FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > NSA, CIA & FBI Release declassified intel
NSA, CIA & FBI Release declassified intel
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Russian president Vladimir Putin interfered in the US presidential election to aid Donald Trump, according to a declassified assessment by the NSA, CIA and FBI. “We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary [Hillary] Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump,” the agencies found in a long-awaited report that stands to hang over the head of the incoming Trump administration. You could say that Russia thought that the world would be a nicer place if Russia and the USA could be friends or you could say that Putin and cohorts felt that it would be easier to get away with their own policies easier with Trump in power than with Clinton in power. Fact is that the combined security services have now told Trump (and the world) that Putin and the Russians wanted him to be President and helped him to achieve this. He can say all he wants that the outcome wasn't affected but he has to live with, and deal with the fact that the Russians believe him to be a playable pawn for their greater benefit. I would like to hope that Donald Trump might wake up a different person tomorrow having been told that a foreign power thinks he is playable as a means to achieve their greater goals. Let's see..." So basically you are saying that you hope trump wakes up today and is a different person and no longer wants good relations with another powerful nation but wants to continue with what the current establishment is doing and edging closer and closer to a war which would be like no other and potential for billions of life's lost. "Golf claps" Well done you, ain't you a lovely soul. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Russian president Vladimir Putin interfered in the US presidential election to aid Donald Trump, according to a declassified assessment by the NSA, CIA and FBI. “We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary [Hillary] Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump,” the agencies found in a long-awaited report that stands to hang over the head of the incoming Trump administration. You could say that Russia thought that the world would be a nicer place if Russia and the USA could be friends or you could say that Putin and cohorts felt that it would be easier to get away with their own policies easier with Trump in power than with Clinton in power. Fact is that the combined security services have now told Trump (and the world) that Putin and the Russians wanted him to be President and helped him to achieve this. He can say all he wants that the outcome wasn't affected but he has to live with, and deal with the fact that the Russians believe him to be a playable pawn for their greater benefit. I would like to hope that Donald Trump might wake up a different person tomorrow having been told that a foreign power thinks he is playable as a means to achieve their greater goals. Let's see..."  Well said.I think Mr trump just got a reality check from the secret service.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I dont think he got a reality check at all. Most reports ive said apart from the die hard Clinton backing media have said the report was underwhelming at best. also the report didnt give any technical evidence. "the report leaves out the much hoped-for technical evidence that informed these conclusions. In its “Scope and Sourcing” section, the report explains that this evidence exists, but can’t be declassified. And that means the report won’t satisfy the majority of the cybersecurity community that believes Russia hacked Democratic targets but has demanded more evidence"" In other words... It's true because they say it is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I dont think he got a reality check at all. Most reports ive said apart from the die hard Clinton backing media have said the report was underwhelming at best. also the report didnt give any technical evidence. "the report leaves out the much hoped-for technical evidence that informed these conclusions. In its “Scope and Sourcing” section, the report explains that this evidence exists, but can’t be declassified. And that means the report won’t satisfy the majority of the cybersecurity community that believes Russia hacked Democratic targets but has demanded more evidence" In other words... It's true because they say it is." Perhaps the evidence is being held in the same drawer as the evidence about the WMDs sadam had, its a bit rich the cia saying another country interfered with the usa when they had to admit to bugging merkel et al's phones | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I dont think he got a reality check at all. Most reports ive said apart from the die hard Clinton backing media have said the report was underwhelming at best. also the report didnt give any technical evidence. "the report leaves out the much hoped-for technical evidence that informed these conclusions. In its “Scope and Sourcing” section, the report explains that this evidence exists, but can’t be declassified. And that means the report won’t satisfy the majority of the cybersecurity community that believes Russia hacked Democratic targets but has demanded more evidence" In other words... It's true because they say it is. Perhaps the evidence is being held in the same drawer as the evidence about the WMDs sadam had, its a bit rich the cia saying another country interfered with the usa when they had to admit to bugging merkel et al's phones" exactly  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would like to hope that Donald Trump might wake up a different person tomorrow having been told that a foreign power thinks he is playable as a means to achieve their greater goals. Let's see..." Heres an analogy of how I see things. Theres the west, theres Russia, theres a boy with a stick and theres a wasps nest. You and a few others for what ever reasons see russia as the boy with the stick and the West as the wasps nest. Where as I and i others see it completely reversed and the west as the boy with the stick poking the wasps nest (russia). I honestly don't get why anyone wouldnt want trump and the US building better relations with russia. Putin is an intelligent guy, he doesn't want world domination, he knows a war will be the potential end of humanity if it ever happens between country's with nukes. He just wants the west to stop poking the nest. The west have interfered and overthrown country after country this past decade. I fell for all the propaganda against gadaffi I thought he was an evil dictator once when I was younger. But how wrong was I, what that guy did for his people, how well they lived (probably better than how the average person in UK lives), look at what Libya is now...its a total mess. Due to us the west. Im gonna keep saying it but its our leaders of the west that are the bad guys over the last 20 years or so. Are meddling is causing all the problems today not russia | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? " you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. " I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I would like to hope that Donald Trump might wake up a different person tomorrow having been told that a foreign power thinks he is playable as a means to achieve their greater goals. Let's see... Heres an analogy of how I see things. Theres the west, theres Russia, theres a boy with a stick and theres a wasps nest. You and a few others for what ever reasons see russia as the boy with the stick and the West as the wasps nest. Where as I and i others see it completely reversed and the west as the boy with the stick poking the wasps nest (russia). I honestly don't get why anyone wouldnt want trump and the US building better relations with russia. Putin is an intelligent guy, he doesn't want world domination, he knows a war will be the potential end of humanity if it ever happens between country's with nukes. He just wants the west to stop poking the nest. The west have interfered and overthrown country after country this past decade. I fell for all the propaganda against gadaffi I thought he was an evil dictator once when I was younger. But how wrong was I, what that guy did for his people, how well they lived (probably better than how the average person in UK lives), look at what Libya is now...its a total mess. Due to us the west. Im gonna keep saying it but its our leaders of the west that are the bad guys over the last 20 years or so. Are meddling is causing all the problems today not russia " Like many Putin apologists on this site and elsewhere, you look one dimensionally at issues and think that this is just about being "friends." Firstly, Russia does not care what the US, EU, UK and RoW thinks about what it does to further its own agenda. Murdering its own former citizens, shooting down civilian airliners, invading sovereign countries and denying human rights to its own citizens are simply par for the course for Putin and the Russian forces. Putin in the process of acting for the greater good of the Russian Federation will, and has caused Russia to act like a rogue state in world affairs. None of what I have said above is factually wrong and if you think it is, you should ask a Russian about how the Russian state acts - they have spent their entire lives knowing that to pop your head up above the parapet and make such claims in public is likely to see you in Police hands at best. No one is saying that everything that Russia does is wrong and is evil, but overall as a State - it conducts internal and external affairs in a way that we as citizens of free and liberal societies quite rightly find abhorrent. So bearing all of this in mind, why would Putin want to and actively engage in a process to undermine the US Election process and favour Trump as President? It is simply because that Putin will continue his worldwide agenda for Russia anyway, but instead of having to be aware of US counter measures to his questionable actions, he feels that he would be able to manipulate Trump in order to make his own life easier. There is more than a single and obvious dimension to this and Donald Trump will have to change his way unless he wants to end up as Putins enabler on the worlds stage. The problem that Trump himself has is that he appears to only be capable of one dimensional thought and this has to change so that he can act in the best interest of his own citizens. Hopefully, yesterday's meeting will have been a wake up call for Trump - for everyone's sake. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it." Was that like your research on the Italian economy?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it." ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work."I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I would like to hope that Donald Trump might wake up a different person tomorrow having been told that a foreign power thinks he is playable as a means to achieve their greater goals. Let's see... Heres an analogy of how I see things. Theres the west, theres Russia, theres a boy with a stick and theres a wasps nest. You and a few others for what ever reasons see russia as the boy with the stick and the West as the wasps nest. Where as I and i others see it completely reversed and the west as the boy with the stick poking the wasps nest (russia). I honestly don't get why anyone wouldnt want trump and the US building better relations with russia. Putin is an intelligent guy, he doesn't want world domination, he knows a war will be the potential end of humanity if it ever happens between country's with nukes. He just wants the west to stop poking the nest. The west have interfered and overthrown country after country this past decade. I fell for all the propaganda against gadaffi I thought he was an evil dictator once when I was younger. But how wrong was I, what that guy did for his people, how well they lived (probably better than how the average person in UK lives), look at what Libya is now...its a total mess. Due to us the west. Im gonna keep saying it but its our leaders of the west that are the bad guys over the last 20 years or so. Are meddling is causing all the problems today not russia Like many Putin apologists on this site and elsewhere, you look one dimensionally at issues and think that this is just about being "friends." Firstly, Russia does not care what the US, EU, UK and RoW thinks about what it does to further its own agenda. Murdering its own former citizens, shooting down civilian airliners, invading sovereign countries and denying human rights to its own citizens are simply par for the course for Putin and the Russian forces. Putin in the process of acting for the greater good of the Russian Federation will, and has caused Russia to act like a rogue state in world affairs. None of what I have said above is factually wrong and if you think it is, you should ask a Russian about how the Russian state acts - they have spent their entire lives knowing that to pop your head up above the parapet and make such claims in public is likely to see you in Police hands at best. No one is saying that everything that Russia does is wrong and is evil, but overall as a State - it conducts internal and external affairs in a way that we as citizens of free and liberal societies quite rightly find abhorrent. So bearing all of this in mind, why would Putin want to and actively engage in a process to undermine the US Election process and favour Trump as President? It is simply because that Putin will continue his worldwide agenda for Russia anyway, but instead of having to be aware of US counter measures to his questionable actions, he feels that he would be able to manipulate Trump in order to make his own life easier. There is more than a single and obvious dimension to this and Donald Trump will have to change his way unless he wants to end up as Putins enabler on the worlds stage. The problem that Trump himself has is that he appears to only be capable of one dimensional thought and this has to change so that he can act in the best interest of his own citizens. Hopefully, yesterday's meeting will have been a wake up call for Trump - for everyone's sake." I see you using this word a lot "putin apologists" Well you are a west apologist at least I know when my own country is part of the cause to all the problems we have today and admit it...whilst people like you want to point the blame on everyone else. carry on as you are but no one with any sense will pay any notice | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert. "well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument."But it's not the first time you have made that error in spelling the name of the place we are talking about. I don't usually pull people up for spelling mistakes, but when someone is trying to persuade others that they are an expert in a subject that they can't even spell, it kind of undermines their credibility. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument."I wonder how they'd be with someone who was dyslexic? Probably the same... "If you can't spell you must be thick" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument.
I wonder how they'd be with someone who was dyslexic? Probably the same... "If you can't spell you must be thick""The rest of his spelling seems to be fine, he just can't spell the name of the place he supposedly knows more about than the rest of us. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Again I keep saying this... I'm not arsed who hacked who. I'm only interested in was the leaked material true?. If it was falsely put out then Russia has a very serious case to account for. If it's true then great thanks Vlad, let's hope some people hack is miss deeds and release his shit... I'm 100% for a transparent open government" Yeah, it was all 100% real, like that child sex ring that Clinton was running out of a pizza shop | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Again I keep saying this... I'm not arsed who hacked who. I'm only interested in was the leaked material true?. If it was falsely put out then Russia has a very serious case to account for. If it's true then great thanks Vlad, let's hope some people hack is miss deeds and release his shit... I'm 100% for a transparent open government Yeah, it was all 100% real, like that child sex ring that Clinton was running out of a pizza shop ". Domino's or pizza hut? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument.
I wonder how they'd be with someone who was dyslexic? Probably the same... "If you can't spell you must be thick"
The rest of his spelling seems to be fine, he just can't spell the name of the place he supposedly knows more about than the rest of us. "CLCC the grammar nazi.
Plenty of people make typos on here while typing out a quick reply. I'm sure he knows how to spell Crimea, anyhow even if he doesn't everyone on the thread knew what he was talking about. I think it's a pretty poor show when you attack someone for their spelling and actually shows the weakness of your argument if that's all you can pick fault with. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just read Alexander Dugin's book; "The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia" Dugin is Putin's closest advisor. Destabilisation if the US is a key objective. They are following the script in the book exactly. And it is being more successful than they could have dreamed. Trump is total gold for them. They have already done exactly what the book proposes in Crimea and Ukraine, the game okay in Syria and. Iran is going exactly as they rushed, they are starting the European game play now, though they failed to get what they needed in Austria. " . Doesn't his book call for Germany to be given the key role of running Europe?...I mean they already do | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument.
I wonder how they'd be with someone who was dyslexic? Probably the same... "If you can't spell you must be thick"
The rest of his spelling seems to be fine, he just can't spell the name of the place he supposedly knows more about than the rest of us.
CLCC the grammar nazi.
Plenty of people make typos on here while typing out a quick reply. I'm sure he knows how to spell Crimea, anyhow even if he doesn't everyone on the thread knew what he was talking about. I think it's a pretty poor show when you attack someone for their spelling and actually shows the weakness of your argument if that's all you can pick fault with. "Spelling, not grammar. Yes we do all make typos, myself included. However, if you are trying to display you know more about a subject than someone else, it helps if you can spell it. I don't usually pull people up on their spelling, I didn't even pull you up Centaur on your numeracy when you said that 1200 was a bigger number than 1800. His argument seemed to be that Russia didn't invade and annex Crimea. Crimea is now under Russian control, I don't think that is in dispute. So how did they get there? Did Ukraine give that land to Russia? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Doesn't his book call for Germany to be given the key role of running Europe?...I mean they already do" Through what mechanism? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument.
I wonder how they'd be with someone who was dyslexic? Probably the same... "If you can't spell you must be thick"
The rest of his spelling seems to be fine, he just can't spell the name of the place he supposedly knows more about than the rest of us.
CLCC the grammar nazi.
Plenty of people make typos on here while typing out a quick reply. I'm sure he knows how to spell Crimea, anyhow even if he doesn't everyone on the thread knew what he was talking about. I think it's a pretty poor show when you attack someone for their spelling and actually shows the weakness of your argument if that's all you can pick fault with.
Spelling, not grammar. Yes we do all make typos, myself included. However, if you are trying to display you know more about a subject than someone else, it helps if you can spell it. I don't usually pull people up on their spelling, I didn't even pull you up Centaur on your numeracy when you said that 1200 was a bigger number than 1800.
His argument seemed to be that Russia didn't invade and annex Crimea. Crimea is now under Russian control, I don't think that is in dispute. So how did they get there? Did Ukraine give that land to Russia? "The Ukraine/Russia debate has been done to death on here. Russia was provoked, with the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Ukraine backed by the EU and other 3rd parties. I don't want to hijack this thread to go over all the same ground again that has already been covered extensively on many other threads. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Doesn't his book call for Germany to be given the key role of running Europe?...I mean they already do Through what mechanism?" .. The printing press is in Frankfurt! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Doesn't his book call for Germany to be given the key role of running Europe?...I mean they already do Through what mechanism?.. The printing press is in Frankfurt!" And? QE is done digitally, not physically. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Doesn't his book call for Germany to be given the key role of running Europe?...I mean they already do Through what mechanism?.. The printing press is in Frankfurt! And? QE is done digitally, not physically." . The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." QE isn't printing money, figure out where on that list you are | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Doesn't his book call for Germany to be given the key role of running Europe?...I mean they already do Through what mechanism?.. The printing press is in Frankfurt! And? QE is done digitally, not physically.. The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." QE isn't printing money, figure out where on that list you are" Fascinating, yet you still haven't answered through what mechanism Germany is more powerful than all the other countries combined inside the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument.
I wonder how they'd be with someone who was dyslexic? Probably the same... "If you can't spell you must be thick"
The rest of his spelling seems to be fine, he just can't spell the name of the place he supposedly knows more about than the rest of us.
CLCC the grammar nazi.
Plenty of people make typos on here while typing out a quick reply. I'm sure he knows how to spell Crimea, anyhow even if he doesn't everyone on the thread knew what he was talking about. I think it's a pretty poor show when you attack someone for their spelling and actually shows the weakness of your argument if that's all you can pick fault with.
Spelling, not grammar. Yes we do all make typos, myself included. However, if you are trying to display you know more about a subject than someone else, it helps if you can spell it. I don't usually pull people up on their spelling, I didn't even pull you up Centaur on your numeracy when you said that 1200 was a bigger number than 1800.
His argument seemed to be that Russia didn't invade and annex Crimea. Crimea is now under Russian control, I don't think that is in dispute. So how did they get there? Did Ukraine give that land to Russia?
The Ukraine/Russia debate has been done to death on here. Russia was provoked, with the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Ukraine backed by the EU and other 3rd parties. I don't want to hijack this thread to go over all the same ground again that has already been covered extensively on many other threads. "So you think that some countries deserve to get invaded and annexed? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying they want worse relationships with Russia, but you guys do come out with some crap. Russia has invaded and annexed two sovereign countries. How many more are you going to let him invade? you talking about crimera? Please go do your research on that subject please as im tired of repeating myself and um sure others are to. I'm sure I have done more research on Crimea than you. So much so, that I even know how to spell it. ahh the attack someone on their spelling tactic when loseing an argument. Well done
I'm sure youve done your research thats why when ever anyone explains the crimera situation on here you just ignore it and stick to your own misguided misinformed narrative.
keep up the good work.
I'm just pointing out that if you can't even spell it, you're probably not a subject matter expert.
well I'm mature enough to know if someone makes a grammer or spelling error that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the context of their argument.
I wonder how they'd be with someone who was dyslexic? Probably the same... "If you can't spell you must be thick"
The rest of his spelling seems to be fine, he just can't spell the name of the place he supposedly knows more about than the rest of us.
CLCC the grammar nazi.
Plenty of people make typos on here while typing out a quick reply. I'm sure he knows how to spell Crimea, anyhow even if he doesn't everyone on the thread knew what he was talking about. I think it's a pretty poor show when you attack someone for their spelling and actually shows the weakness of your argument if that's all you can pick fault with.
Spelling, not grammar. Yes we do all make typos, myself included. However, if you are trying to display you know more about a subject than someone else, it helps if you can spell it. I don't usually pull people up on their spelling, I didn't even pull you up Centaur on your numeracy when you said that 1200 was a bigger number than 1800.
His argument seemed to be that Russia didn't invade and annex Crimea. Crimea is now under Russian control, I don't think that is in dispute. So how did they get there? Did Ukraine give that land to Russia?
The Ukraine/Russia debate has been done to death on here. Russia was provoked, with the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Ukraine backed by the EU and other 3rd parties. I don't want to hijack this thread to go over all the same ground again that has already been covered extensively on many other threads.
So you think that some countries deserve to get invaded and annexed? "OK here goes one more time. Crimea was part of russia from 1783 until 1954 when the soviet government transfered crimea from the Russian soviet federation of socialist republic to the Ukraine soviet so I list republic. Not knowing back then the soviet union would break apart. When Ukraine become unstable and the west started interfering in Ukraine. Russia acted quickly and took back crimea (as its a very important place strategicly for them). Not one bullet was fired, not one drop of blood was spilled and the vast majority of the Crimea people rejoiced at being part of russia again. Now tell me how many country's have the west interfered with with no loss of life? You can call it annexed all you want, but russia was forced to take action and rightly so. Russia has no interest in invading Baltic countries. That's just western propaganda trying to make russia the bad guys. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" OK here goes one more time. Crimea was part of russia from 1783 until 1954 when the soviet government transfered crimea from the Russian soviet federation of socialist republic to the Ukraine soviet so I list republic. Not knowing back then the soviet union would break apart. When Ukraine become unstable and the west started interfering in Ukraine. Russia acted quickly and took back crimea (as its a very important place strategicly for them). Not one bullet was fired, not one drop of blood was spilled and the vast majority of the Crimea people rejoiced at being part of russia again. Now tell me how many country's have the west interfered with with no loss of life? You can call it annexed all you want, but russia was forced to take action and rightly so. Russia has no interest in invading Baltic countries. That's just western propaganda trying to make russia the bad guys. " Think you need to go back and reread your Ladybird book of European history pal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" OK here goes one more time. Crimea was part of russia from 1783 until 1954 when the soviet government transfered crimea from the Russian soviet federation of socialist republic to the Ukraine soviet so I list republic. Not knowing back then the soviet union would break apart. When Ukraine become unstable and the west started interfering in Ukraine. Russia acted quickly and took back crimea (as its a very important place strategicly for them). Not one bullet was fired, not one drop of blood was spilled and the vast majority of the Crimea people rejoiced at being part of russia again. Now tell me how many country's have the west interfered with with no loss of life? You can call it annexed all you want, but russia was forced to take action and rightly so. Russia has no interest in invading Baltic countries. That's just western propaganda trying to make russia the bad guys. Think you need to go back and reread your Ladybird book of European history pal." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" OK here goes one more time. Crimea was part of russia from 1783 until 1954 when the soviet government transfered crimea from the Russian soviet federation of socialist republic to the Ukraine soviet so I list republic. Not knowing back then the soviet union would break apart. When Ukraine become unstable and the west started interfering in Ukraine. Russia acted quickly and took back crimea (as its a very important place strategicly for them). Not one bullet was fired, not one drop of blood was spilled and the vast majority of the Crimea people rejoiced at being part of russia again. Now tell me how many country's have the west interfered with with no loss of life? You can call it annexed all you want, but russia was forced to take action and rightly so. Russia has no interest in invading Baltic countries. That's just western propaganda trying to make russia the bad guys. Think you need to go back and reread your Ladybird book of European history pal." Care to share what you think the correct history is then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" OK here goes one more time. Crimea was part of russia from 1783 until 1954 when the soviet government transfered crimea from the Russian soviet federation of socialist republic to the Ukraine soviet so I list republic. Not knowing back then the soviet union would break apart. When Ukraine become unstable and the west started interfering in Ukraine. Russia acted quickly and took back crimea (as its a very important place strategicly for them). Not one bullet was fired, not one drop of blood was spilled and the vast majority of the Crimea people rejoiced at being part of russia again. Now tell me how many country's have the west interfered with with no loss of life? You can call it annexed all you want, but russia was forced to take action and rightly so. Russia has no interest in invading Baltic countries. That's just western propaganda trying to make russia the bad guys. Think you need to go back and reread your Ladybird book of European history pal." Crimea was initially gifted to the Ukraine in 1954 by Soviet leader Nikita Kruschev, who did not have sufficient quorum members in the Supreme Soviet (USSR parliament) for the decision to be voted on legitimately. But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian and gifted the Crimea to the Ukraine by decree. Admittedly, Kruschev couldn't have foreseen that one day the Soviet Union may not be one unified territory. He could not have foreseen that the US would carry out a government coup in what was Russia's closest ally, and in this way - the historic Russian naval city, Sevastopol, may end up in NATO disposition. It is difficult to guess the reasoning of the White House to think they could pull this off - as it is more likely that Russians would go to war for Sevastopol, than ever see it under NATO or US control. However, no blood was spilled this time and the Crimea made a quick, painless transition into Russia. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He's gone googling.... . . Your all a bunch of traitors who've never learnt anything from history.... Rally the troops, everybody get your balaclavas and bring a good nurse.... Were going to need it!!. CLCC demands yet another war "Where have I demanded another war? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian" DOH! " in what was Russia's closest ally " waarp waaarp waaaaaarp | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian DOH! in what was Russia's closest ally waarp waaarp waaaaaarp" still waiting for what your facts are...your not adding anything to this thread accept insults. goes to show what kind of person you are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian DOH! in what was Russia's closest ally waarp waaarp waaaaaarp still waiting for what your facts are...your not adding anything to this thread accept insults. goes to show what kind of person you are." If you can't get two very simple things like that right then why the hell should I or anyone have to spend a good half hour correcting you where you are wrong wrong and wrong again!, the level of stupidity in what you've written doesn't deserve anything other than ridicule. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian DOH! in what was Russia's closest ally waarp waaarp waaaaaarp still waiting for what your facts are...your not adding anything to this thread accept insults. goes to show what kind of person you are. If you can't get two very simple things like that right then why the hell should I or anyone have to spend a good half hour correcting you where you are wrong wrong and wrong again!, the level of stupidity in what you've written doesn't deserve anything other than ridicule." no seriously come on I want you to go through your history books or go on internet and come back and tell me what the true events are. the multiple sources ive read when I researched it all say the same thing about crimea being given to ukraine when it was part of the Soviet union. Stop being a child and throwing insults and add something to the debate or simply stop posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian DOH! in what was Russia's closest ally waarp waaarp waaaaaarp still waiting for what your facts are...your not adding anything to this thread accept insults. goes to show what kind of person you are. If you can't get two very simple things like that right then why the hell should I or anyone have to spend a good half hour correcting you where you are wrong wrong and wrong again!, the level of stupidity in what you've written doesn't deserve anything other than ridicule. no seriously come on I want you to go through your history books or go on internet and come back and tell me what the true events are. the multiple sources ive read when I researched it all say the same thing about crimea being given to ukraine when it was part of the Soviet union. Stop being a child and throwing insults and add something to the debate or simply stop posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks " No seriously you come on when you can't even get Khrushchev's name right or even his ethnicity correct then it shows up your 'the multiple sources ive read when I researched it' as pretty bloody pathetic and there's only one person posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian DOH! in what was Russia's closest ally waarp waaarp waaaaaarp still waiting for what your facts are...your not adding anything to this thread accept insults. goes to show what kind of person you are. If you can't get two very simple things like that right then why the hell should I or anyone have to spend a good half hour correcting you where you are wrong wrong and wrong again!, the level of stupidity in what you've written doesn't deserve anything other than ridicule. no seriously come on I want you to go through your history books or go on internet and come back and tell me what the true events are. the multiple sources ive read when I researched it all say the same thing about crimea being given to ukraine when it was part of the Soviet union. Stop being a child and throwing insults and add something to the debate or simply stop posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks No seriously you come on when you can't even get Khrushchev's name right or even his ethnicity correct then it shows up your 'the multiple sources ive read when I researched it' as pretty bloody pathetic and there's only one person posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks" Haha I've called you out now 3 times for you to post what your historic facts are with the Ukraine/Crimea situation and 3 times you have failed to post anything but insults. You sir are an idiot and wasteing my time. I have more positive things to be doing on a Saturday night than wasteing my energy on the likes of you. Post as many insults as you want I've called you out and gave you a chance to "educate me". But you conitined to act like a idiot. So i shan't be replying to anything you post on this thread or any other. Tc | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian DOH! in what was Russia's closest ally waarp waaarp waaaaaarp still waiting for what your facts are...your not adding anything to this thread accept insults. goes to show what kind of person you are. If you can't get two very simple things like that right then why the hell should I or anyone have to spend a good half hour correcting you where you are wrong wrong and wrong again!, the level of stupidity in what you've written doesn't deserve anything other than ridicule. no seriously come on I want you to go through your history books or go on internet and come back and tell me what the true events are. the multiple sources ive read when I researched it all say the same thing about crimea being given to ukraine when it was part of the Soviet union. Stop being a child and throwing insults and add something to the debate or simply stop posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks No seriously you come on when you can't even get Khrushchev's name right or even his ethnicity correct then it shows up your 'the multiple sources ive read when I researched it' as pretty bloody pathetic and there's only one person posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks Haha I've called you out now 3 times for you to post what your historic facts are with the Ukraine/Crimea situation and 3 times you have failed to post anything but insults. You sir are an idiot and wasteing my time. I have more positive things to be doing on a Saturday night than wasteing my energy on the likes of you. Post as many insults as you want I've called you out and gave you a chance to "educate me". But you conitined to act like a idiot. So i shan't be replying to anything you post on this thread or any other. Tc" I work with many Ukrainians. I can ask if blood was spilled. What makes you ethnic Ukrainian? Khrushchev was born in a Russian town and his nationality is classed as Soviet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does anybody watch RT?. I'm genuinely asking. . I ask because I do, I'm an avid watcher of Thom Hartman's show, now last week on RT he did a 30 minute show on voter suppression in the US and in particular asking why the democratic party had pretty much completely ignored it for a decade at least. Thom Hartman is unashamedly left wing, he pretty much pulls apart republican attitudes on many issues in the USA from voting to climate change and abortion.... All on RT and quite frankly his show is brilliant, well thought out and always asking the right questions on narratives" I sometimes watch RT news. In particular the Sputnik with George Galloway show. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Kruschev was an ethnic Ukrainian DOH! in what was Russia's closest ally waarp waaarp waaaaaarp still waiting for what your facts are...your not adding anything to this thread accept insults. goes to show what kind of person you are. If you can't get two very simple things like that right then why the hell should I or anyone have to spend a good half hour correcting you where you are wrong wrong and wrong again!, the level of stupidity in what you've written doesn't deserve anything other than ridicule. no seriously come on I want you to go through your history books or go on internet and come back and tell me what the true events are. the multiple sources ive read when I researched it all say the same thing about crimea being given to ukraine when it was part of the Soviet union. Stop being a child and throwing insults and add something to the debate or simply stop posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks No seriously you come on when you can't even get Khrushchev's name right or even his ethnicity correct then it shows up your 'the multiple sources ive read when I researched it' as pretty bloody pathetic and there's only one person posting and waisting space that others with more intelligence can use. thanks Haha I've called you out now 3 times for you to post what your historic facts are with the Ukraine/Crimea situation and 3 times you have failed to post anything but insults. You sir are an idiot and wasteing my time. I have more positive things to be doing on a Saturday night than wasteing my energy on the likes of you. Post as many insults as you want I've called you out and gave you a chance to "educate me". But you conitined to act like a idiot. So i shan't be replying to anything you post on this thread or any other. Tc I work with many Ukrainians. I can ask if blood was spilled. What makes you ethnic Ukrainian? Khrushchev was born in a Russian town and his nationality is classed as Soviet. " The first post i made where i gave dates of when Ukraine was given crimea when it was part of the soviet union then russia took it back once the west started meddling in Ukraine. These was facts of the top of my head. When the guy said that this was all wrong...i went to the first historic website i found and on my second post where i mentioned the leaders name who gifted crimea to Ukraine was a copy and paste to confirm my first post regarding the dates. So if the guys name was misspelt or his nationality was incorrect then sorry for posting information that was wrong but the dates it was given was correct and was why i used it to confirm my initial post where the guy said it was all wrong. Now I've asked the guy to please post his version or even a link so i can read. I am open minded and if there's another version of facts out there then im happy to read it and take it in board. When ever I've read about the history of crimea it was part of russia then given to Ukraine. Soviet union broke apart. West start bringing regime change around country's close to russia and started interfering with Ukraine so russia reacted quickly. (Cause and effect... The west gets involved, russia reacts) You can ask your Ukraine friends if life was lost sure but on record it says non was. People on here believe russia are wanting to take all the Baltic country's which is simply not true. They was left with little option once the west started poking our noses in as we have time and time again and left country after county worse off. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does anybody watch RT?. I'm genuinely asking. . I ask because I do, I'm an avid watcher of Thom Hartman's show, now last week on RT he did a 30 minute show on voter suppression in the US and in particular asking why the democratic party had pretty much completely ignored it for a decade at least. Thom Hartman is unashamedly left wing, he pretty much pulls apart republican attitudes on many issues in the USA from voting to climate change and abortion.... All on RT and quite frankly his show is brilliant, well thought out and always asking the right questions on narratives I sometimes watch RT news. In particular the Sputnik with George Galloway show. ". See that's my point.... RT is full of left wing views and left wing commentators, if it's broadcasting right wing view points at least it's countered. On RT last month I watched a press conference given by three independent journalists who gave a very different picture of what's happening inside Syria, stuff I've never seen or heard on the BBC ch4 or newsnight, is what they reported true? I honestly don't know but their facts stacked up and that's a large problem in modern media, we just don't know if what they report is true and by true even that's very subjective, journalists embedded with troops see and hear what the government want them to, that's why they embed them, John pilger did an excellent documentary years ago on this very thing in the Iraq war. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" People on here believe russia are wanting to take all the Baltic country's which is simply not true. They was left with little option once the west started poking our noses in as we have time and time again and left country after county worse off." By your logic "the west" has acted incorrectly and despite the fact that Russia acts in an infinitely worse way and they share none of the common values that we do - you insist that the west should actually be condemned and Russia supported. The true measure of success of Nationflist propaganda is that it preposterously suggests that there are enemies within (the people who share common values, heritage and background) who are far more dangerous than external enemies who share nothing and indeed who are committed to undermine those values. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And of course, the USA has never once interfered in political processes on foreign soil - covertly or not." ...and they have never bombed schools and hospital's and armed terrorists who slaughter innocent women,children and men and hilary never once said she wanted war with Russia and iran. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And of course, the USA has never once interfered in political processes on foreign soil - covertly or not....and they have never bombed schools and hospital's and armed terrorists who slaughter innocent women,children and men and hilary never once said she wanted war with Russia and iran." As Russians also routinely bomb hospitals and schools in civilian areas and to boot shoot down civilian airliners and murder their own citizens are you suggesting that we should actually be cozying up to them more as their interventionism is a bit more bloodthirsty than our traditional allies? No, of course not - but think about the illogicality of your argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does anybody watch RT?. I'm genuinely asking. . I ask because I do, I'm an avid watcher of Thom Hartman's show, now last week on RT he did a 30 minute show on voter suppression in the US and in particular asking why the democratic party had pretty much completely ignored it for a decade at least. Thom Hartman is unashamedly left wing, he pretty much pulls apart republican attitudes on many issues in the USA from voting to climate change and abortion.... All on RT and quite frankly his show is brilliant, well thought out and always asking the right questions on narratives" with regards to voter suppression... it is not actually the democrats that have been doing it... its the republicans... the republicans won a case in the supreme court in relation to voided parts of the "voting rights act" (which was put in after civil rights act to protect a lot of minority voters in the south) this lead to proposals in a lot of "republican leading" states to make it harder for people to vote because they needed certain id..... or excluded groups (i.e students had to vote from where there home was rather than from on campus) some states struck down same day voting registration, others said you needed to have certain id (the same type of thing that is basically being muted here now), or cutting down the number of days of early voting and cutting back the places where people could vote early..... texas did it, ohio did it, wisconsin did it.... north carolina did it.... Iowa did it... florida did it to more varying forms of extremes) and they all got struck done in supreme court (in the case of north carolina the court said they did it with almost surgical presision to stop certain groups of people who were likely to vote democratic from voting) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and so onto russia... you are never going to hear trump say "yes russia did help me".... but don't even some of you "russia backers" in here wonder why it was only one said that was being "hindered".... if trump is really saying he believes assange over the NSA, CIA and the FBI, that going to not play well with the intelligence community and the general public.... he gets the security briefings and so does obama, so they both know they same information at the moment, the sitting president isn't going to lie because he would have been called out.... they back his assertion of the events rather than trumps.... putin is trying the destablise europe and the us, and is doing a good job.... they are banking on trump not being as tough with russia as clinton would have been (and they saw how tough clinton would have been when she was secretary of state) its going to be interesting this week as the proposed new sect of state elect rex tillerson goes thru his confirmation hearing on tuesday because there are going to be a lot of questions asked about his relationship with russia ... and there are a few republicans i actually respect on those committees who are not convinced by him... john mccain, lindsay graham " Do you not find it really bizarre that the Trump effect has been to divide America to such a degree that many Trumpsters see their own countryman with whom they share so much in common, as being a bigger threat to them than a country like Russia with whom they have no shared values, history or culture. I guess the measure of a successful propaganda war is when fellow countrymen turn against each other and see friendship in the eyes of those who are the real enemies of their way of life. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does anybody watch RT?. I'm genuinely asking. . I ask because I do, I'm an avid watcher of Thom Hartman's show, now last week on RT he did a 30 minute show on voter suppression in the US and in particular asking why the democratic party had pretty much completely ignored it for a decade at least. Thom Hartman is unashamedly left wing, he pretty much pulls apart republican attitudes on many issues in the USA from voting to climate change and abortion.... All on RT and quite frankly his show is brilliant, well thought out and always asking the right questions on narratives with regards to voter suppression... it is not actually the democrats that have been doing it... its the republicans... the republicans won a case in the supreme court in relation to voided parts of the "voting rights act" (which was put in after civil rights act to protect a lot of minority voters in the south) this lead to proposals in a lot of "republican leading" states to make it harder for people to vote because they needed certain id..... or excluded groups (i.e students had to vote from where there home was rather than from on campus) some states struck down same day voting registration, others said you needed to have certain id (the same type of thing that is basically being muted here now), or cutting down the number of days of early voting and cutting back the places where people could vote early..... texas did it, ohio did it, wisconsin did it.... north carolina did it.... Iowa did it... florida did it to more varying forms of extremes) and they all got struck done in supreme court (in the case of north carolina the court said they did it with almost surgical presision to stop certain groups of people who were likely to vote democratic from voting)" . Yes I watched the show it was very interesting, I think you have misunderstood the premise though. He was actually asking why the DNC had largely looked the other way about voter suppression by republicans?.... The black caucus had made quite a bit of noise about it but the DNC had done very little to counter it. When they looked through the numbers in states that trump had one, it turns out if he'd won by 10 thousand votes then 50 thousand votes had been suppressed!... But what do the DNC blame for losing the election? That's right not voter suppression but Russian interference!....I think you need to ask why that narrative is pushed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances was signed by the US, UK, Russia and Ukraine confirming Ukraine's borders and sovereignty. By annexing Crimea Russia broke this treaty and international law. This had been confirm by the UN. Is preposterous that people support this annexation as well as that of Georgia and eastern Ukraine as well. " . I don't think anybody sensible thinks the annexing of Crimea was right, I don't think anybody sensible thinks Vladimir Putin is anything but a tyrant.... Is Russia a place that's to be looked upon with envy, no of course not. Let's not fall into this standard foreign policy of good and bad, foreign policy has nothing to do with good and bad... China Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, turkey, Indonesia, Argentina, Cuba.. There not good and they act outrageously at times but are they a threat to UK sovereignty?. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you wish to make a decision on a national leader's motives look at how much their personal wealth has grown since their rise to power. Look at how free the press is. Look at how much the lives of normal people are improving. What's your view on Russia? https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html%3famp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/25/how-russia-independent-media-was-dismantled-piece-by-piece http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/russian-federation/ " . Do you really want to do this?. Tony Blair Clinton's Bush Regan Thatcher . And last but not least Churchill | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . Do you really want to do this?. Tony Blair Clinton's Bush Regan Thatcher . And last but not least Churchill" So that's a list of names of British and American leaders. What's the point that you are making? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you wish to make a decision on a national leader's motives look at how much their personal wealth has grown since their rise to power. Look at how free the press is. Look at how much the lives of normal people are improving. What's your view on Russia? https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html%3famp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/25/how-russia-independent-media-was-dismantled-piece-by-piece http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/russian-federation/ " From my own experience of speaking to ordinary Russians in Spain they don't seem to be doing too badly, I've recently had dealings with quite a few estate agents there and they all either employ a Russian or Russian speaker due to the high number of customers. Over recent years I think they are second only to the UK in foreign property sales there and if you've ever been to Cyprus the place is full of em. You can usually tell from their trunks, sadly they're still a bit shit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" From my own experience of speaking to ordinary Russians in Spain they don't seem to be doing too badly, I've recently had dealings with quite a few estate agents there and they all either employ a Russian or Russian speaker due to the high number of customers. Over recent years I think they are second only to the UK in foreign property sales there and if you've ever been to Cyprus the place is full of em. You can usually tell from their trunks, sadly they're still a bit shit" Seriously? These are normal Russians? Middle-class even? You don't think that these might be the ones with all the money? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . Do you really want to do this?. Tony Blair Clinton's Bush Regan Thatcher . And last but not least Churchill So that's a list of names of British and American leaders. What's the point that you are making?" . They all end up profitable from politics | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What dickhead thinks that China is the next enemy, or Muslims, or the EU, or Mexicans? Why is anybody anyone's enemy? Paranoia? Someone's out to get "us". Fear? Someone's going to find out about me or take what's "mine". A belief that it's a zero sum game? For me to win, someone else has to lose. Everybody, EVERYBODY, is doing it. Don't believe that the Russians are anymore innocent than the Turks or the Chinese or the Americans or the British. So, don't waste your breath defending the Russians because they deserve it no more, or less than anyone else. RT is certainly biased in a lot of it's reporting as is CNBC or the BBC or am Jazeera. Some are more reliable than others. Some have information that others don't but please do not tell me than one of them is providing "the truth"." . You've mistaken me for somebody who defends Russia. Read above. What I'm telling you is we need an enemy, you pick who you want I'll pick who I want?. Mine will be more substantial than yours. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" They all end up profitable from politics" They were wealthy before. They did not enrich themselves during their tenure. They certainly profited afterwards. They all do. They have a pretty unique knowledge and contact list. Have they taken apart their judiciary, civil rights and free press. Putin is a dictator. I'm not saying that anyone else is not a hypocrite or wholly innocent but he is a totalitarian dictator and shouldn't be defended. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does anybody watch RT?. I'm genuinely asking. . I ask because I do, I'm an avid watcher of Thom Hartman's show, now last week on RT he did a 30 minute show on voter suppression in the US and in particular asking why the democratic party had pretty much completely ignored it for a decade at least. Thom Hartman is unashamedly left wing, he pretty much pulls apart republican attitudes on many issues in the USA from voting to climate change and abortion.... All on RT and quite frankly his show is brilliant, well thought out and always asking the right questions on narratives with regards to voter suppression... it is not actually the democrats that have been doing it... its the republicans... the republicans won a case in the supreme court in relation to voided parts of the "voting rights act" (which was put in after civil rights act to protect a lot of minority voters in the south) this lead to proposals in a lot of "republican leading" states to make it harder for people to vote because they needed certain id..... or excluded groups (i.e students had to vote from where there home was rather than from on campus) some states struck down same day voting registration, others said you needed to have certain id (the same type of thing that is basically being muted here now), or cutting down the number of days of early voting and cutting back the places where people could vote early..... texas did it, ohio did it, wisconsin did it.... north carolina did it.... Iowa did it... florida did it to more varying forms of extremes) and they all got struck done in supreme court (in the case of north carolina the court said they did it with almost surgical presision to stop certain groups of people who were likely to vote democratic from voting). Yes I watched the show it was very interesting, I think you have misunderstood the premise though. He was actually asking why the DNC had largely looked the other way about voter suppression by republicans?.... The black caucus had made quite a bit of noise about it but the DNC had done very little to counter it. When they looked through the numbers in states that trump had one, it turns out if he'd won by 10 thousand votes then 50 thousand votes had been suppressed!... But what do the DNC blame for losing the election? That's right not voter suppression but Russian interference!....I think you need to ask why that narrative is pushed" the DNC and the state democratic parties concerned actually did fight it... which is they the more extreme cases went up to the supreme court and were thrown out as being unconstitutional... it was in effect the gutting of the voting rights act that unfortunately open the window the state republican parties seized on.... for example lets take wisconsin.... what the wisconsin republican party managed to get thru the state legistlature was that for same day voter registration they would no longer accept student id as an acceptable form of id... about a mile from the state congress is one of the biggest larger populated student universities in america, university of wisconsin-maddison they deliberately made it harder for those people to vote.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You've mistaken me for somebody who defends Russia. Read above. What I'm telling you is we need an enemy, you pick who you want I'll pick who I want?. Mine will be more substantial than yours." I don't disagree, but I haven't picked Russia as "the enemy" but I don't believe that they are not aggressively seeking to assert their influence in any number of ways. However, would you say that providing Putin with the outcome that he desires will bring a quiet life or encourage him to persue his goals, national or personal, with the same tactics? Should Hitler have been allowed to invade Czechoslovakia without consequence? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What I'm telling you is we need an enemy, you pick who you want I'll pick who I want?. Mine will be more substantial than yours." Which is your more substantial enemy btw? Not sarcasm. Genuinely interested. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does anybody watch RT?. I'm genuinely asking. . I ask because I do, I'm an avid watcher of Thom Hartman's show, now last week on RT he did a 30 minute show on voter suppression in the US and in particular asking why the democratic party had pretty much completely ignored it for a decade at least. Thom Hartman is unashamedly left wing, he pretty much pulls apart republican attitudes on many issues in the USA from voting to climate change and abortion.... All on RT and quite frankly his show is brilliant, well thought out and always asking the right questions on narratives with regards to voter suppression... it is not actually the democrats that have been doing it... its the republicans... the republicans won a case in the supreme court in relation to voided parts of the "voting rights act" (which was put in after civil rights act to protect a lot of minority voters in the south) this lead to proposals in a lot of "republican leading" states to make it harder for people to vote because they needed certain id..... or excluded groups (i.e students had to vote from where there home was rather than from on campus) some states struck down same day voting registration, others said you needed to have certain id (the same type of thing that is basically being muted here now), or cutting down the number of days of early voting and cutting back the places where people could vote early..... texas did it, ohio did it, wisconsin did it.... north carolina did it.... Iowa did it... florida did it to more varying forms of extremes) and they all got struck done in supreme court (in the case of north carolina the court said they did it with almost surgical presision to stop certain groups of people who were likely to vote democratic from voting). Yes I watched the show it was very interesting, I think you have misunderstood the premise though. He was actually asking why the DNC had largely looked the other way about voter suppression by republicans?.... The black caucus had made quite a bit of noise about it but the DNC had done very little to counter it. When they looked through the numbers in states that trump had one, it turns out if he'd won by 10 thousand votes then 50 thousand votes had been suppressed!... But what do the DNC blame for losing the election? That's right not voter suppression but Russian interference!....I think you need to ask why that narrative is pushed the DNC and the state democratic parties concerned actually did fight it... which is they the more extreme cases went up to the supreme court and were thrown out as being unconstitutional... it was in effect the gutting of the voting rights act that unfortunately open the window the state republican parties seized on.... for example lets take wisconsin.... what the wisconsin republican party managed to get thru the state legistlature was that for same day voter registration they would no longer accept student id as an acceptable form of id... about a mile from the state congress is one of the biggest larger populated student universities in america, university of wisconsin-maddison they deliberately made it harder for those people to vote...." . This was all on Thom Hartmans show on RT a month ago!. It's outrageous in a liberal democracy like the USA.... Were in full agreement here. What have the DNC done to counter it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" From my own experience of speaking to ordinary Russians in Spain they don't seem to be doing too badly, I've recently had dealings with quite a few estate agents there and they all either employ a Russian or Russian speaker due to the high number of customers. Over recent years I think they are second only to the UK in foreign property sales there and if you've ever been to Cyprus the place is full of em. You can usually tell from their trunks, sadly they're still a bit shit" trust me.... if you think you are talking to "ordinary" russians in spain..... you are not talking to an average russian.....  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you wish to make a decision on a national leader's motives look at how much their personal wealth has grown since their rise to power. Look at how free the press is. Look at how much the lives of normal people are improving. What's your view on Russia? https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html%3famp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/25/how-russia-independent-media-was-dismantled-piece-by-piece http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/russian-federation/ From my own experience of speaking to ordinary Russians in Spain they don't seem to be doing too badly, I've recently had dealings with quite a few estate agents there and they all either employ a Russian or Russian speaker due to the high number of customers. Over recent years I think they are second only to the UK in foreign property sales there and if you've ever been to Cyprus the place is full of em. You can usually tell from their trunks, sadly they're still a bit shit" Ordinary Russians buying property in Spain????? I really hope that was sarcastic???? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What I'm telling you is we need an enemy, you pick who you want I'll pick who I want?. Mine will be more substantial than yours. Which is your more substantial enemy btw? Not sarcasm. Genuinely interested." . I dunno you pick it? Your the one that needs an enemy not me... I'm quite happy sticking to my beliefs of staying the fuck out of other sovereign states business unless it threatens our own | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". What have the DNC done to counter it?" thats the point... if a state has a republican legistlature.. and a republican governor and a republican AG.... there isn't really a great deal you can do! unless something is so outrageous that the federal electoral commission (which is independent) get involved and take it to the supreme court because they see it as being unconstitutional... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". What have the DNC done to counter it? thats the point... if a state has a republican legistlature.. and a republican governor and a republican AG.... there isn't really a great deal you can do! unless something is so outrageous that the federal electoral commission (which is independent) get involved and take it to the supreme court because they see it as being unconstitutional..." . So why push the narrative that Russia cost the democrats the election?. It's really clear how the democrats lost via voter suppression, why not push that narrative? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I dunno you pick it? Your the one that needs an enemy not me... I'm quite happy sticking to my beliefs of staying the fuck out of other sovereign states business unless it threatens our own" I don't need an enemy. If I implied that somehow that wasn't my intention. A certain type of politician does. Putin, in fact, uses the West as the enemy just as Trump has taken to using the Muslims and Mexicans and Chinese. The thing with geopolitics is that the world is more connected than it ever was. I don't think that intervention has been very successful but I don't think that non-intervention is necessarily better. Was Rwanda OK? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". So why push the narrative that Russia cost the democrats the election?. It's really clear how the democrats lost via voter suppression, why not push that narrative?" Isn't this oversimplification? As almost everything Trump won for a number of reasons. The democrats didn't help themselves in pushing Clinton rather than Saunders. Wealth disparities have increased. People choose to listen only to information that they agree with. Fake news. Russia got involved and didn't actually care who won. Doubt either way is a victory for them. Voter suppression. British Olympic success has been built on marginal gains. That's exactly how the US election turned out. How all elections turn out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You've mistaken me for somebody who defends Russia. Read above. What I'm telling you is we need an enemy, you pick who you want I'll pick who I want?. Mine will be more substantial than yours. I don't disagree, but I haven't picked Russia as "the enemy" but I don't believe that they are not aggressively seeking to assert their influence in any number of ways. However, would you say that providing Putin with the outcome that he desires will bring a quiet life or encourage him to persue his goals, national or personal, with the same tactics? Should Hitler have been allowed to invade Czechoslovakia without consequence?" . You see this is the same narrative pushed constantly and my worry is it's pushed more by the left than the right, what's going on here. Germany ceded sudentland in the first world war, mostly occupied by ethnic Germans very similar to eastern Ukraine and Crimea. Let's reverse the situation, let's say the USA lost the cold war let's say due to losing it they were forced to give up whole chunks of Mexico which they've held since the Spanish American war, let's say they were forced to share the massive US naval base at San Diego with the Mexicans under a bi lateral agreement that when push comes to shove the Russians are telling the Mexicans to fuck the USA off..... What do you think the response of the USA would be?. That's a genuine question, I'm not sticking up for any nation state. With who's right and who's wrong | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". So why push the narrative that Russia cost the democrats the election?. It's really clear how the democrats lost via voter suppression, why not push that narrative? Isn't this oversimplification? As almost everything Trump won for a number of reasons. The democrats didn't help themselves in pushing Clinton rather than Saunders. Wealth disparities have increased. People choose to listen only to information that they agree with. Fake news. Russia got involved and didn't actually care who won. Doubt either way is a victory for them. Voter suppression. British Olympic success has been built on marginal gains. That's exactly how the US election turned out. How all elections turn out." . No kid, I'm a Bernie bro!. The guy was cheated out of the nomination the DNC deliberately fucked him over because they wanted Clinton, why is the question I ask?. Why push Russia over voter suppression for the reason you lost. I hate to point this out but that's the voice of the military industrial complex speaking... They've paid for a war and there going to get it, do you really think Bernie would be concentrating on Russia or the 30% of the country that's in poverty? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You see this is the same narrative pushed constantly and my worry is it's pushed more by the left than the right, what's going on here. Germany ceded sudentland in the first world war, mostly occupied by ethnic Germans very similar to eastern Ukraine and Crimea. Let's reverse the situation, let's say the USA lost the cold war let's say due to losing it they were forced to give up whole chunks of Mexico which they've held since the Spanish American war, let's say they were forced to share the massive US naval base at San Diego with the Mexicans under a bi lateral agreement that when push comes to shove the Russians are telling the Mexicans to fuck the USA off..... What do you think the response of the USA would be?. That's a genuine question, I'm not sticking up for any nation state. With who's right and who's wrong" It seems to me that you are being as uncritical of Russian intentions as you accuse me of being with the Western perspective. Regardless of what land belongs to who you have to decide if the way to settle matters is through negotiations, referenda and elections or subterfuge, terrorism and military conflict of which BOTH Russia and the West have been guilty. How should you achieve the outcome you want? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you wish to make a decision on a national leader's motives look at how much their personal wealth has grown since their rise to power. Look at how free the press is. Look at how much the lives of normal people are improving. What's your view on Russia? https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html%3famp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/25/how-russia-independent-media-was-dismantled-piece-by-piece http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/russian-federation/ From my own experience of speaking to ordinary Russians in Spain they don't seem to be doing too badly, I've recently had dealings with quite a few estate agents there and they all either employ a Russian or Russian speaker due to the high number of customers. Over recent years I think they are second only to the UK in foreign property sales there and if you've ever been to Cyprus the place is full of em. You can usually tell from their trunks, sadly they're still a bit shit Ordinary Russians buying property in Spain????? I really hope that was sarcastic????" nope. Russians own 7.5% of all registered Spanish property so either a lot of it is owned by ordinary Russians in the same way that you could class UK property owners there as ordinary or there are a hell of a lot of rich people in Russia. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It seems to me that you are being as uncritical of Russian intentions as you accuse me of being with the Western perspective. Regardless of what land belongs to who you have to decide if the way to settle matters is through negotiations, referenda and elections or subterfuge, terrorism and military conflict of which BOTH Russia and the West have been guilty. How should you achieve the outcome you want?" . No your still confusing being critical and understanding how and why things happen!. As I said above the annexing of Crimea we wrong, it needs hopefully reversing... That's not the same as pushing a narrative of Russia being the UKs new enemy because of the annexing of Crimea or meddling in the US elections, which is what we see in the mainstream media. . What it seems like to me in my observations is we've run out of middle eastern enemys on a large scale so the order has come through from above that Russia is once again to be the new old enemy?..... Or maybe I missed the FO policy breifing that all foreign sovereign powers run by dictatorships are now the defacto enemy.... In which case are we now declaring Saudi Arabia as fair game? Coz last time I looked not only do we have good relations with them but we still sell them arms! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Or come to think of it China!!. There's a country with no elections whatsoever, run by tyrants who are billionaires, treats its citizens like shit has been cyber spying and hacking for decades and is expanding its sphere of influence everywhere... How come they get to buy up shit loads of UK assets, they don't get sanctions,, they get to build UK nuclear fucking power stations ffs Why isn't China the new enemy?. Why isn't xi jinping the new personification of Hitler???. " because in films the Chinese are portrayed as small mainly friendly or wise people whereas Russians are portrayed as big nasty people | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What's the difference between Crimea and whole chunks of Mongolia or land in the south China seas. . . Or buying up most of Africa and installing your own government??" There is no difference. However Russia interfering directly with the internal politics of another superpower is different. It's the sort of thing that could easily lead to a direct conflict between the USA and Russia. Last time that happened was in 1963, you may have heard about it, if not google 'Cuban missile crisis'. A lot has been written on the subject. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Spying on your own citizens Murdering your own citizens Shooting down civilian airliners Bombing civilians of other countries Invading and occupying other countries sovereign land These are all things that we as a Nation find objectionable and therefore are suspicious of and will (quite rightly) criticise. " . You are joking aren't you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What's the difference between Crimea and whole chunks of Mongolia or land in the south China seas. . . Or buying up most of Africa and installing your own government?? There is no difference. However Russia interfering directly with the internal politics of another superpower is different. It's the sort of thing that could easily lead to a direct conflict between the USA and Russia. Last time that happened was in 1963, you may have heard about it, if not google 'Cuban missile crisis'. A lot has been written on the subject." . I don't doubt for a minute that Russia has and would love to influence US elections just like the US would with Russian elections, just like they both have hundreds of times in other countries elections, I mean the US intervened in Japanese elections in the 50s and 60s to make sure the socialists didn't get into power, nothing to bad they just released some damming evidence on them?. Now let's not forget the story behind the story, the DNC we're complicit in rigging their own election, what's worse, foreign intervention which you could rightly expect or internal which you shouldn't? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Spying on your own citizens Murdering your own citizens Shooting down civilian airliners Bombing civilians of other countries Invading and occupying other countries sovereign land These are all things that we as a Nation find objectionable and therefore are suspicious of and will (quite rightly) criticise. . You are joking aren't you?" I think shes very serious 
everything she just listed is somthing the west is guilty off. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What's the difference between Crimea and whole chunks of Mongolia or land in the south China seas. . . Or buying up most of Africa and installing your own government?? There is no difference. However Russia interfering directly with the internal politics of another superpower is different. It's the sort of thing that could easily lead to a direct conflict between the USA and Russia. Last time that happened was in 1963, you may have heard about it, if not google 'Cuban missile crisis'. A lot has been written on the subject." Trump doesn't want war with Russia though, he wants to improve USA/Russia relations. It's the war mongers Obama/Clinton who look and act like they want to start a war with Russia. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Donald Trump declared war on Meryl Streep this morning and all she did was make a critical speech about him to a bunch of luvvies. A thin skinned man baby like him will be a very dangerous person to have in the Whitehorse. Fortunately, most Republicans trust him as little as most Democrats so he will likely be well chaperoned. I reckon a 100 day honeymoon (up to around May/June time) until it really kicks off. The fun and games immediately after his inauguration will just be the warm up gig." . There we agree on something  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Donald Trump declared war on Meryl Streep this morning and all she did was make a critical speech about him to a bunch of luvvies. " Saying she is an over rated actress on Twitter is hardly declaring war on the woman. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Spying on your own citizens Murdering your own citizens Shooting down civilian airliners Bombing civilians of other countries Invading and occupying other countries sovereign land These are all things that we as a Nation find objectionable and therefore are suspicious of and will (quite rightly) criticise. . You are joking aren't you? I think shes very serious
everything she just listed is somthing the west is guilty off."I thought she was describing the US. had to read it back again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Donald Trump declared war on Meryl Streep this morning and all she did was make a critical speech about him to a bunch of luvvies. Saying she is an over rated actress on Twitter is hardly declaring war on the woman. "what meryl streep did was awful. firstly following the anti trump media and portraying a lie that has been debunked (saying that he mimicked a disabled reporter, whilst it seemed that way watching the video, but the debunking shows multiple trump speeches where when he is mocking someone he does the exact hand gestures and mannerisms, so it was a unfortunate coincidence). Also if streeps heart was so upset at this as she is passionate about the disabled where the heck was her shout out on such a public stage to the disabled guy who was kidnapped and humiliated and tortured live on face book by 4 people all shouting anti trump slurs? Also when she portrayed hollywood as victims....wtf..... the most privileged people on the planet all in one room making millions per movie and she had the nerve to say they are victims. Overrated or not she lost a lot of respect and its speeches like that why trump won. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What's the difference between Crimea and whole chunks of Mongolia or land in the south China seas. . . Or buying up most of Africa and installing your own government?? There is no difference. However Russia interfering directly with the internal politics of another superpower is different. It's the sort of thing that could easily lead to a direct conflict between the USA and Russia. Last time that happened was in 1963, you may have heard about it, if not google 'Cuban missile crisis'. A lot has been written on the subject. Trump doesn't want war with Russia though, he wants to improve USA/Russia relations. It's the war mongers Obama/Clinton who look and act like they want to start a war with Russia. " Trump is Putin's puppet. He knows that Outin's interference got him elected. He cannot afford to piss Putin off; he owes him big style. He also now knows that Putin can take him down in a heartbeat if he wishes. And since the Russian objective is to destabilise the US ( which it has done, pretty well, so far), I expect Putin will let Trump wreak havoc for awhile, then saw him off at the knees in about 3 years time, just in time to turn the next US election into chaos too; ( the Republicans will be st each other's throats by them, and the Democrats won't have recovered) Meanwhile the Russians will spend the next 2 years destabilising Europe - they are doing quite well already in their funding of LePen, Wikders, ans AfD, and the other Ultra right parties in Europe, and in funding the ultra right websites, and supporting elements such as Breitbart. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No your still confusing being critical and understanding how and why things happen!. As I said above the annexing of Crimea we wrong, it needs hopefully reversing... That's not the same as pushing a narrative of Russia being the UKs new enemy because of the annexing of Crimea or meddling in the US elections, which is what we see in the mainstream media. . What it seems like to me in my observations is we've run out of middle eastern enemys on a large scale so the order has come through from above that Russia is once again to be the new old enemy?..... Or maybe I missed the FO policy breifing that all foreign sovereign powers run by dictatorships are now the defacto enemy.... In which case are we now declaring Saudi Arabia as fair game? Coz last time I looked not only do we have good relations with them but we still sell them arms!" I do not think I quite agree with you on Russia being cast as "the enemy". They are just currently the most active and newsworthy with both their intervention in Syria and interference in the US general election. From the UK perspective they have increased their provocation in flying military aircraft into UK airspace and together with China have been busy "investigating" the software of our public and private infrastructure. Not too long ago they also fed someone a nice cup of radioactive tea in London. They are no innocent. The Democratic party's political machinations are an embarrassment. Labour have tried to do something similar with Corbyn remember. My position is simply that Russia should be treated as a hostile state because that's how it behaves until such time as there is a diplomatic realignment. Unfortunately geopolitics really is like the playground sometimes and bullies will carry on behaving as such until pushed back. That includes the US and UK and Europe. Better talking, but that's not how it always works. Too many egos. Addressing another comments; none of the major powers want to enter into any military conflict with each other. Who said that they did? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok......historically how many countries have the US interfered in? Hypocrisy. Russia hacks in a USA, and vice versa and in many other countries. For gods sake CIA hacked Merkels phone.....and supposed to be an ally! What do you think GCHQ are doing most days?" Hypocritical it may be, but you still don't let foreign states interference with your business unless you've agreed with them to do so, or do you think otherwise? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok......historically how many countries have the US interfered in? Hypocrisy. Russia hacks in a USA, and vice versa and in many other countries. For gods sake CIA hacked Merkels phone.....and supposed to be an ally! What do you think GCHQ are doing most days? Hypocritical it may be, but you still don't let foreign states interference with your business unless you've agreed with them to do so, or do you think otherwise?" No...I don't think otherwise. The point I'm making is that it isn't news. It has been going on for decades....spies and espionage have been part of politics since forever. The methods may have changed but the motivation remains. Many countries, particularly Russia, USA and ourselves have interfered in the politics/elections of countless countries in the past..... I'm just amazed that anyone seems surprised by it! It simply isn't news! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Hypocritical it may be, but you still don't let foreign states interference with your business unless you've agreed with them to do so, or do you think otherwise? No...I don't think otherwise. The point I'm making is that it isn't news. It has been going on for decades....spies and espionage have been part of politics since forever. The methods may have changed but the motivation remains. Many countries, particularly Russia, USA and ourselves have interfered in the politics/elections of countless countries in the past..... I'm just amazed that anyone seems surprised by it! It simply isn't news!" Ah. I see. True. I think it's news because it's the first time that a major power has been so directly and publicly effected and that Trump is refusing to believe his own intelligence services. Obviously it's difficult for him to acknowledge the problem because it questions validity of his election, which was Russia's only intention. I doubt they took sides, but the outcome is just rather better than they expected. I'm not sure that publishing the CIA and FBI is the best plan for a new US President though... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Hypocritical it may be, but you still don't let foreign states interference with your business unless you've agreed with them to do so, or do you think otherwise? No...I don't think otherwise. The point I'm making is that it isn't news. It has been going on for decades....spies and espionage have been part of politics since forever. The methods may have changed but the motivation remains. Many countries, particularly Russia, USA and ourselves have interfered in the politics/elections of countless countries in the past..... I'm just amazed that anyone seems surprised by it! It simply isn't news! Ah. I see. True. I think it's news because it's the first time that a major power has been so directly and publicly effected and that Trump is refusing to believe his own intelligence services. Obviously it's difficult for him to acknowledge the problem because it questions validity of his election, which was Russia's only intention. I doubt they took sides, but the outcome is just rather better than they expected. I'm not sure that publishing the CIA and FBI is the best plan for a new US President though..." how has the U.S. been affected? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" how has the U.S. been affected?" In the OPs original post. It influenced the outcome of the US general election. By no means on its own or decisive but in this case perhaps it was just enough as it appeared to be an election based on belief and doubt more than fact. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" how has the U.S. been affected? In the OPs original post. It influenced the outcome of the US general election. By no means on its own or decisive but in this case perhaps it was just enough as it appeared to be an election based on belief and doubt more than fact." The ex boss of the CIA did an interview on BBC 2 Newsnight last Friday night. He said it was Russia who did the hacking but it had no effect on the outcome of the election. In other words Trump would have still won anyway. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" how has the U.S. been affected? In the OPs original post. It influenced the outcome of the US general election. By no means on its own or decisive but in this case perhaps it was just enough as it appeared to be an election based on belief and doubt more than fact." There's still no proof the Russia was even involved in the hacks. In the 25 page report released most media and exoerts said it was underwhelming, dissapointing, very thin and barely gave it any coverage because it didn't even contain any evidence as they couldn't declassify the parts the public really needed to form their opinion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" how has the U.S. been affected? In the OPs original post. It influenced the outcome of the US general election. By no means on its own or decisive but in this case perhaps it was just enough as it appeared to be an election based on belief and doubt more than fact. There's still no proof the Russia was even involved in the hacks. In the 25 page report released most media and exoerts said it was underwhelming, dissapointing, very thin and barely gave it any coverage because it didn't even contain any evidence as they couldn't declassify the parts the public really needed to form their opinion. " Add to that Wikileaks themselves say Russia was not the source of the hack. The CIA have history of deceiving the public, Saddam Hussain's weapons of mass destruction springs to mind. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" how has the U.S. been affected? In the OPs original post. It influenced the outcome of the US general election. By no means on its own or decisive but in this case perhaps it was just enough as it appeared to be an election based on belief and doubt more than fact. There's still no proof the Russia was even involved in the hacks. In the 25 page report released most media and exoerts said it was underwhelming, dissapointing, very thin and barely gave it any coverage because it didn't even contain any evidence as they couldn't declassify the parts the public really needed to form their opinion. Add to that Wikileaks themselves say Russia was not the source of the hack. The CIA have history of deceiving the public, Saddam Hussain's weapons of mass destruction springs to mind. " totally agree | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected?" Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. " none of what you wrote is based on facts, just assumptions from you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. none of what you wrote is based on facts, just assumptions from you." . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. " you must be a great admirer of Russia if you think it capable of all those things | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. none of what you wrote is based on facts, just assumptions from you." No it's based on a lot of facts; do some research; Read the books that detail the Russian plan. Find out what the " Foundations of geopolitics; the geopolitical future of Russia" is all about, Look at where Marine LePen gets her funding from. look at who is funding the current President of Hungary , and his hard right government . Investigate who pays who; who funds various organisations. Have a look at which nations are entirely or greatly dependent on Russian gas; and the net of links between Russian gas companies and various national energy providers. Start to understand why some countries are controlled by Russia, and why some may criticise Russia, but can't afford to actually do much against them because of their dependencies. It's all there, you just have to look. Read the academic papers which examine these elements. Not the internet nutters, the proper papers published by organisations such as Chatham House, or RUSI, to name but two. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. none of what you wrote is based on facts, just assumptions from you. No it's based on a lot of facts; do some research; Read the books that detail the Russian plan. Find out what the " Foundations of geopolitics; the geopolitical future of Russia" is all about, Look at where Marine LePen gets her funding from. look at who is funding the current President of Hungary , and his hard right government . Investigate who pays who; who funds various organisations. Have a look at which nations are entirely or greatly dependent on Russian gas; and the net of links between Russian gas companies and various national energy providers. Start to understand why some countries are controlled by Russia, and why some may criticise Russia, but can't afford to actually do much against them because of their dependencies. It's all there, you just have to look. Read the academic papers which examine these elements. Not the internet nutters, the proper papers published by organisations such as Chatham House, or RUSI, to name but two. " But the problem is, the people who work at places like Chatham House, RUSI, FES, Wilson Centre etc. are experts, and you know how these people feel about experts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. none of what you wrote is based on facts, just assumptions from you. No it's based on a lot of facts; do some research; Read the books that detail the Russian plan. Find out what the " Foundations of geopolitics; the geopolitical future of Russia" is all about, Look at where Marine LePen gets her funding from. look at who is funding the current President of Hungary , and his hard right government . Investigate who pays who; who funds various organisations. Have a look at which nations are entirely or greatly dependent on Russian gas; and the net of links between Russian gas companies and various national energy providers. Start to understand why some countries are controlled by Russia, and why some may criticise Russia, but can't afford to actually do much against them because of their dependencies. It's all there, you just have to look. Read the academic papers which examine these elements. Not the internet nutters, the proper papers published by organisations such as Chatham House, or RUSI, to name but two. But the problem is, the people who work at places like Chatham House, RUSI, FES, Wilson Centre etc. are experts, and you know how these people feel about experts." and what do these people say of the USA and the UK in their proper papers? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. none of what you wrote is based on facts, just assumptions from you. No it's based on a lot of facts; do some research; Read the books that detail the Russian plan. Find out what the " Foundations of geopolitics; the geopolitical future of Russia" is all about, Look at where Marine LePen gets her funding from. look at who is funding the current President of Hungary , and his hard right government . Investigate who pays who; who funds various organisations. Have a look at which nations are entirely or greatly dependent on Russian gas; and the net of links between Russian gas companies and various national energy providers. Start to understand why some countries are controlled by Russia, and why some may criticise Russia, but can't afford to actually do much against them because of their dependencies. It's all there, you just have to look. Read the academic papers which examine these elements. Not the internet nutters, the proper papers published by organisations such as Chatham House, or RUSI, to name but two. But the problem is, the people who work at places like Chatham House, RUSI, FES, Wilson Centre etc. are experts, and you know how these people feel about experts. and what do these people say of the USA and the UK in their proper papers?" Maybe if you tried reading it you would find out. They all publish plenty of material that's free. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I was wondering if the latest trump rumour should go here... in the lounge... or in swingers chat The man is going to end up being impeached " _abio what have I told you about watching too much CNN
No but seriously you really believe that russia are blackmaiking trump with a video of him having golden showers with prostitutes?
A story that originated on buzzfeed with no evidence what so ever and picked up by the liberal media.
this is the fake news and shitty journalism that needs to be stopped.
what desperation will the democrats or liberals come up with next to try stop the augeration on the 20th. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/818992803829137408 wiki leaks says this 35 page report is fake and in the comments I read that 4chan has come forward and claimed that they was responsible for the hoax. so I do a quick google search for 4chan claims responsibility for trump report. loads of pages pop up all new between 5 hours to an hour ago. all reporting that 4chan have just trolled buzzfeed and CIA and the media. So I have to ask with this all coming to light hours ago about 4chan why is our media making this fake news their top headline with no mention of that 4chan have claimed it was them. and whats even worse is, is it really this easy to troll the CIA (if true and 4chan did fabricate this report), its embarrassing if it is true." If 4chan can fool the CIA then it must be like child's play for Russia (and I'm still not convinced Russia is to blame either). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . how has the U.S. been affected? Massively; Whether or not it affected the actual outcome, the US now has a maverick and divisive president. The divides within US society have been fuelled by Russian intervention. Russia has twice before attempted to get Trump to run for president; once in 1988, via the Czechs , and again in 1996. In addition to the hacking, it has manipulated many areas of the US. The US president elect is damaging relations with China ( a stated objective of Russia), and with his neighbouring countries ( Mexico). The US is possibly turning isolationist ( which is what the Russians want) The New president wants to reduce US involvement in NATO, so another Russian aim, of weakening NATO, is being achieved. The President elect is at war with his own government agencies. The Republican Party is at war with itself. The Russians actually didn't think that Trump would win, they just needed the US to be destabilised. It is. Racial and socio-economic tensions, stoked by Russian interference and by funding of dissident groupings ( on all sides) When Trump won, they could not believe how successful they had been. Now they are busy working on Europe; hacking Germany, They have the Hungarian government in their pockets. They are creating the " Eurasia" that has been the plan growing for 20 years. " If all that's true and Russia is trying to divide America then there is one way for America to easily beat that plot.....The public should unite behind Trump and all accept him as the new democratically elected President. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What would constitute a threat to the UK or the USA or the West short of open warfare that would constitute a threat?" The biggest threat to the UK and Europe ( and the US, but a second order threat) is energy. The majority of Europe is massively dependent on Russia for Gas for energy. Germany ( since it chose to stop nuclear energy is almost totally dependent on outside energy sources, as is most of Eastern Europe, which is currently Russian gas. Of European countries, the only one that is truly self sufficient in energy, is France, because it made a strategic decision, 20 + years ago to ensure it. UK, until it sorts out its nuclear energy, relies on a mixture of imported electricity and imported gas to maintain its base load. If Russia turned the gas tap off, Germany would be in severe trouble, as would the Netherlands, and Belgium, and UK would have some major issues. France can't supply all of them with the deficit. That's why U.K. Is fairly obsessed with trying to get fracking going, as this may be a source of domestic energy to supplement the base load, especially if the Nuclear rebuild is delayed. ( For which UK is relying on Chinese backing) -note that Russian policy is to also weaken china. The Iran / Middle East axis of Russian geopolitical activity is to exert more control over Middke eastern oil. This forces the US to friend more on its internal energy supplies ( the US can currently be self sufficient in energy, but it doesn't have. Surplus, so relies on outside sources for surge and to protect its reserves. A destabilised and inward looking US affects world energy markets. That's the major threat; you don't need a war to destroy a country, you need to starve it of energy. That's the actual reason that Germany invaded Russia in WW2; not idealism, the Germans needed Russian oil to drive their industry. Without energy, there is no industry, then no food, then no society. It's easier to turn a fuel tap off than to bomb a power station. ( though it's effective to cyberattack the energy control systems of a country, as the Russians did recently in the US: ( that attack eas a " demonstration" of their capability). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What would constitute a threat to the UK or the USA or the West short of open warfare that would constitute a threat? " Does anyone in the pro-Russia pro-Trump side of the discussion have any thoughts on this? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What would constitute a threat to the UK or the USA or the West short of open warfare that would constitute a threat? Does anyone in the pro-Russia pro-Trump side of the discussion have any thoughts on this?"I don't think people here are pro Russia pro Trump, the are just pro truth and anti bullshit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What would constitute a threat to the UK or the USA or the West short of open warfare that would constitute a threat? Does anyone in the pro-Russia pro-Trump side of the discussion have any thoughts on this?
I don't think people here are pro Russia pro Trump, the are just pro truth and anti bullshit"Do you have a response then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What would constitute a threat to the UK or the USA or the West short of open warfare that would constitute a threat? Does anyone in the pro-Russia pro-Trump side of the discussion have any thoughts on this?
I don't think people here are pro Russia pro Trump, the are just pro truth and anti bullshit
Do you have a response then?"They just gave you a response didn't they? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What would constitute a threat to the UK or the USA or the West short of open warfare that would constitute a threat? Does anyone in the pro-Russia pro-Trump side of the discussion have any thoughts on this?"Here's a clue. According to verified reports between December 31 2016 and 6 January 2017 there have been 56 Koran-inspired terror attacks worldwide which have killed 329 people, injured 568 and have included ten suicide blasts. These are the ones which have been reported and doesn't include the bloodbath currently going on in Mosul and/or a hundred other Iraqi/Syrian towns and villages. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What would constitute a threat to the UK or the USA or the West short of open warfare that would constitute a threat? Does anyone in the pro-Russia pro-Trump side of the discussion have any thoughts on this?
I don't think people here are pro Russia pro Trump, the are just pro truth and anti bullshit
Do you have a response then?
They just gave you a response didn't they?"There is a sentence with a question mark at the top of the post. Did the response answer the question? Why just argue for the sake of it? Enlighten me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Here's a clue. According to verified reports between December 31 2016 and 6 January 2017 there have been 56 Koran-inspired terror attacks worldwide which have killed 329 people, injured 568 and have included ten suicide blasts. These are the ones which have been reported and doesn't include the bloodbath currently going on in Mosul and/or a hundred other Iraqi/Syrian towns and villages. " Islamic terrorism is a direct threat to the West? Is it a direct threat if it happening in Syria? Should we be taking action then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Islamic terrorism is a direct threat to the West? Is it a direct threat if it happening in Syria? Should we be taking action then?" Yes, Yes, And Yes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I was wondering if the latest trump rumour should go here... in the lounge... or in swingers chat The man is going to end up being impeached _abio what have I told you about watching too much CNN
No but seriously you really believe that russia are blackmaiking trump with a video of him having golden showers with prostitutes?
A story that originated on buzzfeed with no evidence what so ever and picked up by the liberal media.
this is the fake news and shitty journalism that needs to be stopped.
what desperation will the democrats or liberals come up with next to try stop the augeration on the 20th."that golden shower story is just the tip of the iceberg... and i know that came from 4chan.... but it has highlighted 2 other different stories that have come out in the last 24 hrs... 1) the FBI are now saying that the russians also hacked some people in the RNC... but funny enough the info that was gained was not leaked to wikileaks...... 2) the fbi and the compromising info story that is being blastered around this morning was actually information originally gathered by MI6..... and it was passed on to various backchannels and ended up with some american senators (john mccain and lindsay graham) who passed it to the FBI it was briefed to both trump and obma in the national security report a few days ago as to the extent of what was gathered (not just 2 pages... but everything that has not been released) thats where both CNN and the guardian got the exclusive splashes from.... and the MI6 sources are believe to be extremely credible... so i know you like the bash the US secret services..... are you going to be big and brave enough the bash the UK secret services as well???? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I was wondering if the latest trump rumour should go here... in the lounge... or in swingers chat The man is going to end up being impeached _abio what have I told you about watching too much CNN
No but seriously you really believe that russia are blackmaiking trump with a video of him having golden showers with prostitutes?
A story that originated on buzzfeed with no evidence what so ever and picked up by the liberal media.
this is the fake news and shitty journalism that needs to be stopped.
what desperation will the democrats or liberals come up with next to try stop the augeration on the 20th.
that golden shower story is just the tip of the iceberg... and i know that came from 4chan.... but it has highlighted 2 other different stories that have come out in the last 24 hrs...
1) the FBI are now saying that the russians also hacked some people in the RNC... but funny enough the info that was gained was not leaked to wikileaks......
2) the fbi and the compromising info story that is being blastered around this morning was actually information originally gathered by MI6..... and it was passed on to various backchannels and ended up with some american senators (john mccain and lindsay graham) who passed it to the FBI
it was briefed to both trump and obma in the national security report a few days ago as to the extent of what was gathered (not just 2 pages... but everything that has not been released)
thats where both CNN and the guardian got the exclusive splashes from.... and the MI6 sources are believe to be extremely credible...
so i know you like the bash the US secret services..... are you going to be big and brave enough the bash the UK secret services as well????
"mi6, fbi, cia, kgb etc etc etc etc they are all spying, hacking each other. What ever you think russia/putin are doing or trying to do...I can qaurentee that the wests governments and secret services have plotted much worse. and I hate to be a conspiracy theorist here but as somone who doesn't believe in the official 9/11 report as its the worst peice of fiction ever and that the west knew exactly what was going to happen that day. that tells you everything you need to know about what I think of secret service agencys and goverments. lets not go into 9/11 tgough as its been done to death on here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"mi6, fbi, cia, kgb etc etc etc etc they are all spying, hacking each other. " Really? So the FBI (the US Federal police) are not a law enforcement agency, but are a foreign intelligence agency, and the KGB (which ceased to exist with the fall of the Soviet Union) are still in the spying game. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"mi6, fbi, cia, kgb etc etc etc etc they are all spying, hacking each other. Really? So the FBI (the US Federal police) are not a law enforcement agency, but are a foreign intelligence agency, and the KGB (which ceased to exist with the fall of the Soviet Union) are still in the spying game. "you knew what I meant, basically countrys are spying and hacking each other and have been for many years. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I was wondering if the latest trump rumour should go here... in the lounge... or in swingers chat The man is going to end up being impeached _abio what have I told you about watching too much CNN
No but seriously you really believe that russia are blackmaiking trump with a video of him having golden showers with prostitutes?
A story that originated on buzzfeed with no evidence what so ever and picked up by the liberal media.
this is the fake news and shitty journalism that needs to be stopped.
what desperation will the democrats or liberals come up with next to try stop the augeration on the 20th.
that golden shower story is just the tip of the iceberg... and i know that came from 4chan.... but it has highlighted 2 other different stories that have come out in the last 24 hrs...
1) the FBI are now saying that the russians also hacked some people in the RNC... but funny enough the info that was gained was not leaked to wikileaks......
2) the fbi and the compromising info story that is being blastered around this morning was actually information originally gathered by MI6..... and it was passed on to various backchannels and ended up with some american senators (john mccain and lindsay graham) who passed it to the FBI
it was briefed to both trump and obma in the national security report a few days ago as to the extent of what was gathered (not just 2 pages... but everything that has not been released)
thats where both CNN and the guardian got the exclusive splashes from.... and the MI6 sources are believe to be extremely credible...
so i know you like the bash the US secret services..... are you going to be big and brave enough the bash the UK secret services as well????
"MI6 were equally at fault with the CIA on Saddam Hussains weapons of mass destruction. Both deceived the public and both turned out to be wrong about the claims they made of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Maybe the CIA and MI6 should learn the lessons from the story of the boy who cried wolf, if you tell enough lies then no one believes you when you finally do tell them truth. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"mi6, fbi, cia, kgb etc etc etc etc they are all spying, hacking each other. Really? So the FBI (the US Federal police) are not a law enforcement agency, but are a foreign intelligence agency, and the KGB (which ceased to exist with the fall of the Soviet Union) are still in the spying game.
you knew what I meant, basically countrys are spying and hacking each other and have been for many years.
"So you DO believe then that the Russian FSB and GRU hacked both the Republicans and democrats? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" MI6 were equally at fault with the CIA on Saddam Hussains weapons of mass destruction. Both deceived the public and both turned out to be wrong about the claims they made of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Maybe the CIA and MI6 should learn the lessons from the story of the boy who cried wolf, if you tell enough lies then no one believes you when you finally do tell them truth. " So it was MI6 that sexed up the documents, and Blair had nothing to do with it, right? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" MI6 were equally at fault with the CIA on Saddam Hussains weapons of mass destruction. Both deceived the public and both turned out to be wrong about the claims they made of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Maybe the CIA and MI6 should learn the lessons from the story of the boy who cried wolf, if you tell enough lies then no one believes you when you finally do tell them truth. So it was MI6 that sexed up the documents, and Blair had nothing to do with it, right? " what? They can't do it together? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" MI6 were equally at fault with the CIA on Saddam Hussains weapons of mass destruction. Both deceived the public and both turned out to be wrong about the claims they made of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Maybe the CIA and MI6 should learn the lessons from the story of the boy who cried wolf, if you tell enough lies then no one believes you when you finally do tell them truth. So it was MI6 that sexed up the documents, and Blair had nothing to do with it, right? what? They can't do it together?" Well if MI6 had already sexed it up, why would Blair have had to sex it up? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" MI6 were equally at fault with the CIA on Saddam Hussains weapons of mass destruction. Both deceived the public and both turned out to be wrong about the claims they made of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Maybe the CIA and MI6 should learn the lessons from the story of the boy who cried wolf, if you tell enough lies then no one believes you when you finally do tell them truth. So it was MI6 that sexed up the documents, and Blair had nothing to do with it, right? what? They can't do it together? Well if MI6 had already sexed it up, why would Blair have had to sex it up? " More sex the better | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually,MI6 didn't say there were any WMDs; they said that there was a possibility, but that there was no clear evidence either way. " . Same old bullshit. Why didn't they ask what Hans blixt who was the official UN weapons inspector said. The Iraqis complied completely with UN mandates after gulf war 1. They had no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons or systems in place to acquire or use them. . . Even if he was wrong and we genuinely thought there's a chance a small one he did. Where was the first place we secured in the onset of war?. These suspected sites.... No we secured the oil fields! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" mi6, fbi, cia, kgb etc etc etc etc they are all spying, hacking each other. What ever you think russia/putin are doing or trying to do...I can qaurentee that the wests governments and secret services have plotted much worse. and I hate to be a conspiracy theorist here but as somone who doesn't believe in the official 9/11 report as its the worst peice of fiction ever and that the west knew exactly what was going to happen that day. that tells you everything you need to know about what I think of secret service agencys and goverments. lets not go into 9/11 tgough as its been done to death on here." So is your position that as it would be hypocritical we should not expose, interdict or counterattack any foreign influence or espionage with respect to our own or our allies' interests? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" mi6, fbi, cia, kgb etc etc etc etc they are all spying, hacking each other. What ever you think russia/putin are doing or trying to do...I can qaurentee that the wests governments and secret services have plotted much worse. and I hate to be a conspiracy theorist here but as somone who doesn't believe in the official 9/11 report as its the worst peice of fiction ever and that the west knew exactly what was going to happen that day. that tells you everything you need to know about what I think of secret service agencys and goverments. lets not go into 9/11 tgough as its been done to death on here. So is your position that as it would be hypocritical we should not expose, interdict or counterattack any foreign influence or espionage with respect to our own or our allies' interests?" my position is simply this.... trump wants better relations with russia, a relationship that has been deteriorating and is fast snowballing downwards towards potential conflict whilst obama is in power and hillary if she had got in. all I know is any conflict between the west and russia could result in millions if not billions of deaths. now russia and putin want a better relationship, trump wants a better relationship. To me thats fucking music to my ears. so lets wipe the slate clean and focus on this "better relationship" when trumps in power instead of everyone from government to tje media trying to fucking jeopardise it before trumps evrn given a chance. the US wanting a better relationship eith russia is a good thing...NOT a bad thing for the rest of the world. that is my position. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't mind exposing Russia's political intervention at all, I hope they do a really good job and expose everything.... But let's not just stop at Russia hey!. We talk about politican intervention... What do you think lobbying is?... Let's expose Hillary's corruption, Tony Blair's, Osborne, Thatcher, Reagan, bill Clinton... Bush, hey we all forgot about the bushmaster... These people are upto their fucking neck in corruption, all the Russians have done upto now is expose our side of it, if mi6 and the CIA wanna hack Russia and expose theirs, I'm all up for that as well!. But let's not turn the narrative into Russian aggression and expansion.... It's bollocks. If anybody wants to run me through the actual military risk they pose, weapons ,troops, aircraft, ships, missiles and technology... Go ahead, that's a different question!. However all this bullshit about Russian Geo political movement and funding this and that is just nonsense.... All they've actually exposed is the fucking truth, when did the truth become so subversive? I must have missed that lesson at school." Why do you believe that it's all true? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't mind exposing Russia's political intervention at all, I hope they do a really good job and expose everything.... But let's not just stop at Russia hey!. We talk about politican intervention... What do you think lobbying is?... Let's expose Hillary's corruption, Tony Blair's, Osborne, Thatcher, Reagan, bill Clinton... Bush, hey we all forgot about the bushmaster... These people are upto their fucking neck in corruption, all the Russians have done upto now is expose our side of it, if mi6 and the CIA wanna hack Russia and expose theirs, I'm all up for that as well!. But let's not turn the narrative into Russian aggression and expansion.... It's bollocks. If anybody wants to run me through the actual military risk they pose, weapons ,troops, aircraft, ships, missiles and technology... Go ahead, that's a different question!. However all this bullshit about Russian Geo political movement and funding this and that is just nonsense.... All they've actually exposed is the fucking truth, when did the truth become so subversive? I must have missed that lesson at school. Why do you believe that it's all true? ". Lies and smears are easily dealt with by transparency and honesty.. If we actually had a credible unbiased media we might not have needed the Russians expose?. The DNC "fix" on sanders was helped along by the mainstream media. Shutting down Caucasus because of violence and chair throwing that was widely reported turned out to be bollocks, voter suppression and cross checking cancelled out way more votes than any Russian leaks, nobodys mentioning it, manipulation of state voting to preference Clinton... Tax returns and hidden foundations, speech's to bankers... There's whole swathes of dishonesty in western politicans that's just smoothed along by mainstream media. . I don't blame people for being angry for trump's election, he's a fucking idiot and the rush is to blame somebody for it!. The blame for ukip, brexit, trump the Tories, the Swedish democrats, the front national, the AFD... Surely it can't be the failure of the politicans that we've had... No it has to be Russia. 
.
Where I want to start from is rebuilding an honest transparent government for the people by the people and of the people... When we get that, hacking politicans will be pointless because decisions made for us by us and of us are very hard to subverse | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't mind exposing Russia's political intervention at all, I hope they do a really good job and expose everything.... But let's not just stop at Russia hey!. We talk about politican intervention... What do you think lobbying is?... Let's expose Hillary's corruption, Tony Blair's, Osborne, Thatcher, Reagan, bill Clinton... Bush, hey we all forgot about the bushmaster... These people are upto their fucking neck in corruption, all the Russians have done upto now is expose our side of it, if mi6 and the CIA wanna hack Russia and expose theirs, I'm all up for that as well!. But let's not turn the narrative into Russian aggression and expansion.... It's bollocks. If anybody wants to run me through the actual military risk they pose, weapons ,troops, aircraft, ships, missiles and technology... Go ahead, that's a different question!. However all this bullshit about Russian Geo political movement and funding this and that is just nonsense.... All they've actually exposed is the fucking truth, when did the truth become so subversive? I must have missed that lesson at school. Why do you believe that it's all true? .
Lies and smears are easily dealt with by transparency and honesty..
If we actually had a credible unbiased media we might not have needed the Russians expose?.
The DNC "fix" on sanders was helped along by the mainstream media.
Shutting down Caucasus because of violence and chair throwing that was widely reported turned out to be bollocks, voter suppression and cross checking cancelled out way more votes than any Russian leaks, nobodys mentioning it, manipulation of state voting to preference Clinton... Tax returns and hidden foundations, speech's to bankers... There's whole swathes of dishonesty in western politicans that's just smoothed along by mainstream media.
.
I don't blame people for being angry for trump's election, he's a fucking idiot and the rush is to blame somebody for it!.
The blame for ukip, brexit, trump the Tories, the Swedish democrats, the front national, the AFD... Surely it can't be the failure of the politicans that we've had... No it has to be Russia.
.
Where I want to start from is rebuilding an honest transparent government for the people by the people and of the people... When we get that, hacking politicans will be pointless because decisions made for us by us and of us are very hard to subverse "...good comment. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" my position is simply this.... trump wants better relations with russia, a relationship that has been deteriorating and is fast snowballing downwards towards potential conflict whilst obama is in power and hillary if she had got in. all I know is any conflict between the west and russia could result in millions if not billions of deaths. now russia and putin want a better relationship, trump wants a better relationship. To me thats fucking music to my ears. so lets wipe the slate clean and focus on this "better relationship" when trumps in power instead of everyone from government to tje media trying to fucking jeopardise it before trumps evrn given a chance. the US wanting a better relationship eith russia is a good thing...NOT a bad thing for the rest of the world. that is my position. " There is nothing wrong with a less aggressive stance with Russia, but not on Russia's terms and not if this signals the way to behave for other countries. Essentially, aggressive behaviour has led to Russia achieving its goals and the US is going to reward them. At the same time, China is being made the new enemy. Of course, Trump has no financial interests in China... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" But let's not turn the narrative into Russian aggression and expansion.... It's bollocks. If anybody wants to run me through the actual military risk they pose, weapons ,troops, aircraft, ships, missiles and technology... Go ahead, that's a different question!. However all this bullshit about Russian Geo political movement and funding this and that is just nonsense.... All they've actually exposed is the fucking truth, when did the truth become so subversive? I must have missed that lesson at school." This is what people just don't get; weapons and armies are irrelevant; power through resources and alternative stack is the key to all conflict. Even in " proper war " with bullets and bombs, the first things you do are disrupt the other side's comand structure, their communications, and then their logistics, and their morale and cohesion. Only then do you use weapons. Geopolitics is very real. And yes, the US has done it ( with the UK) see for instance the history of Iran from 1918 to 1960, including the 1853 Operation Ajax. The British Empire was built and operated on Geo politics, not by blokes in red jackets and muskets; they were there as an advert; Germany' a annexation of the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia and Poland was preceded by geopolitical means; the tanks and troops drove into lands that had already been effectively defeated. The invasion if Belgium, Netherlands and France by Germany was because of the failure of geopolitics to make those countries succumb voluntarily, do military action had to be taken. If I was Russian, I would be dancing in the streets because of the success of my government. Because I am a Western European, ( and liberal) I fear the influence of Russia and " Eurasia" on my part of the world. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" my position is simply this.... trump wants better relations with russia, a relationship that has been deteriorating and is fast snowballing downwards towards potential conflict whilst obama is in power and hillary if she had got in. all I know is any conflict between the west and russia could result in millions if not billions of deaths. now russia and putin want a better relationship, trump wants a better relationship. To me thats fucking music to my ears. so lets wipe the slate clean and focus on this "better relationship" when trumps in power instead of everyone from government to tje media trying to fucking jeopardise it before trumps evrn given a chance. the US wanting a better relationship eith russia is a good thing...NOT a bad thing for the rest of the world. that is my position. There is nothing wrong with a less aggressive stance with Russia, but not on Russia's terms and not if this signals the way to behave for other countries. Essentially, aggressive behaviour has led to Russia achieving its goals and the US is going to reward them. At the same time, China is being made the new enemy. Of course, Trump has no financial interests in China..." Take it you missed the live press conference Trump did on the news in the last hour or so then? Trump has no financial interests in Russia and said so in the press conference. He also had a member of his legal team make a statement that all of his businesses will be signed over to his sons to run before his term as President starts. He is doing this so no one can accuse him of having any conflicts of interest and he can devote 100% of his time to being President without any of his businesses to worry about. The legal representative said all of Trumps businesses will be barred from making any over seas deals during his term as President. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" But let's not turn the narrative into Russian aggression and expansion.... It's bollocks. If anybody wants to run me through the actual military risk they pose, weapons ,troops, aircraft, ships, missiles and technology... Go ahead, that's a different question!. However all this bullshit about Russian Geo political movement and funding this and that is just nonsense.... All they've actually exposed is the fucking truth, when did the truth become so subversive? I must have missed that lesson at school. This is what people just don't get; weapons and armies are irrelevant; power through resources and alternative stack is the key to all conflict. Even in " proper war " with bullets and bombs, the first things you do are disrupt the other side's comand structure, their communications, and then their logistics, and their morale and cohesion. Only then do you use weapons. Geopolitics is very real. And yes, the US has done it ( with the UK) see for instance the history of Iran from 1918 to 1960, including the 1853 Operation Ajax. The British Empire was built and operated on Geo politics, not by blokes in red jackets and muskets; they were there as an advert; Germany' a annexation of the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia and Poland was preceded by geopolitical means; the tanks and troops drove into lands that had already been effectively defeated. The invasion if Belgium, Netherlands and France by Germany was because of the failure of geopolitics to make those countries succumb voluntarily, do military action had to be taken. If I was Russian, I would be dancing in the streets because of the success of my government. Because I am a Western European, ( and liberal) I fear the influence of Russia and " Eurasia" on my part of the world. " this.. Russia has played a bit of a blinder, even if there is no video or audio of Trump up to whatever they have planted enough of a seed that many will believe it plausible given his history.. puppets and puppet masters.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Take it you missed the live press conference Trump did on the news in the last hour or so then? Trump has no financial interests in Russia and said so in the press conference. He also had a member of his legal team make a statement that all of his businesses will be signed over to his sons to run before his term as President starts. He is doing this so no one can accuse him of having any conflicts of interest and he can devote 100% of his time to being President without any of his businesses to worry about. The legal representative said all of Trumps businesses will be barred from making any over seas deals during his term as President. " His sons are running his business, therefore he will not be influenced. Read that back. Really? Every other world leader who wants to maintain proberty assigns their business interests to a blind trust so he will not know what they are investing in. Of course, if you signed your business interests to a trust they would know what you're business interests are. He still hasn't released his taxes. I think he is a dodgy businessman and he has done nothing to dissuade me. You're happy though. You believe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" But let's not turn the narrative into Russian aggression and expansion.... It's bollocks. If anybody wants to run me through the actual military risk they pose, weapons ,troops, aircraft, ships, missiles and technology... Go ahead, that's a different question!. However all this bullshit about Russian Geo political movement and funding this and that is just nonsense.... All they've actually exposed is the fucking truth, when did the truth become so subversive? I must have missed that lesson at school. This is what people just don't get; weapons and armies are irrelevant; power through resources and alternative stack is the key to all conflict. Even in " proper war " with bullets and bombs, the first things you do are disrupt the other side's comand structure, their communications, and then their logistics, and their morale and cohesion. Only then do you use weapons. Geopolitics is very real. And yes, the US has done it ( with the UK) see for instance the history of Iran from 1918 to 1960, including the 1853 Operation Ajax. The British Empire was built and operated on Geo politics, not by blokes in red jackets and muskets; they were there as an advert; Germany' a annexation of the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia and Poland was preceded by geopolitical means; the tanks and troops drove into lands that had already been effectively defeated. The invasion if Belgium, Netherlands and France by Germany was because of the failure of geopolitics to make those countries succumb voluntarily, do military action had to be taken. If I was Russian, I would be dancing in the streets because of the success of my government. Because I am a Western European, ( and liberal) I fear the influence of Russia and " Eurasia" on my part of the world. " . We had 200 years worth of oil and gas in the UKs resources found using British tax payers money in the late 60 early 70s... should we have decided, hey this stuffs pretty fucking useful, let's keep hold of it and use it internally, let's use it to make the UK better for us?... You know we're digging it up for 3 dollars and selling it for 10 dollars, instead let's undercut world markets, sell it 40% cheaper internally (still making profit) and use that unbelievable natural gift to advance the UK's infrastructure to a point where we don't need to export jobs to compete, coz you know that's just around the corner like?... No no no, let's sell it to private companies because they do a better job at extraction and the profits will go back to the people anyhow in dividends and such | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Take it you missed the live press conference Trump did on the news in the last hour or so then? Trump has no financial interests in Russia and said so in the press conference. He also had a member of his legal team make a statement that all of his businesses will be signed over to his sons to run before his term as President starts. He is doing this so no one can accuse him of having any conflicts of interest and he can devote 100% of his time to being President without any of his businesses to worry about. The legal representative said all of Trumps businesses will be barred from making any over seas deals during his term as President. His sons are running his business, therefore he will not be influenced. Read that back. Really? Every other world leader who wants to maintain proberty assigns their business interests to a blind trust so he will not know what they are investing in. Of course, if you signed your business interests to a trust they would know what you're business interests are. He still hasn't released his taxes. I think he is a dodgy businessman and he has done nothing to dissuade me. You're happy though. You believe. " He could have just kept his businesses in his own name and the legal representative said he was well within the law and his rights to do that as the American President. He chose to sign them over to his sons though. It's upto individuals to interpret if he has a conflict of interest or not, I've got my view and you've clearly made your mind up about yours. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
