Neutrality

[Firefly]

And that Tiananmen Square massacre was just a figment of our imagination.

 

[Purple]

I guess I should have been more explicit. I meant that China, Russia and Iran were no threat to the U.S. in the last few years

Yes, they have successfully contained them. That's good news for the free world.

yet it's gone out of its way to try and provoke all three.

They have contained them. That's upset them.

Taiwan is part of China. It's a legacy, civil war-era, internal issue that they should be left alone to resolve.

The people of Taiwan live in a free democratic country. They transitions from a dictatorship to a democracy. They were probably supported in doing so by other free democratic countries, including the USA. The people of Taiwan would live under a dictatorship in a police state if they were under the rule of China. Do you think they should just accept that?

India-China have a long standing border dispute - big deal.

Oh, okay. Is that because there's no Jews involved?

The rate of incarceration is much higher in the U.S. than it is in China.

Do you believe the figures issued by the Chinese Government?

That's your view and you're sticking to it. No problem. I'm not here to convince you of anything - but I disagree.

There's no basis for your claim. That's why it is rubbish.

More trumped up narrative.

Are you aware of the details of what's going on?

You wrote all this in response to a point I made on infrastructure - and by infrastructure I mean the complete network of high speed rail that didn't exist 15 years ago and now does. I mean roads, bridges, etc. What you've come back with doesn't in any way counter the point I made. They spent money on infrastructure that their people will benefit from for years while the yanks don't even have a single high speed rail line in the entire country and would rather spend the money on forever wars.

You're building a lot of Strawmen.

Totally disingenuous. Are you aware what this symbol/character means -> "?" <-
I asked a question. I know you want to run with a certain assumption but you have no grounds to.

Does that mean you think that Israel were in cahoots with Hamas?!
It wasn't just a leading question, you made a statement in the form of a question.

Yeah, I probably didn't make myself clear. I meant that China/Iran/Russia - in the last few years - have done little to nothing to deserve the aggressive stance taken against them by the U.S. None of them were a threat to the U.S.

That's an incredibly naive statement. I say incredibly in that it lacks credibility.
You're assertion that Viktor Yanukovych was elected democratically in 2004 also lacks credibility. The re-running of the election was ordered by Ukraine's supreme court. That election was free and fair. There was no overthrowing of any government. Suggesting that there was is totally disingenuous.

As regards the Life of Brian reference, criticism isn't a bad thing. Supporting a colony in its genocide should warrant such criticism. 600,000 dead Ukrainians should warrant that criticism (and people will continue to scream bloody blue murder here that that's not on them - but it is).

Are you saying that it was okay for Russia to invade Ukraine and that it was the act of resisting that invasion that was wrong? Are you saying that the resulting deaths are therefore the fault of the Ukrainians?

Do you think that Russia is a democracy and that the people of Russia are free?
Do you think that China is a democracy and that the people of China are free?
Do you think that Iran is a democracy and that the people of Iran are free?

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@Purple China isn't all bad. It bans Bitcoin.

 

[joe sod]

You wrote all this in response to a point I made on infrastructure - and by infrastructure I mean the complete network of high speed rail that didn't exist 15 years ago and now does. I mean roads, bridges, etc. What you've come back with doesn't in any way counter the point I made. They spent money on infrastructure that their people will benefit from for years while the yanks don't even have a single high speed rail line in the entire country and would rather spend the money on forever wars.

That's because the US industrialised in the 19th century whereas China only doing it now. It's easy put in brand new infrastructure where nothing existed beforehand (well whatever was there was just demolished, the state just grabs your house and land and throws you a few shekels) I'd like to see how China deals with infrastructure in already developed cities in 60 years time, then its in the same boat as everyone else.

Like Russia, China wasted alot of time on Mao's failed communist policies and great leaps forward only abandoned for western capitalism in the 90s. It also lost centuries of development before that by closing itself off and isolationism. At least it didn't go down the Russian path of imperialism but suffered under Russian imperialism as result. China has to get manchuria back from Russia first. As for Taiwan, that's the same as ukraine an independent country completely separate from China, they chose capitalism and freedom

China didn't come out of covid too well either, it persisted with harsh lockdowns until last year and never developed a successful mRNA vaccine like the US and Europe did ,the Chinese vaccine became ineffective against the new covid variants just like putin's sputnik vaccine

 

[Purple]

It seems that if you are an democratic country which is technologically advanced and is good at defending yourself and other democracies from dictators, terrorists and fundamentalists you should in fact hold back to give the aggressors a fair chance.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@Purple there are 31 countries (ex the YZI* herself) under the yoke of the YZI. Funny thing is that they are all scared stiff at the prospect of The Donald winning in case he is not bluffing about freeing them from the YZI and letting Putin do "what he damn well likes".
* YZI Yankee Zionist Imperialist

 

[tecate]

And that Tiananmen Square massacre was just a figment of our imagination.

A resident historian enters the chat. Welcome Leo, it's been too long (?). I mean Tiananmen. 34 years ago. As you'll recall, I said that Iran, China & Russia had done nothing to the U.S. in recent years to justify U.S. aggression as it tries its hardest to goad them into conflict (and successfully so in one of the three cases, soon to be 2 of the three cases it looks like. Tiananmen has nothing to do with that.

Yes, they have successfully contained them. That's good news for the free world.

Just how much "rules-based democracy" propaganda are you polluting yourself with each day!? I said that they were NOT a threat and you come back with stating that the U.S. has "contained them." If they weren't any threat...?

They have contained them. That's upset them.

Obviously I'm totally unreasonable here in suggesting that a sovereign nation would have every right to be upset if a military power is doing its best to provoke war, destabilize a country via CIA antics, etc. How very undemocratic of them to take issue with that type of behaviour.

The people of Taiwan live in a free democratic country. They transitions from a dictatorship to a democracy. They were probably supported in doing so by other free democratic countries, including the USA. The people of Taiwan would live under a dictatorship in a police state if they were under the rule of China. Do you think they should just accept that?

My, the spreading of "rules based democracy" for the good of the world is something to behold. Even Tom Cruise's outfit can't match this. What I stated was accurate. I know you want to spread the word of "rules-based democracy" and with that, I don't need to comment further.

Oh, okay. Is that because there's no Jews involved?

When all else fails, then go for Mileikowsky's playbook and default to antisemitism. I've stated previously that there are plenty of good jews. There's no comparison between the two and I dismissed it on that basis. I'll take you back to the opening of my previous post and point out that in trying to engage in whataboutery to try and blacken one side vs. the other, the list of conflicts that the U.S. has ended up in is multiple times longer than that of China. You're on very shaky ground trying to push that narrative.

Do you believe the figures issued by the Chinese Government?

If you can disprove the data, then fill yer boots. I've already listened to the argument that there's no point listening to Putin because he's a liar when the "rules-based democracy" set have been called out on porkies, left, right and centre. It's been long since acknowledged that there's something seriously wrong with the U.S. based on its level of incarceration. I've never heard anyone defend it - but given the interactions here I won't be at all surprised for that to change! Have any one of you acknowledged any wrongdoing by the U.S.? You'd have us believe that they're whiter than white? That's not credible.

There's no basis for your claim. That's why it is rubbish.

I disagree entirely.

Are you aware of the details of what's going on?

I'm aware of the propaganda line that's being followed yes.

You're building a lot of Strawmen.

This is your second attempt at this and another side-stepping epic fail. If you'd like to be honest for a second, the response would be, "yes Tecate, the Chinese have built some wonderful infrastructure that their people will get full benefit from over the coming decades, while the U.S. have added nothing and spent all their $ on forever wars."
It seems you can't dispute that as you have...nothing..in response.

It wasn't just a leading question, you made a statement in the form of a question.

Incorrect. I asked a question. I didn't "make a statement".

That's an incredibly naive statement. I say incredibly in that it lacks credibility.
You're assertion that Viktor Yanukovych was elected democratically in 2004 also lacks credibility. The re-running of the election was ordered by Ukraine's supreme court. That election was free and fair. There was no overthrowing of any government. Suggesting that there was is totally disingenuous.

So, previously I've put it to you that the U.S. has been and is - constantly going round the globe, destabilizing governments, staging coups, not in an effort to spread the word of the almighty to the downtrodden but to further its own objectives. You've said you're down with the crusade and more power to them! But this wasn't that? I mean, you're on record as saying its all good but yet you can't acknowledge what went down in this case? Of course you can't. Nobody here can or will. I won't be trying to convince otherwise either! Why? Because the whole house of cards crumbles the minute any of you acknowledge it - because at that point, you'd have to acknowledge that Russia is NOT the aggressor in this instance.

Do you think that Russia is a democracy and that the people of Russia are free?
Do you think that China is a democracy and that the people of China are free?
Do you think that Iran is a democracy and that the people of Iran are free?

That's their business isn't it? I get your Church of Scientology-level zest for wanting to spread the word of "rules-based democracy" but maybe we should leave that to them. I've no doubt that they're far from perfect - but what you won't acknowledge is that the "rules-based democracy" doctrine is not entirely healthy either.

@Purple China isn't all bad. It bans Bitcoin.

Exactly to my point. I've every reason to hate the Chinese. But the level of absurdity to be found has limitless depth on this thread because this is a thread in which I had to admire the Brits for having the "decency" to not have leveled West Belfast to the ground with every man, woman and child buried beneath the rubble. That, I certainly didn't see on my bingo card!

That's because the US industrialised in the 19th century whereas China only doing it now. It's easy put in brand new infrastructure where nothing existed beforehand (well whatever was there was just demolished, the state just grabs your house and land and throws you a few shekels) I'd like to see how China deals with infrastructure in already developed cities in 60 years time, then its in the same boat as everyone else.

I see some merit in the point you're making but it still doesn't address directly the point I made. So you're saying its easier for the Chinese. But the yanks had $ to allocate. How many billions have they spent on the forever wars? I get that for them to build out infrastructure might be much higher cost but surely they'd have something to show for it that would make the everyday lives of ordinary people better? The Chinese built out an entire high speed rail network. Taking your point on board and allowing for the variance in cost, surely the yanks could have built out a line or two?

Like Russia, China wasted alot of time on Mao's failed communist policies and great leaps forward only abandoned for western capitalism in the 90s. It also lost centuries of development before that by closing itself off and isolationism.

I've always thought of communism as the best system in theory and a flawed system that doesn't account for human behaviour in practice. That said, if anyone thinks that capitalism and "rules-based democracy" are perfect, I'm having none of it. There's plenty of room for improvement.

It seems that if you are an democratic country which is technologically advanced and is good at defending yourself and other democracies from dictators, terrorists and fundamentalists you should in fact hold back to give the aggressors a fair chance.

"good at defending yourself" Yeah, we'll stop right there! "How dare you put your country so aggressively close to our bases!"

@Purple there are 31 countries (ex the YZI* herself) under the yoke of the YZI. Funny thing is that they are all scared stiff at the prospect of The Donald winning in case he is not bluffing about freeing them from the YZI and letting Putin do "what he damn well likes".
* YZI Yankee Zionist Imperialist

I think that war is going to come to a close in 2025 with or without the Donald.

 

[Purple]

A resident historian enters the chat. Welcome Leo, it's been too long (?). I mean Tiananmen. 34 years ago. As you'll recall, I said that Iran, China & Russia had done nothing to the U.S. in recent years to justify U.S. aggression as it tries its hardest to goad them into conflict (and successfully so in one of the three cases, soon to be 2 of the three cases it looks like. Tiananmen has nothing to do with that.

No no answer from you.

Just how much "rules-based democracy" propaganda are you polluting yourself with each day!? I said that they were NOT a threat and you come back with stating that the U.S. has "contained them." If they weren't any threat...?

Why do you keep referring to rules based democracy in quotes when I didn't use that phrase?

Do you think that democracy is a good idea and that people should have the right to elect their leaders on a regular basis?

Obviously I'm totally unreasonable here in suggesting that a sovereign nation would have every right to be upset if a military power is doing its best to provoke war, destabilize a country via CIA antics, etc. How very undemocratic of them to take issue with that type of behaviour.

Do you think that a government should be able to do anything it likes to its people without any intervention of any sort from any other country?

My, the spreading of "rules based democracy" for the good of the world is something to behold. Even Tom Cruise's outfit can't match this. What I stated was accurate. I know you want to spread the word of "rules-based democracy" and with that, I don't need to comment further.

You certainly don't need to comment in that way as it's completely meaningless.

I'll take you back to the opening of my previous post and point out that in trying to engage in whataboutery to try and blacken one side vs. the other, the list of conflicts that the U.S. has ended up in is multiple times longer than that of China. You're on very shaky ground trying to push that narrative.

You are blackening one side against the other by constantly going on about Israel and using the term Zionist in a racist way while not acknowledging the fact that Hamas are a fundamentalist terrorist organisation who started the current round of this forever conflict by murdering hundreds of men women and children. You then engage in whataboutery about America.

If you can disprove the data, then fill yer boots. I've already listened to the argument that there's no point listening to Putin because he's a liar when the "rules-based democracy" set have been called out on porkies, left, right and centre. It's been long since acknowledged that there's something seriously wrong with the U.S. based on its level of incarceration. I've never heard anyone defend it - but given the interactions here I won't be at all surprised for that to change! Have any one of you acknowledged any wrongdoing by the U.S.? You'd have us believe that they're whiter than white? That's not credible.

More ridiculous whataboutery.

I disagree entirely.

Of course you do.

I'm aware of the propaganda line that's being followed yes.

You see to have swallowed it. The Chinese one that is.

Incorrect. I asked a question. I didn't "make a statement".

Okay, I'll ask you again; Does that mean you think that Israel were in cahoots with Hamas?

So, previously I've put it to you that the U.S. has been and is - constantly going round the globe, destabilizing governments, staging coups, not in an effort to spread the word of the almighty to the downtrodden but to further its own objectives. You've said you're down with the crusade and more power to them! But this wasn't that? I mean, you're on record as saying its all good but yet you can't acknowledge what went down in this case? Of course you can't. Nobody here can or will. I won't be trying to convince otherwise either! Why? Because the whole house of cards crumbles the minute any of you acknowledge it - because at that point, you'd have to acknowledge that Russia is NOT the aggressor in this instance.

Are you saying that it is the fault of Ukraine and America that Russia invaded Ukraine?

That's their business isn't it? I get your Church of Scientology-level zest for wanting to spread the word of "rules-based democracy" but maybe we should leave that to them. I've no doubt that they're far from perfect - but what you won't acknowledge is that the "rules-based democracy" doctrine is not entirely healthy either.

Same question as above; Do you think that a government should be able to do anything it likes to its people without any intervention of any sort from any other country?

Exactly to my point. I've every reason to hate the Chinese.

Do tell.

But the level of absurdity to be found has limitless depth on this thread because this is a thread in which I had to admire the Brits for having the "decency" to not have leveled West Belfast to the ground with every man, woman and child buried beneath the rubble. That, I certainly didn't see on my bingo card!

More strawman nonsense.

I've always thought of communism as the best system in theory and a flawed system that doesn't account for human behaviour in practice. That said, if anyone thinks that capitalism and "rules-based democracy" are perfect, I'm having none of it. There's plenty of room for improvement.

There's always room for improvement. It happens more when the government is elected by the people and the people have the right to free expression. Like what happens in rule based democracies rather than in Russia, China, Iran and Hamas controlled Gaza.

"good at defending yourself" Yeah, we'll stop right there! "How dare you put your country so aggressively close to our bases!"

What on earth are you talking about?

I'd have a conversation with you about the legacy of colonialism, the destruction caused to the development of so many countries during the cold war and the deep flaws in the current international order but frankly I don't think you'd be worth the effort as you are extremely ill-informed and have what is a childishly unbalanced understanding of the world.

 

[Leo]

A resident historian enters the chat. Welcome Leo, it's been too long (?).

You'll note I wasn't responding to you, I've learned long ago that rational argument and your presence are mutually exclusive. While psychologists would fine your need to label everyone intriguing, likely suggestive of a reflection on your perceptions of self, I find them tedious and immature.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@Purple This thread is about Ireland's neutrality. LWT has made a very strong case that we should align with the jihadists.

 

[tecate]

No no answer from you.

Not only is it quite the opposite, Leo tells us he wasn't looking for a response.

Why do you keep referring to rules based democracy in quotes when I didn't use that phrase?

I didn't say you used the phrase, but it certainly has been used in the wider world and it is certainly pertinent to this discussion. You may not have used the phrase but it is precisely what you've been referring to, because that's the brand of democracy being pursued by the U.S. and its vassels and in terms of foreign policy, the rules are made up as they go along and are inconsistent.

Do you think that democracy is a good idea and that people should have the right to elect their leaders on a regular basis?

In general, yes I do. Do I think it's a perfect system? - No. Should people have that right? - people should determine what is best for them. I don't think anyone should be going around forcing the matter by destablizing governments, orchestrating coups, etc.

Do you think that a government should be able to do anything it likes to its people without any intervention of any sort from any other country?

I don't think the knee-jerk should be lets bomb these people into democracy. I don't think that there is a grain of honesty in the approach to such things right now and until that's fixed, I'd say that there shouldn't be any such intervention. We're also seeing "intervention" from the "rules-based democracy" crowd right now which is inflicting misery on people. I think there's a need to get back to diplomatic means rather than what we're seeing right now. And of course in the case of Ukraine, there were several agreements - all broken by the "rules-based democracy" crowd because they had a different agenda entirely. Imagine that 600,000 Ukrainians have died because someone wanted to use their territory to pose a threat to Russia? Zelensky was elected on a peace mandate. There was an agreement on the table and agreed to, which basically meant no NATO - and that wasn't good enough for his overseas masters (and their agenda)...but he followed those overseas masters, not the peace mandate promised to his people.

You certainly don't need to comment in that way as it's completely meaningless.

Upon reflection, I'm more than happy with the appropriateness of my comment/response.

You are blackening one side against the other by constantly going on about Israel and using the term Zionist in a racist way while not acknowledging the fact that Hamas are a fundamentalist terrorist organisation who started the current round of this forever conflict by murdering hundreds of men women and children. You then engage in whataboutery about America.

I dare not mention Israel? I'm guilty about "constantly going on about Israel"? I'm not in any way going on enough about Israel and nobody is. You keep trying to "blacken" an opposing view with the racism card. It's pure bs. I've said multiple times now, there are plenty of decent jews out there, who are opposed to this war. And more labelling with the use of "terrorist" when states are presented as being beyond terrorism. There's a fundamentalist streak to that culture that to me is ugly but we're certainly not going to get along with them any better by genociding their men, women and children....and not recognizing that there are state-level terrorists and equally recognizing them with that same terminology.

As regards how many men, women and children Hamas killed on October 7, it seems that it's a hell of a lot less than was claimed as the Israeli state implemented the Hannibal directive and killed their own.

More ridiculous whataboutery.

How is it whataboutery when I responded directly to something you brought up? You blackened China on the basis of the number of people jailed when the number of people jailed in the U.S. is much higher. I would think that's relevant to what you asserted.

Okay, I'll ask you again; Does that mean you think that Israel were in cahoots with Hamas?

I believe that I was asking a question. Perhaps you could have answered it instead of trying to chisel out a conspiracy theory gotcha. But I'll answer your question. I doubt that.

Are you saying that it is the fault of Ukraine and America that Russia invaded Ukraine?

1000% YES! Three words for you - Cuban Missile Crisis ...which also neatly ties in with my ongoing reference to the "rules-based democracy" deal...because the rules are made up as it suits by the entity installing itself as the moral authority.

Same question as above; Do you think that a government should be able to do anything it likes to its people without any intervention of any sort from any other country?

Asked and answered.

Do tell.

The Duke just told you.

More strawman nonsense.

It's the farthest thing from strawman. The propaganda line that was pursued was "human shield" this and "human shield" that. The strategy is to use all compliant media to push out that slop - because if you keep telling it to people again and again and again and again, eventually they might work on assumption and not question its validity or evidence backing it OR the simple fact that even if there was such a thing, in NO WAY could it be reasonable to use that as an excuse to bomb innocent people.

There's always room for improvement. It happens more when the government is elected by the people and the people have the right to free expression. Like what happens in rule based democracies rather than in Russia, China, Iran and Hamas controlled Gaza.

That may well be the case but you don't make that choice for people. You leave them to organize themselves.

What on earth are you talking about?

I'll tell you what I was talking about. You referred to the U.S. as being good at defending itself. Nobody attacked it! It's half a world away from any of these things. The joke is that it claims that China is being aggressive, that Russia is being aggressive, and it is the one plonking military bases all around those places. Can you imagine the uproar there would be if, tomorrow, the Russians entered into an agreement with the Mexicans and put a big ass military installation in place along the border with the U.S.? And yet that's exactly the same deal as what played out in Ukraine. Double standards.

I don't think you'd be worth the effort as you are extremely ill-informed and have what is a childishly unbalanced understanding of the world.

I see this as an attempt to undermine the validity of the points raised. You can't address them directly so blacken me instead. Anyone with any intelligence will see through that.

You'll note I wasn't responding to you, I've learned long ago that rational argument and your presence are mutually exclusive. While psychologists would fine your need to label everyone intriguing, likely suggestive of a reflection on your perceptions of self, I find them tedious and immature.

See my response to Purple above this comment. Same goes for you.

 

[tecate]

@Purple This thread is about Ireland's neutrality. LWT has made a very strong case that we should align with the jihadists.

I've said no such thing.

 

[Purple]

Not only is it quite the opposite, Leo tells us he wasn't looking for a response.


I didn't say you used the phrase, but it certainly has been used in the wider world and it is certainly pertinent to this discussion. You may not have used the phrase but it is precisely what you've been referring to, because that's the brand of democracy being pursued by the U.S. and its vassels and in terms of foreign policy, the rules are made up as they go along and are inconsistent.


In general, yes I do. Do I think it's a perfect system? - No. Should people have that right? - people should determine what is best for them. I don't think anyone should be going around forcing the matter by destablizing governments, orchestrating coups, etc.


I don't think the knee-jerk should be lets bomb these people into democracy. I don't think that there is a grain of honesty in the approach to such things right now and until that's fixed, I'd say that there shouldn't be any such intervention. We're also seeing "intervention" from the "rules-based democracy" crowd right now which is inflicting misery on people. I think there's a need to get back to diplomatic means rather than what we're seeing right now. And of course in the case of Ukraine, there were several agreements - all broken by the "rules-based democracy" crowd because they had a different agenda entirely. Imagine that 600,000 Ukrainians have died because someone wanted to use their territory to pose a threat to Russia? Zelensky was elected on a peace mandate. There was an agreement on the table and agreed to, which basically meant no NATO - and that wasn't good enough for his overseas masters (and their agenda)...but he followed those overseas masters, not the peace mandate promised to his people.


Upon reflection, I'm more than happy with the appropriateness of my comment/response.


I dare not mention Israel? I'm guilty about "constantly going on about Israel"? I'm not in any way going on enough about Israel and nobody is. You keep trying to "blacken" an opposing view with the racism card. It's pure bs. I've said multiple times now, there are plenty of decent jews out there, who are opposed to this war. And more labelling with the use of "terrorist" when states are presented as being beyond terrorism. There's a fundamentalist streak to that culture that to me is ugly but we're certainly not going to get along with them any better by genociding their men, women and children....and not recognizing that there are state-level terrorists and equally recognizing them with that same terminology.

As regards how many men, women and children Hamas killed on October 7, it seems that it's a hell of a lot less than was claimed as the Israeli state implemented the Hannibal directive and killed their own.



How is it whataboutery when I responded directly to something you brought up? You blackened China on the basis of the number of people jailed when the number of people jailed in the U.S. is much higher. I would think that's relevant to what you asserted.


I believe that I was asking a question. Perhaps you could have answered it instead of trying to chisel out a conspiracy theory gotcha. But I'll answer your question. I doubt that.


1000% YES! Three words for you - Cuban Missile Crisis ...which also neatly ties in with my ongoing reference to the "rules-based democracy" deal...because the rules are made up as it suits by the entity installing itself as the moral authority.


Asked and answered.


The Duke just told you.


It's the farthest thing from strawman. The propaganda line that was pursued was "human shield" this and "human shield" that. The strategy is to use all compliant media to push out that slop - because if you keep telling it to people again and again and again and again, eventually they might work on assumption and not question its validity or evidence backing it OR the simple fact that even if there was such a thing, in NO WAY could it be reasonable to use that as an excuse to bomb innocent people.


That may well be the case but you don't make that choice for people. You leave them to organize themselves.


I'll tell you what I was talking about. You referred to the U.S. as being good at defending itself. Nobody attacked it! It's half a world away from any of these things. The joke is that it claims that China is being aggressive, that Russia is being aggressive, and it is the one plonking military bases all around those places. Can you imagine the uproar there would be if, tomorrow, the Russians entered into an agreement with the Mexicans and put a big ass military installation in place along the border with the U.S.? And yet that's exactly the same deal as what played out in Ukraine. Double standards.



I see this as an attempt to undermine the validity of the points raised. You can't address them directly so blacken me instead. Anyone with any intelligence will see through that.


See my response to Purple above this comment. Same goes for you.

I can't keep responding to your nonsense. You really have no idea what you are talking about. Fact, balance and reason are nowhere to be seen in your comments so it's just not possible to use those tools to construct a response.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@Purple LWT kindly posted a link to the YZI's 21st century "wars" and indeed they have been going after quite a few chappies; Al Qaeda, Taliban, Mujahideen, Islamic State in (Iraq, Levant, Somalia), Uzbeck Islamic Party, Houthis, Lord's Resistance Army, Somali Pirates. These guys wish no harm to the USA and this shocking info left me in a highly radicalised state, which I am now slowly recovering from. I know LWT did not directly say that one should join the jihad. Nonetheless they should act a bit more responsibly as younger folk more impressionable than me might not be able to resist the urge to chop off a few Yankee or Zionist heads.

 

[tecate]

I can't keep responding to your nonsense.

This is just a discussion. You're not obligated to, nor is an announcement required.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

And you do? You're expressing a personal opinion - which you're fully entitled to do, but it's not fact. Address the subject, not the messenger.

Fact, balance and reason are nowhere to be seen in your comments.

Fact is nowhere to be seen in my comments? Then point that out explicitly. I've not seen you do that - other than express a contrary opinion. You think you're balanced!?..in the views you've expressed here!? I'd encourage you to re-read what you've written and claimed, this time trying to apply a modicum of critique.

It's just not possible to use those tools to construct a response.

I can see that you struggle to back up some of your assertions using fact, balance and reason! I agree.

@Purple LWT kindly posted a link to the YZI's 21st century "wars" and indeed they have been going after quite a few chappies; Al Qaeda, Taliban, Mujahideen, Islamic State in (Iraq, Levant, Somalia), Uzbeck Islamic Party, Houthis, Lord's Resistance Army, Somali Pirates. These guys wish no harm to the USA and this shocking info left me in a highly radicalised state, which I am now slowly recovering from. I know LWT did not directly say that one should join the jihad. Nonetheless they should act a bit more responsibly as younger folk more impressionable than me might not be able to resist the urge to chop off a few Yankee or Zionist heads.

You can bend it like Beckham Duke - but anyone with a degree of intelligence can see through that. The bottom line is the big claim here was that the likes of Iran/China/Russia are the aggressors - but when you look at cold hard fact, the U.S. is never not in a war. While you all flung dirt in the form of 'but China/Iran/Russia this/that/the other,' several times I mentioned a couple of very relevant items from the other side - such as the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, Hilary's bombing of Libya, the Cuban Missile Crisis...that involve war criminals that were never dealt with, that involve the killing of 100s of thousands of innocent people, or in the case of the last item, totally calls out the current "Western" position on Ukraine/Russia. What did I get in response? *Crickets* ...because there is no answer to that hypocrisy.

And even in the examples you give, one minute the yanks are SUPPORTING the very same groups and then when they have different objectives, they're doing the opposite. One of you brought up the Iran-Iraq war - and who was in the middle of that? Next minute, they're telling us the Iraqi regime is the devil. The same with the Taliban. The same with ISIS.

As regards radicalized Islam, I'm not down with that but what is a contributing cause to all that? Meddling with parts of the world that should be left to develop in their own way at their own pace, etc. You think they're going to be more radical or less radical if you steal their land, steal their resources, kill half their family? Would you give a toss about anything under those circumstances?