Your for examples don't take into account that those are reaction against the established government. The creation of ISIL is a product of previous insurrection. The case of Saddam you mention , it was a suppression of a movement for independence by the Kurds, Why don't wa attack Turkey, for the uprising of Kurds ? Let me give you an other example , what happen in the USA in the 1950 when blacks were not admitted in the white schools . the USA government sent the national guard to enforce , what would happen if the white population would react forcefully ? would not come close to a civil war . And you asked if at any time the USA initiated a war . Can you tell me why did the USA entered in war with Germany in 1942 ? the excuse was the sinking of Lusitania ? why was it sunk ? Other thing Weapon of mass destruction in Iraq , did they find any ? the problem was OIL , is that that that brought ISIL. Saddam did not have ISIL problem. ETE. ETE.
Were did the political opposition got the weapon ? was not the Saudi and US ? why not fight like Gandhi in India or Mandela in South Africa
Well, now that's more hope than reality. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Facts matter comrade. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The got their weapons from Syria's army. In case you haven't been paying attention, Syrians rebelled against the Assad regime. That means Syrian military and civil leaders rebelled. A good portion of Assad's army rebelled and became the Free Syrian Army. Are you really that ill informed? It wasn't the US or Saudi Arabia. Syrian's rebelled because they grew angry with Assad's brutal repression and his murdering of their families. Did Gandhi or Mandela watch their families being slaughtered by the government? No they didn't. So for you to assert some sort of equivalence is more than a little disingenuous. The British Empire and the South African governments never used weapons of mass destruction against their own people as Assad has repeatedly done.
So ... why the hell do we have to waste another thread on Russia? I'm sick and tired of this. Hell, we tried discussing American politics of sexual behavior last year, and it was obliged to become a discussion about Russia. What the hell is wrong with people that we can't have a discussion without it eventually transforming into a bunch of pompous, useless, bullshit about Russia, Russia, Russia? I mean, I get that Puti-Toots is an icon to closet queers all over the former Iron Curtain region, an emblem of how a closeteer can achieve success in society, but these cultish devotionals are both stupid and transparent. And it's also true that we don't believe "independence" and refusing to enforce the law in order to empower political supporters hunting other human beings are compatible, so when people get up and lie about Putin it really stands out.
No. States do not loose sovereignty because of whatever propaganda lies. And international law is not at all about what states do inside their territory with their own citizens. You may prefer the world rulership of the US empire in comparison with international law, but international law is as it is, and your wish to rule the world does not change international law. Tiassa, such is life. Once people have no arguments, they start ad hominem, and once they start ad hominem against me, Russia will be included. Despite the fact that I'm not Russian but German, and that I do not consider Russia as a nice place to live actually, simply because I correct the usual anti-Russian propaganda.
Comrade, who does any of that make the least bit of sense? It doesn't. Further you are way off the subject, i.e. the OP. Two, there was no civil war, nor was the nation even close to a civil war, during the civil rights movement of the 1950's or the 1960's. We have something called the rule of law in the US and in all Western countries. You were asked a question, and you have not answered that question. The USA entered WW II because both Japan and Nazi Germany declared war on the US - silly Americans. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Lusitania was WW I. The Lusitania was a British civilian ocean liner which transported civilians across the Atlantic and it was sunk by a German submarine in 1915. The US was angered because a number of US citizens were on-board and lost their lives as a result. Two years later in 1917, when Germany stated they would resume unrestricted attacks on civilian ships, that's when the US entered WW I against Germany. The US had long taken a neutral stance in both WW I and WW II. But, when foreign powers attack your people and in the case of Japan, your military while housed on your land and declare war on you as both Japan and Nazi Germany did, that's called self defense. No, they didn't find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The US and allied powers made a mistake. But Saddam was playing a dangerous game and he lost. He wanted everyone to believe he had weapons of mass destruction and it ultimately worked to his disadvantage. The problem isn't oil. The problem is political instability in the Middle East. It has been a problem all of my life. It has been a problem for decades. For more than a century it hasn't been fixed and it won't be fixed anytime soon. The problems are deeply rooted and the problems in the Middle East won't be solved with guns as Assad and Putin believe. I guess they didn't explain that to you in Russian trolling school. None of this has nothing to do with the OP.
Frankly, I think this is just another attempt by the Russian Troll Army to prevent any critical and honest discussion about The Donald.
All you can do is what you have done, spew Russian propaganda. The truth isn't propaganda comrade. The world knows what Russia, i.e. Putin, is really saying and doing and that's your problem.
With only a few weeks left before the election and with Trump failing in the polls the question remains what will the post Trump world look like? The data suggests Trump is highly unlikely to win. So what will America look like after the election? What will the Republican Party look like after this election? I don't think Trump is going away. That's not his style. He loves the adoration of the crowds. That kind of adoration really appeals to narcissists and Trump is nothing if not a narcissist. That's not going away. So I would expect Trump will continue his political campaign even when he loses. This won't be the end of Trump. The question is what happens then? How does this affect the Republican entertainment industry? Will the Republican entertainment industry continue to support Trump? What will happen to all those Republicans who don't support Trump? Will Trump become the new face of the Republican Party going forward? Will the Republican Party become 2 or more parties? The demographics already are against the Republican Party, a split in the party will render the party virtually meaningless and powerless in national politics. Republican leaders know they are a minority party. Splitting an already minority party doesn't increase the party's power and influence. If that happens, the Democratic Party will have a cakewalk. They will be essentially unopposed. That's kind of mind-boggling to think about. The next question is how does a split Republican Party affect state level politics? What impact would a split of the Republican Party have on traditionally Republican states? It could well make traditional Republican states less Republican, e.g. Utah. The implications are profound. Trump is now referring to his campaign as a movement. If Trump has anything to say about, his movement won't end with the election. Just as a drug addict won't walk away from the object of his addiction, Trump won't walk away from the object of his addiction. I think it likely either moderate Republicans become Democrats as many have done, or the Republican Party fragments into 2 or more parties and I'm not sure how that affects the post Trump Republican entertainment industry. I think after this election more moderate and the more intelligent and knowledgeable Republicans will be more amenable towards restoring the Fairness Doctrine. PS: This is another reason why Trump is so dangerous; he wants to imprison his political opponents and has no problems with using the powers of the state to do so. This morning Trump gave a speech in which he stated again, that if elected, he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hilary Clinton and he will appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the special prosecutor or so he has said. That's really a sad state of affairs. That's a scary state of affairs.
I read his post three times, and it still didn't make any sense. Talk about confusion!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You have no evidence for any of these speculations of yours - you lack information. For example, there are by outward appearance at least two factions in US government opposed to Trump and Clinton both. The only point made obvious so far, by wikileaks among others and linked for you several times now, is that there were at least two opposed factions within the US government in conflict over what the US should do in Syria, back in 2004 - 2005 when the current civil war was being instigated. And that the eventual path chosen, by W&Cheney, marks the primary deliberate US government influence on the current civil war (the unplanned and uncontrolled effects of the Iraq War being the other source of US influence). Clinton was involved only peripherally, at the time - being a junior Senator of a minority Party, although of course more influential than most in her position. Later, as Secretary of State, she inherited the whole shitass scene - including the growing Russian involvement, the fallout from the Iraq War refugees including Sunni revolt, and the increasingly severe effects of the drought. The American media behaved as if they were campaign fighters for Trump. If the German media behaved differently, there are more obvious and sufficient explanations than puppet control by a monolithically Clinton-favoring "deep state" - there is the fact that Clinton's Republican opponents were really not very good or reasonable candidates for President, for example. Back in 2000 and 2004, the German media behaved as if they were campaign fighters for Al Gore and John Kerry, respectively. I don't know how they behaved in 2008 and 2012 - maybe you do: for or against Clinton in '08, Obama in '12? The US "deep state" appears to be easily confused, or possibly simply ineffectual, in its German operations. The war in Syria - like the invasion of Iraq - was instigated by a Republican Party administration. It was unipartisan. If that was enough to control the refugee influx and Islamic conflicts in Syria, to manage Assad's response in detail, to control the effects of the drought, and to play puppet with the Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, Israeli, Turkish, Russian, and US governments, and so forth, why'd they make such a mess for themselves? And why would you blame Clinton for anything they did? She has no such such super powers, had no reason to damage the US administration in pursuit of ineffectual gestures, and plenty of enemies of both her and her agenda who would have welcomed her resignation cheerfully and doubled down on the bad in Syria. But it is an option here, for you. And since that is obvious, common sense would indicate that you select it. Yep. Funny how a video will have so much more effect than mere information, on the naive - jog your memory? No, it doesn't. It sounds like I think there is a "deep state" faction - the fascistic - that has chosen the Republican Party as a major instrument, but that's the opposite direction of implication. The destruction and cooption of the major media by internet influences in the US has been significant in weakening opposition to the "deep state" agenda, especially of certain factions. The internet has proved to be a very useful tool for those whose agenda is furthered by disintegration of reason and isolation of informed discourse. The internet was largely invented by the "deep state", as you identify it, in the US. Very long irrelevance, mostly, for life after Trump. Mostly, but not quite - there is the matter of Trump and the "deep state", in the wake of this campaign. If we presume that the "deep state" prefers the Republican Party remain intact and effectively fascistic, it has to prevent the neo-Confederate and fundamentalist electoral bases from splitting. Is that best accomplished by a Trump loss or a Trump win?
I am not sure who is il informed . But weapons bullets usually are limited if you use them , and this war is going for several years , so by this argument the ammunition would be gone by now. That tells me you are ill informed . Next I have heard of slaughtering people for rebellion were the USSR during 1930 , Syria have lost more then 5 million of its population 86,692[98]–99,227[117] (3,160 foreign; mostly Palestinian) civilian deaths documented by opposition 88 other foreign soldiers killed (Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 48, Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 16, Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 17, Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 7) Total killed: 301,781–422,317 (September 2016 SOHR estimate)[98] 470,000 (February 2016 SCPR estimate)[118] Over 7,600,000 internally displaced (July 2015 UNHCR estimate) Over 4,800,000 refugees (August 2016 estimate NRC Handelsblad)[119]; over 4,000,000 (July 2015 UNHCR estimate)[120][121][12 Is that worth for a nation of 18 million population . I wonder whose weapons made are Russian or others ( Syria was a client state of Russian ) if Russian by now the war would be long over, the military rebels would have only rocks and slings. During Hassans father uprising there vere about 20000 casualty . Can you compare to the present . That is because foreigner get involved. Do foreign power give a dam. No . Were is the humanitarian action no were
...all because Assad forgets his own mortality and clings to power. He forgets as does Putin, that a country or nation belongs to it's citizens and not the leadership. (Fundamentals 101)
First of all I am not a camarade. My grand parents died of starvation in Siberia building a canal. So keep your bloody judgment in you arsh I can agree with you on the Japanese attack on Hawaii. But on other entry of US into war you should read some more history instead politics
You are forgetting that not every country's citizen have anglosaxon mentality , Are you forgetting about your civil war in the 1860
Stop gaslighting and who cares what you are sick and tired of? I'd also suggest that it would elevate the conversation if "we" quit calling Schmelzer "comrade" (this is not addressed toward Tiassa obviously).
Well, at least you admit you are Russian. But here is the thing, you cannot see that the current Russian government is no better than the one which killed your grandparents? It's the same government - a different name, but the same government. It's doing all the same things which led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russian government remains what it has always been an autocratic dictatorial state. It has never managed to successfully become a democracy. Russia's current government is one of the most corrupt governments in the world. I fully expect, the US will respond to Russia's attempt to meddle in US elections by exposing how the Russian government monitors the internet which will allow Russian dissidents to avoid government detection. I also expect the US government will make public corruption within the Russian government which will include exposing Putin's wealth. One, more point, before you go accusing other people of not knowing their history, you had better know it yourself, and clearly you don't. You may not have been taught a truthful version of history in your beloved Mother Russia, but you clearly have access to the internet. You should use that opportunity to learn. Below are some links for your edification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Lusitania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism Well, you are moving the goal post comrade. You had accused the US of starting the Syrian Civil War - remember? How does Syria sustain its civil war? I imagine, that's the same way the rebels sustain the war. Two, most of your numbers are off, i.e. wrong. Almost 5 million people have fled the country as refugees. I noticed you didn't mentioned your beloved Mother Russia's casualties - about 45 people. Unfortunately for you comrade facts do matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War
What's the matter with "comrade"? It would be nice if we could stay on topic. But it's quite apparent that Sciforums has been invaded by Putin's troll army. Let's be honest here. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/31/world/europe/russia-finland-nato-trolls.html http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-internet-trolls-and-donald-trump-2016-7 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_brigades Who could have imagined this Russian-Republican alliance? Ronald Reagan would be rolling over in his grave if he knew what had become of his party.
