RUSSIA CLEARLY WANTS WAR with the USA!

[Sbiker]

Most Americans know of Russia. Not many have been to Russia.

Or just see some movies about real Russian life...

 

[Sbiker]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

 

[GLASNOST]

Or just see some movies about real Russian life...

During Sovjet times I was in Moscow twice, and in Leningrad once. I was also in many Warsaw Pact countries during Sovjet times, and also many after Sovjet.

 

[Sbiker]

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

No. ISIS is made up of Islamists on Russia's back porch. It is more of their business than the US.

... the US...... is supporting those who are fighting the Syrian regime and Russia, but not ISIS ..... .

"But not ISIS"? You might want to reconsider that statement.

No I don't. The US is not supporting ISIS.

Unless of course you want to make the argument that it is so, then you are free to make such an argument.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-created-al-qaeda-and-the-isis-terror-group/5402881

http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-th...op-vs-billions-in-covert-military-aid/5409449

Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq | Seumas Milne

Germany In ‘Total Shock’ As Proof Emerges Of U.S. Support Of ISIS

Pentagon acknowledges US ground forces supporting ISIS fight in Libya

Propaganda against propaganda?

 

[frigidweirdo]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

 

[Sbiker]

Or just see some movies about real Russian life...

During Sovjet times I was in Moscow twice, and in Leningrad once. I was also in many Warsaw Pact countries during Sovjet times, and also many after Sovjet.

And what about now? Moscow ... so, not only Moscow - Russia have changed You may not to find out what you've seen

 

[Sbiker]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

 

[GLASNOST]

Or just see some movies about real Russian life...

During Sovjet times I was in Moscow twice, and in Leningrad once. I was also in many Warsaw Pact countries during Sovjet times, and also many after Sovjet.

And what about now? Moscow ... so, not only Moscow - Russia have changed You may not to find out what you've seen

Москва слезам не верит!

 

[Sbiker]

Or just see some movies about real Russian life...

During Sovjet times I was in Moscow twice, and in Leningrad once. I was also in many Warsaw Pact countries during Sovjet times, and also many after Sovjet.

And what about now? Moscow ... so, not only Moscow - Russia have changed You may not to find out what you've seen

Москва слезам не верит!

Yeah, and have you seen the movie, named so?

 

[frigidweirdo]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

 

[GLASNOST]

Yeah, and have you seen the movie, named so?

Yes. I saw it many years ago. A good film, but sad.

 

[Tehon]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

 

[GLASNOST]

Putin ..... In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

In a true Democracy he might have been kicked out, as you say. Then again, in a true Democracy, Bush Baby Jr. - Donald Rumsfeld - Richard Cheney - Tony Blair - and Silvio Berlusconi would all have been given the electric chair ..... after a fair trial of course.

 

[GLASNOST]

..... defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

Bravo, Tehon!

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

Bravo, again!

 

[Sbiker]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Putin is really elected by Russian majority, instead of his careness... This "regime" is really not enough "brutal", majority wants more respect to law from some groups of richmen in Russia...

Putin does have the majority of votes, but we've seen ballot stuffing in places even in an election where he controls the media, has been knocking off some opponents, stifles debate and things like that. So he's not as secure as his election victories suggest.

You don't know, what is Russia really. If this all violations would be significant - it would be really mass riots, till the revolution. In media you can hear only the voice of "bohema" people, who have opposite opinion and wide abilities for spreading it.
Half of people upkeep Putin, half are indifferent to any leaders, but majority of voices for Putin is real.

If the people were willing to go to revolution, but they seem to like the guy who goes about being the strong man. I don't understand it, but it happens in the US and Russia. If Putin controls the media, he can get away with a lot. The economy has gone to hell, and yet still has support. In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

The media is often made up of intelligent people who have the ability to put their thoughts down in words. They might not be un-biased, but usually with a free media you'll have different types of bias which balance itself up.

How interesting As I know, Putin doesn't control a lot of media, only a few official resources. Is he controls economics? He trying, but who said you, Russian economics in hell? It's not a good time now for consumers, but a lot of chances for new businesses, replacing foreign... The level of life now is significantly lower, but if it a fee for solving at least a part of problems with US aggression - no any Russians could worry about it...

Russians are strongly dislike wars after WWII, which took every seventh life here. But don't have an illusion - after a years of "peaceful" and "compromised" US politics all Russians are ready to total war with US. It's interesting, when a lot of US civilians discussing about "another lesson to Russia", do they really ready to bid their lives in a "Big Game" for the "some interests" of US government?

 

[frigidweirdo]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

 

[gipper]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

I doubt Putin wants war with the USA. I am not so sure about the powers that control the US government. They may want war with Russia and the politician they support is Hillary.

War is always about the health of the STATE!

 

[frigidweirdo]

Putin ..... In a true democracy he'd have been kicked out a long time again.

In a true Democracy he might have been kicked out, as you say. Then again, in a true Democracy, Bush Baby Jr. - Donald Rumsfeld - Richard Cheney - Tony Blair - and Silvio Berlusconi would all have been given the electric chair ..... after a fair trial of course.

Well yes, but we're not talking about those others. Russia is far less transparent than the US, and the US isn't very good.

 

[frigidweirdo]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

I doubt Putin wants war with the USA. I am not so sure about the powers that control the US government. They may want war with Russia and the politician they support is Hillary.

War is always about the health of the STATE!

More than likely he likes playing with the big boys, and he knows the US doesn't want to risk war, so he keeps pushing and pushing.

 

[Sbiker]

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.

No, I don't think Russia or the US has any moral high ground at all. Russia has no business being there the same as the US. Both are their for their own agendas. The US is supporting one lot of people, Russia another lot of people. Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Just because Russia is supporting the official leader of the country (unelected and part of a brutal regime) doesn't make it have the higher moral ground in any way.

Of course it does. Russia has been welcomed by the officially recognized, elected government of the sovereign state of Syria, and is defending the rule of law and the country of Syria from falling prey to US sponsored terrorism. The US has no legal basis for sponsoring civil war in Syria, it is morally reprehensible, on par with what has been done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The moral juxtaposition is clear.

You know Russia didn't set this sequence of events off, right. You know it was the acts of aggression perpetrated by the US that did, right. I don't understand why sensible Americans are unable/unwilling to look this thing in the face and see it for what it is.

And what does "official recognized" mean? It means they managed to convince others they should have that power. As for "elected government", seriously? The Assad regime has been passed from father to son. Oh, there is an elected parliament, well, kind of seeing as the ruling party got 200 of the 250 seats. Germany refused to accept the results and the US too, simply because it was impossible to do so. But the Assad regime has ruled since 1963 without the need for a fair election. His "election" saw him get 99.7% of the votes, only 8.6 million people voted, that's three time less than voted in the war influenced parliament elections.
Opposition to the election was not allowed. That's not an election. It's a rubber stamp.

So, do you see it for what it is?

Assad regime has been passed from father to son. It's an indisputable evil...

US regime has been passed from father-Bush to son-Bush, and it seems to be passed from Clinton-husband to Clinton-wife... Do you really mean, US regime is double evil? )