all ignorance here i thought u people were diferent but nubbs is right alll u do is argue with insults, what does this man life have to do with what goes on in the world u people are way out of the subject ..
"u are not worth trying to reason to, u are the enemy"
Do you not see the irony here? You sound exactly like George Bush and the Taliban. My guess is you are a neo-con in disguise trying to make real progressives and anti war advocates look like crazy irrational tea baggers. Get a life.
i see that this douchebag is the enemy now because he refuses to open his eyes and TRY and learn from the other side. If that is not a definition of an enemy i dont know what else is, thats a sure path to conlfict. And your camparison of me to Bush is ridiculous, im the open minded one here, NUBBS is the close minded reactionary..like Bush was!
if you're so open minded why are you unable to be open minded enough to address my indisputable facts
considering im on record here saying NATO should leave afghanistan and that the US should never have gone to iraq, you must be a very deranged person to call me an enemy for simply pointing out that US is responisble for less violence in iraq than iraqis themselves and other foreign agents like the iranian revolutionary guard or saudi wahabis entering through syria. these are facts
you are exactly like bush - you see the world through manichean lenses. and you are as uninformed on the middle east as he is. getting your news from paul jay and folks at znet does not make you knowledgeable. your just a dumb kid with a miserable meaningless life.
ok i didnt see that u are against US entry into Iraq and Afhganistan. MY BAD. Im far from a kid though, im 30 with a pretty good life...but whats the point of u bringing up what u think my life is like??
take a look at the middle east as a whole, and u will see that the US is almost on par for being responsible for as much death and mayhem as all extremists in that region combined.
And dont ask me where u can find this, if your so smart you'd already know this.
oh yeah and you are so much better than both with that arrogant fuckwit corporate creation obama arent you? Tell me my friend what the fuck has changed in the middle east since obama got in? compared to bush? because the only difference is that people like you are being sweet talked into war by the fucking hero obama
what has changed? well, pakistan is now cooperating with the US in the swat valley and wasiristan. muslims in madrasses no longer believe the US is the great satan with a black man named hussein in the white house, thus dramatically reducing al qaeda's recruiting numbers. he's got most of iran's governing council to agree to ship their uranium to russia and france for refining.
and yeah, obama is my fucking hero. who's yours? osama bin laden?
nubbs YOU are the one here showing no understanding of how wars are really fought, if u think the US is a do-gooder and its always trys to protect the innocent you are seriously mistaken.
The US openly terrorizes populations into submission, only after they have a foothold, and someone in power they can control is when they then try and protect and keep order.
anyone with half a brain can see this, every military and paramilitary follows this doctrine, including al qaeda and the taliban.
ive got a great idea for your next piece, realnewsnetwork!
how about "al qaeda and international law"?
yeah, cause last i checked, al qaeda didn't care about international law or human rights or even the UN, whom they have continually attacked and whose workers they have beem intentionally murdering for years
yeah, i mean there are DEFINITELY no human rights, whats so ever, in the united states. how silly of me to allow nuance into my thinking and not to see the moral equivalence between the united states of america and al qaeda.
the only difference between al qaeda's stance on human rights and the United States Government stance on human rights is that atleast The United States Government believes in human rights for its own people. so yes "nubbs" as long as its happening outside of the US your governments stance on human rights abuses has traditional been to ignore them. (theyve been the perpetrators of quite a few as well.). But just look at the UN resolution condemning Israel for human rights abuses, vetoed by the us
im not american (never even been there), so im only left to wonder how many other erroneous assumptions you allow to prejudice your thinking
i have no idea why you bring up israel either, since im not israeli, never been there either, and im not even jewish. of course i could ask why a UN resolution from general assmebly, where such fine countries as libya and sudan vote against israel in said resolutions, means anything anyways, but that would be to digress
... treatment of afghans is on par with al qaeda or taliban treatment of afghans, again subtle and sophistication of logic and mastery of the facts prevent me from deducing a moral equivalence
you see, the americans are trying to help afghans. they build schools and hospitals. the taliban tear them down and throw acid in girls' faces.
americans have killed, according to taliban propaganda, 8,000 innocent civilians. the red crescent and UN estimates that the taliban have murdered 15x as many
now, we might agree that the US and NATO should leave afghanistan
but we can not agree that the US actions in afghansitan are morally equivalent to those of the taliban or of al qaeada (whose murderous ways have even turned pakistanis against them)
i would also point out that for the last 8 years the US has enjoyed at least 3 times as much support from afghans as the taliban.
sure, most want BOTH to just go away. but only the US is trying to actually help, and tries to limit civilian deaths
you have no evidence to back up a statement like that
al qaeada and the taliban go out of their way to try and maximize civilian death. the US goes out of its way to minimize civilian death
they are fighting a counterinsurgency - that means you try to win over the civilians. you do that by protecting them not accidentally killing them. why do you think the US is having such a hard time in helmand and knadahar - they taliban hide (unwelcomed) amoung civilians cause thy know NATO want bomb there
no, im saying of the 800,000 plus iraqis who have been killed since the 2003 invasion, the overwhelming majority were killed by iraqis themselves (sunnis killing shia and vice versa, with the shia being funded largely by iran's revolutionary guard and the sunnis being funded by saudi wahabis)
since "mission accomplished" in may 2003, the US has killed less than 10,000. now, that's probably 8,000 too many, but it's less than iran, or iraqis themselves, bears responsibility for
what about Disbanding the Iraqi Army, sending thousands of armed men into the streets?
what about the arming of one group vs. another Shiite at first, then Sunni during the "Surge"?
The US-trained Iraqi "police" and "soldiers" have used their equipment for personal and religious vendettas a la death squads and the close range killing of their US advisers.
If we train them, arm them and pay them, how is NOT our responsibility when they kill people?!?
If the US & UK govts had not invaded and overthrown Saddam, these people would not be died. Therefore, the actions of our elected governments lead to the deaths of 800,000 people. Our governments NEW these deaths would occur (see the Dick Cheney interview after Bush 1st's war), and they NEW their excuse for starting this war was a LIE. I reckon this makes them more than responsible for all these deaths, poverty, starvation and more.
first of all, i have said nothing to indicate i have ever supported that war
i made it quite clear that post "mission accomplished" in may03, the brunt of murder has not been by US troops but by sunnis funded from wahabis and shia funded by irans revolutionary guard
no, saddam would have kept stability. but he would have continued killing shia in the south and kurds in the north
so choose you poision. at least the US gave iraq the chance for a better future (like the saddists udai or kusai)
but if i break into your home, you dont have the right to start killing your family and say "well you started it by breaking into my house"
it's called personal responsibility. murder is murder. and the US is responsible for far less murder of iraqis than iraqis themselves or even iran
cheneys a war criminal. but he did believe, erroneously, that the war ended with "mission accomplished" in may. he did not predict, as you say, all the violence that followed. the goal is obviously for stability
the only people who have an interest in destabilizing iraq and causing chaos are the iranians and al qaeada.
the US has successfully gotten the iraqi sunnis to turn against al qaeada (no small feat and proof that the US is not as bas as a; qaeda). but iran is essentially in control in the south where their proxy militias reign
you think cheney predicted iran would be in control of iraq when the whole point of the war was the encircle iran from iraq and afghanistan? (THAT is what he wrote)
nubb u dont know shit, but u pretend to, ur not even american, i am. i know what my gov't does... i know what our military does. i certainly have done more research on it than u have.
u are simply just either anti muslim or anti arab or who knows what because u refuse to do research before making these assumptions about what is going on.
your ignorance about where it is u can find info on how america fights wars says it all. u are not worth trying to reason to, u are the enemy
wow, you're a real arrogant asshole. no wonder you're american. way to address my arguments with nothing but insults. you must be a real fan of fox news. good luck making friends in life.
btw, there is not ONE thing that is FACTUALLY incorrect about ANYTHING that i have written.
the proof is that you can only counter with insults instead of argument, you lonely, uneducated, unemployed scrawny little shit (again, ALL factually correct)
i suggest you LAYlow1978 (which im guessing is the year you last had your mouth on a tit - you mommy's)
Sometimes it's easier to see what's wrong from an outside perspective, if you lived in a cave all your life you might never notice the people out on the lawn enjoying the sunshine.
Did you read the recent Taliban manual?, it talks about wining over the population very similar to the own US strategy.
Basically both sides are using the civilians as Human shields IMHO. Soldiers simply cannot communicate with the Afghan people. effectively. The Taliban is in much greater contact with the people than the ISAF forces are.
Counterinsurgency only works when you have a popular government in which to place trust. The Karzai debacle is totally corrupt. War with no end in sight...
i have no evidence of america's targeting of civilian populations???? pick up a friggin history book on america's wars in indochina and in southern and central america...
The US ONLY "builds and protects" AFTER it has subdued a population to its will. There is alot of evidence of this. like i said pick up a friggin book.
i was referring only to afghanistan. as for "wars" in latin america, you'll have to direct me to a book. so far as i know, only 10 people were killed during invasion of grenada.
so let's have it - what books would you have me read, given that ive already read everything by chomsky
i suggest u do more research. because the U.S. are the biggest terrorists around. and have been for a number of years not just these past few years with this "war on terror" . im not going to go into facts because it will cause a pointless argument and you wont listen. so please. just research your history. peace.
tell me where you get your information? is it chalmers johnson and noam chomsky, or eric margolis and robert fisk, or amy goodman and michael albert, because i read them all
what did you think of the goldstone report? because the author was on bill moyers last night and said no country is more concerned with international law and human rights than the united states
and im surprised you think the US does more "terrorism" than russia. or Iran, which has killed more iraqis than the US since 2005
has the cia participated in covert acts of terrorism in nicaragua? yes. but if you added up all the cia murders in the last 50 years it would not come close to death caused by al qaeada and its offshoots (bali in 03, london 07, etc)
and if you are thinking of mosedek in iran or arbenz in guatamala from the 50s, the US technically didn't murder anybody - they have a preferred ruler and gave him money (though the congress never consented to the appropriations). and if you look at the record, the shaw was better than what preceeded and proceeded him.
as for chile 73, which im sure you'd mention, the didn't do anything. if you actually examine the historical record (see hitchens book), kissenger gave moral support only
The USA cannot win in Afghanistan as long as it props up a puppet government of drug runners. Bring the Taliban into the government and get rid of Karzai's cartel.
he's not american. he's canadian. he does this because he couldn't get a job in canada as a journalist. his show on the cbc (publically funded) was cancelled for being too left wing
Read the comment posted above my reply. Jay said he had dual citizenship. The prior comment was that he was not American, but Canadian. So, either Jay has dual citizenship, or, if the comment that he does not, then that would make him a liar, which has nothing to do with dual citizenship. And yes, I do recognized that some countries recognize dual citizenship. The US does not.
ACtually the US doe recognize dual citizenships. It wouldn't make sense if they didn't. There are many people that have dual citizenship based on the fact that their parents are different nationals. If they didn't then there wouldn't be a box to check concerning dual citizenship or their wouldn't be a notice on your passport explaining how dual citizenship can complicate receiving aid while abroad. There are a few countries where Americans can legally get dual citizenship.
Iraq has a history of centralized government, even democracy until that was toppled by the US in 1953.
Afghanistan has been an undeveloped tribal state for millennium. Legends of armies from the Soviets to the Ottoman Empire to Alexander the Great and beyond have tried to conquer Afghanistan.
Every Afghan killed leaves a family mandated by religion to revenge the death. The more we kill the more there are. We can not force our system on these people. Wont work.
that's actually quite ignorant of you to say. prior to the russian invasion, they actuallly had a developing civil society and civilian infrastructure.
that said, yes, centralized government is rather foreign. but they have not all always led this medieval existence
Afghanistan actually was very developed and modern up until the Russians invade, anda fter that during the 1990s basically the US gave weapons to the tribal groups in the mountains, and those people basically took over the country, and forced that country to revert back into the medieval ages. IF you had came from the countryside in the 1970s-1980s with a hajib on people would've laughed at you thinking you were from the countryside.. Afghanistan is what happens when central gov't collapses.
all ignorance here i thought u people were diferent but nubbs is right alll u do is argue with insults, what does this man life have to do with what goes on in the world u people are way out of the subject ..
Ala Akbar & god bless our freeworld amen
MrGuerrero2000 2 years ago
To Lawlow1978
"u are not worth trying to reason to, u are the enemy"
Do you not see the irony here? You sound exactly like George Bush and the Taliban. My guess is you are a neo-con in disguise trying to make real progressives and anti war advocates look like crazy irrational tea baggers. Get a life.
verbalpocketplayer 2 years ago 2
i dont see any irony verbalpocket,
i see that this douchebag is the enemy now because he refuses to open his eyes and TRY and learn from the other side. If that is not a definition of an enemy i dont know what else is, thats a sure path to conlfict. And your camparison of me to Bush is ridiculous, im the open minded one here, NUBBS is the close minded reactionary..like Bush was!
Lawlow1978 2 years ago
if you're so open minded why are you unable to be open minded enough to address my indisputable facts
considering im on record here saying NATO should leave afghanistan and that the US should never have gone to iraq, you must be a very deranged person to call me an enemy for simply pointing out that US is responisble for less violence in iraq than iraqis themselves and other foreign agents like the iranian revolutionary guard or saudi wahabis entering through syria. these are facts
nubbs 2 years ago
you are exactly like bush - you see the world through manichean lenses. and you are as uninformed on the middle east as he is. getting your news from paul jay and folks at znet does not make you knowledgeable. your just a dumb kid with a miserable meaningless life.
nubbs 2 years ago
ok i didnt see that u are against US entry into Iraq and Afhganistan. MY BAD. Im far from a kid though, im 30 with a pretty good life...but whats the point of u bringing up what u think my life is like??
take a look at the middle east as a whole, and u will see that the US is almost on par for being responsible for as much death and mayhem as all extremists in that region combined.
And dont ask me where u can find this, if your so smart you'd already know this.
Lawlow1978 2 years ago
oh yeah and you are so much better than both with that arrogant fuckwit corporate creation obama arent you? Tell me my friend what the fuck has changed in the middle east since obama got in? compared to bush? because the only difference is that people like you are being sweet talked into war by the fucking hero obama
apacheslim 2 years ago
what has changed? well, pakistan is now cooperating with the US in the swat valley and wasiristan. muslims in madrasses no longer believe the US is the great satan with a black man named hussein in the white house, thus dramatically reducing al qaeda's recruiting numbers. he's got most of iran's governing council to agree to ship their uranium to russia and france for refining.
and yeah, obama is my fucking hero. who's yours? osama bin laden?
verbalpocketplayer 2 years ago
nubbs YOU are the one here showing no understanding of how wars are really fought, if u think the US is a do-gooder and its always trys to protect the innocent you are seriously mistaken.
The US openly terrorizes populations into submission, only after they have a foothold, and someone in power they can control is when they then try and protect and keep order.
anyone with half a brain can see this, every military and paramilitary follows this doctrine, including al qaeda and the taliban.
Lawlow1978 2 years ago
anyone can see this? where can i see this? where do you see this?
nubbs 2 years ago
If the Democrat Whitehouse was still launching drone attacks on Serbia, then the Euro-centric Left would be cheering loudly.
What a bunch of hypocrites.
manofsan 2 years ago
red, white and blue is the butcher's apron
maydayfire 2 years ago 3
God Bless the Taliban.
Parvez86 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
THE REAL NEWS - WHAT A LOAD OF BULLSHIT
PeterSodhi 2 years ago
Go away, stinkface.
kelseywall 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this clowns show is so far tilted left its allmost on its side..The real news...lol..more like the real propagenda..
just fuels the libtards fires..
playful316 2 years ago
Compared to US mainstream news, anything moderately moderate sounds like Che Guevara.
NicosNicosNicosNicos 2 years ago 3
ive got a great idea for your next piece, realnewsnetwork!
how about "al qaeda and international law"?
yeah, cause last i checked, al qaeda didn't care about international law or human rights or even the UN, whom they have continually attacked and whose workers they have beem intentionally murdering for years
nubbs 2 years ago
that is entirely true nubbs and its funny how the United States of America has stooped to the level of a terrorist group.
thedarkest001 2 years ago
ironic isn't it?
Knightshield 2 years ago
yeah, i mean there are DEFINITELY no human rights, whats so ever, in the united states. how silly of me to allow nuance into my thinking and not to see the moral equivalence between the united states of america and al qaeda.
nubbs 2 years ago
the only difference between al qaeda's stance on human rights and the United States Government stance on human rights is that atleast The United States Government believes in human rights for its own people. so yes "nubbs" as long as its happening outside of the US your governments stance on human rights abuses has traditional been to ignore them. (theyve been the perpetrators of quite a few as well.). But just look at the UN resolution condemning Israel for human rights abuses, vetoed by the us
thedarkest001 2 years ago
im not american (never even been there), so im only left to wonder how many other erroneous assumptions you allow to prejudice your thinking
i have no idea why you bring up israel either, since im not israeli, never been there either, and im not even jewish. of course i could ask why a UN resolution from general assmebly, where such fine countries as libya and sudan vote against israel in said resolutions, means anything anyways, but that would be to digress
now, if you think american ...
nubbs 2 years ago
... treatment of afghans is on par with al qaeda or taliban treatment of afghans, again subtle and sophistication of logic and mastery of the facts prevent me from deducing a moral equivalence
you see, the americans are trying to help afghans. they build schools and hospitals. the taliban tear them down and throw acid in girls' faces.
americans have killed, according to taliban propaganda, 8,000 innocent civilians. the red crescent and UN estimates that the taliban have murdered 15x as many
nubbs 2 years ago
now, we might agree that the US and NATO should leave afghanistan
but we can not agree that the US actions in afghansitan are morally equivalent to those of the taliban or of al qaeada (whose murderous ways have even turned pakistanis against them)
i would also point out that for the last 8 years the US has enjoyed at least 3 times as much support from afghans as the taliban.
sure, most want BOTH to just go away. but only the US is trying to actually help, and tries to limit civilian deaths
nubbs 2 years ago
The US only trys to avoid civilian casualties when it is in its own best interest to do so.
Otherwise, civilian and foe alike are targeted...
Lawlow1978 2 years ago
Comment removed
nubbs 2 years ago
you have no evidence to back up a statement like that
al qaeada and the taliban go out of their way to try and maximize civilian death. the US goes out of its way to minimize civilian death
they are fighting a counterinsurgency - that means you try to win over the civilians. you do that by protecting them not accidentally killing them. why do you think the US is having such a hard time in helmand and knadahar - they taliban hide (unwelcomed) amoung civilians cause thy know NATO want bomb there
nubbs 2 years ago
So your saying 500,000 Iraqi deaths is a minimal figure? Evil is still evil, no matter how minimal it is.
UKLooney 2 years ago
no, im saying of the 800,000 plus iraqis who have been killed since the 2003 invasion, the overwhelming majority were killed by iraqis themselves (sunnis killing shia and vice versa, with the shia being funded largely by iran's revolutionary guard and the sunnis being funded by saudi wahabis)
since "mission accomplished" in may 2003, the US has killed less than 10,000. now, that's probably 8,000 too many, but it's less than iran, or iraqis themselves, bears responsibility for
nubbs 2 years ago
what about Disbanding the Iraqi Army, sending thousands of armed men into the streets?
what about the arming of one group vs. another Shiite at first, then Sunni during the "Surge"?
The US-trained Iraqi "police" and "soldiers" have used their equipment for personal and religious vendettas a la death squads and the close range killing of their US advisers.
If we train them, arm them and pay them, how is NOT our responsibility when they kill people?!?
Our weapons, our money, our crimes
micahgee 2 years ago
clearly you have absolutely no sense of basic criminal law, let alone a basic understanding of the situation in iraq
yes, the US bought off the sunnis to STOP fighting, but no, the US has not armed any militia. of course you have no evidence that they have
and yes the police forces are essentially shia militias, but only because they infiltrate the police force
the US only trains and pays for an army that is absent from the fighting
its a sunni (saudi arabia) vs shia (iran) civil war
nubbs 2 years ago
If the US & UK govts had not invaded and overthrown Saddam, these people would not be died. Therefore, the actions of our elected governments lead to the deaths of 800,000 people. Our governments NEW these deaths would occur (see the Dick Cheney interview after Bush 1st's war), and they NEW their excuse for starting this war was a LIE. I reckon this makes them more than responsible for all these deaths, poverty, starvation and more.
If you think otherwise, you must be on of them.
UKLooney 2 years ago
first of all, i have said nothing to indicate i have ever supported that war
i made it quite clear that post "mission accomplished" in may03, the brunt of murder has not been by US troops but by sunnis funded from wahabis and shia funded by irans revolutionary guard
no, saddam would have kept stability. but he would have continued killing shia in the south and kurds in the north
so choose you poision. at least the US gave iraq the chance for a better future (like the saddists udai or kusai)
nubbs 2 years ago
but if i break into your home, you dont have the right to start killing your family and say "well you started it by breaking into my house"
it's called personal responsibility. murder is murder. and the US is responsible for far less murder of iraqis than iraqis themselves or even iran
cheneys a war criminal. but he did believe, erroneously, that the war ended with "mission accomplished" in may. he did not predict, as you say, all the violence that followed. the goal is obviously for stability
nubbs 2 years ago
the only people who have an interest in destabilizing iraq and causing chaos are the iranians and al qaeada.
the US has successfully gotten the iraqi sunnis to turn against al qaeada (no small feat and proof that the US is not as bas as a; qaeda). but iran is essentially in control in the south where their proxy militias reign
you think cheney predicted iran would be in control of iraq when the whole point of the war was the encircle iran from iraq and afghanistan? (THAT is what he wrote)
nubbs 2 years ago
nubb u dont know shit, but u pretend to, ur not even american, i am. i know what my gov't does... i know what our military does. i certainly have done more research on it than u have.
u are simply just either anti muslim or anti arab or who knows what because u refuse to do research before making these assumptions about what is going on.
your ignorance about where it is u can find info on how america fights wars says it all. u are not worth trying to reason to, u are the enemy
Lawlow1978 2 years ago
wow, you're a real arrogant asshole. no wonder you're american. way to address my arguments with nothing but insults. you must be a real fan of fox news. good luck making friends in life.
nubbs 2 years ago 2
btw, there is not ONE thing that is FACTUALLY incorrect about ANYTHING that i have written.
the proof is that you can only counter with insults instead of argument, you lonely, uneducated, unemployed scrawny little shit (again, ALL factually correct)
i suggest you LAYlow1978 (which im guessing is the year you last had your mouth on a tit - you mommy's)
nubbs 2 years ago
You must be pro taliban and pro shia militias
verbalpocketplayer 2 years ago
Sometimes it's easier to see what's wrong from an outside perspective, if you lived in a cave all your life you might never notice the people out on the lawn enjoying the sunshine.
endlessnameless16 2 years ago
Did you read the recent Taliban manual?, it talks about wining over the population very similar to the own US strategy.
Basically both sides are using the civilians as Human shields IMHO. Soldiers simply cannot communicate with the Afghan people. effectively. The Taliban is in much greater contact with the people than the ISAF forces are.
Counterinsurgency only works when you have a popular government in which to place trust. The Karzai debacle is totally corrupt. War with no end in sight...
micahgee 2 years ago
if we read my previous post, i say that i agree NATO should pull out
and that taliban manual is direct response to their overwhelming unpopularity. even in helmand and kandahar they are less popular than NATO
afghans would prefer that both NATO and the taliban went away, but at least NATO builds and protects while the taliban destroys and terrorizes
you cant compare nato to the taliban, or even nato to russia or the british. read the mcchrystal report - the point is to protect and develop
nubbs 2 years ago
i have no evidence of america's targeting of civilian populations???? pick up a friggin history book on america's wars in indochina and in southern and central america...
The US ONLY "builds and protects" AFTER it has subdued a population to its will. There is alot of evidence of this. like i said pick up a friggin book.
Lawlow1978 2 years ago
i was referring only to afghanistan. as for "wars" in latin america, you'll have to direct me to a book. so far as i know, only 10 people were killed during invasion of grenada.
so let's have it - what books would you have me read, given that ive already read everything by chomsky
nubbs 2 years ago
i suggest u do more research. because the U.S. are the biggest terrorists around. and have been for a number of years not just these past few years with this "war on terror" . im not going to go into facts because it will cause a pointless argument and you wont listen. so please. just research your history. peace.
RedSkullBeats 2 years ago
tell me where you get your information? is it chalmers johnson and noam chomsky, or eric margolis and robert fisk, or amy goodman and michael albert, because i read them all
what did you think of the goldstone report? because the author was on bill moyers last night and said no country is more concerned with international law and human rights than the united states
and im surprised you think the US does more "terrorism" than russia. or Iran, which has killed more iraqis than the US since 2005
nubbs 2 years ago
has the cia participated in covert acts of terrorism in nicaragua? yes. but if you added up all the cia murders in the last 50 years it would not come close to death caused by al qaeada and its offshoots (bali in 03, london 07, etc)
and the CIA was tame compared to the FSB
nubbs 2 years ago
and if you are thinking of mosedek in iran or arbenz in guatamala from the 50s, the US technically didn't murder anybody - they have a preferred ruler and gave him money (though the congress never consented to the appropriations). and if you look at the record, the shaw was better than what preceeded and proceeded him.
as for chile 73, which im sure you'd mention, the didn't do anything. if you actually examine the historical record (see hitchens book), kissenger gave moral support only
nubbs 2 years ago
Right, so Al Qaeda is a useful model for the US government to emulate.
NicosNicosNicosNicos 2 years ago
The American Empire has overstayed its welcome. Bring the troops home, dissociate from the corrupt regimes, treat the world right.
audadvnc 2 years ago 9
The USA cannot win in Afghanistan as long as it props up a puppet government of drug runners. Bring the Taliban into the government and get rid of Karzai's cartel.
audadvnc 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Paul Jay should be stripped of his US citizenship and deported. What a traitor.
bbburton 2 years ago
he's not american. he's canadian. he does this because he couldn't get a job in canada as a journalist. his show on the cbc (publically funded) was cancelled for being too left wing
nubbs 2 years ago
He stated in one of his videos that he has dual citizenship. So he may also be a liar to boot.
bbburton 2 years ago
What does dual citizenship have anything to do with being a liar? You do realize that dual citizenship is a very common occurance right?
lordblazer 2 years ago
Read the comment posted above my reply. Jay said he had dual citizenship. The prior comment was that he was not American, but Canadian. So, either Jay has dual citizenship, or, if the comment that he does not, then that would make him a liar, which has nothing to do with dual citizenship. And yes, I do recognized that some countries recognize dual citizenship. The US does not.
bbburton 2 years ago
ACtually the US doe recognize dual citizenships. It wouldn't make sense if they didn't. There are many people that have dual citizenship based on the fact that their parents are different nationals. If they didn't then there wouldn't be a box to check concerning dual citizenship or their wouldn't be a notice on your passport explaining how dual citizenship can complicate receiving aid while abroad. There are a few countries where Americans can legally get dual citizenship.
lordblazer 2 years ago
Comment removed
420marrijane420 2 years ago
"If you don't have money, you can not get anything done in the Afghanistan court system"
Wow, Sounds like our corrupt court system.
btigtime2 2 years ago
who knows, maybe it actually is.
lysergicaddict 2 years ago
wow, sound like the american court system
nubbs 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I think we did win in Iraq, We are just now starting to fight in afgan,even though we been there for 8 years
andrew38024 2 years ago
Afghanistan is not Iraq.
Iraq has a history of centralized government, even democracy until that was toppled by the US in 1953.
Afghanistan has been an undeveloped tribal state for millennium. Legends of armies from the Soviets to the Ottoman Empire to Alexander the Great and beyond have tried to conquer Afghanistan.
Every Afghan killed leaves a family mandated by religion to revenge the death. The more we kill the more there are. We can not force our system on these people. Wont work.
gsuitter 2 years ago
that's actually quite ignorant of you to say. prior to the russian invasion, they actuallly had a developing civil society and civilian infrastructure.
that said, yes, centralized government is rather foreign. but they have not all always led this medieval existence
nubbs 2 years ago
Afghanistan actually was very developed and modern up until the Russians invade, anda fter that during the 1990s basically the US gave weapons to the tribal groups in the mountains, and those people basically took over the country, and forced that country to revert back into the medieval ages. IF you had came from the countryside in the 1970s-1980s with a hajib on people would've laughed at you thinking you were from the countryside.. Afghanistan is what happens when central gov't collapses.
lordblazer 2 years ago 2
More like when a progressive central government collapses and right-wing reactionaries run rampant.
blackiron60 2 years ago 2
40 - 80 thousand troupes...don't
SickBang 2 years ago 2
Good item.
charlessmyth 2 years ago
clones lol
REVOLTbydesign86 2 years ago
Excellent..
martinaoe2 2 years ago 2