Hillpig Posted September 5, 2013 Author Share Posted September 5, 2013 :)I believe everything you say, but there is a limit on what action can be taken because of it. Comes a time to move on. SF continues to fight on many of long dead debates without any thought of compromise. it really gets boring. As you may know, I'm a retired veteran of long service in the RN. I've seen more deaths than I care for on the flight decks of Her Majesties Carriers, most of that just in training. We do what we're told by our politicians. But I'd sooner them where they are than making those flight decks even more dangerous. Really sorry you are so bored. Maybe the survivors of the 500,000 dead Iraquis will get bored as well. A crime is a crime, Murder has no statutory limitation, Blair and Bush plotted and lied together to invade Iraq. Their lies and concerted crimes led to the deaths of innocents. They should stand trial. ---------- Post added 05-09-2013 at 12:59 ---------- But there's no proof that he lied, that's the point I'm making The proof is there for all to see in the dodgy dossier, there is further proof in the mountain of dead people they are responsible for killing. Mecky do not defend the indefensible, try to look beyond your Labour party loyalty. Think of those poor people who have suffered, think of how they regard us as it was our Leader, in our name,who countenanced this action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Really sorry you are so bored. Maybe the survivors of the 500,000 dead Iraquis will get bored as well. A crime is a crime, Murder has no statutory limitation, Blair and Bush plotted and lied together to invade Iraq. Their lies and concerted crimes led to the deaths of innocents. They should stand trial. ---------- Post added 05-09-2013 at 12:59 ---------- The proof is there for all to see in the dodgy dossier, there is further proof in the mountain of dead people they are responsible for killing. Mecky do not defend the indefensible, try to look beyond your Labour party loyalty. Think of those poor people who have suffered, think of how they regard us as it was our Leader, in our name,who countenanced this action. Who are you, & what have you done with Hillpig? . Whoever you are, have to agree with you on this occasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillpig Posted September 5, 2013 Author Share Posted September 5, 2013 Who are you, & what have you done with Hillpig? . Whoever you are, have to agree with you on this occasion. I am Hillpig, just because you and I disagree on most things doesn't mean we have to disagree on everything. On this subject you have written eloquently and I agree with every word. No doubt we will disagree again in future. Respect to you, keep the faith. ---------- Post added 05-09-2013 at 16:53 ---------- The Russians and Chinese came up with a different strategy when all this started. The strategy of non intervention. Where did that work? You can ignore it and hope that somehow it will all magically disappear. That Iran seeing that the west is divided and irresolute, suffering from "war weariness and lack of willing" wont be tempted to help Assda militarily with weapons and manpower to finish off the rebels. That some incident wont occur that will bring Israel into the fray or that our NATO ally Turkey wont be sucked into it either. If that happened and Turkey requested assistance then there'll be no debate in the Commons or Congress since when one NATO member is attacked the rest must assist "war weary" or not. It's now very clear that because of all the dithering at the beginning the Syrian rebels who originally did not have members of Al Qaeda among them had little choice but to accept them as fellow rebels or risk losing the war against Assad The case being as you have stated does this mean that we oppose Assad no matter what? The gassing incidents if true merit action, but before we go blazing in should we not reflect ? Why would Assad use poison gas on when he is winning anyway? Why do we need to replace Assad? If the weapons inspectors report is negative or inconclusive what then? Should we really ally ourselves with Al Queda or cannibals? Don't we have enough trouble to deal with at home? Isnt it time for others to become the Worlds cops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I am Hillpig, just because you and I disagree on most things doesn't mean we have to disagree on everything. On this subject you have written eloquently and I agree with every word. No doubt we will disagree again in future. Respect to you, keep the faith. ---------- Post added 05-09-2013 at 16:53 ---------- The case being as you have stated does this mean that we oppose Assad no matter what? The gassing incidents if true merit action, but before we go blazing in should we not reflect ? Why would Assad use poison gas on when he is winning anyway? Why do we need to replace Assad? If the weapons inspectors report is negative or inconclusive what then? Should we really ally ourselves with Al Queda or cannibals? Don't we have enough trouble to deal with at home? Isnt it time for others to become the Worlds cops? If the evidence shows that Assad did use chemical weapons Obama has already said enough about "crossing red lines" that seems to indicate that he will do something. In this case if he doesn't then he's sending a signal to countires like North Korea and Iran that he's a "paper tiger" All words and no action. It's this kind of stuff that leads to real big wars as history has shown. Obama is facing a battle with congress and the public. Very few want to get stuck in another war when it would cost millions to carry out just for a few air and missile strikes and the money is really needed here at home. There could be a chance... but just a chance that he and Putin might get around to talking over the situation during the G-20 summit in St Petersburg. When you see those two together though it's plain to anyone that there's no chemistry at work. Brief handshakes and forced smiles dont hold much hope for co-operation of any kind in bringing both sides in Syria together for a peace conference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillpig Posted September 5, 2013 Author Share Posted September 5, 2013 What more can you expect from the French Resistance. ---------- Post added 04-09-2013 at 08:17 ---------- You know as well as I do, Hillpig, that that is never going to happen. No use flogging dead horses. ---------- Post added 04-09-2013 at 08:32 ---------- What more can you expect from the French Resistance. ---------- Post added 04-09-2013 at 08:17 ---------- For all your statements about the US,how many Americans do you know to be so certain of their attitudes and opinions. For all the maturity and seniority of your nation, why is it in such a sorry state, it's people sad and dissatisfied, it's political parties easily as bad as ours. I know, blame America. But when America goes down, you will have gone down first. Although I have been less than complimentary about Americans, apart from being brash and noisy I actually have no issue with the American people. I go further and repeat that as far as the US serviceman goes their sacrifice was and is laudable and noble. As hosts the typical American is generous and welcoming. My issue is with the Military/Industrial complex that runs your country behind the scenes. Before you call me paranoid study President Eisenhower's speech on this subject from 1959/60. He warned the world then and he was right. My comments are not based on hatred, they are simply based on a premise that because you are basically an insular society you do not understand the nuances of dealing with the myriad other societies, belief systems and attitudes of others. Your insistence in believing that your version of democracy is right for the rest of the world is wrong, in your own country less than 50% vote and to become elected to high office you need to be either rich or have rich backers (presumably with an agenda). I am not stating that it is all bad but it is certainly no better than anywhere else that purports to allow people to vote. In short you are not always right. For instance you state that the UK is in a sorry state, how do you justify that? I am no fan of over generous state provision but if a man is out of work in the UK he does not starve, if he is ill he is cared for, education is generally of a decent standard and secondary education second to none. I would further point out that compared to the rest of the western economies we are actually doing pretty well. We lost our 3star rating but that was some months after you lost yours. The anonymity of the forum allows us to rant and rave and if I have been obnoxious to anyone I regret that. God Bless America, God Bless us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catpus Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I am Hillpig, just because you and I disagree on most things doesn't mean we have to disagree on everything. On this subject you have written eloquently and I agree with every word. No doubt we will disagree again in future. Respect to you, keep the faith. ---------- Post added 05-09-2013 at 16:53 ---------- The case being as you have stated does this mean that we oppose Assad no matter what? The gassing incidents if true merit action, but before we go blazing in should we not reflect ? Why would Assad use poison gas on when he is winning anyway? Why do we need to replace Assad? If the weapons inspectors report is negative or inconclusive what then? Should we really ally ourselves with Al Queda or cannibals? Don't we have enough trouble to deal with at home? Isnt it time for others to become the Worlds cops? How come everybody can't see this? All the evidence anyone could possibly want is on the net... BRTAIN sold nerve gas chemicals to Syria ILLEGALY http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07...bahrain-syria/ http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/britain-sold-nerve-gas-chemicals-2242520 CIA agent Saudi Prince BANDAR was/is the go between https://therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/bandar-praises-british-help-in-importing-terrorism-and-civil-war-into-syria/ Don't Show Obama This Report About Who Really Is Behind The Syrian Chemical Attacks http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-30/dont-show-obama-report-about-who-really-behind-syrian-chemical-attacks REBELS admit to using Sarin gas, but didn't know that it was. http://www.zerohedge.com/ne.. U.S. revealed as the enemy of the world http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/31/321425/us-revealed-as-enemy-of-world/ UNDERSTAND global economics. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/03/global-economic-model-of-war-understanding-syria-and-more/ I realise that reading is not easy for some people, but all they can ever want to know is in these videos... Once digested they can then investigate their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillpig Posted September 5, 2013 Author Share Posted September 5, 2013 If the evidence shows that Assad did use chemical weapons Obama has already said enough about "crossing red lines" that seems to indicate that he will do something. In this case if he doesn't then he's sending a signal to countires like North Korea and Iran that he's a "paper tiger" All words and no action. It's this kind of stuff that leads to real big wars as history has shown. Obama is facing a battle with congress and the public. Very few want to get stuck in another war when it would cost millions to carry out just for a few air and missile strikes and the money is really needed here at home. There could be a chance... but just a chance that he and Putin might get around to talking over the situation during the G-20 summit in St Petersburg. When you see those two together though it's plain to anyone that there's no chemistry at work. Brief handshakes and forced smiles dont hold much hope for co-operation of any kind in bringing both sides in Syria together for a peace conference I appreciate your comments, I cannot agree that attacking Syria without substantive proof is justified on the basis that not to do so would encourage North Korea and Iran. North Korea will not do a thing whilst you have your fleet in the South China sea and your army in South Korea. Iran has to be watched but poses no imminent threat. If the US attacks Syria it will be portrayed as a bully, and with some justification. Don't do it. its just plain wrong unless the UN states unequivocally that Assad had used gas on his own people. If this happens I believe that the British Parliament should be recalled and another vote taken, in these circumstances I believe we should act to prevent further such attacks on the Syrian people. There is no contradiction here, there is as yet no proof. ---------- Post added 05-09-2013 at 17:50 ---------- How come everybody can't see this? All the evidence anyone could possibly want is on the net... BRTAIN sold nerve gas chemicals to Syria ILLEGALY http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07...bahrain-syria/ http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/britain-sold-nerve-gas-chemicals-2242520 CIA agent Saudi Prince BANDAR was/is the go between https://therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/bandar-praises-british-help-in-importing-terrorism-and-civil-war-into-syria/ Don't Show Obama This Report About Who Really Is Behind The Syrian Chemical Attacks http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-30/dont-show-obama-report-about-who-really-behind-syrian-chemical-attacks REBELS admit to using Sarin gas, but didn't know that it was. http://www.zerohedge.com/ne.. U.S. revealed as the enemy of the world http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/31/321425/us-revealed-as-enemy-of-world/ UNDERSTAND global economics. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/03/global-economic-model-of-war-understanding-syria-and-more/ I realise that reading is not easy for some people, but all they can ever want to know is in these videos... Once digested they can then investigate their own. I am aware of these videos, personally I find more accurate facts in the Beano. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/03/global-economic-model-of-war-understanding-syria-and-more/ Global Economic Model of War::: Understanding Syria and more Following a quick survey of macro-economic indicators which are readily available on the web, from such public sites as the CIA, WTO, and so on, one can readily posit a clear and predictive model of war. (All numbers in this article are expressed in trillions of US dollars, such as 1.0T for one trillion US dollars, as an amount, or as a rate per year, as per the context.) On observing the planet from space (using a macro-economic telescope), the first and most glaring observation arises from a look at net exports, which clearly show a single and dominant global empire, the USA. It has, for many decades, had a negative annual net export, of -0.63Tr, or so — far greater than that of its closest “rival”, and former dominant empire, the UK, with -0.14Tr. This means that US military projection (over 1000 military bases world wide) and power is such that the US can maintain steady and long-term extraction of wealth from the rest of the world towards itself, no questions asked. Only a country which is a participating satellite of the empire can share in the spoils of the global extortion project and consistently report a large negative rate of net exports. Notably, the UK (-0.14Tr), and France (-0.07Tr). (In this regard, it is no accident that the governments of the UK and France are the most willing partners in the US’s present call to destroy Syria; more on this below.) There are also momentary localized cases of large negative rates of net exports in post-war financial invasions, otherwise known as re-constructions financed by the empire (in the broad sense, including the financiers). But that is part of the accompanying phenomenon of how the empire profits from war itself. For the system of extortion to function, the empire must maintain two parallel instruments: its military apparatus, and its financial apparatus based on the US dollar as world currency for the purchase of the main strategic commodity, which is energy. Only the empire can print the money that is needed to access the ability to develop or expand. A threat to the US dollar is a sufficient reason for war. Both Libya and Iraq had taken concrete steps to circumvent the US dollar as the operational currency, prior to their destructions. An attempt to circumvent the US dollar in buying or selling oil is an attempt to escape the empire’s control, and this cannot be tolerated. As long as the US dollar is needed to buy and sell the key strategic commodity, the US controls the relative value of other currencies, and as long as the US prints the money, it controls world finance and uses the global financial instrument to enslave all those without military protection, or without the sense to know better (i.e., jurisdictions with puppet leaderships).Financial extortion is a tremendous tool. World national debt is 56.3Tr or so. The US debt is only a fraction of this at 11.6Tr or so. Interest on the national debt is low for “stable” states protected by the empire, and high for “unstable” states being consumed by the empire. The world revenue from interest on national debts can be estimated to be at least 1Tr (per year), and possibly as much as 10Tr or more from all loan sources. This is comparable to or greater than the gargantuan world revenue from oil and gas, presently at 4.5Tr. Based on history, it is more than reasonable to posit that the empire’s wars are driven by profit, that is, by an insatiable desire to extract as much stolen wealth as possible as quickly as possible, and to control territory to ensure continued extraction. Next, I examine the consequences of this assumption. If the militarily superior empire is driven, as it has always been in terms of its military campaigns, by instant wealth gratification and conquest, then, in order to predict wars, we search for where wealth can be found and stolen. Wealth comes in many forms, such as slave labour, and natural resources, but one form is, more than any other, a strategic commodity: fossil fuel energy. In the present technological and economic context, fossil fuel is incomparable as a strategic resource. It is the most accessible source of development and growth. Without it, a civilization slows and looses its ability to compete. Control energy supply and you control development. By cutting supply, you can bring an economy to its knees. It is well known, for example, that the Afghan war is in large part about pipeline geopolitics, in view of controlling China’s access to energy. To an empire, territory is important for two reasons: the resources that it contains, and the transportation routes that it sustains. In the case of Afghanistan, there is also the formidably profitable drug trade, now controlled (and, to some degree, exploited) by the empire. The world illegal drug economy is estimated to be between 1.5Tr to 5Tr (per year), comparable to oil and gas. Whereas these drugs are not a major strategic commodity, the empire must control the illegal drug economy in order to prevent any competitors or resisters from accessing the corresponding easily-earned mega-revenues. This explains the so-called US “war on drugs”. It of course has nothing to do with US public health. In a nutshell, in the empire’s mind, non-compliant and counter-allied states, such as Iran and Syria, cannot be allowed to benefit from and to control significant oil resources, in an area where China could secure protected land access to these resources. The war in Syria is nothing if it is not a predictable march forward by the dominant global empire. The sectarianism on the ground is as significant a motive, from a macro-economic perspective, as the war propaganda spewed out by the empire’s sock puppet politicians and disinformation media is truthful. Sectarianism without financial and military support on either side has a way of turning into negotiated accommodation. In addition to its geopolitical objectives, war also has its immediate dividends for many in the empire. The destroyed territory (infrastructure, population, etc.) must be “reconstructed”, as a compliant serf state, using the empire’s financing, and re-building enterprises, all leveraged via the continued world pillaging elsewhere. The sick and dying or diseased population needs expensive prescription drugs, and so on. World spending on prescription drugs is approximately 0.95Tr (per year), and this is a major high-profit sector in the empire’s operations. The interest rates on reconstruction loans will keep the invaded population subservient and exploited for decades.The main high-profit services and commodities include: prescription drugs, illegal drugs, fossil fuels, ultra-cheap labour, debt financing, and so on, all related to non-essentials to which entire First-World populations are addicted. These economic areas, consequently, are represented by the corporate players that have the greatest influence within the empire, and that most generously contribute to political campaign funds, and to post-political lucrative prize-positions for former politicians and their family members. Medium-profit economic sectors such as domestic manufacturing and services can hardly compete for influence, and have a much reduced voice compared to the industrial era. Behold the era of the US war economy empire. Basically, the Empire’s behaviour is entirely predicted by a mafia economic model of geopolitics. To be fair, however, mafias have ethical rules regarding killing an opponent’s family and such, whereas the drone-wielding USA empire has no such rules. By comparison, from a macro-economic perspective, military spending in China (0.17Tr) and Russia (0.09Tr) is defensive against the military spending of the US and its client/satellite states — US (0.68Tr), UK (0.06Tr), Japan (0.06Tr), France (0.06Tr), Saudi Arabia (0.06Tr), …, Australia (0.03Tr), Canada (0.02Tr) Since their net exports are positive: China (+0.20Tr), Russia (+0.14Tr). The net exports of the US’s main war partners are of course negative: UK (-0.14Tr), and France (-0.07Tr). There can be no surprise that the US’s most willing war partners will always be the UK and France. Such are their macro-economic structures. They have satellite war economies, a status Canada is working hard to fully achieve. Enjoy the learning curve. No one can accuse you of being mis-informed now. It now means that, should I ever lower my intellect as to even read your garbage, I will know how to believe the opposite. All that needed to be said in 31 words. All in black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 How come everybody can't see this? All the evidence anyone could possibly want is on the net... BRTAIN sold nerve gas chemicals to Syria ILLEGALY http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07...bahrain-syria/ http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/britain-sold-nerve-gas-chemicals-2242520 CIA agent Saudi Prince BANDAR was/is the go between https://therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/bandar-praises-british-help-in-importing-terrorism-and-civil-war-into-syria/ Don't Show Obama This Report About Who Really Is Behind The Syrian Chemical Attacks http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-30/dont-show-obama-report-about-who-really-behind-syrian-chemical-attacks REBELS admit to using Sarin gas, but didn't know that it was. http://www.zerohedge.com/ne.. U.S. revealed as the enemy of the world http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/31/321425/us-revealed-as-enemy-of-world/ UNDERSTAND global economics. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/03/global-economic-model-of-war-understanding-syria-and-more/ I realise that reading is not easy for some people, but all they can ever want to know is in these videos... Once digested they can then investigate their own. Cant you ever post anything without links from Youtoob Area 51 people? You remind me of some religious fanatic. You ask him a question about an event that was supposed to have taken place on biblical times and he responds by throwing this at you "It's all in John Verse Six chapter three" or some such reply. That doesn't prove anything whatsoever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillpig Posted September 5, 2013 Author Share Posted September 5, 2013 It now means that, should I ever lower my intellect as to even read your garbage, I will know how to believe the opposite. All that needed to be said in 31 words. All in black. Buck, You and I disagree regularly. We will continue to do so, but you are right, Catpus contributions border on the moronic. Ignore him/her/it there are serious issues here, not helped by this half wit. (I do hope he/she/it is not British) But I fear the worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.