nothing to lose. They have no stake in it. What did the UK lose from being involved in Iraq and Afghanistan? What did the average citizen sacrifice? Same for Poland, the US, etc. What's it away from them even if ground troops go into Syria?
Look at that rat-faced limey bastard cunt smiling at the death of europe. We need fertile muslim wombs desperately you see, the fact that western women are freer and have less children is problematic, let's import more backwards third worlders who breed like fucking rabbits, it's apparently a genetic trait and not a cultural one. It would be deeply racist and badwrong to encourage the natives to have more children, like the lands and the countries belong to them anyways, european countries are for the entire planet. Just accept the inevitable, cunts like Overdriven already have.The whole "oh my god we need immigrants because we're losing people otherwise!" thing is ridiculous. Why do we need more people? So what if the white population is on the decline? All of those countries got along just fine before with a lot less people, with worse/no technology. If anything, there are too many people, and bullshit jobs have been created to give them something to do.
http://www.cracked.com/blog/isis-wants-us-to-invade-7-facts-revealed-by-their-magazine/
Very interesting.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Even these guys hate the apologists.
Very good read indeed. And according to it, they got Oberyn exactly where they wanted him to be.Some of the conclusions the writer of the article draws are questionable at best. "ISIS wants us to attack them (so we shouldn't)." ISIS wants the west to attack because they think Allah is going to destroy the armies of the west when they attack... that's hardly a reason for not doing it.
The recordbreaking amount of homeless poor women and children hoarding the Western borders kinda turns it into our concern aswell m8. Because where the fuck do you think a bunch of people run to instantly when their homes get burned or some dictator rapes his own country?Yeah now the refugee situation in Mediteranea is so much better now that Kadafi was removed from power and all those refugee coming from Syria when Assad was head of state were unbeareable. Luckily we made Irak a better and more stable place to live in.
How can you be so blind as to not start seeing that it turns out that it actually is our problem aswell? I thought so too aswell. "Whats the point, let the dictators in the Middle-East do whatever they want with their countries". How is it related to me? Well now it kinda turns out it is. You either fight the psychos in their land or you start arguing with the immigrants near at your own lands border. Pick an option. The third option is to make your own country so shit, nobody wants to migrate there.
Because again. The poor people infront of our borders kinda turn it viable. Their governments can turn the average peoples homes uninhabitable and they have to relocate.
You should the the one crying that too. Because its an actually fact. The dude was an agressive retard, who, if given the chance to rule longer, would have ripped the middle-east to shreads(bigger or same shreads it is in currently) eventually. The Arab League knew it. US knew it.
You either fight the psychos in their land or you start arguing with the immigrants near at your own lands border. Pick an option. The third option is to make your own country so shit, nobody wants to migrate there.Let's ban Russian from official language to appease tension in Ukraine! What a surprise when some months after the Swiss delegation in Mali for mediation and peace has been sent home by French, there's an uprising in northern Mali followed by a Jihadist takeover!
Yeah now the refugee situation in Mediteranea is so much better now that Kadafi was removed from power and all those refugee coming from Syria when Assad was head of state were unbeareable. Luckily we made Irak a better and more stable place to live in.
I hope we soon remove Khomeiny from power in Iran, I am tired of this mass of iranian refugee!
Also what is it that you see self-accusing whites everywhere? You know better than many others here that geniuses like Sykes, Picot or more recent Bush junior do have their share in the current situation, but do you really know so many people the equal that with "We are responsible for all problems in the middle east?" - Of course that is completely stupid. :(
I never claimed that anything was better. I simply claimed that the things happening in the Middle East are also our issues(which you, may I quote, claimed were not), wether you like it or not. Revolutions nomatter what kind always create more refugees. And who the fuck are you to claim that those people people are happy or content with their fucked up leaders? I sure am happy that people like you didnt exsist that much during the Soviet Unions collapse. "Nono, dont risk with this revolution to gain sovereignty and finally rid ourselves of our oppressing leaders. Things might get worse, lets just deal with it, its not that bad." Is the kind of an person that you are brokar.That's a very good exemple and history proved me right. When the Soviet Union came up it was in part by force but also because they had the momentum due to the people will, nobody intervened and with time people realised what they wished for could not be, the government even if authoritarian collapsed by itself by lack of support, without bloodshed.
Its not the Wests fault that there is always a powervaccum that is filled by fanatics whenever some leader is overthrown in the Middle-East. Its a bit like Africa. Even if the West wouldnt do shit, it would still generate a lot of refugees. Than the warlords, like in Africa, would just burn eachothers homes and the result would be relatively similar to what it is now.
That's a very good exemple and history proved me right. When the Soviet Union came up it was in part by force but also because they had the momentum due to the people will, nobody intervened and with time people realised what they wished for could not be, the government even if authoritarian collapsed by itself by lack of support, without bloodshed.
Same happened in Taiwan, Nationalist authoritarian government decided to have a democratic transition when it realised it had no more reason to be.
I am pretty confident that in some years China will have its own transition but I am sure as hell that if we provoked the collapse of the government right now it would be chaos.
What you don't understand but Oberyn managed to understand is that fanatics in Syria have the support of the population, it couldn't have raised to power so fast without the momentum of the population. Whether they were under a dictatorship or under fanatics rules was in both cases thanks to the population making the balance lean on one side or the other. But just let the balance be, whether we intervene or not change absolutely nothing if we go against the will of the people living there. Unless we simply exterminate the whole population like Oberyn is suggesting.
I have no fear of muslims fanatics as my government never stepped their boots in the middle east shit, and so muslim fanatics have nothing to do with my country either. So just keep getting in everyone shits if it pleases you but don't come crying when you get shit on your boots.
I can only hope someone in his family gets killed by a muslim fanatic, that a woman he knows gets raped and pissed on by these poor opressed victims, that he gets the shit beaten out of him and called a white piece of shit, and then have his own people call him an evil racist if he so much as complains.
I think right now a massive invasion against ISIS is overdue, though I am in no way certain that it is really the best thing to do or if it will solve any problems in the long run.
Whether its the best thing or not should not stop us from actually doing the good thing and fighting against them. Leave the consequences to the survivors and the population, which I hope wont try something like that again afterward.
Considering what the Chinese government is, it will definately be chaos wether we provoke it or not. You do realise that in the collapse of the Soviet Union, the majority of the role was still played by foreign intervention and own caused inefficiency and some countries barely got independence? Were extremely close to not getting it even. And it was pretty close to chaos. Kremlins tanks were all over the lands that tried to claim independence and were extremely close to actually fire at the protesters. In Soviet unions case it was just pure luck and covincidence none of it happened. The way you make it sound like "eh, thats a textbook example of what happens when people want to leave peacefully and naturally". You have no idea about what you are talking about. The reason why bloodshed was avoided was thanks to the pressure of the international community and USSR leaders showing that they still have some degree of humanity left in them. The Chinese however, will definately bomb Taiwan to shit before they ever let it be independent. And there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. Same applies to the the Middle-East. No way any of those leaders will ever show a degree of humanity. They will bomb their own people.
Yet, the Chinese president feels the need to threaten Taiwan with missiles? And as far as it appears to me, the Chinese elite did almost remove the expansionist ideology in their roots, but in a couple of years now, it kinda appears to be coming back. Ofcourse this just appears to me.
They've always been threatening Taiwan.
Considering what the Chinese government is, it will definately be chaos wether we provoke it or not. You do realise that in the collapse of the Soviet Union, the majority of the role was still played by foreign intervention and own caused inefficiency and some countries barely got independence? Were extremely close to not getting it even. And it was pretty close to chaos. Kremlins tanks were all over the lands that tried to claim independence and were extremely close to actually fire at the protesters. In Soviet unions case it was just pure luck and covincidence none of it happened. The way you make it sound like "eh, thats a textbook example of what happens when people want to leave peacefully and naturally". You have no idea about what you are talking about. The reason why bloodshed was avoided was thanks to the pressure of the international community and USSR leaders showing that they still have some degree of humanity left in them. The Chinese however, will definately bomb Taiwan to shit before they ever let it be independent. And there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. Same applies to the the Middle-East. No way any of those leaders will ever show a degree of humanity. They will bomb their own people.Hahaha like the USSR had any care of "pressure of the international community" which didn't even exist when the world was divided in two. And the fall of the USSR caused by foreign intervention? didn't know you where tovi's brother. Was it caused by CIA or Illuminatti?
(click to show/hide)
Now considering middle-east. Suppose we should send troops there and remove Daech and Assad, what should we put instead?Shouldn't send troops, should send this:
....
you know quite little about USSR dont you? :lol:
Well I quess the people in Iraq want ISIS to rule them than, dont they? Because clearly the area, that ISIS currently occupies, the previous leaders were kicked out "by the population", as you put it. If thats the case than wtf are we even arguing about. Iraq clearly wants an abomination like that to rule them. ISIS was chosen by the people. :lol:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/palestinian-poet-ashraf-fayadh-sentenced-death-by-saudi-court-renouncing-islam-1529763
"religious police" wtf
that country lacks democracy
The large area of territory ISIS occupies includes the eastern part of Syria and the Northwestern part of Iraq. For the last 15 years Syrian Sunni's have been crossing the Iraqi boarder to fight a guerrilla war alongside other Sunni insurgents against the Iraqi government with Assad's blessing. The Iraqi Shias have been fighting these same people for the last 15 years, now they just have a different name and have turned on Assad as well.
Since Assad allowed his own country to be used as a staging point to cause the coalition and Iraqi government much grief our policy has been hostile against him. He supported this kind of abomination growing on his own territory and enjoyed it as long as it wasn't going after him.
The US was able to create a temporary peace between the Sunni and Shia, which was very difficult to do because of all the outside influence. That all went out the window when the new Iraqi prime minister Maliki (who is a Shia) went out of his way to purge the Iraqi government of all Sunni's he considered a threat. The Iraqi parliament voted for US troops to leave Iraq and with that huge security void he became increasingly paranoid of an imminent uprising (which was liable to happen) but made things worse by just blindly arresting and jailing any Sunni's who he considered a threat and openly accepted Iranian support. So when this uprising did come in the form of ISIS, most Sunni's had already been kicked out of the Iraqi Army and the Shia soldiers had no intention of dying defending what they considered "Sunni" territory.
How can you possibly blame the poor muslims for sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing, don't you know the US is 110% responsable? They were literally forced to slaughter each other while calling on their religion and god as justifications (obviously merely as a form of exploitation, all their tribal and religious leaders are cynics who don't really entertain any of these notions beyond what it can do for them politically, only an islamophobe would suggest otherwise). Anyways, it's all obviously a long term plan by the US and their Israeli puppet masters to plunge the middle east into chaos and make muslims suffer, all of this was foreseen and expected, encouraged by the crusaders and zionists every step of the way. The muslims are merely victims, as they always are.
Are you going to calm down any time soon Oberyn? You have been in this angry forum crusademode for some time now. :lol:
http://takimag.com/article/give_hate_a_chance_gavin_mcinnes#axzz3s99e2z9f
He's absolutely right. The abject submission of my countrymen to kumbayaa delusions is sickening, not to mention the completely expected rationalizations of "french" muslims. Bunch of weak-kneed bundle of stickss. The sort of reaction that cunts like Heskey are proud of. Hate breeds hate, unless that hate is directed at western europeans, in which case all it breeds is shame and guilt and endless excuses for why that hate is perfectly normal and rational. This country is fucked, time to learn polish and get out. We deserve everything that is coming.
Putin is offering us a liability free solution to the problem. Unguided massive indiscriminate bombing, you can't get any more multi-cultural than that.
Things in Russia work differently than they do in the US. Unlike US, where you basically get shit from everyone including your own people for bombing anything, to the point that any politician related to those events has a deadline in his political career. The Russian government does not have that issue. It practically has the power to shut everybody up in their own country forcefully and not suffer for it at all. This actually allows them to have significantly more free hands to basically bomb everything and claim anything.
To be honest I think it would be quite wise to let Russia loose in the Middle-East. They could finally act out their powerfantasies, the patriots get to jack off on the exploding motherlands bombs videos and ontop of that ISIS gets fucked. And even if they fuck up big time, this time they couldnt pin it on the West.
The left-wing nuts here are acting like the Muslim refugees are going to starve to death in Germany and Sweden..
The only people who deserve anything out of this conflict IMO are the Kurds.
There are no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent U.S. interests.
It's not about who deserves what but who's willing to accept certain propositions. There is a reason Turkey exist today in this shape and form. They are useful American ally for decades, if they weren't country would be split into many different national states (joke is on those who believe their Turkey is strong enough to fight USA, NATO or even Russia). Kurds are too much socialist for American taste and will never get their support, much like Armenians.
Edit: This is useful article to get some perspective on Kurdish issue - http://peacemagazine.org/archive/v08n2p19.htm
I especially like this quote:
Some of our current cultural dispositions are food for thought in regards to Nietzche's master\slave morality.(click to show/hide)
Turkey downs Russian warplane near Syria border
Turkish military official says fighter jets destroyed plane after it violated country’s airspace, which Russia denies