Who Really Loves Russia?

[mudwhistle]

Earth to dumbass......Denesh was convicted during the Obama Administration and Manafort is being accused by Obama Administration officials still in the DOJ.

Well, there are no Obama administration officials in the DOJ…there is no Obama administration fuck face.

Are you really this fucking stupid?

Not as stupid as the **** that thinks when Trump was elected all of the Democrats left government service.

Sure you are….your blob could fire them all tomorrow but he doesn’t do it. Is he weak or stupid?. You’re both so you should be able to answer it.

How can you be this ignorant?????????
Trump fired Comey, and the same folks you say could be easily fired reacted by appointing Mueller to investigate him. Imagine what happens if Trump cleans house like Nixon did.

"IMPEACH 45!!!!!"

Boy…that sucks for him; having to obey the law and everything. I said when he was elected that I’m sure he would be humored to hear that there were limits on presidential power.

However, if there are people in the Executive that are in fact crooked, he could fire them. It probably would be a good idea if he didn’t ask them to ignore the law before doing so as he did with Director Comey.

All this time I just thought you were clueless.
Now I know you are.

You really need to expand where you get your information from.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Absolutely no evidence that safe spaces or safe corridors could be erected and protected.

Any of you who want to work with Russia need to emigrate there.

They ARE THE RUSSIANS, and our President is in their pocket.

 

[AntonToo]

He MAY be pussy. No one's actually called his bluff. But this should never be a NATION of pussies. Apologies to every one of the women's movements.

I know there's a hundred dead Russian mercenaries in Syria and a lot of bomb craters. That's as close as it comes to calling his bluff.

Are you happy about "dead Russian mercenaries in Syria"? And I am praying about every Russian citizen (about 60 overall) who has been killed while cleaning Syria from the mess Obama+Soros have brought there.

Two young women are among victims as well: Nadezhda Durachenko and Galina Michaylova: they were trying to save wounded Syrian civilians.

View attachment 206904

View attachment 206905

Two nurses from Russian Far East killed on attack on mobile hospital in Aleppo

View attachment 206906

Too bad your Media fails to tell you the REAL stories and is too busy stuffing you with all kinds of fakes.

Obama+Soros????

They died because Putin's regime backed that country's dictator regime against internal rebellion and was bombing the SHIT out of Aleppo

So, cleaning Syria from ISIS which Obama has planted there

Idiot, Obama didn't plant ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). What he did is bomb the crap out of ISIS for years.

Russian state media has long spread falsehood that Obama's admin somehow caused ISIS and clueless idiots like you and our current doof President perpetuate that baseless bullshit.

Trump's Pants on Fire claim on Obama, Clinton founding ISIS

Russia, unlike what it claims on TV for it's dupe population, is NOT in Syria to fight ISIS, thats just a side job to their main occupation there - squashing rebellion and keeping Assad in power.

More substitution of "flack checking" psychics instead of learning to process info critically and logically. Obama screwed up on ISIS from the time he called them the J.V. team. Did virtually nothing to move them out of their strongholds. But the WORSE PART is -- Obama and the WORLD ignored the 6 Million refugee problem and didn't create safe space for them in the Middle East. Which would have set OUR mission apart from Putin's mission of simply backing Assad. That created the worst migration crisis in decades.

This is long diversion from the OP topic. So I'm out on just Syria. Not going do that in this thread.

No doubt ISIS became a more seirous issue than what some, inc. Obama saw them initially as, but that doesn't mean Obama "planted them".

And "virtually nothing"? That just ignorance, ISIS targets were under frequent American airstrikes. About 9000 such strikes by 2015 perioiod. By the end of 2016 ISIS was taking it's last stand in Iraq (in Mosul). Trump's war on ISIS has looked a lot like Obama's war on ISIS.

International military intervention against ISIL - Wikipedia

 

[flacaltenn]

No doubt ISIS became a more seirous issue than what some, inc. Obama saw them initially as, but that doesn't mean Obama "planted them".

No actually our chronically shitty MidEast policy birthed them. Four administrations in a row. They actually sprung out of our prisons in Iraq. Al Baghdadi and his top men were in US custody. And in an effort to turn control over to the Iraqis, we let THEM release them from prison. US blood was shed to PUT them there. And THEN -- they capture all their heavy equipment from stuff we GAVE to the Iraqi army.

About 9000 such strikes by 2015 perioiod. By the end of 2016 ISIS was taking it's last stand in Iraq (in Mosul).

I have documentation that MOST of those sorties never unloaded their ordinance because of engagement rules.

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS
The campaign against Serbia in 1999 averaged 138 strike sorties daily. Against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: seven.
By
Mark Gunzinger And
John Stillion
Updated Oct. 14, 2014 7:46 p.m. ET



Since U.S. planes first struck targets in Iraq on Aug. 8, a debate has raged over the effectiveness of the Obama administration’s air campaign against Islamic State. The war of words has so far focused on the need to deploy American boots on the ground to provide accurate intelligence and possibly force ISIS fighters to defend key infrastructure they have seized, such as oil facilities. But debate is now beginning to focus on the apparent failure of airstrikes to halt the terror group’s advances in Iraq and Syria—especially Islamic State’s pending seizure of Kobani on the Syrian border with Turkey.


US Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75% of ISIS Strikes

U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes
‘We can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us’

U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.

Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.

You cannot conduct a war like that from 10,000 feet. Obama refused to insert the Intel and spotters to make those air sorties effective.

 

[Stratford57]

No doubt ISIS became a more seirous issue than what some, inc. Obama saw them initially as, but that doesn't mean Obama "planted them".

No actually our chronically shitty MidEast policy birthed them. Four administrations in a row. They actually sprung out of our prisons in Iraq. Al Baghdadi and his top men were in US custody. And in an effort to turn control over to the Iraqis, we let THEM release them from prison. US blood was shed to PUT them there. And THEN -- they capture all their heavy equipment from stuff we GAVE to the Iraqi army.

About 9000 such strikes by 2015 perioiod. By the end of 2016 ISIS was taking it's last stand in Iraq (in Mosul).

I have documentation that MOST of those sorties never unloaded their ordinance because of engagement rules.

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS
The campaign against Serbia in 1999 averaged 138 strike sorties daily. Against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: seven.
By
Mark Gunzinger And
John Stillion
Updated Oct. 14, 2014 7:46 p.m. ET



Since U.S. planes first struck targets in Iraq on Aug. 8, a debate has raged over the effectiveness of the Obama administration’s air campaign against Islamic State. The war of words has so far focused on the need to deploy American boots on the ground to provide accurate intelligence and possibly force ISIS fighters to defend key infrastructure they have seized, such as oil facilities. But debate is now beginning to focus on the apparent failure of airstrikes to halt the terror group’s advances in Iraq and Syria—especially Islamic State’s pending seizure of Kobani on the Syrian border with Turkey.


US Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75% of ISIS Strikes

U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes
‘We can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us’

U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.

Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.

You cannot conduct a war like that from 10,000 feet. Obama refused to insert the Intel and spotters to make those air sorties effective.

A little addition to your post if you don't mind:

Republican member of the Virginia State Senate Richard Hayden Black talks to Press TV about ties between Washington and Daesh, further exposing the true “axis of evil” in the Middle East.

“If the United States had just stayed out of it at that point, the war would be over by now; people would be rebuilding, refugees would be returning back to Syria, but the United States rushed anti-Tank missiles, and we used these so-called moderate rebels as a conduit to supply al-Nusra, which is al-Qaeda in Syria,” he noted.

“If we were not supporting the war in Syria, I believe that the Syrians, combined with their allied forces from Iran, Lebanon and Russia… would move very steadily and restore the borders of Syria.”
PressTV-Senator exposes Washington's ties with Daesh

*

Richard Black: Origins of the Syrian War,

Western nations promote terrorism. Sadly, the French, British and American governments have trained, armed and organized jihadist terrorists from 60 foreign nations to invade and destabilize Syria. They are willing to use any means, however hideous to topple Syria. Jihadist training takes place at camps in Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. The U.S. actually pays the salaries of terrorist mercenaries, who frequently graduate from CIA camps to join al Qaeda and ISIS, where they conduct mass executions, beheadings, and crucifixions. Those western-trained terrorists enslave Christian and Yazidi women; they rape them and their children. This is a filthy war—a despicable crime against Syria in every sense.

The U.S. led Coalition against ISIS is a complete sham. We pretend to bomb ISIS but 75% of our planes return without engaging the enemy. In every war we’ve fought before, we attacked the enemy’s capital cities. It speaks volumes that—before the Russians’ arrival–the ISIS capital of Raqqa was never targeted for a serious onslaught. Rules of engagement tie the hands of American flyers in ways that benefit ISIS. When Turkey joined the “anti-ISIS Coalition,” it launched 300 air strikes against our valiant Kurdish allies—but only three against ISIS. Turkey is closely allied with ISIS and al Qaeda. They will never deliberately harm them.

600 U.S.-supplied TOW anti-tank missiles sent to al Qaeda-linked forces for that specific purpose.
when the news stops: Origins of the Syrian War, Richard H. Black, Senator of Virginia

 

[Stratford57]

Also:
German journalists:

The commercial cargo ship was commissioned by the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to haul 1,600 tons of ammunition to Syria’s neighbors Turkey and Jordan, and from there almost certainly on to US-backed rebels fighting the Islamic State (ISIS).

The transportation operation is part of one the Pentagon’s biggest buy-ups of Soviet-style weapons in its history – as much as $2.2 billion by 2022 – as it seeks to arm Syrian rebels fighting the Islamic State.

The Pentagon told BIRN and OCCRP that in 2016 it delivered equipment to “vetted Syrian Opposition” groups in 20 airdrops, 100 cargo flights, and 500 truckloads. It added that the pace had increased as efforts to retake Raqqa, the so-called capital of ISIS, had been upped.

The weapons was going through Germany, Bulgaria, Romania, Georgia and Ukraine.

The Black Sea Route to Syria - OCCRP


End User Certificate says: items will not be delivered or exported by any third party. However the end user has not been specified. The German journalists claim: weapons certified this way were coming directly to terrorists in Syria.

 

[Missourian]

NOTHING?? Why are ignoring the escalation of targets in the 2nd strike and focused on an asphalt runway? Did you see the targets the 2nd time? Or do I have to post them?

Feel free.

Why did we need a "2nd strike" if there was so much outrage about chemical weapons?

Are you under the impression that WE need to defeat Assad in Syria in order to stand up to Putin? That's pretty warped foreign policy if you do.... Trump doesn't want to destroy and rebuild a 3rd or 4th Arab country.

On THIS POINT --- he's got a seriously superior view of NOT REPEATING the same shitty mistakes we made in Iraq, Libya, Somalia and the 10 other Middle East places we've bombed in the past 25 years.

The point you engaged me on was whether or not Trump is a pussy. You trotted out Syria as an example of Trump's manhood. If it is an example of effectiveness, I'd hate to see what you call a boondoggle.

I also gave you a chance to explain what a NON-pussy would do. The object is not to defeat Assad. That's stupid. In the past 3 or 4 cases of "defeating dictators" in the Arab world -- we left basket case countries that are breeding grounds for terrorists. Arab countries NEED dictators to keep their folks from killing each other.

Syria is not about "standing up to Putin" to point of a punch-out. But Trump DID draw a line about the chemical weapons and continued to enforce it.

Okay...whatever.

The calculation of Syria (or anywhere else) should be whether it is in our national interests. Syria is not. Hence why I was against any military action over there--like most conservatives were when Obama was running the show:

Obama should just drop it. It's a tragedy; but American muscle can't prevent every tragedy.
You're making a mistake, Mr. President.

The battle plan should be scrapped. There is no reason to send our military over there and there is no win to be had.
You're making a mistake Mr. President.

A non-pussy would not be engaging over there to show how "strong" he is and then even mess up that demonstration.

IMO everything going on in Iraq and Syria comes down to natural gas, Russia, and Europe. As was pointed out by President Trump just over a week ago, Russia is attempting to place a stranglehold on Europe via natural gas...there are opposing natural gas pipelines...one starting in Iran, the other in Qatar...that must run thru Syria.

Iran–Iraq–Syria pipeline - Wikipedia

Russia backs this one ^^^^, Europe and the US the Qatar pipeline primarily to lessen Russian leverage in Europe.

Again, IMO, this is the primary motivation behind both the Iraq and Syria Wars.

Germany and Russia gas links: Trump is not only one to ask questions

 

[AntonToo]

Western nations promote terrorism.

Exhibit A - a throughly brainwashed Russian poodle.

 

[AntonToo]

No doubt ISIS became a more seirous issue than what some, inc. Obama saw them initially as, but that doesn't mean Obama "planted them".

No actually our chronically shitty MidEast policy birthed them. Four administrations in a row. They actually sprung out of our prisons in Iraq. Al Baghdadi and his top men were in US custody. And in an effort to turn control over to the Iraqis, we let THEM release them from prison. US blood was shed to PUT them there. And THEN -- they capture all their heavy equipment from stuff we GAVE to the Iraqi army.

About 9000 such strikes by 2015 perioiod. By the end of 2016 ISIS was taking it's last stand in Iraq (in Mosul).

I have documentation that MOST of those sorties never unloaded their ordinance because of engagement rules.

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS
The campaign against Serbia in 1999 averaged 138 strike sorties daily. Against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: seven.
By
Mark Gunzinger And
John Stillion
Updated Oct. 14, 2014 7:46 p.m. ET



Since U.S. planes first struck targets in Iraq on Aug. 8, a debate has raged over the effectiveness of the Obama administration’s air campaign against Islamic State. The war of words has so far focused on the need to deploy American boots on the ground to provide accurate intelligence and possibly force ISIS fighters to defend key infrastructure they have seized, such as oil facilities. But debate is now beginning to focus on the apparent failure of airstrikes to halt the terror group’s advances in Iraq and Syria—especially Islamic State’s pending seizure of Kobani on the Syrian border with Turkey.


US Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75% of ISIS Strikes

U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes
‘We can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us’

U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.

Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.

You cannot conduct a war like that from 10,000 feet. Obama refused to insert the Intel and spotters to make those air sorties effective.

How the fuck does it not even occur to you that an article from 2014 poorly accounts for a 2014-2016 anti-ISIS effort.

You've desputed NOT A SINGLE THING I SAID.

 

[flacaltenn]

No doubt ISIS became a more seirous issue than what some, inc. Obama saw them initially as, but that doesn't mean Obama "planted them".

No actually our chronically shitty MidEast policy birthed them. Four administrations in a row. They actually sprung out of our prisons in Iraq. Al Baghdadi and his top men were in US custody. And in an effort to turn control over to the Iraqis, we let THEM release them from prison. US blood was shed to PUT them there. And THEN -- they capture all their heavy equipment from stuff we GAVE to the Iraqi army.

About 9000 such strikes by 2015 perioiod. By the end of 2016 ISIS was taking it's last stand in Iraq (in Mosul).

I have documentation that MOST of those sorties never unloaded their ordinance because of engagement rules.

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS
The campaign against Serbia in 1999 averaged 138 strike sorties daily. Against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: seven.
By
Mark Gunzinger And
John Stillion
Updated Oct. 14, 2014 7:46 p.m. ET



Since U.S. planes first struck targets in Iraq on Aug. 8, a debate has raged over the effectiveness of the Obama administration’s air campaign against Islamic State. The war of words has so far focused on the need to deploy American boots on the ground to provide accurate intelligence and possibly force ISIS fighters to defend key infrastructure they have seized, such as oil facilities. But debate is now beginning to focus on the apparent failure of airstrikes to halt the terror group’s advances in Iraq and Syria—especially Islamic State’s pending seizure of Kobani on the Syrian border with Turkey.


US Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75% of ISIS Strikes

U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes
‘We can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us’

U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.

Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.

You cannot conduct a war like that from 10,000 feet. Obama refused to insert the Intel and spotters to make those air sorties effective.

How the fuck does it not even occur to you that an article from 2014 poorly accounts for a 2014-2016 anti-ISIS effort.

You've desputed NOT A SINGLE THING I SAID.

Never changed. Never committed the forward observers and the spotters required. Really 1/2 ass effort. Like his $40Mill for training 13 "Syrian freedom fighters" that took 3 yrs and most of them never saw combat.

 

[AntonToo]

No doubt ISIS became a more seirous issue than what some, inc. Obama saw them initially as, but that doesn't mean Obama "planted them".

No actually our chronically shitty MidEast policy birthed them. Four administrations in a row. They actually sprung out of our prisons in Iraq. Al Baghdadi and his top men were in US custody. And in an effort to turn control over to the Iraqis, we let THEM release them from prison. US blood was shed to PUT them there. And THEN -- they capture all their heavy equipment from stuff we GAVE to the Iraqi army.

About 9000 such strikes by 2015 perioiod. By the end of 2016 ISIS was taking it's last stand in Iraq (in Mosul).

I have documentation that MOST of those sorties never unloaded their ordinance because of engagement rules.

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS

The Unserious Air War Against ISIS
The campaign against Serbia in 1999 averaged 138 strike sorties daily. Against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: seven.
By
Mark Gunzinger And
John Stillion
Updated Oct. 14, 2014 7:46 p.m. ET



Since U.S. planes first struck targets in Iraq on Aug. 8, a debate has raged over the effectiveness of the Obama administration’s air campaign against Islamic State. The war of words has so far focused on the need to deploy American boots on the ground to provide accurate intelligence and possibly force ISIS fighters to defend key infrastructure they have seized, such as oil facilities. But debate is now beginning to focus on the apparent failure of airstrikes to halt the terror group’s advances in Iraq and Syria—especially Islamic State’s pending seizure of Kobani on the Syrian border with Turkey.


US Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75% of ISIS Strikes

U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes
‘We can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us’

U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.

Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.

You cannot conduct a war like that from 10,000 feet. Obama refused to insert the Intel and spotters to make those air sorties effective.

How the fuck does it not even occur to you that an article from 2014 poorly accounts for a 2014-2016 anti-ISIS effort.

You've desputed NOT A SINGLE THING I SAID.

Never changed.

Ok dumbass - read my lips - 9000 ACTUAL strikes by middle of 2015. Thats was the official, undesputed, count.

If you have any refute, lets have it, otherwise stop posting nonsense.

 

[skye]

I love Russian history....particularly Czar Nicholas II ... his family and his history....the family


I have many biographies books of them....


I love them...


What happened to them is one of the most horrible things that ever happened in the beginning of the 20th century.,...for the communists Bolsheviks to go and kill the Tzar and wife and this their children ....just like that....is beyond words sad

 

[PoliticalChic]

To be precise, the question was meant to continue in the vein of who loves communist Russia, totalitarian Russia, world-domination Russia.

And, the answer is the Leftist Democrat Liberals.


Based on his desire to mirror the other dictators....Franklin Roosevelt developed a life-long crush on Joseph Stalin, and the Democrat demigod, FDR, provided the invitation that prominently established cultural Marxism in the United States.

1. A year into his administration, with full knowledge of the barbarity through which the Bolsheviks took charge, he gave official recognition to Russia.....something which no other President nor Sec'y of State would do.

2. Even when Soviet spies were made known to them.....he welcomed them into government.

3. He allowed Stalin to dictate how and were our troops were used in WWII

4. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever that it would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'

Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"

5. When the Nazis threw Marxist professors out of German universities.....the Democrats made certain that there was a home for them, here.



Who really.....REALLY....loves Russia and all it stands for?

The Democrats, of course

 

[Stratford57]

The smarter question to ask would be: Who Wants You to Hate Russia and Why? And then you'll find a very simple and a very pragmatic answer:

Follow the money trail for source of 'Russian threat' paranoia
You’d have to have been locked in a wardrobe if you live in the West not to have heard ominous phrases like ‘The Russian threat’, ‘Russian aggression in Europe’ and ‘Russia set to invade Poland/Estonia/ Ukraine/Finland’.

But ‘follow the money’ trail is all we really have to do. Ask yourself who benefits financially from all this scaremongering and then you’ll understand it.

I [ Neil Clark, a journalist ] wrote about a ‘non-partisan’ US policy institute called the Center for European Policy Analysis. The CEPA issued a paper attacking Russian media outlet Sputnik for giving a voice to "anti-establishment protest politicians"who were critical of NATO.

And who funds the ‘non-partisan’ CEPA? Recent donors include the US Department of Defense, Boeing, Raytheon Company, Textron Systems, Sikorsky Aircraft, Bell Helicopter and the Lockheed Martin Corporation.

What’s happening in Europe today is the same that’s been happening in the Middle East for years.
The US creates chaos, then goes in to sell countries in the region the latest military hardware to ‘protect’ them from the chaos. It’s quite a racket and clearly modeled on the extortion schemes of the Mafia. Countries that don’t want to pay up, like Yugoslavia in 1990s, are likely to get bombed.

Consider how the crisis in Ukraine started. The US spent billions of dollars in a ‘regime change’ op
to topple the democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovych and replace it with a pro-US puppet administration. We even heard the State Department’s Victoria Nuland - after she had handed out cookies to anti-government protestors in the Maidan - discussing who should and shouldn’t be in the new ‘democratic’ Ukrainian government, with US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt.

When the people of Crimea predictably said ‘Nyet’ to the State Department’s operation, and voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia in a referendum, Russia was cast as the ‘aggressor’ who had ‘invaded’ the Ukraine. The US would have known that its regime change op in Ukraine would cause chaos and increase tensions with Russia. And that’s exactly why they did it!

To counter the new Russian ‘threat’ not just to ‘democratic’ Ukraine, but to other countries in eastern Europe, we’re told we need a big increase in NATO ‘defense’ spending. And who does that benefit? Why, US defense contractors!

As Charlie Chaplin commented in his classic 1947 black comedy Monsieur Verdoux, "Wars, conflicts, it’s all business!"

By any objective assessment it's NATO - not Russia - with its build up of arms and soldiers on the borders of Russia, which threatens the peace of Europe. But anyone who points this out, and mentions the military alliance’s relentless Drang nach Osten, threatens the profits of US defense companies and is attacked as an ‘appeaser' or ‘Kremlin stooge’ by those with a vested financial interest in keeping tensions high.

It was a US President, Dwight D Eisenhower, who first warned us about the US military-industrial complex, back in 1961:“We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex”, he said.

No one could accuse Ike, the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe in World War Two, of being a ‘pinko’ or a ‘Kremlin stooge’. But the situation is much worse today than it was back in Eisenhower’s day.

Neocons have embedded themselves in the corridors of power. They claim to be interested in spreading ‘democracy’, but the reality is that the neocon movement is all about money and profits.

How much longer will the citizens of the world put up with a situation in which warmongers with ties to the military-industrial complex are allowed to stoke up international tensions? The next time you read or hear someone issue stark warnings about the ‘Russian threat’ - and why NATO needs to hike its spending to deal with it - just follow the money trail.

Follow the money trail for source of 'Russian threat' paranoia

So, by hating Russia you are helping Neocons, Elites, War Party = The Swamp which your president is willing to drain.

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[PoliticalChic]

Roosevelt welcomed Marxists, communists, Soviets into the country.
Prominent among them were the members of the Frankfurt School....

1. The Frankfurt School’s research was never impartial scholarship but the aggressive promotion of a radical left-wing socio/political agenda. “the true object of Marxism... was not the uncovering of immutable truths, but the fostering of social change.”

2. Based on their influence on the New Left from the ‘60’s, these neo-Marxists have largely succeeded in terms of secularizing American culture and undermining traditional values and institutions, and much of its ideology, inspiration and tactics were gleaned from the Frankfurt School’s Institute of Social Research.

a. A key component of Critical Theory was its integration of Marxism with Darwinism and Freudianism, which, based on the idea of sexual repression, could be used against Judeo-Christian morality. Wilhelm Reich combined Darwin and Freud, and propounded the idea that humans are no different than any other animals in terms of sex, and therefore, there need be no sexual restrictions, and the blame should be placed on the authoritarian structure of the traditional family.

3. Waiting to ally themselves with the Frankfurt School Marxists were the Americans who had accepted the Wilson/TR synthesis of Hegel and Marx. And a welcoming ‘nest’ was provided for these vipers by the Columbia University Sociology department. And, the perfect storm: America was up for helping scholars fleeing from Germany. The guy in charge of this was Edward R. Murrow, the Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars.
See Breitbart, "Righteous Indignation"

 

[PK1]

Western nations promote terrorism.

Exhibit A - a throughly brainwashed Russian poodle.

I doubt Stratford is brainwashed; he’s a Russian nationalist who has a 99.9% MO of a paid Putin troll.

US & western nations do NOT hate Russia, as Putin trolls & naive Trumpkins imply. The educated western people focus on Putin’s repressive authoritarianism and human rights violations during his pursuit of increasing Russia as a global power that craves respect.
HOWEVER, Russia under Putin will NEVER get the west’s respect as long as they act like bullies, cheat (Olympics), hack & lie, and continue their human rights violations inside and outside of Russia.

 

[easyt65]

Hillary loves Russia...for more than 100 million reasons....

Hillary loved Russia and 5 other foreign entities enough to give the TOP SECRET data from off of her illegal server

Bill loves Russia for 500k reasons

John Podesta loved Russia enough to fill 2/3rds of his company's board member positions with prominent Russian businessmen who have direct ties to the Kremlin and Putin himself - they loved him enough to give him thousands of shares of Russian stocks

Fat Tony Podesta loved Russia enough to work for the KGB Bank and the Russian spy agency

Barry loved Russia enough to give them Crimea, 20% of the US supply of uranium, Hillary's classified info, & the 'green light' to begin spying on the US and interfering in 2014

 

[PoliticalChic]

Who loves Russia....???


If Democrat Franklin Roosevelt didn't love Russia and Stalin, so much so that he gave them the plans and the means to produce atomic weapons.....

...there would not have been a Korean War....with 36,940 Americans killed, 91,134 wounded, and 8,176 still missing, and this does not include at least two million civilian lives claimed on both sides. Bruce Cumings, "The Korean War: A History.'



And...we wouldn't have in today's news:

"POLITICS
07/26/2018 11:46 pm ET Updated 6 hours ago
North Korea Returns Remains Of Americans, White House Says
“We are encouraged by North Korea’s actions and the momentum for positive change,” press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.

...the remains of 55 American servicemen killed during the Korean War were released by North Korea on Friday and flown to a U.S. air base, the White House said."
North Korea Returns Remains Of Americans, White House Says | HuffPost

 

[JakeStarkey]

Stratford and PC love Russia.