- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 31,645
- Reaction score
- 7,598
- Location
- Canada, Costa Rica
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Agreed.
As though the lap dog MSM that is not doing their journalistic duties wasn't floating cover for George Bush while he was taking us into a costly and quite senseless war in Iraq.
There was a decline in the Population growth in the RF after the collapse of the SU, due to migration and due to the horrible conditions that were inflicted upon Russia by Boris Yeltsin and his "Oligarch Family".
But Putin stopped this process by promoting a healthy family policy, I guess that this is one of the reasons why Putin is so hated by some people.
It would be wonderful if German government also promoted a healthy family policy in Germany, but now the promotion of homosexuality already begins in German elementary schools, and German families with children are de facto punished by the German government.
They promote non-European migration in Germany, they are eager to replace the native German population with non-European migrants.
Healthy people in Germany can see that Putin is representing the interests of Russians and that it is idiotic to believe that Putin is an enemy of Germans.
Putin loves Germany and the Germans maybe more than today German government.
Great! Then why not deal then with opinions based on facts rather than just venting an outburst of your feelings?
You feel the US media was supportive of George Bush?? Where do you really live???
No, I didn't say that, stop lying. They gave cover for him, simply because (and this is why MSM isn't real news) in many cases MSM is owned by or owns large unrelated corporations, including defense contractors, so they are supportive of themselves.
Yep. Let's go around promoting conflict with everyone we dislike. Because we're betterer than them.
Anyone who disagrees is a fat Communist.
Yep. Islamist democracies are so much better than secular dictatorships. Only a fat Communist who hated America would disagree.
Dude... read the treaty....... the only one backtracking here is you.
No it's not unfortunately. And the people you'd like to see in power will be far worse than president Assad. The era that needs to be over is the era of US interference in the internal affairs of sovereign countries, and that looks promising at this point, much as that clearly chaps the ass of those apologists for failed and corrupt US foreign policy.
Yes, it is...unfortunately. The conflict will go on with or without us. The only thing that will stop it is the Dictator thoroughly eliminating all resistance or, the rebels eliminating Assad. With or without US involvement.
Whether you want to admit it or not, the US stabilized western Europe, and broke to continuous cycle of warfare there. Unless someone else is willing and able to do it in the middle east (the UN is neither), then it needs to be the US there too.
How is giving cover for him not supportive? You never seem able to supply any back-up for these unusual opinions of yours.
The US did a great job in the stability of Europe, I've got no problem acknowledging that. But the Middle East is a different animal, A and B we've got a Military Industrial Complex and international corporations that don't necessarily benefit from stability. And your right that president Assad eliminating all resistance would end the violence, but that's going to take longer, and result in more loss of life then would be necessary, because of US/Western support for the terrorists that president Assad is fighting.
It was supportive of their own agendas. Covering for Bush's deceitfulness, which advances their agenda, doesn't mean they like him or support him, in any general ideological fashion as you think they do with Obama. Money is their ideology.
Any Democracy is better than any dictatorship.
The US did a great job in the stability of Europe, I've got no problem acknowledging that. But the Middle East is a different animal, A and B we've got a Military Industrial Complex and international corporations that don't necessarily benefit from stability. And your right that president Assad eliminating all resistance would end the violence, but that's going to take longer, and result in more loss of life then would be necessary, because of US/Western support for the terrorists that president Assad is fighting.
Well, the second place in google list was the Wiki-link I have quoted.
Do you yourself read the sources you are linking?
No, we in Germany are not compensating our German population, it will be replaced by Muslims in a couple of decades. Today in German schools there are more Muslim children, than German.
Well, the West is still involved in wars that were started by American imbeciles, like W. Bush, and this imbecile was elected by Americans.
Can we be sure that they will not elect another warmongering imbecile that will start WWIII?
Are you able to read and understand the stuff you are pasting?
They are quoting Russian results from the year 2003 and American results from the year 2012 (almost 10 years difference).
Only imbeciles believe that it is OK to compare peaches to apples.
Russia is below the replacement level of 2.1. I said Western Europe not eastern/central. Where is Russia going to find replacements without immigrants may I ask?
Link?
Meh since 2008, Russia and the US are one apiece when it comes to starting wars. Seems Putin is closer to starting another at this point in time.
This may surprise you, but these aren't exactly recently discovered scientific revelations.
What "deceitfulness" was this??
Assad is a dictator that has used and will use weapons of mass destruction, ie chemical weapons, against his own people. He is a threat to humanity....of all the things America get's involved with, this is a just cause. That simple, Assad has to go, and the age of Dictators is over. If the rest of the world doesn't want to put on their big boy pants, then the US, as usual, has to do the heavy lifting.
[h=1]Obama warns US will 'isolate' Russia
if Putin doesn't pull back in Ukraine[/h]
Obama threatens to
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the time for warnings is over. The article says they are considering what steps to take. Why don't they already KNOW what steps to take? Why are no contingency plans for this in place already? If our intelligence didn't see this coming? Why not?
I blame our intelligence community. We spend billions of dollars to get a heads up on this type action. What happened?
How many times does this need to be covered. Nuclear weapons, the smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud over a US city. That the Iraq mission would take six days, six weeks, but we doubt six months. That it would cost 70 billion dollars, fixing the intelligence around his policy.......................
That's a joke.
Since when did Russia ever need the US in the past 70 years?
Obama is a really ignorant person if he thinks idle threats of "isolation" will intimidate Russia, especially with China (and every communist nation) in their back pockets.
Except thankfully, the UK backed out of that, the UN denied the US the job of heavy lifting in Syria, and 70% of Americans disagree with you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?