Time to Set the Record Straight - Russian Atrocity

LOL! I call you out on your lying BULLSHIT OP and you're calling me a liar. Only a trumpy uses that kind of logic.

 

I don't care about "numbers" they don't prove American "atrocities". Which was the BULLSHIT I'm calling on your OP.

 

First you cry - Prove it - Prove it.. Pretending never to have heard of the Iraq War. Then when you are given numbers of Deaths .. and links .. you then cry -- "I don't care about Numbers. they don't prove atrocities" "BULLSHIT"

Of course the number dead - each an atrocity - proves "atrocities" .. what kind of silliness is this. What measure would you like to use. one that doesn't include dead .. raging nonsense mate.

So the one crying "BULLSHIT" is full of it

 

Russia has committed more war crimes just in Chechnya, Georgia, and Syria than the US has since the end of the cold war. That doesn't even include what they've done in Ukraine.

 

I don't agree that oligarch is a vague term, but I described it, rather thoroughly, in my post; certainly differentiating it enough from merely influential businessmen, so that there should be no way that you could imagine them to be similar to "the Jews" in banking, entertainment, etc., or to the NRA.

I'm starting to feel that you might not be approaching this issue with objectivity-- find someone saying that, in a nicer way than I just did-- but I'll point out the salient point for you, once more, in case you honestly just don't get it: the crucial element, which sets oligarchs apart from other rich people, is the source of their income. If they are awarded their position by the leader of the country, then they ain't no normal businessman, or "special interest," lobby. Do you follow?

 

"Syria" ? You been badly underinformed mate .. combined with a big load of State Sponsored Propaganda .. not suprising given massive propaganda fest.

how to deprogram .. where to begin .. ? OK War in Syria .. There were two sides - Kurds fighting ISIS and Turkey are a separate issue .. I guess you could say more on Assad's side fighting ISIS but .. is separate issue.

Side A) Syrian Army - Assad backed by Russia and Iran. - although Russia doesn't officially enter the war until late 2015 .. Iran was fighting throughout. War starts in late 2011 to get your timeline set.

Side B) Salafi Islamist Jihadists - right from the beginning - no connection to the original protest movement other than taking it over and telling Christians to either join the Extremists or leave the Country .. prior to the war bands of extremists are running round the country killing and persecuting Christians and others .

After the war broke out tens of thousands of foreign Salafi Jihadists poured into Syria .. they take over all of Syria - every major city - sans Demascus .. in a short period of time - and declare a new Islamic State in 2013 ... all of the rebel factions have coalesced under either Al Qaeda or ISIS .. the two factions making up the new Islamic State.... The objective of which is to bring Strict Sharia Theocracy to Syria .. which is a shining star on the hill in terms of "Secularism" .. and the Islamists hate this .. western infidel is one thing .. this is a cancer from withing .. Holy Jihad must be waged.

Side A was fighting for freedom and liberty -- to keep what they had of it .. Side B - The new Islamic State that was created and thrived for 3 years .. was a Strict Sharia Nightmare -- dark age style .. daily public executions - rape - forced marriage ... a bad day if you were Christian, Jew, "Other" ...even Muslims of the wrong kind .. Shia .. I See Saudi Arabia just Executed 80 Shia just the other Day .. Brother El Saud..

So then .. which side of the war do you favor .. and which side did USA favor ?

 

Russia committed war crimes in Syria.

 

The US armed ISIS in Syria so spare me the war crimes talk

 

Are you suggesting that the US arming groups in Syria cancels out Russian war crimes?

Why are you so interested in defending Russia?

 

You have no idea what Russia did or didn't do - other than what you heard on Fake News CNN or FFF .. Fake News Fox ... For Example ...this stuff "Chemical Weapons" but that is well into Lesson 3 and we have yet to get through pre-school.

Which side did you favor Assad or the Islamic State .. and which side did US Favor ... which side Russia favor.

 

Al Qaeda is not Iraq mate - the claim that Saddam had something to do with 911 shown completely false. - did you not get the memo ?

 

I understand your justification of the action based on a definition. Justification is all relative. Justification is not rule of law. Your Justification is not universal across the spectrum. You may not want to target jews who hold power within government and wealth. There are others who feel its justified based on their definition.

I would feel more comfortable if the argument I heard was....for the American citizen, there are constitutional protections against seizure and punitive measures for political speech or free speech or doing business with a country they support but government doesnt.

 

Putin's cheerleaders, in a snit over advanced democratic nations uniting behind the United States in opposition to Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine in his attempt to exhume the USSR, should not overlook the explanation that he did it for love:

"They had a country.
You could see it was a country
where there was a lot of love."



​

 

Funny enough, Russia is doing this to their own people. So the accusations are misplaced.

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/companies-leave-russia-assets-seized-83405396

 

What accusation is misplaced ? ---

 

​

You have a strange conception of "Love" - War Crimes - like those committed under Biden's watch .. are not Love.

 

I don't know what you mean, here. I have advocated that the way that the Palestinians are treated, by Israel, be considered the equivalent of Apartheid. The only thing standing in the way of that, IMO, is the Palestinians changing their stance (at least for the time being) from wanting an independent state, requiring the detailed work of drawing borders-- something that most feel out of their depth, in holding a passionate opinion about-- to an appeal to the world that they only wish to be accepted & treated the same as any other Israeli citizens.

I do not want to derail this thread, on this separate issue, which you have brought to our conversation, in what I would deem a false equivalence. But I will wrap up the subject (I hope), by pointing out that if Palestinians in Gaza were given citizen status, and so representation, not only could they improve their own condition but if, at some point, they wished independence, they would be in a much better position, within the Israeli government, to negotiate that independence. An analogy might be the residents of Quebec, within greater Canada (though I am not familiar with all the details, there).

Of course, even all of that is only hypothetical, because, in all likelihood, the Jewish state or, more specifically, its politicians, would see the option of giving voting rights to all Palestinians as being more objectionable, even, than just giving them their independent State. But, as I just explained, this would only occur, if they stopped asking for that State, and began asking for the other alternative, instead.

If your allusion to Jewish crimes had NOT been intended to refer to the Palestinian situation, I will say, again, it would seem you would be trying to take this thread off- topic, into a region that is too much of a quagmire, for a clean, clear analogy to be drawn. But if your argument involves non- Palestinian, Israeli foreign policy, please be extremely specific, in your accusations. I will merely point out, beforehand, how Israel's much more vulnerable position, among its neighbors, relative to Russia's circumstance, seems to discredit this analogy, even before it is made.

Would you please clarify what you are saying, here? The way you have phrased it, is less than clear. Are you saying that members of government have fewer rights than normal citizens? This is patently untrue, as government officials are generally granted "immunity" status. Again, it is too hard to know your meaning, from your vague phrasing, which seems to confer Constitutional protections for all U.S. citizens, onto everyone, which is obviously a strawman assumption; that is, this patently not the way that "Constitutional protections," have ever been applied. You could, of course, first make the argument that all peoples, and nations, should be treated by the American government, like its own citizens (but you cannot merely assume hypocrisy, from any difference in treatment of the two, very different, things).

Even on this charge, however, your argument, above, tries to speciously sneak a contraband "right," within the borders of our debate. Namely, even U.S. citizens do not have the unfettered right to do business with any country they support. Surely you are familiar with the U.S. embargo of Cuba? Or, formerly, of Iran? And there are certainly restrictions on doing business with many other nations. Once more, if your argument is even a valid one, you are not presenting it in a sufficiently defined manner. Being concise is not a virtue, if it results in leaving too much, unexplained. Please try again.

 

That we are setting a bad precedent.
The question should be asked of Putin.

 

Putin is not running around siezing the assets of Rich folks in other nations ... the "bad precedent" in question .. so the question that should be asked is "Will we go after the Rich Jewish Bankers next" ?

 

Why is Israel allowing the plans of the Russian oligarchs to fly to their country, which we send billions to every year????