RUSSIA CLEARLY WANTS WAR with the USA!

[Meathead]

I have to disagree on this issue with you albeit on most issues we do have similar views. Run the numbers by population and military strength comparing the Russian Federation and the EU. Considering conventional warfare the EU is capable to stand an army with twice as many personnel as Russia, calculating with 10% of the population what is applicable for total mobilization. The EU is equipped with state of the art military hardware and a nuclear arsenal. Why would they need the U.S. unless they want to spend other people's money and blood for their defense? BTW, Russia is not a threat to the EU.

Only through NATO does Europe have an integrated defense capable of withstanding a Russian onslaught. In truth, if the US is not perceived of committing to its obligations under the treaty, Europe, especially the former Warsaw Pact states, feels justifiably threatened by Putin who is inarguably seeking to re-establish the sphere of influence which it had during the Soviet period.

Weak American leadership is alarming for them and the current administration has done nothing to ally those fears.

 

[Tehon]

Why do you need an American "defense shield" in the EU? Russia is not a threat to them and they are capable to defend themselves anyway. Then, why should we pay for the EU's paranoia?

The real question that I want answered: Is it 'EU paranoia' or is it American imperialist maneuvering? It's the latter for sure. I don't feel any threat (just as you say in your second sentence) and I don't know anyone who does feel a threat.

It is not American imperialist maneuvering per se, it is Globalist effort and the U.S. is controlled by Globalists. Russia is a threat to their plan, therefore has to be dealt with. Globalists hate strong national cohesion resulting strong nations because they are in their way in establishing total control over the globe. They are successfully destroying nations in the EU by flooding them with alien nationals as "refugees."

The US is controlled by american corporations who seek monetary and resource hegemony over the rest of the globe. It is indeed american imperialism, your re-branding efforts notwithstanding.

American corporations are controlled by intricately woven international financial entities. You need to follow the money. They are American Corporations indeed by charter, your reference to "re-branding" raises a read flag though.

You need to follow the money.

You need to site an example of an "intricately woven international financial entity" that has control over US corporations.

 

[defcon4]

Only through NATO does Europe have an integrated defense capable of withstanding a Russian onslaught. In truth, if the US is not perceived of committing to its obligations under the treaty, Europe, especially the former Warsaw Pact states, feels justifiably threatened by Putin who is inarguably seeking to re-establish the sphere of influence which it had during the Soviet period.

Weak American leadership is alarming for them and the current administration has done nothing to ally those fears.

This is from a former USSR satellite country's government:
"Hungary's foreign minister said on Tuesday he thought it "unrealistic" that Russia would attack any NATO member, a view that contrasts with some other NATO member countries in the region who see Moscow as a real threat."
Hungarian foreign minister says Russia poses no threat to NATO members

 

[defcon4]

Why do you need an American "defense shield" in the EU? Russia is not a threat to them and they are capable to defend themselves anyway. Then, why should we pay for the EU's paranoia?

The real question that I want answered: Is it 'EU paranoia' or is it American imperialist maneuvering? It's the latter for sure. I don't feel any threat (just as you say in your second sentence) and I don't know anyone who does feel a threat.

It is not American imperialist maneuvering per se, it is Globalist effort and the U.S. is controlled by Globalists. Russia is a threat to their plan, therefore has to be dealt with. Globalists hate strong national cohesion resulting strong nations because they are in their way in establishing total control over the globe. They are successfully destroying nations in the EU by flooding them with alien nationals as "refugees."

The US is controlled by american corporations who seek monetary and resource hegemony over the rest of the globe. It is indeed american imperialism, your re-branding efforts notwithstanding.

American corporations are controlled by intricately woven international financial entities. You need to follow the money. They are American Corporations indeed by charter, your reference to "re-branding" raises a read flag though.

You need to follow the money.

You need to site an example of an "intricately woven international financial entity" that has control over US corporations.

Have a good day......hahaha..
I like your false flag operation though.

 

[defcon4]

GLASNOST
You need to take that avi down. It alienates even reasonably thinking Americans and it will turn them off with immediate bias. Just a thought you might want to consider....

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Russia is cool. We should touch penises.

I mean Russia. Unless you are cool with the idea.

What is it with Democrats and the attraction to penises?

 

[Meathead]

This is from a former USSR satellite country's government:
"Hungary's foreign minister said on Tuesday he thought it "unrealistic" that Russia would attack any NATO member, a view that contrasts with some other NATO member countries in the region who see Moscow as a real threat."
Hungarian foreign minister says Russia poses no threat to NATO members

You're cherry-picking a diplomat's statement on the eve of a nuclear power plant building contract between Hungary and Russia. I've bolded something you may have missed from the the extract you provided.

 

[Tehon]

The real question that I want answered: Is it 'EU paranoia' or is it American imperialist maneuvering? It's the latter for sure. I don't feel any threat (just as you say in your second sentence) and I don't know anyone who does feel a threat.

It is not American imperialist maneuvering per se, it is Globalist effort and the U.S. is controlled by Globalists. Russia is a threat to their plan, therefore has to be dealt with. Globalists hate strong national cohesion resulting strong nations because they are in their way in establishing total control over the globe. They are successfully destroying nations in the EU by flooding them with alien nationals as "refugees."

The US is controlled by american corporations who seek monetary and resource hegemony over the rest of the globe. It is indeed american imperialism, your re-branding efforts notwithstanding.

American corporations are controlled by intricately woven international financial entities. You need to follow the money. They are American Corporations indeed by charter, your reference to "re-branding" raises a read flag though.

You need to follow the money.

You need to site an example of an "intricately woven international financial entity" that has control over US corporations.

Have a good day......hahaha..
I like your false flag operation though.

That is what I thought. International globalist conspiracy sounds great until you are tasked with naming them.

Why do so many refuse to see the american imperialism that is staring us straight in the eye? Nothing gets solved until the problems are correctly identified.

 

[defcon4]

This is from a former USSR satellite country's government:
"Hungary's foreign minister said on Tuesday he thought it "unrealistic" that Russia would attack any NATO member, a view that contrasts with some other NATO member countries in the region who see Moscow as a real threat."
Hungarian foreign minister says Russia poses no threat to NATO members

You're cherry-picking a diplomat's statement on the eve of a nuclear power plant building contract between Hungary and Russia. I've bolded something you may have missed from the the extract you provided.

That's a NATO country, former USSR satellite, former Warsaw Pact member had been under Russian occupation directly or indirectly from 1945 to round 1984. USSR army bloodily put down their 1956 revolution against communists. So, by no means can it be considered as an over friendly nation to Russia based on their first hand experience.

 

[defcon4]

It is not American imperialist maneuvering per se, it is Globalist effort and the U.S. is controlled by Globalists. Russia is a threat to their plan, therefore has to be dealt with. Globalists hate strong national cohesion resulting strong nations because they are in their way in establishing total control over the globe. They are successfully destroying nations in the EU by flooding them with alien nationals as "refugees."

The US is controlled by american corporations who seek monetary and resource hegemony over the rest of the globe. It is indeed american imperialism, your re-branding efforts notwithstanding.

American corporations are controlled by intricately woven international financial entities. You need to follow the money. They are American Corporations indeed by charter, your reference to "re-branding" raises a read flag though.

You need to follow the money.

You need to site an example of an "intricately woven international financial entity" that has control over US corporations.

Have a good day......hahaha..
I like your false flag operation though.

That is what I thought. International globalist conspiracy sounds great until you are tasked with naming them.

Why do so many refuse to see the american imperialism that is staring us straight in the eye? Nothing gets solved until the problems are correctly identified.

I said have a good day. Which part is it you don't you understand?
When we say that it is a polite way to indicate that you can GFY.

 

[Tehon]

The US is controlled by american corporations who seek monetary and resource hegemony over the rest of the globe. It is indeed american imperialism, your re-branding efforts notwithstanding.

American corporations are controlled by intricately woven international financial entities. You need to follow the money. They are American Corporations indeed by charter, your reference to "re-branding" raises a read flag though.

You need to follow the money.

You need to site an example of an "intricately woven international financial entity" that has control over US corporations.

Have a good day......hahaha..
I like your false flag operation though.

That is what I thought. International globalist conspiracy sounds great until you are tasked with naming them.

Why do so many refuse to see the american imperialism that is staring us straight in the eye? Nothing gets solved until the problems are correctly identified.

I said have a good day. Which part is it you don't you understand?
When we say that it is a polite way to indicate that you can GFY.

Well in that case, have a good day sir. Thanks for playing.

 

[Meathead]

That's a NATO country, former USSR satellite, former Warsaw Pact member had been under Russian occupation directly or indirectly from 1945 to round 1984. USSR army bloodily put down their 1956 revolution against communists. So, by no means can it be considered as an over friendly nation to Russia based on their first hand experience.

Perhaps you don't realize this, but I am well aware of the history of the region in which I live. I was merely pointing out that you were cherry picking while ignoring the content your own post and indeed an extract that you copied&pasted.

If you choose to believe that Russia is not widely viewed as an existential threat in this part of the world, I would only ask that you delve deeper into the history and current politics of the region.

 

[Penelope]

Why do you need an American "defense shield" in the EU? Russia is not a threat to them and they are capable to defend themselves anyway. Then, why should we pay for the EU's paranoia?

The real question that I want answered: Is it 'EU paranoia' or is it American imperialist maneuvering? It's the latter for sure. I don't feel any threat (just as you say in your second sentence) and I don't know anyone who does feel a threat.

It is not American imperialist maneuvering per se, it is Globalist effort and the U.S. is controlled by Globalists. Russia is a threat to their plan, therefore has to be dealt with. Globalists hate strong national cohesion resulting strong nations because they are in their way in establishing total control over the globe. They are successfully destroying nations in the EU by flooding them with alien nationals as "refugees."

The US is controlled by american corporations who seek monetary and resource hegemony over the rest of the globe. It is indeed american imperialism, your re-branding efforts notwithstanding.

American corporations are controlled by intricately woven international financial entities. You need to follow the money. They are American Corporations indeed by charter, your reference to "re-branding" raises a read flag though.

You need to follow the money.

You need to site an example of an "intricately woven international financial entity" that has control over US corporations.

I think I know but you go first.

 

[Tehon]

The real question that I want answered: Is it 'EU paranoia' or is it American imperialist maneuvering? It's the latter for sure. I don't feel any threat (just as you say in your second sentence) and I don't know anyone who does feel a threat.

It is not American imperialist maneuvering per se, it is Globalist effort and the U.S. is controlled by Globalists. Russia is a threat to their plan, therefore has to be dealt with. Globalists hate strong national cohesion resulting strong nations because they are in their way in establishing total control over the globe. They are successfully destroying nations in the EU by flooding them with alien nationals as "refugees."

The US is controlled by american corporations who seek monetary and resource hegemony over the rest of the globe. It is indeed american imperialism, your re-branding efforts notwithstanding.

American corporations are controlled by intricately woven international financial entities. You need to follow the money. They are American Corporations indeed by charter, your reference to "re-branding" raises a read flag though.

You need to follow the money.

You need to site an example of an "intricately woven international financial entity" that has control over US corporations.

I think I know but you go first.

That is a bit different......but yeah.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well Russia may not want war .....

So you agree with me then, that despite what Washington says to the contrary, it's the US that's pushing for war .... not the Russians.

No, I don't agree with you. The US isn't pushing for war with Russia at all. The left don't particularly want war. Hence why in the last 8 years there has only been a start of minor wars for the US rather than than two big ones under Bush. Obama tried to pull back from the anti-Islam sentiment, he hasn't done much with Russia either.

The right might want more war, it seems to be their thing, however they've got the "War on Terror" and ISIS to keep the people in their place and spend more and more money on the military. They don't need Russia.

In Syria the US bombed some Syrian forces. The Russian decided they had to have revenge for this act which appeared to either be a mistake, or someone duped the US into it. The Russians then went and attacks aid workers, killing them. I mean, seriously.

Why is Russia aiding Assad? It would see that any guy the US hates, is a friend of Putin's, so he went in to piss the US off. He knew he could get away with it, playing with people's lives because he doesn't care.

I rather disagree, Russia , Iran and Syria are allies, everyone needs allies. Turkey wanted to by bypass Russia's natural gas, preferring Qatar, and Assad wont allow Qatar's gas line , and Israel wants to expand in Syria and get rid of Hezbollah and take down Iran. Israel already has farms and beef ranches in the Golan Heights, and also has been drilling for oil.

Yeah, they're allies. Why does Russia need Syria as an ally?

But that doesn't mean that there are only two sides. There are more. ISIS isn't with the US or Syria.

Why does Russia need Syria as an ally?

Who is anyone to question whom Russia is in alignment with? The two nations have historical ties and at the present the Assad government is the only thing preventing ISIS from building a salafist principality in Syria, which is very much a threat to Russia. And what business is it of the US who governs the sovereign state of Syria anyway?

I am someone to question Russia's motives. I'm a human being. Assad might be like Saddam was, a strong man who prevented such a thing. US foreign policy has been a mess for a long time, often creating enemies to give reason to make fear and spend heavily.

What business is it of the US's? Well about as much as it is Russia's I would guess. Yes, the US likes to interfere when their oil is threatened.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The US isn't fighting ISIS ... Russia is. The US is supporting ISIS

No, you're wrong.

And you say this because .......?

You seem to think there are only two sides in that war.

Huh? What I think .... what I don't think ...... what?

You're wrong because the US isn't fighting on the same side as ISIS. Yes, ISIS is fighting the Syrian regime and Russia, and yes the US is supporting those who are fighting the Syrian regime and Russia, but not ISIS. The war is a mess, and there are many different interests at play, it's not a traditional two sided war, there are probably four or five different sides, with different groups fighting for the same "side" more or less but doing their own thing.

 

[defcon4]

That's a NATO country, former USSR satellite, former Warsaw Pact member had been under Russian occupation directly or indirectly from 1945 to round 1984. USSR army bloodily put down their 1956 revolution against communists. So, by no means can it be considered as an over friendly nation to Russia based on their first hand experience.

Perhaps you don't realize this, but I am well aware of the history of the region in which I live. I was merely pointing out that you were cherry picking while ignoring the content your own post and indeed an extract that you copied&pasted.

If you choose to believe that Russia is not widely viewed as an existential threat in this part of the world, I would only ask that you delve deeper into the history and current politics of the region.

"The reality is that, according to General Petr Pavel, chairman of the NATO Military Committee, there is no intelligence that suggests Russia is planning any broad-scale aggression whatsoever. [...]
Deployment of substantial military force is not being considered. It is not the aim of NATO to create a military barrier against broad-scale Russian aggression, because such aggression is not on the agenda and no intelligence assessment suggests such a thing." [...]
"Well that's quite a statement, because the actions of the US and NATO have completely contradicted that assessment. If Pavel is correct, and there is no actual intelligence that suggests any aggression is being planned by Russia, then either the US is trying to provoke the country into action on purpose..."
NATO General Admits Russia Is Not A Threat To The Region | Zero Hedge

 

[Tehon]

So you agree with me then, that despite what Washington says to the contrary, it's the US that's pushing for war .... not the Russians.

No, I don't agree with you. The US isn't pushing for war with Russia at all. The left don't particularly want war. Hence why in the last 8 years there has only been a start of minor wars for the US rather than than two big ones under Bush. Obama tried to pull back from the anti-Islam sentiment, he hasn't done much with Russia either.

The right might want more war, it seems to be their thing, however they've got the "War on Terror" and ISIS to keep the people in their place and spend more and more money on the military. They don't need Russia.

In Syria the US bombed some Syrian forces. The Russian decided they had to have revenge for this act which appeared to either be a mistake, or someone duped the US into it. The Russians then went and attacks aid workers, killing them. I mean, seriously.

Why is Russia aiding Assad? It would see that any guy the US hates, is a friend of Putin's, so he went in to piss the US off. He knew he could get away with it, playing with people's lives because he doesn't care.

I rather disagree, Russia , Iran and Syria are allies, everyone needs allies. Turkey wanted to by bypass Russia's natural gas, preferring Qatar, and Assad wont allow Qatar's gas line , and Israel wants to expand in Syria and get rid of Hezbollah and take down Iran. Israel already has farms and beef ranches in the Golan Heights, and also has been drilling for oil.

Yeah, they're allies. Why does Russia need Syria as an ally?

But that doesn't mean that there are only two sides. There are more. ISIS isn't with the US or Syria.

Why does Russia need Syria as an ally?

Who is anyone to question whom Russia is in alignment with? The two nations have historical ties and at the present the Assad government is the only thing preventing ISIS from building a salafist principality in Syria, which is very much a threat to Russia. And what business is it of the US who governs the sovereign state of Syria anyway?

I am someone to question Russia's motives. I'm a human being. Assad might be like Saddam was, a strong man who prevented such a thing. US foreign policy has been a mess for a long time, often creating enemies to give reason to make fear and spend heavily.

What business is it of the US's? Well about as much as it is Russia's I would guess. Yes, the US likes to interfere when their oil is threatened.

What business is it of the US's? Well about as much as it is Russia's I would guess.

Morally or ethically there is no equivalence between Russian and US actions in Syria. Russia clearly stands on the high ground, the US has no business there.

 

[Meathead]

That's a NATO country, former USSR satellite, former Warsaw Pact member had been under Russian occupation directly or indirectly from 1945 to round 1984. USSR army bloodily put down their 1956 revolution against communists. So, by no means can it be considered as an over friendly nation to Russia based on their first hand experience.

Perhaps you don't realize this, but I am well aware of the history of the region in which I live. I was merely pointing out that you were cherry picking while ignoring the content your own post and indeed an extract that you copied&pasted.

If you choose to believe that Russia is not widely viewed as an existential threat in this part of the world, I would only ask that you delve deeper into the history and current politics of the region.

"The reality is that, according to General Petr Pavel, chairman of the NATO Military Committee, there is no intelligence that suggests Russia is planning any broad-scale aggression whatsoever. [...]
Deployment of substantial military force is not being considered. It is not the aim of NATO to create a military barrier against broad-scale Russian aggression, because such aggression is not on the agenda and no intelligence assessment suggests such a thing." [...]
"Well that's quite a statement, because the actions of the US and NATO have completely contradicted that assessment. If Pavel is correct, and there is no actual intelligence that suggests any aggression is being planned by Russia, then either the US is trying to provoke the country into action on purpose..."
NATO General Admits Russia Is Not A Threat To The Region | Zero Hedge

Oh, FFS! My fault. I gave you too much credit. I should have known better. Chalk it up to the internet I guess.

Ciao

 

[aaronleland]

Russia is cool. We should touch penises.

I mean Russia. Unless you are cool with the idea.

What is it with Democrats and the attraction to penises?

I'm not a Democrat. And are we touching penises or what? Don't be a fucking tease.