PDA

View Full Version : Russian jets buzz U.S. destroyer in the Baltic Sea.



Angela
14-04-16, 23:57
This has happened more than 30 times in the last week.

See:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/russian-fighters-buzz-us-navy-destroyer-close-range/story?id=38364404

It's important to note the ship was in international waters, which apparently didn't matter to Putin.

"On Monday, the destroyer was conducting flight operations with a Polish military helicopter that was conducting landing operations on the ship, the official said.
A pair of unarmed Russian SU-24’s then “conducted a series of low passes over the ships, came within 1,000 yards and within 100 feet of altitude," the official said, noting that the aircraft eventually conducted twenty passes over the destroyer."

This was followed by the predictable calls for the President to do something. I personally like the blase response of the U.S. Navy Commander: You don't kill somebody for being annoying. :)

How childish. Putin had better get all the game playing out of his system. Unless I'm very mistaken whoever next becomes the U.S. President will have more you know what than Obama, even Hillary. Well, unless we get Bernie. He'll figure Putin must be cranky because he's sick and send over chicken soup. :)

Silesian
15-04-16, 01:11
If I recall USS Liberty was in international waters also. I guess just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

bicicleur
15-04-16, 09:00
when I was doing my military service, this wouldn't happen
now that I left, the Russians have become much more bold ...

Fire Haired14
15-04-16, 09:29
when I was doing my military service, this wouldn't happen
now that I left, the Russians have become much more bold ...

Councidence? Looks like they're more bold because that Belgian stud bicicleur left the military. We need your help as soon possible.

Yetos
15-04-16, 14:52
when I was doing my military service, this wouldn't happen
now that I left, the Russians have become much more bold ...

a man who had served military obligations for me has honor,
+1 from me

bicicleur
15-04-16, 15:58
a man who had served military obligations for me has honor,
+1 from me

maybe it should be that way,
but it was 10 months of utter boredom
I've never seen such unorganised and unmotivated organisation
it made me lose all respect and pride I might have had for my own country

I hope they are better organised today

ElHorsto
15-04-16, 20:16
What was the destroyer's mission? Flight operations. But maybe also a little bit spying by the way. We don't know.
Hard to believe this was just for fun without an agenda. Military activities have multiplied in eastern europe since 2014, and this is just the tip of the ice berg.

DejaVu
15-04-16, 21:23
These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In Americahttp://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4fd9ee1e6bb3f7af5700000a/media-infographic.jpg

DejaVu
15-04-16, 21:26
Russian jets fly DANGEROUSLY CLOSE to a US warship, which is dangerously close to Russia.
https://www.facebook.com/inthenowrt/videos/607951272688579/

Angela
15-04-16, 21:35
Oh for goodness' sakes. Last time I checked "international waters" means "international waters".

Those are the rules. Keep them.

This was a provocation and an extremely childish one at that; that destroyer could have bombed them all to kingdom come, but instead the U.S. Navy commander treated it with the respect it deserved, which is to say-none.

The one who should be ashamed is Putin, who played with the lives of young Russian men who could have crashed doing those kinds of maneuvers, and all for the sake of sticking out his tongue at America. He and Trump would make a good pair; loud mouthed clowns who unfortunately can turn out to be very dangerous for the world.

If your country isn't spying on other countries I suggest you vote them out, unless, of course, you live in Russia, where you don't really have any say in anything; you might as well be living under the Czars.

Angela
15-04-16, 21:46
These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America

http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4fd9ee1e6bb3f7af5700000a/media-infographic.jpg

Please....and one man controls all the media in Russia. You might just as well call all their media outlets Pravda.

It's amazing to me how some of you still buy all the old Soviet propaganda. Decades of communism, a few of robber baron capitalism high jacked by ex-KGB operatives, and Russia is still a third world autocracy, albeit one that has nuclear and biological weapons. Worked out really well, right?

Why do you think Putin wants to take over the Baltic states and the newly freed Eastern European countries now that they're finally starting to become prosperous? To rob them blind, of course, just like the Soviet Union did after the Second World War. My God, look what East Germany was like compared to West Germany, as just one example. They had to build a wall not to stop immigration, as America may have to do, but to keep everybody prisoner there who wanted to get out. People can vote with their feet, guys.

LABERIA
15-04-16, 21:57
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cf8cetgWQAAYSzC.jpg

This are dangerous games.

DejaVu
15-04-16, 22:08
Gallup International’s poll (http://www.wingia.com/en/services/about_the_end_of_year_survey/global_results/7/33/) of 68 countries for 2014 found the US as the greatest threat to peace in the world, voted three times more dangerous to world peace than the next country.

Since the United States was founded in 1776, she has been at war during 214 out of her 235 calendar years of existence.

To put this in perspective:
* Pick any year since 1776 and there is about a 91% chance that America was involved in some war during that calendar year.
* No U.S. president truly qualifies as a peacetime president. Instead, all U.S. presidents can technically be considered “war presidents.”
* The U.S. has never gone a decade without war.
* The only time the U.S. went five years without war (1935-40) was during the isolationist period of the Great Depression.

http://i1.wp.com/www.loonwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/US-war-graph.jpg?zoom=1.5&resize=426%2C386

The United States spent more on its military than the next 13 nations combined in 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/01/4A8078449E794DFB8CC33ADD00A6F1AF.gif

http://www.truth-out.org/images/images_2014_05/2014.5.13.Rasor.Chart.jpg


U.S. military spending dwarfs all other countries:


“The United States is responsible for 41% of the world’s total military spending. The next largest in spending are China, accounting for 8.2%; Russia, 4.1%; and the United Kingdom and France, both 3.6%. . . . If all military . . . costs are included, annual [US] spending amounts to $1 trillion . . . . According to the DOD fiscal year 2012 base structure report, ‘The DOD manages global property of more than 555,000 facilities at more than 5,000 sites, covering more than 28 million acres.’ The United States maintains 700 to 1000 military bases or sites in more than 100 countries. . . .”



The U.S. launched 201 out of the 248 armed conflicts since the end of WWII:


“Since the end of World War II, there have been 248 armed conflicts in 153 locations around the world. The United States launched 201 overseas military operations between the end of World War II and 2001, and since then, others, including Afghanistan and Iraq ….”




Around 90% of all deaths in war are civilians:


“The proportion of civilian deaths and the methods for classifying deaths as civilian are debated, but civilian war deaths constitute 85% to 90% of casualties caused by war, with about 10 civilians dying for every combatant killed in battle.”



Swanson notes: “A top defense of war is that it must be used to prevent something worse, called genocide. Not only does militarism generate genocide rather than preventing it, but the distinction between war and genocide is a very fine one at best.”



The U.S. Is Still No.1 at Selling Arms to the World
http://time.com/4161613/us-arms-sales-exports-weapons/

The United States remains (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/26/world/middleeast/us-foreign-arms-deals-increased-nearly-10-billion-in-2014.html?_r=1&mtrref=undefined&gwh=C3F30D4EF302B6F0CA70BA661362A414&gwt=pay) the world’s preeminent exporter of arms, with more than 50 percent of the global weaponry market controlled by the United States as of 2014.
Arms sales by the U.S. jumped 35 percent, or nearly $10 billion, to $36.2 billion in 2014, according to the Congressional Research Service report, which analyzed the global arms market between 2007 and 2014.
Trailing the U.S. in weapons receipts is Russia, with $10.2 billion in sales in 2014, followed by Sweden with $5.5 billion, France with $4.4 billion and China with $2.2 billion, reports The New York Times.
The top weapons buyer in 2014 was South Korea, a key American ally, which has been squaring off with an increasingly belligerent North Korea in recent years.
Iraq was the second biggest weapons buyer, as the country seeks to build up its military capacity following the withdrawal of the bulk of American ground troops there. Brazil was the third biggest buyer, primarily of Swedish aircraft.

bicicleur
15-04-16, 23:25
I wish Europe would spend a little more for its own defence
and Merkel would stop licking Erdogans' arse
I think that is a more dangerous game going on

ElHorsto
15-04-16, 23:27
If your country isn't spying on other countries

The speculation was not about civil spying but military spying using radars. The russian military base was only 70 km away.

Angela
16-04-16, 00:23
@Deja-Vu
Honestly, a European is going to talk about other countries being militaristic? How many died in World War I, started by Germany, which the U.S. entered only in the latter stages to save the bacon of the Allies? That was a rhetorical question. The answer is 18 million.

How many people died in World War II, also started by Germany? Answer: 60 million. In neither case did the U.S. want to get involved.

How many of its own people did Russia kill? Stalin alone is responsible for tens of millions.
http://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people-did-joseph-stalin-kill-1111789

Shall we go on? How about your own Balkans where people who are virtually indistinguishable from one another genetically tried to ethnically cleanse each other and thought rape as a weapon of war was a good idea?

You want to go back further yet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Europe

America isn't even in the running for war mongering.

As for America's military, it's the only reason Western Europeans were never serfs of the Soviets like the poor Eastern Europeans. It's the only reason that South Koreans had the freedom to develop a system where they are educated, prosperous, and modern instead of starving, ill, automatons like the North Koreans. It's the only reason Japan was able to develop its modern economy and maintain its independence.

That military is now on its knees because of our current President, so will Europe be happy if the next one is just as feckless, and there's no one to prevent Russian tanks from rolling through Europe again? If anyone thinks that the military forces of the European countries can stop them, think again. Bicicleur has pointed out what is the case for all of them, with the exception of Britain. It would be just what an ungrateful Europe deserves.

As for opinion polls, I'm totally uninterested in "world" opinion, opinion which has been formed by decades of Marxist propaganda in schools and media and natural envy and resentment of the "big dog". After World War II Europeans thought it was a good idea to unilaterally disarm, which may be one of the most abysmally stupid opinions ever expressed. Even five year olds should know better.

@El Horsto.
You spy using the best technology and resources available, if that's even what was going on. You have a perfect right to sit in international waters and train your radar on a military base. Can you really believe that Russia doesn't do the same? Heck, they came onto the grounds of the American embassy in Moscow, which is technically American territory, and bugged the whole damn building, including the offices of the military attaches.

That's what countries do, althoughI don't see why it would be necessary, frankly. NSA satellites can pick out individual faces, so why the heck would they be dependent on a destroyer's radar?

What countries should not be doing is risking the lives of their young flight crews on dangerous stunts, stunts which could also provoke an actual military escalation if American leaders were as childish and reckless as Putin.

ElHorsto
16-04-16, 00:47
@El Horsto.
You spy using the best technology and resources available, if that's even what was going on. You have a perfect right to sit in international waters and train your radar on a military base. Can you really believe that Russia doesn't do the same? Heck, they came onto the grounds of the American embassy in Moscow, which is technically American territory, and bugged the whole damn building, including the offices of the military attaches.

That's what countries do, althoughI don't see why it would be necessary, frankly. NSA satellites can pick out individual faces, so why the heck would they be dependent on a destroyer's radar?

What countries should not be doing is risking the lives of their young flight crews on dangerous stunts, stunts which could also provoke an actual military escalation if American leaders were as childish and reckless as Putin.

Would you please consider only what I actually wrote and not what I didn't. Thank you!

Angela
16-04-16, 01:09
Would you please consider only what I actually wrote and not what I didn't. Thank you!

My apologies if I misunderstood your post. There are disadvantages to being quite so cryptic and laconic.

Silesian
16-04-16, 01:24
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSN-Kku_rFE

Angela
16-04-16, 01:58
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSN-Kku_rFE

I don't see the relevance to this thread, but the CIA definitely thought he had them, the Russians thought he had them, the Brits thought he had them, the Israelis thought he had them. Every intelligence agency of which I'm aware thought he had them. Why is that conveniently forgotten? It's not the first time there's been a massive intelligence failure, unfortunately.

The data recovered since then indicates that Hussein deliberately tried to give the impression that he had them in order to intimidate his neighbors in the Middle East. That was a fatal miscalculation, which should give pause to other countries inclined to bluffing.

Had Iraqis been less corrupt, and more capable of rising above petty tribal and religious differences, they could have, with the help of the U.S., created a model of what the Middle East could become. They didn't deserve the blood and treasure expended. They weren't capable of it, but then I wonder whether some European countries are capable of maintaining a liberal democratic form of government. For what percentage of its history has Russia been an autocracy of one form or another? Virtually all of it.

ElHorsto
16-04-16, 02:02
My apologies if I misunderstood your post. There are disadvantages to being quite so cryptic and laconic.

Okay, I was not cryptic nor laconic, just differentiated and careful, because it is a sensitive topic. Only so much: Let's be careful with bold conclusions. Cold war has already started. The press has a key role during war, in the West, in Russia and everywhere else, so let's be more skeptic. And yes, the russian flights were very dangerous, yet unarmed. Maybe they had a reason, maybe not. Considering what military activities already happened since 2014*, this is a rather minor event. Probably there will be many more events like this in the future, and each side will report or be silent differently. Hope my point is more clear now.

(*) "...The landing craft, especially the mega hovercraft of the Americans, were monstrous, on a scale that would have awed D-day veterans." [Nato shows its teeth to Russia with elaborate Baltic training exercise]

(http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/17/nato-russia-elaborate-training-exercise-dangerous-signal)

LeBrok
16-04-16, 02:33
What was the destroyer's mission? Flight operations. But maybe also a little bit spying by the way. We don't know.
Hard to believe this was just for fun without an agenda. Military activities have multiplied in eastern europe since 2014, and this is just the tip of the ice berg.
Nobody is accusing Russia of flying over the same international waters, right?
Tell us is this looks right to you, on any level:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cf8cetgWQAAYSzC.jpg

LeBrok
16-04-16, 02:39
@Deja-Vu
Honestly, a European is going to talk about other countries being militaristic? How many died in World War I, started by Germany, which the U.S. entered only in the latter stages to save the bacon of the Allies? That was a rhetorical question. The answer is 18 million.
Ah, our top conspirator theorist. I wouldn't even try to convince him that earth goes around the sun, or beg him to post something relevant to the thread. :)

Auld Reekie
16-04-16, 03:44
Gallup International’s poll (http://www.wingia.com/en/services/about_the_end_of_year_survey/global_results/7/33/) of 68 countries for 2014 found the US as the greatest threat to peace in the world, voted three times more dangerous to world peace than the next country.

Since the United States was founded in 1776, she has been at war during 214 out of her 235 calendar years of existence.

To put this in perspective:
* Pick any year since 1776 and there is about a 91% chance that America was involved in some war during that calendar year.
* No U.S. president truly qualifies as a peacetime president. Instead, all U.S. presidents can technically be considered “war presidents.”
* The U.S. has never gone a decade without war.
* The only time the U.S. went five years without war (1935-40) was during the isolationist period of the Great Depression.

http://i1.wp.com/www.loonwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/US-war-graph.jpg?zoom=1.5&resize=426%2C386

The United States spent more on its military than the next 13 nations combined in 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/01/4A8078449E794DFB8CC33ADD00A6F1AF.gif

http://www.truth-out.org/images/images_2014_05/2014.5.13.Rasor.Chart.jpg


U.S. military spending dwarfs all other countries:


“The United States is responsible for 41% of the world’s total military spending. The next largest in spending are China, accounting for 8.2%; Russia, 4.1%; and the United Kingdom and France, both 3.6%. . . . If all military . . . costs are included, annual [US] spending amounts to $1 trillion . . . . According to the DOD fiscal year 2012 base structure report, ‘The DOD manages global property of more than 555,000 facilities at more than 5,000 sites, covering more than 28 million acres.’ The United States maintains 700 to 1000 military bases or sites in more than 100 countries. . . .”



The U.S. launched 201 out of the 248 armed conflicts since the end of WWII:


“Since the end of World War II, there have been 248 armed conflicts in 153 locations around the world. The United States launched 201 overseas military operations between the end of World War II and 2001, and since then, others, including Afghanistan and Iraq ….”




Around 90% of all deaths in war are civilians:


“The proportion of civilian deaths and the methods for classifying deaths as civilian are debated, but civilian war deaths constitute 85% to 90% of casualties caused by war, with about 10 civilians dying for every combatant killed in battle.”



Swanson notes: “A top defense of war is that it must be used to prevent something worse, called genocide. Not only does militarism generate genocide rather than preventing it, but the distinction between war and genocide is a very fine one at best.”



The U.S. Is Still No.1 at Selling Arms to the World
http://time.com/4161613/us-arms-sales-exports-weapons/

The United States remains (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/26/world/middleeast/us-foreign-arms-deals-increased-nearly-10-billion-in-2014.html?_r=1&mtrref=undefined&gwh=C3F30D4EF302B6F0CA70BA661362A414&gwt=pay) the world’s preeminent exporter of arms, with more than 50 percent of the global weaponry market controlled by the United States as of 2014.
Arms sales by the U.S. jumped 35 percent, or nearly $10 billion, to $36.2 billion in 2014, according to the Congressional Research Service report, which analyzed the global arms market between 2007 and 2014.
Trailing the U.S. in weapons receipts is Russia, with $10.2 billion in sales in 2014, followed by Sweden with $5.5 billion, France with $4.4 billion and China with $2.2 billion, reports The New York Times.
The top weapons buyer in 2014 was South Korea, a key American ally, which has been squaring off with an increasingly belligerent North Korea in recent years.
Iraq was the second biggest weapons buyer, as the country seeks to build up its military capacity following the withdrawal of the bulk of American ground troops there. Brazil was the third biggest buyer, primarily of Swedish aircraft.



Not that I totally disagree with what you say but I can sense a bit of biased hatred when I read it. Wasn't Sweden a bit of a bogeyman and bully during the 17th and early 18th centuries? The invasion of Poland and Lithuania caused the rape, murder and destruction of their people and historical treasures, which by the way, Sweden still has possession of historical artifacts that it stole from Poland that Poland have asked to be returned. These things intrigue me immensely because I am of part Swedish ancestry. Again, I don't necessarily disagree, I just read a lot of history. Nobody is pure or blameless.

Fire Haired14
16-04-16, 04:04
As for America's military, it's the only reason Western Europeans were never serfs of the Soviets like the poor Eastern Europeans. It's the only reason that South Koreans had the freedom to develop a system where they are educated, prosperous, and modern instead of starving, ill, automatons like the North Koreans. It's the only reason Japan was able to develop its modern economy and maintain its independence.

So true. My history teacher attempts to paint post-WW2 America as an evil imperialistic power, who wrongly used Western Europe for US businesses and wrongly prevented the spread of communism. He puts the Soviet Union and communism(which is from the Soviet Union) as freedom-fighters and the true Democracy. I'm not exaggerating at all. I peacefully say exactly what you just layed out, so my classmates don't get brainwashed. The US definitly was too aggressive and imposing at times. The US basically conquered Guatemala in the 1950s, for US business interests. You have to include that and not present it as one-sided.

LeBrok
16-04-16, 04:15
Not that I totally disagree with what you say but I can sense a bit of biased hatred when I read it. Wasn't Sweden a bit of a bogeyman and bully during the 17th and early 18th centuries? The invasion of Poland and Lithuania caused the rape, murder and destruction of their people and historical treasures, which by the way, Sweden still has possession of historical artifacts that it stole from Poland that Poland have asked to be returned. These things intrigue me immensely because I am of part Swedish ancestry. Again, I don't necessarily disagree, I just read a lot of history. On his defence of not knowing Swedish history is that he is Macedonian who lives in Sweden.


Nobody is pure or blameless.It is so true and simple statement and yet most of us find hard to believe it. What is wrong with people?!!! Is our "vision" skewed to see faults and sins of others and only good deeds and superiority in ourselves?
Well, it is important to have good self esteem and confidence but it shouldn't serve as blinds over our eyes.

LeBrok
16-04-16, 04:21
So true. My history teacher attempts to paint post-WW2 America as an evil imperialistic power, who wrongly used Western Europe for US businesses and wrongly prevented the spread of communism. He puts the Soviet Union and communism(which is from the Soviet Union) as freedom-fighters and the true Democracy. I'm not exaggerating at all. I peacefully say exactly what you just layed out, so my classmates don't get brainwashed. The US definitly was too aggressive and imposing at times. The US basically conquered Guatemala in the 1950s, for US business interests. You have to include that and not present it as one-sided. Agreed, the self interest of US roughed up many nations around the globe, but honestly in a scale of empires, meaning cruelty and sucking nations dry, (if US truly belongs to this category) US is a kitten.

Angela
16-04-16, 14:58
So true. My history teacher attempts to paint post-WW2 America as an evil imperialistic power, who wrongly used Western Europe for US businesses and wrongly prevented the spread of communism. He puts the Soviet Union and communism(which is from the Soviet Union) as freedom-fighters and the true Democracy. I'm not exaggerating at all. I peacefully say exactly what you just layed out, so my classmates don't get brainwashed. The US definitly was too aggressive and imposing at times. The US basically conquered Guatemala in the 1950s, for US business interests. You have to include that and not present it as one-sided.

I don't excuse America's actions toward Latin America. However, imperialism was hardly an American invention. Look at the British, the French, the Dutch, the Russians. Germany and Italy were just ticked off because they unified late and so got into the game late. It was also not a uniquely "whites" taking advantage of the "colored" nations phenomenon. What was Japan in the 20th century? What was China for most of its history? They were imperialist nations. People either don't study history, or they have very short memories, or as LeBrok suggested, they see only the transgressions of other countries, never those of their own.

Also, if Europeans want to talk about militarism they should look at their own history before presuming to judge other countries. There's no comparison at all in terms of militarism between the history of the European powers and the history of the U.S.

As far as communism is concerned, I don't just have an academic knowledge of the subject. Half of my family was anarchist and communist, people who were partisans during the war. I honor their bravery, and their idealism, and mourn their losses, but they were deluded one and all about communism itself. Some of the older ones won't admit to this day what went on in Russia with the Kulaks, the show trials of the thirties, the gulag, the repeated famines and forced migrations. It's willful blindness.

They can't admit that they were hoodwinked, hoodwinked because they were idealists who wanted to lift up the poor of their country, but hoodwinked none the less. If you read some history of the period, the mental gymnastics that party members engaged in to support the Hitler-Stalin non aggression pact is beyond pathetic. Or read the accounts of the show trials to see how a perverse ideology can so degrade intelligent, capable people that they'll confess to bizarre lies not just because they hope for mercy, but because they've convinced themselves they must be guilty if the party has arrested them. It's truly tragic.

What's also tragic is that you're being taught this bilge in school. Not that my own children didn't have to endure some of that. I raised holy hell with the principal though, and I was far from the only one. At least we got them to present the opposing point of view as well. Americans as a whole wanted nothing to do with the war in Europe, and had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor I don't think Roosevelt could have bucked public opinion. Once the war was over what was the U.S. supposed to have done, let Russia gobble up all of Europe? That turned out so well for Poland and Czechoslovakia and Hungary and the others. Or perhaps it should never have passed the Marshall Plan and should have let Europeans sit and die among the rubble? Or, they could have stolen everything that wasn't bolted down, and even some that were, like the Russians. Would that have been better?

Instead, they poured millions into Europe. Yes, a rebuilt Europe was a market for European* goods, but Europe could and did eventually produce their own goods in the factories set up with American help so that now they are our competitors, and set updemocratic, representative governments.

The largest town in the area, where my grandfather worked all his life, and where my father also worked, LaSpezia, was totally leveled, as was the local commune where I was born and raised. People were starving, there was no fresh water, and they were suffering from typhus, TB, you name it. The American forces fed us, housed us, eventually helped us rebuild our port, the Arsenale, and on and on. Eventually we recovered, and in what’s called the postwar miracle, more than recovered, in fact came fully into the modern world in ways never possible before that time, leaving us in a far better position than we were in before the war, and it was done with a good heart, and no rancor that we could see for having fought against them for the first years of the war.

What European victor in a war ever acted like that? Certainly none that ever fought in Italy. Starting with the fall of Rome all we ever got from the other Europeans was pillage, death, and massive destruction. The Germans added wholesale theft of our agricultural and industrial production, leaving us to starve, the looting of our art treasures, the wholesale hijacking of our young men for slave labor in Germany, the transportation and annihilation of the Jews we couldn't hide, and they threw in the burning and mass killing of any village suspected of giving aid to the partisans, most of whom were women, children, and old men. America has been a far better friend to Italy than any European country.

Silesian
16-04-16, 16:10
I don't excuse America's actions toward Latin America. However, imperialism was hardly an American invention. Look at of the British, the French, the Dutch, the Russians? Germany and Italy were just ticked off because they unified late and so got into the game late.
I don't quite understand your line of thinking. Why do you compare yourself to other countries? You are surrounded by natural defense, two oceans Atlantic and Pacific, why go to foreign countries?
A couple more questions.
1]Why do you make jokes? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5YgJx8VGRA
2]Why do you turn on your people when they have no jobs and money and in of need help? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNOsIB5VMSQ
3]Are these true events? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJLwqBfrcu8
4]Why do you not invest in your cities, healthcare,quality of life; but invade foreign lands? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL_YdRxBhzI

Yetos
16-04-16, 21:30
@ Angela

I like the way you think,

plz open further your eyes,
this has nothing to do with USA people,
it is a global game,
THEY CALL IT GLOBALIZATION,

I will share 2 stories/movies, from youtube,
first is this,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGiu6e7oqzE

''well except aquadect shewers education etc etc what else Romans do to us'',
''Nice race that Romans'' 'today they hung me at normal position, not upside down'
'Judea national front? No the National front for Judea, and the Judea poppular front'
away from them, crussifiction awaits

the second is a song from Thin Lizzy
how to exterminate a culture,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqG5LKI8JGA
but a deeper analysis of that story also can provide us the same
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGW7hNcMMf4



The largest town in the area, where my grandfather worked all his life, and where my father also worked, LaSpezia, was totally leveled, as was the local commune where I was born and raised. People were starving, there was no fresh water, and they were suffering from typhus, TB, you name it. The American forces fed us, housed us, eventually helped us rebuild our port, the Arsenale, and on and on. Eventually we recovered, and in what’s called the postwar miracle, more than recovered, in fact came fully into the modern world in ways never possible before that time, leaving us in a far better position than we were in before the war, and it was done with a good heart, and no rancor that we could see for having fought against them for the first years of the war.
.

finnaly stange is n't it?
Canada, they accept and welcome immigrants but what happens to ameridians?
the above story of USA Buffallo killing, but not at 18nth century, at 2016
http://air.news.gr/cov/ab/aboriginal_b2.jpg

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/canadian-first-nation-suicide-epidemic-attawapiskat-indigenous-people

Globalisation and imperialism does not accept any different culture,
so America helped your village, and that is an honor, and Europeans maybe never did such, even Italian central goverment might not or never act such,
but America also destroyed, and continues to do, her previous cultures, when same time is accepting immigrants to work as cheap labour, or to show a good looking abroad, diplomacy affairs,


USA and Canada skyscrapers were build by Mohawk tribe indians,
but their contracts were not equal with others,
<<Their contracts offered lower than average wages to the First Nations people and limited labor union (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_union) membership>>
from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohawk_people

anyway I see no difference among British empire, France colonial times, Spanish conquistadors, Dutch India etc etc

anyway, WE ARE ALL LIVING IN AMERICA
USA pizza with chopped meat, not Italian prosuto and mozzarela
Coca Cola
HAMBURGers for Halal food or vegeterian style for India,
American NIKE from Indonesia
etc etc

<font color="#252525"><span style="font-family: sans-serif">
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr8ljRgcJNM


PS
It is an honor to remember and respect the one who trully help you, with out asking repay, cause then it is a bargain,
and is also a honor to make a good and fair burgain.

Angela
16-04-16, 22:06
Silesian;478688]I don't quite understand your line of thinking. Why do you compare yourself to other countries? You are surrounded by natural defense, two oceans Atlantic and Pacific, why go to foreign countries?

We're obviously suffering from a mutual lack of comprehension, because I don't understand how a Canadian, in particular, could ask such a question. I do understand that Europeans might get their information from leftist rags and the internet, and so I make some allowances, but a Canadian? Surely they teach a little bit of American history? We certainly learn a bit about yours. Well, I take some of that back, almost half of America itself has drunk that particular Kool-Aid. That's what comes of letting the education system be hijacked by left wing 60's radicals starting from the universities on down, and not countering the half baked ideas promoted by Hollywood.

American isolationism: foundations set during the presidencies of Washington and Adams.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DItb55O25lg&ebc=ANyPxKpnYEhPXRZ7gghs4XiamwNbBhSmXAKGcfRxKZf9Cv ITeOoSq8k1HKalOp_ly_s8a8vSBMoG

The only wars fought were with the British, first the Revolutionary War, and then the War of 1812, the latter because of the impressment of U.S. sailors and the attacks against U.S. merchant ships, and which included British troops attacking and burning down parts of Washington, D.C.

In case you think I don't acknowledge the darker aspects of American history, a type of history shared by Canada, by the way, and Australia, and New Zealand in taking over land inhabited by Native Americans:

Manifest Destiny:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DItb55O25lg&ebc=ANyPxKpnYEhPXRZ7gghs4XiamwNbBhSmXAKGcfRxKZf9Cv ITeOoSq8k1HKalOp_ly_s8a8vSBMoG

The vast majority of the land was acquired by purchase from other European powers. The wars were against the Native Americans and the Mexican-American War over the southwestern states and California. I don't think you'd find a single American who thinks the Native Americans were treated fairly.

The Monroe Doctrine: in some ways a restatement of American isolationism versus Europe and in some ways the assumption of a protectionist policy toward the other countries in the Western Hemisphere. Of course, it also protected the economic interests of the U.S.The closest analogy would be the protectionism (and exploitation) of Eastern Europe and the Balkans by the Russian Empire, made more palatable in the Russian case by claims of brotherhood of blood and language.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjtziqQ3rnM&ebc=ANyPxKoWZVrx4sSDSyJsvd650Wu4VZibmsJKvuAelMk7Su EkVqc44RcQ6Tu4htRO8v1Mqr90ZrOO

The Roosevelt Corollary: imperialism in the Western Hemisphere
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0HEMUoVrh4

On current attitudes toward isolationism versus world engagement. More Republicans (the more conservative Americans) are in favor of isolationism than Democrats:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMqCrSYQxns

As to why America fought in the first and second world wars, I won't go into detail since I assume everyone knows that the U.S. came into World War I late, and only after the American public was inflamed by reports of German atrocities, and the fact that the Germans sank American ships. I also think the special relationship between the U.S. and Britain had a great deal to do with it. Even that late entrance resulted in huge protests by those who vehemently didn't want to get involved. Unfortunately, our President at the time, a liberal Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, was hell bent on saving the world.

The disillusionment that followed thrust the country into its most extreme period of isolationism. Most Americans were totally against getting involved in a second European war, as was exemplified by the "America First" movement. As I said above, had the Japanese not bombed Pearl Harbor, I highly doubt that even the wily Franklin Roosevelt could have gotten a declaration of war through the U.S. Congress.

On the Cold War:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpYCplyBknI

The Policy of Containment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vdXLkWUjrU

This is a very intelligent, informed, and polite discussion, densely packed with content, between William Buckley, Christopher Hitchens, and that touches upon imperialism, the Cold War, and the special relationship between Britain and the U.S. One pithy take away: Stalin pushed America into the Cold War and into an acceptance of Churchill's push to have America take over Britain's role in the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZMVKwmeprY

The 60s and the left:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JKFSWl4f4o

All you really need to know about Christopher Hitchens is revealed there: he was a Trotskyite and was in Cuban as a supporter of Castro and Che Guevara, although he here tries to distance himself with some unsuccessful fancy footwork. It was people like him, lionizing murderers and autocrats, who helped to turn me against the left. It's one thing to support dictators as the best choice among worse players, it's another thing to admire them and want to adopt their systems.

Angela
17-04-16, 01:34
Silesian:A couple more questions.
1]Why do you make jokes? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5YgJx8VGRA
2]Why do you turn on your people when they have no jobs and money and in of need help?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNOsIB5VMSQ
3]Are these true events? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJLwqBfrcu8
4]Why do you not invest in your cities, healthcare,quality of life; but invade foreign lands?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL_YdRxBhzI

If I had clicked on the links and read this more carefully I wouldn't have bothered to give a thoughtful reply to your initial question. This is b.s. anti-American propaganda.

1. Really? That's the response to the fact that every intelligence service in the world thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction? Sometimes, if you don't laugh, you'll cry, which he has done a plenty, especially during his innumerable meetings with vets, meetings which he doesn't allow to be publicized. Is this supposed to mean that he did know? That's ridiculous. Does it mean the decision was correct, a decision supported by the entire Congress including Hillary Clinton? No, it doesn't. Even given he was working from faulty intelligence, he should have been more cautious. He, and a lot of American planners gave the Iraqis far more credit than they deserved.

2. Enlighten me. Are you so fortunate that you are a citizen of a country of whose every decision you're in favor, even those taken before you were born? Do I approve of the army throwing tear gas at these ex-soldiers? No, I don't. Neither do I approve of a virtual army of angry men surrounding the Capitol of this country and putting legislators in fear of their lives because they don't agree with a law passed by Congress. That kind of crap should be for other countries, not the U.S. Neither, by the way, do I approve of Kent State or the actions of the Chicago police in putting down the riots at the Chicago Democratic convention. It's not smart policing. However, the pendulum has swung too far the other way. The "Occupy Wall Street" protesters in Oakland shut down a whole part of the city, destroying the livelihood and even buildings in the area. The black protesters in Baltimore destroyed their whole city, and over a lie, a lie perpetuated by their leaders.

3. You want to know why Detroit is an utter disaster and emblematic of what is happening to a lot of primarily minority inner city areas in the U.S.?

a. The total breakdown of the traditional family structure, and the frequent pregnancies of unmarried women, often starting at a very young age is a prime cause. This leads to a situation where young girls leave school before graduation or even any technical training, which ensures that they will never be able to earn a living wage, and further ensuring that their children grow up not only as financial wards of the community, but without the stability and discipline of a two parent home.

b. The decline of high paying unskilled factory jobs, which is what drew a lot of African-Americans from the south in the first place, is another big factor. The fact that African Americans in these underclass communities, both male and female, drop out of school and don't even get technical training means that they're not equipped for decently paying white collar jobs. Their choices are to get minimum wage service jobs or stay home and go on welfare, which isn't much different in terms of buying power.

c. The ever increasing use of drugs and alcohol fuels a myriad of social ills, starting from an inability to keep a job even if you get one, to gang membership, violence both in the community and among family members, the disruption of familial relationships, and the birth of drug addicted and otherwise mentally and physically impaired children who will never be able to pull their own weight.

d.The creation of a whole generation of children who are barely socialized,and therefore have not internalized the ethos necessary for responsible adulthood, and who are very prone to anti-social behavior.

e.All of this means that you can throw all the money you want at the schools, give free health care to all of them (Medicaid), which has already been done, build brand new housing blocks, and you still have incredibly high school drop out rates, poor utilization of health resources, and the new housing blocks are trashed within a generation.

f. Speaking of "free" everything, you can add the policies of the Democratic administrations which have run almost all of these once industrial cities for decades. Their solution was to give as much "free stuff" as possible to keep them quiet and to get elected. Never have they suggested that some of the responsibility for this situation lies with the community itself. Instead, they've stoked the fires by maintaining that every time a cop, white or black or Hispanic, and increasingly the cops are from the latter two communities, shoots a young black man it's some sort of targeted racist assassination. Are there racist cops? Yes. Are there cops who should never have been given a gun and use excessive force? Yes. When it happens, they're prosecuted, no ifs, ands or buts. I know that for a fact. Most of the time, some street thugs with guns or knives are threatening a police officer, and have to be shot for the police officer's own safety. These politicians don't tell their constituents that; they feed the hysteria and misinformation, and when there are riots, they tell the police to stand aside and let the entire city burn. That's one reason so much of Detroit looks like a crater of the moon. Who do you think did it? For a long span of time it was considered fun by the young people in Detroit to celebrate Halloween by setting fires in the city. Did that news make it to Canada? Is it any wonder that the police aren't anxious to do real policing, and companies don't want to build businesses in the inner cities?

g. Related to the above, these local governments rely to a great extent for the financing of some social programs, but even more for maintenance of the infrastructure, for the police department, for the fire department, on the receipts from local taxes. However, the vast majority of their local population doesn't work and so it pays no taxes. Trying to make it up by increasing the taxation burden on the working part of the population resulted in what is called "white flight" to the suburbs. So, nothing gets fixed, get it?

I think that's basically it, although I'm sure I'm forgetting some things. Plus, I know attention spans are now short. It's a tragic, horrible situation, and my heart breaks for these people, but throwing money at the problem doesn't solve it.

4. We've thrown billions at poverty programs, and the result has been a big fat O. All the money in the world won't help if you're dealing with a dysfunctional family and community structure.

We certainly would be better off if the billions we spent carrying Europe's (and Canada's) water in terms of security and stability had been spent on our own infrastructure, and health care, and promoting and helping our own industries. You may be in luck, however, if Trump does win. He'll be inclined to let you all sink and to hell with you. We'll see how Europe likes it when it's totally on its own against ISIS, Russia, and economically, at least, China. If forced to it, I think the U.S. could be self-sufficient, certainly in terms of energy. Europe, on the other hand, will get strangled by Russia and destroyed economically by China.

Oh, and even without any military expenditures, Europe can't continue to pay for the social services it has promised. Not with an aging work force, and a shrinking population, and especially not when all of a sudden it has a large underclass of its own which soaks up millions in benefits and pays not taxes. Let's see how they do when they have to add military expenditures into the mix.

Alan
17-04-16, 13:54
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSN-Kku_rFE

That is one of the biggest nonsense claims/arguments spred especially by anti-West conspiracy theorists.

Of course Iraq had WMDs, just because you didn't found them, after you warned them month before, that you would attack, is no proof.

If Iraq didn't had WMDs with what did they gas the people in Halabja? My origin is next to the Syrian/Iraqi border. And we have people from the region who swear that before the Iraqi war started hundreds of trucks crossed the Syrian border from Iraq obviously bringing something there. Take a gues what this could have been.

Where do you think Assad had his stock of Chemical weapons from? Just as reminder Assad and Saddam, both buddies of the same Baath party.

But this whole WMD thing is again just childish nonsense to distract from the main point. Namely that there was a cause of war. Even when there wasn't WMD's(there were WMD'S), aggressions against Kuwait, the killing and oppressing of a milion Kurds, Shia's and non loyals was reason enough.

I don't care if someone is anti or pro west but if he starts to defend a brutal genocidal dictator and his regime just out of his hate for the country who was involved in the war, than he is crossing the line.

DejaVu
17-04-16, 15:06
http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Russia-US-Map-Joke-1024x337.jpg


We need more sob story and subliminal manipulation from Angela & LeBrok.

Silesian
17-04-16, 15:56
That is one of the biggest nonsense claims/arguments spred especially by anti-West conspiracy theorists.

Of course Iraq had WMDs, just because you didn't found them, after you warned them month before, that you would attack, is no proof.

If Iraq didn't had WMDs with what did they gas the people in Halabja? My origin is next to the Syrian/Iraqi border. And we have people from the region who swear that before the Iraqi war started hundreds of trucks crossed the Syrian border from Iraq obviously bringing something there. Take a gues what this could have been.

Where do you think Assad had his stock of Chemical weapons from? Just as reminder Assad and Saddam, both buddies of the same Baath party.

But this whole WMD thing is again just childish nonsense to distract from the main point. Namely that there was a cause of war. Even when there wasn't WMD's(there were WMD'S), aggressions against Kuwait, the killing and oppressing of a milion Kurds, Shia's and non loyals was reason enough.

I don't care if someone is anti or pro west but if he starts to defend a brutal genocidal dictator and his regime just out of his hate for the country who was involved in the war, than he is crossing the line.


So many stories, what to believe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk35suofbYQ

Angela
17-04-16, 15:58
http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Russia-US-Map-Joke-1024x337.jpg


We need more sob story and subliminal manipulation from Angela & LeBrok.





We need more sob story and subliminal manipulation from Angela & LeBrok.

Do you know the definition of subliminal manipulation?

http://subliminalmanipulation.blogspot.com/

You think I'm sending images and thoughts out that are presented so quickly that people can't register it consciously, just subconsciously? :laughing:

Wow, I didn't know I had that kind of power! Scary stuff!!! You should all be very afraid.:petrified:

I also have telepathic powers, by the way, :grin: so I know all your secrets, like how many Balkan posters were part of the genocide or had family members who were involved. That's part of why some of them so hate the U.S. We stopped their party before it was finished, and exposed all their dirty secrets before the world. Can't have that, might make people think you're uncivilized, so shoot the messenger.

Actually, what I'm doing is called the logical presentation of historical fact and international law and the application of common sense as regards a current event.

Before opining further you might want to review the provisions of NATO and other security agreements between the U.S. and various European countries. Putin has been making threatening gestures toward the Baltic states and some of the eastern European states. He obviously has designs on them. He needs to be reminded that NATO and the U.S. aren't done for yet, and that the security agreements between the U.S. and these countries still stand. Military exercises are a standard part of preparedness for any possible attacks. In case you're unaware of it, the Russians do it all the time as well.

Since you like maps, here is a map of countries where Russia was seeking permission to dock and resupply their ships (2014).
http://cdn.cnsnews.com/images/map-russia_0.jpg

Russian war ship spotted near Georgia nuclear submarine base:
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/navy-spotted-russian-war-ship-near-georgia-nuclear-submarine-base/

Chinese navy ship actually entered U.S. territorial waters off Alaska:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/04/politics/china-ships-alaska-us-waters/

I could go on and on, but the main point is that we didn't send young flight crews on almost suicidal buzzing missions over the ships. We leave that to megalomaniac, reckless dictators who fancy they can remake the Soviet Empire.

Silesian
17-04-16, 16:06
If I had clicked on the links and read this more carefully I wouldn't have bothered to give a thoughtful reply to your initial question. This is b.s. anti-American propaganda. ............

I don't want to derail the thread sorry.Thank you for taking the time to express your perspective/insight. Looking at the old footage of Detroit is amazing. A once vibrant beautiful city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAIg_Hv7gU
Modern day looks something out of a zombie apocalypse movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2IScU_q_zY

Yetos
17-04-16, 16:07
I think the world is turning mad,

Lets burn the planet.

DejaVu
17-04-16, 16:13
reckless dictators who fancy they can remake the Soviet Empire.

Soviet Empire? You mean the communist bolsheviks?

DejaVu
17-04-16, 16:50
NATO military bases
http://russia-insider.com/sites/insider/files/users/382/13-Apr-2015/nato_bases_around_russia.jpg

US military bases
http://www.thehistoryreader.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/us-military-reach.gif
http://images.politico.com/global/2015/06/23/backpage-11601.jpg

Angela
17-04-16, 17:14
I don't want to derail the thread sorry.Thank you for taking the time to express your perspective/insight. Looking at the old footage of Detroit is amazing. A once vibrant beautiful city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAIg_Hv7gU
Modern day looks something out of a zombie apocalypse movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2IScU_q_zY

The South Bronx, with which I'm much more familiar, has had much the same history:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AVzkTd9R44

A police precinct there was nick-named Fort Apache.

The South Bronx was subsequently totally rebuilt at the cost of billions of dollars of tax payer money, but has since started to deteriorate again, in my opinion.

Then, New Detroits are being created all the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IheTWmwIbDw

You could go through inner city New Orleans, or Atlanta, and on and on and find the same.

The major cost is not tax dollars to keep rebuilding the infrastructure, however, or the costs of police and fire departments and prisons: it's the cost to human lives within these communities themselves. You have no concept how many of these young men go though the criminal justice system, how many children's lives are permanently blighted. Believe me, if I thought throwing more money at poverty programs would change things, I'd vote for increased spending happily.

Anyway, my long post on the history of isolationism in the U.S.(#31) was only slightly more on topic, and too long as well, but it's hard to summarize the history of American foreign policy in a few sentences, and without knowing if there's a common background of knowledge, it's difficult to debate any particular doctrine or treaty or military action. Anyway, I would say that in terms of foreign policy I'm definitely right of center, and my positions are indeed close to those of William F. Buckley. He was a formative influence on me. In fact, my political views are pretty close to his in a number of areas, although not on social issues, among them gay rights, as just one example.

ElHorsto
17-04-16, 18:00
If Iraq didn't had WMDs with what did they gas the people in Halabja?


Wasn't that in 1988, long before the Iraq war?



My origin is next to the Syrian/Iraqi border. And we have people from the region who swear that before the Iraqi war started hundreds of trucks crossed the Syrian border from Iraq obviously bringing something there.

Wasn't that much later, 10 years after Saddam was dead? I really don't know that's why I'm asking.

bicicleur
17-04-16, 18:09
Anyway, my long post on the history of isolationism in the U.S.(#31) was only slightly more on topic, and too long as well, but it's hard to summarize the history of American foreign policy in a few sentences, and without knowing if there's a common background of knowledge, it's difficult to debate any particular doctrine or treaty or military action. Anyway, I would say that in terms of foreign policy I'm definitely right of center, and my positions are indeed close to those of William F. Buckley. He was a formative influence on me. In fact, my political views are pretty close to his in a number of areas, although not on social issues, among them gay rights, as just one example.

so what about Erdogan then? in my opinion he is a bigger lunatic than Putin
yet Merkel is licking his arse and Kerry gives him his utmost respect
he has a strategic position and he enjoys the games he can play because of that
when will this guy be put in place?

Yetos
17-04-16, 18:16
so what about Erdogan then? in my opinion he is a bigger lunatic than Putin
yet Merkel is licking his arse and Kerry gives him his utmost respect
he has a strategic position and he enjoys the games he can play because of that
when will this guy be put in place?

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


and not only Merkel,
Obama also,
He realise time ago what 'Sultan' he is and he is pushing him to provoke Russia,

and beacause his only fear is Greece and Kurds, West input imbeciles to Greek goverment via crisis and loans and corporations like Goldman Sachs and Bring NATO to gather refuggees when the immigration problem is almost zero.

2016 will be the year of Italy and Bulgaria, the high traffic road is already there,
I wonder will they send NATO to save sinking boat survivors?

ElHorsto
17-04-16, 18:28
:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
He realise time ago what 'Sultan' he is and he is pushing him to provoke Russia,

Which is yet another similarity between Merkel and the 'Sultan'.

Yetos
17-04-16, 19:11
and still I believe that both USA and Russia are dying

and they create such things to change the real problems they have,
for example Putin and Panama papperes
USA and Washington state, which has less rights than other states and maybe start a race for autonomy

and EU is not ready yet, either as soul either as mind, to create the third pole,

Yetos
17-04-16, 19:24
We're obviously suffering from a mutual lack of comprehension, because I don't understand how a Canadian, in particular, could ask such a question. I do understand that Europeans might get their information from leftist rags and the internet, and so I make some allowances, but a Canadian? Surely they teach a little bit of American history? We certainly learn a bit about yours. Well, I take some of that back, almost half of America itself has drunk that particular Kool-Aid. That's what comes of letting the education system be hijacked by left wing 60's radicals starting from the universities on down, and not countering the half baked ideas promoted by Hollywood.

American isolationism: foundations set during the presidencies of Washington and Adams.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DItb55O25lg&ebc=ANyPxKpnYEhPXRZ7gghs4XiamwNbBhSmXAKGcfRxKZf9Cv ITeOoSq8k1HKalOp_ly_s8a8vSBMoG

The only wars fought were with the British, first the Revolutionary War, and then the War of 1812, the latter because of the impressment of U.S. sailors and the attacks against U.S. merchant ships, and which included British troops attacking and burning down parts of Washington, D.C.

In case you think I don't acknowledge the darker aspects of American history, a type of history shared by Canada, by the way, and Australia, and New Zealand in taking over land inhabited by Native Americans:

Manifest Destiny:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DItb55O25lg&ebc=ANyPxKpnYEhPXRZ7gghs4XiamwNbBhSmXAKGcfRxKZf9Cv ITeOoSq8k1HKalOp_ly_s8a8vSBMoG

The vast majority of the land was acquired by purchase from other European powers. The wars were against the Native Americans and the Mexican-American War over the southwestern states and California. I don't think you'd find a single American who thinks the Native Americans were treated fairly.

The Monroe Doctrine: in some ways a restatement of American isolationism versus Europe and in some ways the assumption of a protectionist policy toward the other countries in the Western Hemisphere. Of course, it also protected the economic interests of the U.S.The closest analogy would be the protectionism (and exploitation) of Eastern Europe and the Balkans by the Russian Empire, made more palatable in the Russian case by claims of brotherhood of blood and language.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjtziqQ3rnM&ebc=ANyPxKoWZVrx4sSDSyJsvd650Wu4VZibmsJKvuAelMk7Su EkVqc44RcQ6Tu4htRO8v1Mqr90ZrOO

The Roosevelt Corollary: imperialism in the Western Hemisphere
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0HEMUoVrh4

On current attitudes toward isolationism versus world engagement. More Republicans (the more conservative Americans) are in favor of isolationism than Democrats:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMqCrSYQxns

As to why America fought in the first and second world wars, I won't go into detail since I assume everyone knows that the U.S. came into World War I late, and only after the American public was inflamed by reports of German atrocities, and the fact that the Germans sank American ships. I also think the special relationship between the U.S. and Britain had a great deal to do with it. Even that late entrance resulted in huge protests by those who vehemently didn't want to get involved. Unfortunately, our President at the time, a liberal Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, was hell bent on saving the world.

The disillusionment that followed thrust the country into its most extreme period of isolationism. Most Americans were totally against getting involved in a second European war, as was exemplified by the "America First" movement. As I said above, had the Japanese not bombed Pearl Harbor, I highly doubt that even the wily Franklin Roosevelt could have gotten a declaration of war through the U.S. Congress.

On the Cold War:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpYCplyBknI

The Policy of Containment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vdXLkWUjrU

This is a very intelligent, informed, and polite discussion, densely packed with content, between William Buckley, Christopher Hitchens, and that touches upon imperialism, the Cold War, and the special relationship between Britain and the U.S. One pithy take away: Stalin pushed America into the Cold War and into an acceptance of Churchill's push to have America take over Britain's role in the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZMVKwmeprY

The 60s and the left:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JKFSWl4f4o

All you really need to know about Christopher Hitchens is revealed there: he was a Trotskyite and was in Cuban as a supporter of Castro and Che Guevara, although he here tries to distance himself with some unsuccessful fancy footwork. It was people like him, lionizing murderers and autocrats, who helped to turn me against the left. It's one thing to support dictators as the best choice among worse players, it's another thing to admire them and want to adopt their systems.


Angela
All the above are good for you, cause you are an USA citizen,

but what about me who I am not?

Henry Kissinger?
Briezinsky?
Albright who bomb with uranium Balkans
what about Argentina Chile Portugal Spain etc etc
what about the dictators of CIA?
what about Arab spring?

and I ask what the difference among all presidents speeches and all Queen's speeches for british empire? none,
cause the policy is always the same, colonial

and the most simple and easy question
USA always support the 'minorities' of other countries, and call supressors the leader and goverment,
now what If I call Obama a supressor, a dictator against the many ameridian/indians tribes?
what if I call him dictator for the Washington state unright treaty?
will I have right?

Angela
17-04-16, 21:39
In my opinion, Merkel, and also Kerry, although it's a less immediate problem for the U.S., want Turkey to stop the flow of refugees, and are also trying to negotiate for a return of refugees to the Near East through Turkey. You don't have to like the people with whom you have to negotiate.

That won't stop the flow from North Africa into Italy by way of the Mediterranean, since they embark from North Africa, mainly Libya, last I heard.There should be patrols in the Mediterranean to interdict these ships, and the passengers should then be taken back to those same ports in North Africa. However, because of the policies of the so called "Arab Spring", which are the fault of both the Obama administration and the European countries, there's really no government with whom to negotiate, so I don't know how the hell that could be done.

If a way was found, why should NATO, much of whose budget is borne by the U.S., foot the bill? What does the EU exist for, precisely? Or does the rest of Europe just propose to let Italy deal with it alone and put up a wall protecting northern Europe?

I don't understand how so many Europeans can be so blind to the problems caused by the increasing Russian sphere of influence in the Near East, and not see what a catastrophe it would be for Europe if Russia had large bases in Turkey. Russia already controls a lot of the energy flow into Europe. If they also have control of the energy sources in the Near East they can make client states of the other European countries. What would be the option? How can your factories, your economies, your cities operate, without energy? The answer is that they can't.

How can it not be clear how different the situation is with regard to the U.S.-European relationship? Of course there is economic competition, but that's healthy for everyone. The more prosperous Europe is, the more of America's goods it can buy, but also the more goods Europe itself can sell. It's a win/win. That's what free trade is all about.

That's why the U.S. is trying to use Turkey to neutralize the Russian presence to some extent. Of course, if the Obama administration hadn't tried to totally disengage from the Middle East, there would have been no power vacuum for Russia to fill. If he hadn't pulled out all the troops from Iraq, ISIS could have been destroyed long ago, and there would have been no refugee tsunami into Europe. Whether the decision to go into Iraq was wise or not, it's like if you drop a porcelain vase in a nice shop: if you break it, you own it. If that means keeping a few thousand troops and bases there, that's what you do. We've had tens of thousands of troops along the DMZ between North and South Korea since the 1950s. What do people think would happen to South Korea if they were removed?

If he had even armed the Kurds, it might have made some difference. Now, he can't, because since the power vacuum exists, and all he can do is try to keep Erdogan out of the clutches of Putin, he can't antagonize Erdogan by arming the Kurds properly. Meanwhile, if his advisers think they can trust Erdogan, they're bigger fools even than I think. Use him to get the worst of the refugees back to the Near East, by all means, but don't trust him; he'll double cross the west in a minute.

@Yetos, from my perspective your view of world affairs in general, of the nature of free markets and of American policy is totally incorrect, and that has nothing to do with whether I am now an American citizen as well as an Italian citizen. It has to do with a political and economic philosophy which I have developed over the years through a lot of reading, but also through a lot of experience both in the U.S. and Italy.

My post wasn't meant to excuse every action ever undertaken by the U.S. government over the centuries, just as I would never attempt to excuse every action ever taken by the various Italian governments. It was meant to rebut the statement that the U.S. is some war mongering country out to invade and subjugate countries.

I can only say again that the U.S. didn't seek out involvement in either World War I or World War II. As for the Cold War, that was created by Joseph Stalin and the politburo, although Russia has sought hegemony in its part of the world for centuries. Communism was a pernicious, dangerous, and destructive doctrine, almost as destructive as fascism, which had to be resisted and contained as much as possible. Churchill was right about that, at least. No one else could do it except the U.S. A rebuilt and prosperous Europe would not fall into the Communist camp. There's no doubt that it would also create a great market for European goods.

I don't think you understand the nature of "colonialism". Colonialism is when a prosperous, advanced nation settles groups of its own people on land belonging to another country, or through military might dominates another country, extracting raw materials at below market prices, and reserves the right to manufacture goods and then dump them into the subjugated countries. A good example of the latter is the British Raj. An example of the former might indeed be the appropriation of the land of the indigenous peoples by the Americans, Canadians, Australians, and virtually all the Latin Americans. Germany planned to make colonies of both Poland and Russia; worse, they planned to exterminate most of the Slavs altogether. Another example is the establishment of Greek city states in the first millennium BC, or the conquests and building of cities by Alexander the Great.

This has nothing to do with the relationship between the U.S. and Europe following the Second World War. The U.S. didn't loot your raw materials, as Russia did in the east, or France did in North Africa and Africa, or the Netherlands did in Indonesia, or the Germans in Africa, or the Italians in East Africa, and on and on. Yes, as I've said, a prosperous Europe means more markets for U.S. goods, but the U.S. helped you build new factories and new infrastructure so that you could also become producers of goods, and prosperous again, more prosperous than you'd ever been. Do you have any idea how much the U.S. imports from Europe? This isn't colonialism, it's free trade.

As for Chile, Nicaragua, etc., if you really knew who Castro was, what he did, what the people suffered through him, maybe you would understand what the U.S. feared in Chile. It also wouldn't hurt to re-read the facts about the Cuban Missile crisis.

I realize that capitalism, free markets are not admired in Europe. I know from personal experience that the teaching of economics in Europe is almost always done from a Marxist perspective. There is an alternative point of view. See:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2007/08/capitalism_and_democracy_take

From my perspective, free markets and individual rights and representative government go hand in hand.

Anyway, in a prior post you were complaining about American cultural hegemony. I'm afraid that's the way of the world, Yetos. Railing against it does no good. When Greeks were top dog, and especially because of Alexander, copies of Greek cities, temples, etc. dotted the world. Yes, some other groups feared it, so much so, in the case of the Jews, for example, that they rebelled against the Seleucid Empire. The same happened under Rome. People adopted the Latin language, and architecture, and on and on. Later, during the Renaissance, Italian forms of literature, of art, of architecture, spread across Europe, to be succeeded by a passion for all things French, from language to fashion, to architecture again, only to be supplanted by a wave of English and a whole way of living which fittingly enough came to be called Victorianism. It's how things are...

Yetos
17-04-16, 22:03
Russian influence at Africa and middle East is not increasing, plz
it declines, it is decreasing,
they lost Kantafi and Libya and Santam who bought Scud missiles,
and also lost Egypt an ex 3rd world country, and now they lose most of Syrria,

so the myth that USA is using Turkey to stabilize area against Russia is a myth, a BIG MYTH,
simply they create a new ISLAM defender, Erdogan,
since Kantafi and Sandam are dead, (I am not defending them) and Assant lost security at his country, and Jordania king is a peacefull one, afraid to lose his sauvereign,
THEY CREATE a new SULTAN, DEFENDER OF FAITH,
and I ask USA that is giving to much at minority problems, why show much tolerance to Turks and not Kurds?
who is minority? Erdogan or Kurds? so come on, they bargain above and under the table, they made him the petrol 'dava' of today,

@ Angela
I ask if i call Obama and all USA president genociders and supressors of human rights due to amerindian/indian policies even today, will I have right?

about free world? let me laugh, :laughing: the world stoped to be free after late 50's early 60's cause the only free world was at West, behind iron curtain, I do not even dare to discuss it. neverland there
HOW USA SUPPORTED FREEDOM WHEN ESTABLISHED DICTATORS FROM ARGENTINA TO GREECE AND INDOCHINA?

a coin, a currency, is a mark of a state sauvereign, so when I move capitals from USA to china and Indonesia, or Greece to Swiss etc then I am a traitor,
all those capitalists who speak about free world at USA and generally WEST are traitors, they give the sauvereign of USA citizens and habbitants to foreign just to earn,
and they call it GLOBALIZATION,
come on, there are USAers who starve and can not afford school for children, but they are eager to work, but no job, cause their taxes for a better future fled as capitals abroad,

Angela i know the story about the 'gulf of the pigs'
I HAVE DEAD RELATIVES DUE TO CIVIL WAR, AND BELIEVE ME, Pigs Gulf is nothing infront civil war,
so I can support Russia cause they always force as to revolt against Turkey, and then forgot us,
But I can not support USA and NATO also, cause they create troubles in order to be 'welcomed'

there is a story that my father told about Mussolini and Italians,
when Italians surrender to Germans, they brought some soldiers at local park as prisoners, for about 3-6 months
no soap, little food, etc, prisoners of war,
one of my ungles who fought them as officer at Epirus frontier, every Sunday he wore his army coat and stand against them at the fence as an Olympian and sing a song against Mussolini, a winner, showing them how proud he was for defeating them,and here is Greece, no matter Greece was under German occupation, and as he said he shoot a few at battle,
when church finished about 11 at morning, he was asking all woman to make bread and feed them,
my grand mother once/twice a weak made bread ( that time they made 8-20 kilos per family per weak, and each bread was 2-3 kilos) and gave it to my father who was fast enough, with a bar of soap and a (pork fat made) candlle for beards, (razor were expensive and rare, so they burn the beard with a candle, they clean and wash it, and then with hands apply soft semi-warmed fat/wax to skin for few hours to avoid iritation, chamomile water or jasmin water was ideal under the wax)
my father a twelve years old boy always went and throw above fence the bread, and Italians for thanks they gave him buttons,
one day a German soldier see him and hit him with gun's handlle and he fade, he carried that mark all his life, but the same soldier who hit him, took him under fresh water and gave him a cube of sugar!!! (wow that time was something indeed)
as you see emotions change, ideas change, dogma does not, my ungle who fought them, was also willing to feed them, cause he see 'una raca, una faca' to them, and he could be at their position also,
I wonder if he was a pure dogmatic capitalist/banking thinking like the ones today, or a foundamental communist, what he would?


that was free world,
a poor man that had few fields of grain and few goats, and was away from his fields 2 years, was so free, to be generous, sharing his products, instead of selling them to black market. (there were many that made fortunes from balck market that time).
today most of us are 'slaves', cause through loans and high taxes we stoped to be free, we call them 'economical executioners' cause they are like heroin dealers,
they always say how high they can send you, but they never say what a crush you will have when you fall

and as a free man I prefer not to participate at their 'imperial' games, although I am cause our world is so small,

about economists
when Europe had Adam Smith and Marx and many others USA had not even economical theories, only rich men.
Europe after each WW manage to stand up and raise again due to CAYNES, my favorite economist,
when Europe abbandon caynes, misery and blaim came, cause even the last inventions and big corporations of mobile, NOKIA and ERICKSON, who once gave job at Europes factories, today are sold and are in Asia,
by following Caynes political system, Europe should be ahead of USA and Russia today, but our politicians are puppets of bankers,
today Europe has Pikety, an economist which I admire, yet we are still stucked to chicago economics who brought 'Argentina' to the world,
and all today we know Steve Jobs, and iphone, but 20 years before him Nokia had model 9**, who knows the designer of that wonderfull phone, the first mobile and laptop, upon which tablets are made?
nobody, why? cause bankers will not allow Europe to have legends,

the first strike against world freedom was this

http://s.nbst.gr/files/1/2015/11/ttisanoosmsffsef000.jpg

they sunk a ship and send thousands to death to kill 3 economists
why? and who?
and why J P Morgan who owned the ship offered to 3 a luxus room, but although planed to embark he did not? after 3 economists embark?
few years later WW1 at Europe, the fear or the will of Jekyll island 1910? the real ghost of WW, but who knows it?
cause simply we can not tell if WW were planed there? or they try to avoid them? but surely 3 economists who were there died at Titanic,
Have you seen any practice of Jekyll island 1910?

well I can not say who is behind, but surely was not the Russians there, neither Chineses, neither Daesh Jihadists,
But surely I am not free, I am forced to pay a loan who took others for me, spend the money to luxury etc etc, so I am a slave,
as you see I lost my Freedom without a penny drop to my pocket,
if this you believe is free world, then it is all yours, I do not want it,

cause trully real freedom is there, at eidomene
http://www.newsit.gr/files/Image/2016/03/21/idomeni/resized/eidomeni_474_355.jpg

http://content-mcdn.ethnos.gr/filesystem/images/20160311/engine/newego_LARGE_t_1101_54646026_type13145.jpg

and I am sure that they win or they will find a way to take what they want, cause they are free,
no matter that is not what I want, cause my culture is in danger,

''cause thinks clear, the one who think free'' From Greek revolution

bicicleur
17-04-16, 23:27
if you try to use Erdogan to controll Putin, I think you'll create yourself a far worse enemy than Putin himself
let me remind you that Al Qaeda was supported by America to fight the Russians in Afghanistan
it was the start of their international carreer
and Europe should not rely on Erdogan to send the refugees back
it should first acknowledge the situation and say the Geneva and other international conventions have to be have to be amended because they simply are unworkable
now they let Erdogan do the dirty work because Erdogan is not tight to the same rules as Europe is tying itself to
it is a very hypocrit construction
Europe does not want to follow the rules, nor does it want to bend them, that is where Erdogan comes in
Europe should create it's own set of rules on how to deal with the refugees and these rules should remain humane, but practical

Alan
18-04-16, 00:07
So many stories, what to believe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk35suofbYQ

Russia Today with the story that CIA helped using Chemical weapons on Iran.

I have this habit, that I am carefull in regards of US involvements in the world when the media outlets are RT or the kind just as I am carefull in regards of stories about Russia when they are told by US media like CNN.

The both countries always through things at each other, but that is not the problem. Problematic it becomes if you believe everything.

Angela
18-04-16, 01:27
if you try to use Erdogan to controll Putin, I think you'll create yourself a far worse enemy than Putin himself
let me remind you that Al Qaeda was supported by America to fight the Russians in Afghanistan
it was the start of their international carreer
and Europe should not rely on Erdogan to send the refugees back
it should first acknowledge the situation and say the Geneva and other international conventions have to be have to be amended because they simply are unworkable
now they let Erdogan do the dirty work because Erdogan is not tight to the same rules as Europe is tying itself to
it is a very hypocrit construction
Europe does not want to follow the rules, nor does it want to bend them, that is where Erdogan comes in
Europe should create it's own set of rules on how to deal with the refugees and these rules should remain humane, but practical

I doubt he'd be a worse enemy, but I in no way support the way the Obama administration and Merkel as well are handling any part of this situation, including the faith they seem to be putting in their ability to work with and control Erdogan.

@Yetos,
I'm perfectly willing to debate people who hold points of view different from my own. I'm not willing to debate people who believe conspiracy theories based on fantasies rather than fact or regurgitate propaganda put out by Russian state controlled media.

You people are turning me into an isolationist myself.

Yetos
18-04-16, 02:01
come on do you believe that Russian propaganda is smart enough?
or Europe is Russia for you?

about the conspiracy theories,

http://static4.uk.businessinsider.com/image/561b8acd9dd7cc01308b59c6-600-593/cq4i3bmveaangbs.jpg

they all died at Titanic conspiracy coinsidence, divine fate, you tell me, Astor was the richest man of the world that time,
and more

here,
http://www.jekyllislandhistory.com/federalreserve.shtml

there are no practiles, it was considered the top secret,
is it also coincidence that the same person senator Aldrich at 1930 submited?


<<Although Congress did not pass the reform bill submitted by Senator Aldrich, it did approve a similar proposal in 1913 called the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve System of today mirrors in essence the plan developed on Jekyll Island in 1910.>>



@Yetos,
I'm perfectly willing to debate people who hold points of view different from my own. I'm not willing to debate people who believe conspiracy theories based on fantasies rather than fact or regurgitate propaganda put out by Russian state controlled media.


come on, USA, had put dictators all over world, same did Soviets with 'eternal presidents'
but Castro and Che is another story, as Mandela at Africa, as IRA at Ireland,
when European powers was on top they call them regent and viceroy,

and as USA citizen, I understand you, you must the raise the shield to defend your house,
but claiming that USA is better than Russia or ex European powers, come on,
or did not profit from the WW1 and WW2 in Europe, come on.

ElHorsto
18-04-16, 02:27
Russian influence at Africa and middle East is not increasing, plz
it declines, it is decreasing,
they lost Kantafi and Libya and Santam who bought Scud missiles,
and also lost Egypt an ex 3rd world country, and now they lose most of Syrria,


You are spot on, +1. Everywhere Russia intervened (Georgia, Crimea, Syria,...) it was a defensive reaction, a desperate attempt to preserve the status quo, even if the methods might be controversial. Wherever the West intervened, it meant expansion. Certain elites in the west (not all!) smelled blood and play the "all-or-nothing card", betting on Russia's collapse or at least it's retreat behind the Urals. Merkel aligned with them.
Russia has many problems: too large land mass, not enough people, too strong to be no superpower, too weak to remain a superpower. It needs at least neutral buffer zones like Finland (see Mearsheimer, Brzerzinski, Kissinger). It is possible that Russia in the future becomes imperialist like every country does if it can, but for now it is in a defensive situation.

Now the cold war is there, the "cordon sanitaire/Intermarium" between Russia and Europe is built, distrust and sanctions established, which was one goal of the Ukraine coup. Friendly and profitable relations win-win between Europe and Russia are destroyed. Congrats to EU for shooting it's own foot! Islamists sneak to the south of Russia and Caucasus, and Europe. Turkey is linked to this. Congrats to EU for shooting it's second foot!

You are also right that both, the West and Russia are struggling with death.
China recently joined the debt community.
Europe as usual is acting like a fool, eating itself.
Russia was already almost dead under Jelzin, who had even more administrative power than "dictator" Putin, who stopped the collapse.

Money printing stopped working, we entered negative interest rate territory. If not an arms race can buy time for the economy, a hot war could (According to G. Friedman, US escaped the Great Depression due to WW2, not money printing). Also Russia increases arms export in order to compensate losses from oil and gas export.
I prefer helicopter money, not perfect but better than the alternatives.
I disagree with Keynesianism though.



so the myth that USA is using Turkey to stabilize area against Russia is a myth, a BIG MYTH,
simply they create a new ISLAM defender, Erdogan,

Silesian
18-04-16, 03:50
come on do you believe ............

At one time Roman Empire was the most powerful in all of Europe. Do you think that Titus Flavius Caesar Vespasianus Augustus- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vespasian#/media/File:Vespasianus03_pushkin.jpg and what he did; could have ever imagined that Rome could have been depopulated from 1million to 35,000?
Its population declined from more than a million in 210 AD to 500,000 in 273[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome#cite_note-39) to 35,000 after the Gothic War,[40] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome#cite_note-40) reducing the sprawling city to groups of inhabited buildings interspersed among large areas of ruins, vegetation, vineyards and market gardens.[41] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome#cite_note-41)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome
Sometimes things just fall apart. No conspiracy theory needed.
Draco-Draconian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draco_%28lawgiver%29

Yetos
18-04-16, 08:10
You are spot on, +1. Everywhere Russia intervened (Georgia, Crimea, Syria,...) it was a defensive reaction, a desperate attempt to preserve the status quo, even if the methods might be controversial. Wherever the West intervened, it meant expansion. Certain elites in the west (not all!) smelled blood and play the "all-or-nothing card", betting on Russia's collapse or at least it's retreat behind the Urals. Merkel aligned with them.
Russia has many problems: too large land mass, not enough people, too strong to be no superpower, too weak to remain a superpower. It needs at least neutral buffer zones like Finland (see Mearsheimer, Brzerzinski, Kissinger). It is possible that Russia in the future becomes imperialist like every country does if it can, but for now it is in a defensive situation.

Now the cold war is there, the "cordon sanitaire/Intermarium" between Russia and Europe is built, distrust and sanctions established, which was one goal of the Ukraine coup. Friendly and profitable relations win-win between Europe and Russia are destroyed. Congrats to EU for shooting it's own foot! Islamists sneak to the south of Russia and Caucasus, and Europe. Turkey is linked to this. Congrats to EU for shooting it's second foot!

You are also right that both, the West and Russia are struggling with death.
China recently joined the debt community.
Europe as usual is acting like a fool, eating itself.
Russia was already almost dead under Jelzin, who had even more administrative power than "dictator" Putin, who stopped the collapse.

Money printing stopped working, we entered negative interest rate territory. If not an arms race can buy time for the economy, a hot war could (According to G. Friedman, US escaped the Great Depression due to WW2, not money printing). Also Russia increases arms export in order to compensate losses from oil and gas export.
I prefer helicopter money, not perfect but better than the alternatives.
I disagree with Keynesianism though.

yet it was Keynesianism who rebuilt Europe after WW2.

Yetos
18-04-16, 08:24
At one time Roman Empire was the most powerful in all of Europe. Do you think that Titus Flavius Caesar Vespasianus Augustus- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vespasian#/media/File:Vespasianus03_pushkin.jpg and what he did; could have ever imagined that Rome could have been depopulated from 1million to 35,000?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome
Sometimes things just fall apart. No conspiracy theory needed.
Draco-Draconian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draco_%28lawgiver%29

Rome's power at that time was not its people, its citizens, it was praitors and legions,
with a good amount of denari you could buy a praitorian and become emperror,
and when a state enters that situation, that status, is already with one foot at the tomb,
when I can buy Roman citizenship, and be a Roman, then Rome is dead, and the only way to prove that is alive, is to make expansion wars, which many times are not worthy, just to prove that you are alive,
Julius brougth oyster shells from Albion coasts to show how meaningless it was, but who understood it?
same is today with Europe, soon Europe will be full with 'citizens' who only ask rights, have citizenship, but not care for her, cause Europe is givind citizenship easier than Romans did,
you could buy a vote of a Roman citizen with a bucket of grain,
you can buy a vote of a modern European with 5 E raise to its social state help subvention,
or just with 50 E

about Dracon and his laws, well we all know the story, i can not understand what has to do,

bicicleur
18-04-16, 09:11
I doubt he'd be a worse enemy, but I in no way support the way the Obama administration and Merkel as well are handling any part of this situation, including the faith they seem to be putting in their ability to work with and control Erdogan.


Russia is merely trying to consolidate it's current influence sphere, something which they won't be able to hold because their military and economical power is decreasing.
Erdogan makes Turkey dream of expansion and a revival of a Muslim Ottoman empire. He has completely destroyed the legacy of Ataturk.

Maybe you are right, maybe I am. It is a complicated matter. It is easier to say what has been done wrong than saying what is the right policy now.

ElHorsto
18-04-16, 11:05
yet it was Keynesianism who rebuilt Europe after WW2.

Maybe to some extent, but I think mainly the need of rebuilding itself was driving the economy ("Creative destruction", Schumpeter). Monetary expansion was more a consequence of that, not the cause.

Angela
18-04-16, 18:03
Russia is merely trying to consolidate it's current influence sphere, something which they won't be able to hold because their military and economical power is decreasing.
Erdogan makes Turkey dream of expansion and a revival of a Muslim Ottoman empire. He has completely destroyed the legacy of Ataturk.

Maybe you are right, maybe I am. It is a complicated matter. It is easier to say what has been done wrong than saying what is the right policy now.

As to Erdogan, I fear you may be right.

As to Russia, I sincerely hope your more optimistic view turns out to be correct, especially for the Baltic countries and countries like Poland. The latter, especially, has paid the price for Russian aggression too many times.

I would just suggest that in foreign affairs, it's always best to prepare for the worst scenario, not hope for the best one.

Actually, that's my motto in personal life as well. It's never let me down yet. :)

DejaVu
18-04-16, 22:24
Can anyone tell me who the Bolsheviks were and how many they killed in Russia?
Is there anyone who can answer the question? I´m very curious.

Angela
18-04-16, 23:13
Bolshevik = Communist. Bolshevik is just the original name of the Communist Party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolsheviks

To get the correct number for Europe you'd have to add up the people killed under Lenin and Trotsky and also those killed under Stalin. Even if you don't count the millions dead from famine the death toll is in the tens and tens of millions. You can find more detail in the link below.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/museum/comfaq.htm

You can also go further into the future with the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/soviet-invasion-czechoslavkia

The death toll during the last two was much less.

The best expose of the Gulag is the memoir of someone who lived it: Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/70561.The_Gulag_Archipelago_1918_1956

The best biography of Stalin I've ever read, and from the official Russian archives:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/93653.Stalin

For fiction, Dr. Zhivago, by Boris Pasternak is the best. You can even watch the movie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Zhivago_(novel)

For the Ukrainian point of view, especially of the forced collectivization of the peasants and the resulting famines.
http://faminegenocide.com/resources/kulchytsky/kulchynsky5.htm

Not an American in the bunch, as you can see.

LABERIA
18-04-16, 23:42
One thing can be said that Stalin was the biggest anti communist in the world. Nobody has killed so much communists like Stalin.

Yetos
19-04-16, 00:09
One thing can be said that Stalin was the biggest anti communist in the world. Nobody has killed so much communists like Stalin.


wow :laughing: :laughing: +1 from me,
indeed,
the funny side of a true tragedy,

Yetos
19-04-16, 00:41
As to Erdogan, I fear you may be right.

As to Russia, I sincerely hope your more optimistic view turns out to be correct, especially for the Baltic countries and countries like Poland. The latter, especially, has paid the price for Russian aggression too many times.

I would just suggest that in foreign affairs, it's always best to prepare for the worst scenario, not hope for the best one.

Actually, that's my motto in personal life as well. It's never let me down yet. :)


that depends, Russia has lost all of its influence, markets, and production that Soviets had,
but not her military power,
but that has to do also with how willing to provoke are the Balts and Poland,
the more the USA troops develope there, the more agressive the bear will be at future,
the more Poland is Poland and peacefully EU, and not another's puppet the less agressive the bear will be,

for example Balts and Greece had significant damage to exportations and lost much of their merchant earning, due to the embargo for Ukraine,
if remember correct Lithuania lost about 35-40% of exportation income,
so I really wonder what is more profet, to accept the NATO 4 divisions of tanks that USA is planning to sent?
or just organise her military forces and be just a defending member of NATO, and not an agressive one,
and I give you some points of right there, cause with EU, is like gambling, as a Union how can protect borders and state sauvereign.
Although I believe that Deutsch will not let something like that to happen, cause they are in their sphere of influence now,
Besides Visengrad is already a small, more united and stronger EU, inside EU, Balts could join Visengrad as another option,

Anyway, the strongest the merchants relations of EU with Russia, the better for everyone, my opignion,
but at modern imperial games I can not certify a thing.

Also I do not think is a good idea to deploy the 4 divisions of NATO tanks as permanent force (2500 tanks)
is like 'wake the dead', a strong provoke, that can even pass as an agressive stance, and if 'Pigs Gulf' pissed off Americans, the oposite will piss off Russians,
and I believe is better not to piss off one of them, just stay indepentent, join OTAN as defender, and not as an attacker,

PS
as we see these days, for each ex-Soviet state Russia is losing, is taking a piece for her shelf,
Ossetia Georgia
Krimea Ukraine
Hyperdneisteria Moldova
etc
but did not took a piece from Poland Balts and ChechoSlovakia (ex)
that area always bring me a headache when I try to think their position, their strategy, their defence, their abilities, their production, and after them is Dutch India,
gush I already have one,

Milan
19-04-16, 14:08
Angela
All the above are good for you, cause you are an USA citizen,

but what about me who I am not?

Henry Kissinger?
Briezinsky?
Albright who bomb with uranium Balkans
what about Argentina Chile Portugal Spain etc etc
what about the dictators of CIA?
what about Arab spring?

I would like to add something here and would ask the same question,yes what about them are they criminals or they aren't?
ANALYSIS18 APR 16
Italian Soldiers Keep Dying from ‘Balkan Syndrome’

At least 300 Italian soldiers may have died from exposure to depleted uranium in Bosnia and Kosovo - but the Italian authorities continue to deny the existence of a connection.

Rodolfo Toe
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/file/show//Images/Images.New/Places/Bosnia/italian%20soldier%20sarajevo%20640%20NATO.jpg
An Italian soldier on the hills above Sarajevo in 1996 | Photo: NATO








More than 300 Italian soldiers may have died during the past 15 years from exposure without protection to depleted uranium during missions to Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq, while another 3,700 are sick for the same reason.
“To date, 331 Italian soldiers have died and another 3,764 have developed cancer as a consequence of having been exposed to depleted uranium,” said Domenico Leggiero, a former Italian pilot who is now president of the Osservatorio Militare [Military Observatory] association, which represents the victims and their relatives.

For what cause was used,the war to be stopped? ok there is other weapons.
What about the population that is living around?
P.S
No American despise more than me the criminal politicians in ex-Yugoslavia or the war,crimes they made with their para-criminal militaries or their own twisted ideals,although the region i am from we were not connected in this wars neither we took part anyhow,still the depleted uranium was droped couple miles from us.
Not all of them are in jail either,many still occupy high ranking positions.
Most of them still made their safe heaven in newly created countries.*Cooperation*
About the Russians they are no difference either,well they never did anything useful here apart from barking from the sidelines giving false promises to nationalists.

Yetos
19-04-16, 22:04
@ Milan
depleted uranium makes something like strong amalgum, like mercury metallic crafts
depleted uranium makes bigger splash when crush with metal especially hardened steel, which can cut him (or it) more easy
it is more effective,
but burns and vaporises and is like setting 'free' poison gas,
it acts like spread inside enemy very small quantities of poissonus mercury gas,

and not only this,
it is the easiest way to get ride your nuclear trash to a foreign country,
which country of those who have nuclear plants wants to burry them inside country?
they usually bury them at deep oceans
so the easiest way is to 'spread' them abroad, at enemy,

bicicleur
22-04-16, 10:16
As to Erdogan, I fear you may be right.

As to Russia, I sincerely hope your more optimistic view turns out to be correct, especially for the Baltic countries and countries like Poland. The latter, especially, has paid the price for Russian aggression too many times.

I would just suggest that in foreign affairs, it's always best to prepare for the worst scenario, not hope for the best one.

Actually, that's my motto in personal life as well. It's never let me down yet. :)

Erdogan's administration is gathering adresses and contact info of all Turks living in Europe.
Most Turks in Europe have double nationality and voting rights in Turkey.
Last year when there were elections in Turkey most Turks in Europe got a letter from Erdogan asking for their votes.
Now the Turkish consulate in Rotterdam has sent mails to Turks living in Europe instructing them to report insults to the adress of Erdogan.

http://www.knack.be/nieuws/wereld/turks-consulaat-in-rotterdam-roept-op-om-beledigingen-aan-erdogan-te-melden-misverstand/article-normal-694587.html?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1461284433

This is very counterproductive for Europe, it is an attempt of Erdogan to make Turks in Europe not integrate and keep their Turkish identity.
He is trying to prepare his empire inside Europe.
And from what comments I read on social media from Turks living in Europe, Erdogan has the support of a lot of them.

Of course, Europe is to blaim in part again.
They should never allow immigrants to keep double nationality.

Boreas
22-04-16, 12:17
Erdogan's administration is gathering adresses and contact info of all Turks living in Europe.
Most Turks in Europe have double nationality and voting rights in Turkey.
Last year when there were elections in Turkey most Turks in Europe got a letter from Erdogan asking for their votes.
Now the Turkish consulate in Rotterdam has sent mails to Turks living in Europe instructing them to report insults to the adress of Erdogan.

http://www.knack.be/nieuws/wereld/turks-consulaat-in-rotterdam-roept-op-om-beledigingen-aan-erdogan-te-melden-misverstand/article-normal-694587.html?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1461284433


Kurdish-Left? Party(HDP) did similar things in Turkey. They sent letters to all house using voters personel informations. Before the last election, all parties in Turkey got these information. Thanks them, now information of 50 million Voters is turing around on web :mad:



This is very counterproductive for Europe, it is an attempt of Erdogan to make Turks in Europe not integrate and keep their Turkish identity.
He is trying to prepare his empire inside Europe.


About Assimilation and İntegration, we need to talk lot. It is a global problem.




And from what comments I read on social media from Turks living in Europe, Erdogan has the support of a lot of them.


Yes you are right.

Who got the most vote in the last election

http://www.londrali.com/uploads/editor/yurt-disi-secim-sonuclari.jpg



They should never allow immigrants to keep double nationality.


In voting case, they shouldn't have right to vote.

Angela
22-04-16, 15:32
Erdogan's administration is gathering adresses and contact info of all Turks living in Europe.
Most Turks in Europe have double nationality and voting rights in Turkey.
Last year when there were elections in Turkey most Turks in Europe got a letter from Erdogan asking for their votes.
Now the Turkish consulate in Rotterdam has sent mails to Turks living in Europe instructing them to report insults to the adress of Erdogan.

http://www.knack.be/nieuws/wereld/turks-consulaat-in-rotterdam-roept-op-om-beledigingen-aan-erdogan-te-melden-misverstand/article-normal-694587.html?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1461284433

This is very counterproductive for Europe, it is an attempt of Erdogan to make Turks in Europe not integrate and keep their Turkish identity.
He is trying to prepare his empire inside Europe.
And from what comments I read on social media from Turks living in Europe, Erdogan has the support of a lot of them.

Of course, Europe is to blaim in part again.
They should never allow immigrants to keep double nationality.

Well, I can't agree with you in this case since I have dual citizenship myself. I would agree with Boreas, however, that it may not make sense to allow voting in both countries. Personally, I don't think I should be allowed to vote in Italy. If I'm not going to suffer the consequences yet, I shouldn't be inserting myself into the outcome. When I live there half the year, and pay taxes there, it will be a different thing.

However, generally, the two situations are not analogous; one can't compare the U.S. and European countries with regard to this or many other issues.

For one thing, any child born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen, period, so ipso facto children of immigrants born here are citizens.

Second of all, the goal here is to assimilate immigrants. I don't think that's the goal anywhere in Europe, and I'm not only talking about not wanting to assimilate Middle Easterners. I have relatives who went to Switzerland to work after the second world war and some of them were treated abominably. It's different for their children, but that's partly because they married Swiss people. I visited them in Zurich once and the little I heard from my relatives and overheard in passing is why I've never been back. I'll spend my dollars elsewhere. I see those relatives when they return to Italy or come here.

So, I'm skeptical of any narrative that it's totally the fault of the Turks and North Africans that they're not assimilating. I'm sure it's a two way street.

That said, the immigrants to the U.S. from the Middle East and even to some extent those from Mexico are not assimilating as quickly as did the ones from Europe with the big surge in immigration in the late 19th and early 20th century. That is indeed the fault of the U.S. in part, not because they are mistreating or excluding the immigrants, but because they are making it too easy for them to remain apart. Aggressive assimilation should be the goal, as it was for the Irish, Germans, Italians, Poles, Jews etc. The last thing we need is Balkanization.

bicicleur
22-04-16, 15:59
Second of all, the goal here is to assimilate immigrants. I don't think that's the goal anywhere in Europe, and I'm not only talking about not wanting to assimilate Middle Easterners. I have relatives who went to Switzerland to work after the second world war and some of them were treated abominably. It's different for their children, but that's partly because they married Swiss people. I visited them in Zurich once and the little I heard from my relatives and overheard in passing is why I've never been back. I'll spend my dollars elsewhere. I see those relatives when they return to Italy or come here.

So, I'm skeptical of any narrative that it's totally the fault of the Turks and North Africans that they're not assimilating. I'm sure it's a two way street.

That said, the immigrants to the U.S. from the Middle East and even to some extent those from Mexico are not assimilating as quickly as did the ones from Europe with the big surge in immigration in the late 19th and early 20th century. That is indeed the fault of the U.S. in part, not because they are mistreating or excluding the immigrants, but because they are making it too easy for them to remain apart. Aggressive assimilation should be the goal, as it was for the Irish, Germans, Italians, Poles, Jews etc. The last thing we need is Balkanization.

Here in Europe they all get the same rights as other citizens. They get medical care, their children get education. If they don't have an income they have social security, they have housing, if necessary they'll get extra education in order to find a job. Are they being treated abominably?

The only thing that fails is aggressive asimilation. They are made it even much easier than in the US to remain apart.

And in the mean time, what do you think about Erdogans' actions trying to appeal to the Turks living in Europe? He is certainly trying to keep them apart.

Yetos
22-04-16, 16:44
Erdogan's administration is gathering adresses and contact info of all Turks living in Europe.
Most Turks in Europe have double nationality and voting rights in Turkey.
Last year when there were elections in Turkey most Turks in Europe got a letter from Erdogan asking for their votes.
Now the Turkish consulate in Rotterdam has sent mails to Turks living in Europe instructing them to report insults to the adress of Erdogan.

http://www.knack.be/nieuws/wereld/turks-consulaat-in-rotterdam-roept-op-om-beledigingen-aan-erdogan-te-melden-misverstand/article-normal-694587.html?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1461284433

This is very counterproductive for Europe, it is an attempt of Erdogan to make Turks in Europe not integrate and keep their Turkish identity.
He is trying to prepare his empire inside Europe.
And from what comments I read on social media from Turks living in Europe, Erdogan has the support of a lot of them.

Of course, Europe is to blaim in part again.
They should never allow immigrants to keep double nationality.


i HAVE TO AGREE AT THE LAST

the low in Greece say that the one who is 250 km away is not obliged to vote,
but especially at 80' we had the 'election tourists'
parties carried out normally 300 000 to even 600 000 voters inland and abroad,
from abroad they put planes with cheap cost tickets,
relatives from USA Australia Germany Russia Canada etc were coming to vote,
but I do not know for whom they vote,
since they live and their interests are not common with Local,
as you see a % of taxes of local Greeks went to lower prices to 'specialized voters' and parties made lists who would come,
and although I like the idea to help them come back to homeland, I do not like the idea to do this for voting reasons,
I believe that after 5-10-15 they must forbit them to vote,
cause someone for example who is in England, will not vote according his interests, but what ever his relatives say to him,
the double nationality is also a problem,
why,
cause as a Greek I can have one id at Europe, and can not change the id,
as an immigrant to EU i can have 2-3-4 etc

So IF WE ASK GLOBALIZATION, WE MUST HAVE ONE GLOBAL ID CARD, AND VOTE ONCE, EITHER GLOBALISATION IS JUST A TRICK OF THOSE WHO PLAN IT

A. Papadimitriou
22-04-16, 17:34
I agree with those who say that everyone should have voting rights in only one country.

Angela
22-04-16, 17:49
Here in Europe they all get the same rights as other citizens. They get medical care, their children get education. If they don't have an income they have social security, they have housing, if necessary they'll get extra education in order to find a job. Are they being treated abominably?

The only thing that fails is aggressive asimilation. They are made it even much easier than in the US to remain apart.

And in the mean time, what do you think about Erdogans' actions trying to appeal to the Turks living in Europe? He is certainly trying to keep them apart.

Bicicleur, I can't speak to the situation in Belgium. I can speak a bit to the situation in Switzerland, and in France by way of contrast. After the war, in the fifties, there was immigration from Italy to Switzerland and France. Indeed there had been immigration to France for decades. In Switzerland there were Swiss who wouldn't rent apartments to them, places that wouldn't hire them even though the government was encouraging the immigration, especially to the farms, hotels etc. Then add the taunts, insults etc. that were common.

Even in my time when I went there as a teenager to visit my half Swiss cousins I was aware of it. Innocent that I was, I thought that since Italian was one of the three recognized languages, along with French and German, and since I obviously speak better Italian than either of those two, that it would be polite to ask questions, seek service etc. in Italian rather than presuming that people should speak English. Well, that was a mistake. I was either ignored or shouted at, so, at the advice of my relatives I asked if anyone spoke English and all of a sudden I was treated courteously. You don't forget things like that, and I'm the type who doesn't forgive, either. I haven't been back to their boring country since.

I never heard of any of that going on in France. I have a feeling it's different for Middle Easterners and North Africans, however.

As to Erdogan, I'm no apologist for him, and I question his motives, but if he is listened to perhaps part of the reason is that the Turks have not been accepted in Europe. If the goal was not to totally assimilate them they should not have been encouraged to immigrate there.

From what I know from relatives who immigrated here before the second world war Mussolini tried a bit of that, but his pleas fell on deaf ears. Italy had done very little for these people, whereas here they were welcomed and given an opportunity. So, while it was painful, I have relatives, born and raised in Italy, who enlisted in the American services during World War II. Most of them were sent to the Pacific theater, but some did go to Europe.

On the other hand, while I support arming the Kurds, some of the things posted on this site make me wonder about the long term consequences of that as well, both in terms of whether there will be a civil war among the different factions, and about the nature of the "Kurdistan" that will be created.

That's why I think some of the comments I've seen about how terrible the U.S. was to arm the Afghans etc. are ridiculous. That entire policy was driven by one U.S. Senator not only to help contain the Soviet Union and the spread of communism, but also out of naive idealism that we should help freedom fighters. The lesson that should have been learned is that some countries in the third world aren't yet ready for liberal democracy, and what will take the place of these dictators will be even worse not only for them but for the west. Once Qaddafi was defanged, he should have been left in place, Mubarak should have been left alone, and, I don't know, maybe even Assad was better than the alternative, although I hate to say that. It certainly would have been better for Europe than the current situation.

Yetos
30-04-16, 14:33
Well we might a repeat yesterday,

as seems Russian planes and USA planes had a 'warm kiss' above baltic sea.

PS
I think it is time to dig and equip my 'nuclear shelter'
do you believe 10 m depth is ok?

kosmonomad
30-04-16, 16:40
Well we might a repeat yesterday,

as seems Russian planes and USA planes had a 'warm kiss' above baltic sea.

PS
I think it is time to dig and equip my 'nuclear shelter'
do you believe 10 m depth is ok?


It is the excessive radiation that will do the most work. And the gangs of hungry, after a while. Something like the Fallout gameseries. Cities will go puff in smoke quickly. A nice tool to measure where to run http://www.nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/


Here's the opinion of one of the former figures from the US establishment http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/04/25/world-war-iii-has-begun-paul-craig-roberts/. My understanding is: after quarter of a century of attempts to destabilize we have finally entered the hot phase.

Yetos
30-04-16, 20:57
that is because Russia declines, a ghost of past
and Kissinger and Brzezinski are about to die so the want to see their 'work' done.

ElHorsto
30-04-16, 22:32
that is because Russia declines, a ghost of past
and Kissinger and Brzezinski are about to die so the want to see their 'work' done.

I understand why Greeks don't like Kissinger, but in this case I think his role is positive. Unlike certain liberal presidential candidates, he is not aligned with Brzerzinski.

oriental
01-05-16, 02:15
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-considine/us-depleted-uranium-as-ma_b_3812888.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/may/18/armstrade.kosovo

http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/depleted_uranium/

The Gulf War syndrome of US soldiers could be the depleted uranium shells bursting into dust and soldiers not wearing gas masks inhale the dust become victims of radiation and so on.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/uranium-and-depleted-uranium.aspx

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/du.htm

https://www.rt.com/news/iraq-depleted-uranium-health-394/

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-science-of-the-silver/


The Science of the Silver BulletDepleted uranium has been hailed as the military¿s new silver bullet and condemned as Kosovo¿s Agent Orange


By Harald Franzen (http://www.scientificamerican.com/author/harald-franzen/) on March 5, 2001












Share on Facebook


Share on Twitter


Share on Reddit


Email


Print


Share via


Google+ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-science-of-the-silver/#)
Stumble Upon (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-science-of-the-silver/#)




http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciam/cache/file/B87E68B4-0157-496E-A908C142C04C1DE5.gif?w=590&h=395
Credit: J. W. Stewart

http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/inline/0003C801-90E4-1C75-9B81809EC588EF21_arch1.jpg
Image: ERNST SCHMID/CHRISTOPH WIRZ
SILVER BULLET made from depleted uranium can pierce even the heaviest armor. Uranium shells burn away at the edges upon impacta "self-sharpening" that helps them bore into armor.



Used as ammunition, it penetrates the thick steel encasing enemy tanks; used as armor, it protects troops against attack. And when it was used in the Gulf War and later during the Allied bombing of Yugoslavia and Kosovo, depleted uranium (DU) was hailed as the new silver bullet that would solve most of the militarys problems.
After the end of Operation Allied Force, however, several Italian soldiers were diagnosed with leukemia. Politicians and the media soon forged a link between the disease and depleted uranium use. They further drew a parallel with Gulf War Syndromeand in no time, depleted uranium became the Agent Orange of the Balkan conflict.
Despite the recent attention, depleted uranium is not all that new. The military has experimented with it since the 1970s. Military interest in the heavy metal is twofold: For one thing, uranium is almost twice as dense as lead, and thus packs a lot of punch as ammunition. Like its slightly denser cousin, tungsten, uranium can penetrate most heavy armor. But whereas tungsten projectiles become rounded at the tip upon impact, uranium shells burn away at the edges. This "self-sharpening" helps them bore into armor.
Also attractive to the military is depleted uranium's abundance. Depleted uranium is a by-product of the process by which uranium 235the most radioactive and most useful form of uraniumis isolated from natural, mined ores (for more information, see the side bar). In 1998 the U.S. Department of Energy had about 500,000 metric tons of depleted uranium in storage.
Depleted uranium armor-piercing incendiary (API) munition comes in two main forms. One is fired from the suitably nicknamed "Tank Buster" A-10 Thunderbolt aircraft; the other shoots from M1 Abrams tanks, which are also enforced with DU armor. Both types of API munitionsa total of 300 tonswere used during the Gulf War. But only the A-10 kind was used during Operation Allied Force in Yugoslavia.
According to a statement by NATO Secretary-General Lord Robertson, some 31,000 rounds of DU ammunition were used throughout Kosovo during the 11 weeks of Operation Allied Force. Each round of A-10 DU ammunition contains a 300-gram DU penetrator slug, which brings the total amount of depleted uranium dropped during the conflict to a little less than 10 metric tons.
Radioactive and Toxic


http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/inline/0003C801-90E4-1C75-9B81809EC588EF21_arch2.jpg
Image: ERNST SCHMID/CHRISTOPH WIRZ
DU AMMUNITION can easily destroy an armored vehicle such as the American M1 A1 above, which was accidentally hit by friendly fire.



The question now is whether the metal that lies scattered over a wide area of the Balkans presents a health threat to soldiers and civilians. "There are clearly two issues" with DU, explains David Brenner of Columbia University's School of Public Health, "the radiation and the toxicological issue." Indeed, not only is depleted uranium potentially dangerous because of its radioactivity, it is also a strong toxin. "If there are effects, it would seem to me that the radiation effects would be the smaller of the two," adds Brenner, a specialist in the biological effects of radiation.
In fact, compared to other materials, uranium and depleted uranium are not terribly radioactive (see the side bar). The latter is used to actually shield radiation from fuel rods in nuclear power plants. But that's not to say that they couldn't have some deleterious health effects. As uranium and its daughter products decay, they emit alpha-, beta- and gamma-radiationall of which behave differently within the human body. Gamma-radiation can reach far into the body, but releases its energy gradually. As a result, it has little impact on any one part or organ. Alpha- and beta-radiation, on the other hand, are more hazardous because they have a short range and release all their energy within a small area.
"The so-called RBE, the relative biological effectiveness, for alpha particles is about 20 times higher than that of x-rays or gamma rays," says Tom Hei, also of Columbia University, who studies radiation and cancer. Brenner agrees that alpha-radiation is the biggest concern, but adds that its short range also makes it less harmful in some ways: "The alpha particles have to reach sensitive cells to be of any relevance. The distance they can travel in tissue or water or something like that is in tens of microns." In other words, if a person is exposed to alpha-radiation from the outside of the bodyfrom standing next to a pile of uranium, for examplethe alpha-radiation won't penetrate the skin, if it reaches the skin at all.
So what is important, then, is not so much the amount of radiation involved, but how much enters the body. The relevant unit for the impact of radiation on tissue is the Sievert (Sv), defined as the amount of energy given off in one kilogram of tissue. Another unit to describe the same thing is the Rem (100 Rem is equivalent to 1 Sv).
In a normal setting, a person is exposed to between one and three millisieverts (1Sv = 1,000 mSv) per year. If you were to stand about three feet from 1 kilogram of DU for one yearthe equivalent of about three A-10 shellsyou would be exposed to about one millisievert per year. But the tissues exposed would most likely be skin or fatneither of which are among the sensitive cells Brenner mentions above. Indeed, to do real damage, the radiation would have to reach tissue such as bone marrow.
Theoretically that could happen if a soldier got fragments of uranium embedded in his or her body through injury in combat. During Operation Desert Storm, about 30 soldiers were hurt when their tank was hit by "friendly fire" that contained depleted uranium. As a result of the incident, several soldiers were left with DU shrapnel embedded in their bodies. "Then perhaps the DU is right next to bone marrow, for example, so the alpha particles would have enough range to damage the blood cells," Brenner says. The soldiers' health is being closely monitored, but so far there is no evidence of any ill effects.
Ingested or Inhaled?


http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/inline/0003C801-90E4-1C75-9B81809EC588EF21_arch3.jpg
Image: USAF
A-10 THUNDERBOLTS, such as the one above, carried armor-piercing incendiary (API) munition made from depleted uranium during Operation Allied Force.



Of course, there are other ways that depleted uranium can enter the body. When DU projectiles hit a target, they partly burn up, creating uranium dust particles, or aerosols. Unlike southern Iraq, Kosovo and Yugoslavia are agricultural regions, and some observers have raised the concern that uranium dust particles might enter the food chain through crops.
According to the AC-Laboratorium Spiez, an independent laboratory that tests soil samples for the United Nations and other organizations, only about 17 percent of the DU particles found after a DU explosion are easily soluble, and might thus find their way into foods. Of those, only 2 to 5 percent are actually taken into the blood stream through the digestive system, making it a negligible source of radiation. "That would be the smallest possible source of exposure," says Brenner. "Because, again, the alpha particles would then be within some stuff, within liquid or whatever and it wouldnt have enough range to get out."
Apart from ingesting the aerosols, they can also be inhaleda potentially more harmful path. "When you inhale some of these particlesfor instance, in the case of radon, which is a decay product of uraniumthese particles give off alpha-radiation, which could cause lung cancer," Hei says. The correlation between radon and an increased risk of lung cancer was first discovered in uranium miners, who inhaled large quantities. As many as 75 percent of them got lung cancer. Radon gas also rises naturally from the soil, especially in regions with high granite concentrations such as the New York/New Jersey area.
"It depends on how much [exposure] we are talking about here," Brenner says. "I think you would probably get a bigger exposure just from being in your house than from almost any conceivable DU exposure." Similarly, he does not believe that temporary exposure to the radioactive aerosols will do damage. "If you just inhale radon gas, for example, the alpha particles would be in the air in your lung and would have no range to get to any significant, sensitive cells."
Of importance is where exposure to the aerosols occurs. "In an outdoor setting, like in a war or something, the concentrations would be very low," Brenner says. The worst-case scenario might be for the crew of a tank hit with DU ammunition. According to a study by the AC-Laboratorium Spiez, those soldiers could inhale up to 50 milligrams of uranium aerosol. Still, only about 25 percent of the particles with a diameter less than 10 microns would be deposited in the lungs. And as mentioned above, only a small percentage of them would be easily soluble. The rest would be incorporated into the mucus in the lungs, and coughed or sneezed back out in less than an hour.
Poisonous Legacy?


http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/inline/0003C801-90E4-1C75-9B81809EC588EF21_arch4.jpg
Image: NATO
KOSOVO was rocked with some 31,000 rounds of DU ammunition during the 11 weeks of Operation Allied Force. People must now remove any pieces that remain before they can cause any additional harm.



To be certain, inhaling or ingesting uranium aerosols delivers some additional radiation to the body, but the real health threat may have nothing to do with radioactivity. "Uranium is a toxin that effects the kidneys," toxicologist Bruce Kelman says. "Once you get the uranium into biological fluids, it mostly goes to the liver and kidneys. It breaks down the tubules in the kidneys that allow you to filter the urine out."
It is difficult to say how little depleted uranium it might take to make a person sick, Kelman says, because it depends on its physical form and whether it was inhaled, ingested or shot into the body. "The U.S. EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] determined that the most appropriate oral measure to use was a study in rabbits indicating that the lowest level at which there was an adverse effect observed was 2.8 mg/kg/day"that is, milligrams per kilogram of body mass per day. To put that into perspective, Kelman observes, "in terms of making the environment dirty, I don't think it makes it any dirtier than any other kind of military munition, where you have lead scattered throughout the environment, where you have toxic components of explosives that are left over."
So thus far, the threat seems negligible, but a certain amount of caution is warranted. "There is a general known lag period between radiation exposure and when a cancer is going to occur, if it's going to occur," Brenner says. "And it's on the order of 20 years or so. So you wouldn't expect to see radiation-related cancers from, say, Kosovo now. That would be against everything we know about how radiation causes cancer." There are two exceptions to that rule: thyroid disorders and leukemia. "Radiation-induced leukemia occurs generally in the first five years."
Most of the controversy over Kosovo has, in fact, focused on leukemia. After several NATO soldiers who served in Kosovo were diagnosed, the World Health Organization investigated whether the number of leukemia cases in Kosovo had risen during the last few years. They came to the conclusion that it had not. But this past November, the United Nations Environmental Program followed up, sending a team of experts to Kosovo to take soil and water samples in 11 locations. "At eight sites the team found either slightly higher amounts of beta-radiation immediately at or around the holes left by DU ammunition, or pieces and remnants of ammunition," Pekka Haavisto, former Finnish environment minister and leader of the UNEPs Balkan Task Force team, said in a statement on January 11.
A later analysis concluded that some of the depleted uranium used during the war contained traces of plutonium and uranium 236neither of which occur naturally, but are created during nuclear fission. This discovery made the origins of the DU a hot political issue and raised additional health concerns because both materials are far more radioactive than regular DU. As it turned out, though, the traces of U236 were so small that they did not change the radioactivity of the depleted uranium; so too, the plutonium content varied from a negligible 0.8 to 12.87 becquerel per kilogram.
Although depleted uranium may not pose an immediate threat, because it is both radioactive and toxic, some action is warranted. Klaus Toepfer, executive director of the UNEP, sums up the recommendations made by the Balkans Task Force in 1999: "Highest priority should be given to finding pieces of depleted uranium and heavily contaminated surfaces. Measures should be taken for the secure storage of any contaminated material recovered.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2GTP1pe2c4

A. Papadimitriou
01-05-16, 03:14
I understand why Greeks don't like Kissinger, but in this case I think his role is positive. Unlike certain liberal presidential candidates, he is not aligned with Brzerzinski.
The Greeks who believe in conspiracy theories and have antisemitic tendencies don't like him. Regular Greeks are indifferent towards him.
Greek conspiracy theorists have said that he claimed that because the Greek people are hard to govern / to subdue, Greek culture, language, religion etc should be destroyed.
Of course this is bs. (This myth is from 1997)

Yetos
01-05-16, 07:11
The Greeks who believe in conspiracy theories and have antisemitic tendencies don't like him. Regular Greeks are indifferent towards him.
Greek conspiracy theorists have said that he claimed that because the Greek people are hard to govern / to subdue, Greek culture, language, religion etc should be destroyed.
Of course this is bs. (This myth is from 1997)

is not a myth,
and it is from 1972, when the Junda he pushed, did not done his work
1) aircorridor to Iesrael
2) Nato headquarters at Larissa
3) invasion to cyprus and cancel of Makarios,

so he sent Robin to made November of '73 and bring dictator Ιωαννιδης

ατ 1974 at an interview he declare in Public that Greeks should be 'reformed' cause their social structure does not fit with the 'modern world'
search Aviano-Suda bay and Yom Kippur war, and why in occupied lands of cyprus there is no strong NATO airport, but a strong exists at Incirlic.

after civil war, started the dogma of 'no war' at Greece, not one Greek soldier to die for foreigns,
Although due to king Παυλος (Paul) a battaglion went to Korea, as obligation to the 3000 indians of Scomby,
that broke 1 time from that time, when Greece send a battleship at Arabian gulf against Sadam's Iraq.
search also for EOKA division why it has retreated from Cyprus.
the stupidity of Freiderica of Hannover to visit Queen of England at 50's, started a fire among Greek politicians and palace (το χαστουκι της Φρειδερικης)
and division of Army to National and Royal (Εθνικος Στρατος, Βασιλικον Ναυτικον etc)
now Kissinger knew about that, so they manage to bring a Junda, in order to force Greece to participate at the wars of Arabs and Iesrael,
But first Junda denied, and USA had to change plans at the wars of Yom Kippur, so they bring the second of Ιωαννιδης of ΕΣΑ,
to fullfill the acts against Makarios and Cyprus which lead to division of Cyprus,
But Although Cyprus divided, strangely no Strong NATO or USA is there, at least as strong as Aviano and Suda bay

Kissinger and Greek Τετενες had a fight and punch each other at a meeting.

after that he created Ozalism,
for why Greece has so many immigrants although almost at economical destruction etc etc is a plan from late 70's
8 years now all we hear is μνημονια και χρωσταμε, but we still acomodate immigrants from all over the world, and they can find a job, when ανεργεια reach 25%, madness, or science fiction movie?
were are they pushing us? have you ever thought?
simply if you are Greek as you claim remember, not a drop of Greek blood for foreigns,
Although I am afraid that a new Junda will come again that will force us to fight for foreigns,
or we will become as Lebanon, but is better to become Lebanon, than to spoil Greek blood for foreign imperialistic games.

except if you a boy of frappe, who never worked and pass your time drinking frappe and discuss movie and music culture and stock exchange.
Media were and are controled and you know it, they shut down public TV to reopen it, and now they will shut down private TV, just to reopen them, carbage show,
a new era is coming, but will not last long,not even a generation, choose your destiny, cause all these politicians will be executed, and many ιδρυματα πολιτικων will become public toilets.

Yetos
01-05-16, 07:49
I understand why Greeks don't like Kissinger, but in this case I think his role is positive. Unlike certain liberal presidential candidates, he is not aligned with Brzerzinski.

ypou have a big point of truth here.
Kiisinger's friend was Dayan,
they both share the dogma 'detente' with USSR.
Kissinger was very smart indeed,

as seems he only lost at Brasil, due to massive European migration and European corporations/industry at 1970-80s and after, but still as seems,
and at Balkans where only half of his plan took place until now

LABERIA
27-05-16, 11:54
that is because Russia declines, a ghost of past
and Kissinger and Brzezinski are about to die so the want to see their 'work' done.

Yes:
Putin Loses Handle On Presidential Military Inspection.
Russia President Vladimir Putin looks on, bemused, as the handle on the door of the armored SUV comes off in the hand of General Aleksandr Shevchenko, while the chief of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff, General Valery Gerasimov, looks on, appalled.
http://i64.tinypic.com/vs06dd.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW7tLdlai30

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=https%3A%2F%2Flenta.ru%2Fnews%2F2016%2 F05%2F12%2Fruchka%2F&langpair=auto|en
At that moment, when Putin showed UAZ military jeep, a heavy machine gun which can be installed in a car jammed the handle. President alone tried to open the car door, and then he came to the aid of Shevchenko. The general also failed, and the handle came off in the end.