Io guess I just don't see that. He certainly continued the policies of Bush, though there were reductions in the number of servicemen overseas. He was ready to go in with ground troops in Syria, but did not thanks to that reporter whose name I can't bother to look up right now. But he was generally pretty ineffective. Bush got a couple of wars going - and that's setting aside neo con involvment in 9/11 - the privitization of the military - meaning giant shifts of money from citizens to corporations. Clinton set the pace for the 2008 crisis by repealing the Glass Speagal act. Obama was the worst against whistleblowers, he was king of the drones, though these killed far fewer than Bush 1s embargo of Iraq alone. Obama failed to get any significant gun legislation. Perhaps he's left some time bombs in there like Clinton did. But most of his destructiveness seems small scale to me, not for want of kissing neocon ass.Fixed Cross wrote:Absoutely. Before Obolkos second term I always considered the Republicans the worst maniacs.
Then Obolko with Clont as SS broke all records of insanity.
I don't see Iran as an imminant threat to me. Nor did I see Sadaam or the Taliban as that. They just want another war, another privitization of closed off resources. All the players, including Israel, set up terrorists, and Israel managed to help governmental terrorist all over the world. But since these were aligned with the neo-cons, it is not talked about, not noticed.This makes no sense to me. If someone is an imminent threat to you, you take him out, or do something about his capacity to threaten. You don't let him sit there for fear he may become more of a threat if you do anything about him.
Iran with an atomic bomb would truly be a fundamental problem for the coming thousands of years.
Iran has already been spending more than their GDP on terrorists, the money they got from Obolk all went into weaponry for Hezbollah and Hamas. Taking away money from them is not going to cause them to be able to pay for more terrorists. Hamas, incidentally, tells Palestinian boys that the Israeli border is open and they can just walk into Jerusalem. So they try, and get in the line of legitimate fire, as bloody meat for the antisemite press and masses. It is profoundly sickening, this Obama-Hamas axis.
I don't think it's existence was justifiable, however that transition is over. I have no happy perfect solutions, bu their internal policies and external arms and disruption policies were not a good approach to stabilizing that transition. I don't see their nukes as a good thing.Im from Amsterdam, by the way. You did not appear to me at all like an antisemite (the "if" was pretty strong) because you display a calm and thoughtful disposition. Antisemites are invariably jumpy morons.
Your objections to Israels politics are of a normal political order, and I do not have issue with such objections, other than that I don't find the proper weight in them to object to Israels existence. And if Israels existence is desirable, then this is the moment to affirm and defend it.
I am not in the position to demand that any country behaves. They have more firepower and ability to destabilize than any of their neighbors and their internal and external policies are terrible. The US and Britain certainly have had even more resources and cannot be competed with. I don't need to hold back criticism of one because others are worse.Politics is brutal, Israel is no exception. Surely its acts aren't nearly as ugly as those perpetrated by Turkey, France, England, etc, let alone the US, China and Russia, not to mention Hamas and the Palestinian Authority itself - basic "human grocery stores". (Ive been embedded with Hezbollah as a journalist. Ugliest shit Ive ever seen) Lets first turn to our own countries and see that they can compare to Israels relative prudence before we start to demand that Israel "behaves".
It's hardly resolved. Further, I don't really care about any people's selfmythologizations, especially when it gives them entitlement to do what people tend to do with these kinds of hallucinations. It makes for a world where some Arab group will, in 2000 years come in and kill a bunch of innocent people in the name of their stories.The only change here is that the Jews finally feel they have their old kings city back. A place in the world where they belong.
take a moment and imagine being part of a generation that sees a 3000 year old struggle resolved.
And of course all of my countries, whatever that means, pull this kind of shit also.
Well, it's interesting getting an Amsterdamians perspective. I have no problem with that. I know a lot about what Britain has done to many parts of the world. I am not a fan of their policies, though I see them as generally aligned with the neo cons on most things. The EU is still trying to get a hold on Europe and has recently been more destabilized. I am extremely skeptical about what is coming. I am amazed at both the left and non-radical right for never mentioning that large countries with centralized goverments tend to be less democratic in reality and treating any rejection of the EU as racist or even nationalist in some pejorative sense. The EU will end up being a nation and a fucking big one. Skeptics about the power of states should have at least some respect for rejection of the EU. But there is none.If you study the English politics vs the continent from way before the Westphalian peace, you see they never did anything that wasn't aimed at weakening this or that continental power, causing war between them, along with of course ravaging the rest of the world.
Well, I love that you read Chomsky, since you seem to be in a sense on the right, but the right can get a lot out of ChomskyNow, if you look at the news, that news which is allowed to come out, I think it would be hard to deny that England has quite officially become an islamic regime.
It may seem unlikely, but on the other hand, its ruling castes have always have shared a resemblance with the Sultans of the Ottoman Empire, for example - it is a distinctly tyrannical, authoritarian sort of nation.
Im sure you read Chomsky, the Manufacture of Consent - look at how it went since the invention of the printing press.
I honestly can't get a full bead on or interest in which of the exceptionally rich are responsible for the most shit.It has been a freedom fearing terror-state all along. But it has always managed to shift the blame on this or that other nation, that is its main strategy.
For example how it blames its massive banking schemes on Rothschild, whose wealth and influence pales in comparison to the big Anglo families.
I think it is still vengeance for what Rothschild pulled on them after Waterloo. In any case it makes no real sense.
OK, but I would be surprised if privitization, a slow creep of power towards Brussels, more and more centralization of media power in a few companies, more reduction of the commons, further Disneyfication, don't all just keep heading the way they are heading. Perhaps what you feel with counter these trends, but i am not hearing about it. I know that resistance to refugee/immigration policies is taking some root, but this is peanuts to the NeoCons, especially given how much has already happened.I live here, have been waging this war since I am an adult, Ive become deeply familiar with the islamic world here as well as the liberal trends which have been very powerful here since Erasmus, and Ive been the tide begin to change since Trumps victory. Sitting here, outside at a cafe drinking coffee at the corner of my street, I feel I can almost guarantee that Holland is done with the expansion of neocon and globalist agenda, simply stopped caring for it, realized life is better now than it will be if we keep changing with these fads and manias. The country has turned rigidly conservative, calm.
One of the few things I appreciated about Trump was that it felt like he was pulling us away from WWW3, no small thing. But he ended up actually firing missles at a base in Syria with Russian soldiers on it. And that was after one of these chemical weapons things, before any investigation. And he has recently attacked again, then requested the UN do an investigation to see who did it. He seems a loose cannon there, and I am no longer sure he is preferable even in that area. Don't get me wrong. I think the neo-cons thought that after the debacles of the Iraq&Afgan wars the only way to get a war was to have a minority president or a woman president start it. I was sure Hilary was going into Syria if she won. I am not a fan of her or hubby. I just see Trump as manipulable at the least and potentially very dangerous.We look with different eyes then. Innumerable dangers have been lifted. Firstly, tensions with Russia were at the verge of a breaking point under Obolko and WWIII would have broken out if Clont had won, the Russians were nuke-drilling for it daily. A mere detail to most of Trumps adversaries apparently, for me a huge victory for mankind, the elimination of the "caliphate", going linea recta against old US policies
How did he do this, can you link me?No more children being kneaded in ovens across the Middle East. So much suffering has stopped there, it was worse than Dantes hell. And thats just one of the many things Ive seen him resolve.
