Obviously you seem to be OK with sending troops to war for political expediency, and then turning on them for political expediency.
Fine. We know where you stand.
I AM DEPLORABLE.
NEVER CRIMINAL HILLARY (S-NY)
1. Nixon and Kissinger aided Pakistan in its genocidal campaign against Bangladesh and its war against the democracy of India.
2. Pakistan was sending not just aid but soldiers to fight alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan against the Northern Alliance right up until 9/11. They have in effect continued this policy, not just through the Taliban but also via Hekmatyar and the Haqqani network. We will never win in Afghanistan unless we do something about this
3. Pakistan launch tested a nuclear bomb in the early 1990s. We were hostile at first, but we put our rightful indignation aside when we "allied" in Afghanistan. As a result, A. Q. Khan was able to operate his proliferation racket with impunity.
4. Isn't it awfully coincidental that the world's most wanted terrorist was hiding in a Pakistani garrison city?
Pakistan was responsible for the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul; it continues to use our War on Terror funds to finance its own internal conflicts; it uses its leverage with terrorists in order to continually extort American taxpayer aid. Obviously the case of Dr. Afridi is tragic, but it pales in comparison to the larger implication of our unquestioning alliance with Pakistan. It by far deserves the title of 51st more than Israel does.
Back to Ukraine: my position on this has slowly been evolving, and I believe that if we cannot resolve South Ossetia and Crimea in favor of Georgia and Ukraine, respectively, then we should formally give them over to Russia. This will be a short-term Russian victory in its campaign to bully post-Soviet states, but settling these issues will facilitate the far more significant Western gain of pulling those countries into NATO. What does the Crimean peninsula matter to Russia when it realizes that it could incur the military wrath of the Western world if it attempts another invasion and occupation?
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
Yes, they were mutually hostile, but that was mainly due to Gaddafi reaching out to the Soviet Union against Egyptian wishes and Libya's adamant opposition to any peace talks with Israel. Gaddafi was undermining Arab unity when Sadat was building it from scratch - it's really no wonder they were at odds.and Egypt was planning to attack Libya. have you seen this:
(Sorry I didn't finish that sentence, I have no idea what happened.) On whose part? Are you suggesting that Gaddafi intended to bait someone else, or that the Khan network was baiting Gaddafi for no reason?Using the yellowcake as a commodity to sell, as bait.
Really? Did the rebels decide to keep proliferating, keep torturing prisoners dissidents en masse, and be openly hostile to the United States?But the rebel movement is known to be a group worse than him. The only purpose can be to want a destabilized Middle east. There is no honorable purpose here. Libya will not be worse than it has been for decades.
Why does it matter how long ago it was? He's still the same guy, and there's no reason that he should be absolved of guilt just because he outlived the immediate responses?Why do you speak of actions four decades old? Is that the best you have?
They've engaged in clashes with South Korea, kidnapped Americans, South Koreans, and Japanese, and have assiduously (if incompetently) tried to construct a nuclear arsenal.What have they done to us, or other countries outside of chain rattling?
LOL, it's your claim, it's your job to provide the evidence. I'm not required to prove your point for you.I'm not going to look. Apparently you weren't watching back in 2011 when they were being pointed out. Go back and look at protest YouTube videos. Why do peaceful protester carry weapons? In some of these, you see them firing first if you look closely, unless in over site they were shown and have been pulled since.
You know why we knocked out Gaddafi?
It;'s because he was starting to become a big player in the world game. He had a strong economy and wanted to unite Africa. He had the 8th wonder built, and Libya was thriving. Too bad we bombed the 8th wonder. Anyone know if it ever got repaired?
'VLAD THE BAD STEALS A MARCH ON THE WEST
by Eric Margolis
Soviet leader Josef Stalin used to shrug off critics by his favorite Central Asian saying: “The dogs bark; the caravan moves on.”
Russia’s hard-eyed president, Vladimir Putin, is following the same strategy over Ukraine and Crimea.
Putin swiftly moved his knight into the empty chess square of Crimea, thereby regaining full control of one of Russia’s four strategic port regions: Sevastopol, Murmansk, St Petersburg and Vladivostok.
Sevastopol, now firmly in Moscow’s hands, is Russia’s sole gateway to the Black Sea, Mediterranean, and Mideast. The vast, co-shared Russian-Ukrainian Sevastopol naval base was a shaky, awkward arrangement doomed to eventual failure.
Semi-autonomous Crimea, over 60% ethnic Russian, will hold a referendum on 16 March to decide to remain in Ukraine or rejoin Russia. A referendum is clearly the answer to the whole Ukraine-Russia problem.
Ukraine has been a corruption-ridden failed state since it separated from Russia in 1991. This writer has long suggested that partition of Ukraine into Western and Russian-oriented halves is the sensible solution, with Crimea returning to Russia.
Putin asks if Western-backed Kosovo can go independent of Serbia, why can’t Crimea break its links with Kiev?
The temporary attachment of majority ethnic Russian Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 after 250 years of Russian rule was unnatural, a ticking time bomb. It has now exploded, triggered in part by the West’s successful effort to overthrow the elected but corrupt government in Kiev of Viktor Yanukovich.
Overturning regimes deemed uncooperative or hostile has long been a CIA specialty. Its first big success came in 1953 with the subversion of Iran’s democratic-nationalist leader, Mohammed Mossadegh by a combination of propaganda, rented crowds, and bribes. We saw this same technique used – enhanced by modern social media – in Ukraine’s first Orange Revolution, Georgia, again in Iran(unsuccessfully), and, with the help of US and British special forces, in Libya and Syria. Egypt came next, where a US-backed tinpot military dictator, the self-appointed “Field Marshall al-Sisi” claims he is answering the people’s call.” Not a peep from Washington. Or about the crushing of opposition by Bahrain’s US-backed monarchy.
Russia, which used to be adept at subversion, has lagged in recent years but it still knows the signs. The Kremlin is convinced that Ukraine’s latest revolution was engineered by Washington. The US Undersecretary of State for Europe admitted Washington has spent $5 billion over recent years in Ukraine to bring it into the West’s orbit – aka “building democracy.”
Two points to note. Did Washington think that tough Vlad Putin would just take its coup lying down?
Second, it’s amazing how determined Washington’s cold warriors remain to tear down Russia. The bankrupt US, $17 trillion in debt, running on money borrowed from China, with bridges collapsing and 44 million citizens on food stamps, suddenly finds the money to offer bankrupt Ukraine a new $1 billion loan – just to compete with Moscow. A loan unlikely to be repaid.
America has a bad habit of personalizing foreign affairs and demonizing uncooperative leaders. Remember when Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser was denounced as “Hitler on the Nile?” “Khadaffi, Mad Dog of the Mideast?” Most Americans have little knowledge of geography, history or world affairs so the easiest way to market overseas adventures to them is by creating foreign bogeymen like Khadaffi and Saddam.
Vladimir Putin is the latest. He is being hysterically demonized by the US and British media. Vlad the Bad.
Disturbingly, US Republicans and the usual media propagandists are heaping blame on President Barack Obama for “losing Crimea,” as if any of them knows where it was before last week. John McCain and his sidekick Sen. Lindsey Graham have been demanding that Obama “get tough.”
Sure. Let’s mine Russia’s ports or blockade its oil and gas exports. Nothing like a nuclear war to show how weak the Democrats are. Thank god McCain did not win the presidency. The dolts at Fox TV can’t tell the difference between caution and cowardice.
President Putin’s ambition is to slowly reassemble some parts of the old USSR, Ukraine being the most important. Doing so is in Russia’s national interest, much as we may not like it. Nearly all Russians believe Putin is on the right track. By contrast, Washington wants to keep Russia weak and treat it as an obsequious, defeated nation, like postwar Germany or Japan.
The US won’t accept that Russia has any legitimate spheres of influence, while Washington’s span the globe. Last week, US Secretary of State John Kerry, who used to be a sensible fellow before becoming corrupted by power, blasted Russia: “you just don’t invade a country under a phony pretext!”
I guess Kerry has never heard of the US invasions of the Dominican Republic, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and Libya. Or can’t remember Vietnam and the Gulf of Tonkin “incident.”
Kerry should cut the hypocrisy and get to work on a diplomatic settlement. Two major nuclear-armed powers cannot – must not – be allowed to confront one another.
Ukraine could turn out to be the 1914 Bosnia-Herzegovina of our era if we don’t stop primitive breast-beating over a region no one could even find on a map until recently'
VLAD THE BAD STEALS A MARCH ON THE WEST « Eric Margolis
'What kind of sick and twisted toy factory is this?'
'We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile, and nothing can grow there. Too much, the best of us is washed away.'
"Better to be dead and cool, than alive and uncool."