Well yet again, you are creating your own narrative and then pinning it on me. I don't know why you just cant read what is typed and then respond to that.Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
"In bed" with the Russians? How does avoiding conflict with the Russians transform into that caricature? It's like more of the lunacy out of the Podesta camp.
And then you go back to trying to suggest my position is the voters rejected Clinton to save Syrians. I didn't say that. I said I was pleased the criminal bitch was rejected because it would result in fewer deaths. So of course you turn that into another anti-Trump angle - which is all you are really saying. Trump bad. And you'll transform any argument so it can be used for that purpose.
So instead we can look at the facts. Clinton is (was?) part of a war agenda designed to encircle Russia and China and establish "full spectrum dominance", their words. They have launched most of the wars they promised to launch. They wrote it all down on paper and you can easily find the details if you want to look. Russia has warned time and again that this sustained aggression will eventually have to be met. And so we now have Russia in the Ukraine and Russia in Syria. Unfortunately, precisely what the neocons expected and wanted. Clinton in the State Dept. supported this agenda every step of the way, when in fact it's supposed to be the State Dept's role to offer diplomatic solutions first and foremost. "We came, We Saw, He Died!", remember that one? The fucking secretary of state, a rank barbarian bathing herself in blood. Anyone who can't see we've dodged a bullet with that cunt's ambitions being checked sure likes to live dangerously.
As for Trump, all along he's said he wants trade with Russia, not war. He said it all along. And for some reason, that sane position is viewed as a concession to the nation the US has encircled with hundreds of military bases. Remember what happened when the Russians had a bash at placing one base in Cuba? But hundreds of bases and a missile defence shield pushed to Russia's border, that's all acceptable and conducted in the interests of peace. Russia isn't the good guy, but for sure the US is the biggest threat to world peace because look, use your eyes, look at the map. WHY does the US have hundreds of bases all over the world? Why is it tipping the nuclear balance wildly by staging anti-missile defences right on Russia's borders in regions that were previously within the Soviet sphere of influence? Why has the US rejected the balance of power out of hand and pushed for absolute power? Trump says he wants to roll all this back. Great. Spectacularly good idea. He has little chance of achieving it because the warmongers can always create events on the ground that will force his hand, but at least he's not cheerleading for war. And no, attacking ISIS is not a war. They are stateless, they have no diplomatic legitimacy. Attacking Assad's forces - that's a war.
So yes, it's very much progress if tensions with Russia are calmed. I mean why wouldn't it be? Why does that question even need to be asked or answered?
Reply With Quote
Oh sod off 2016, now apparently my aunt has died 
Yeah, can't believe she didn't make the cut.
