Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 97

Thread: U.S. Launches Missiles at Syrian Base

  1. #61
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    53
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,573
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,794
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,310
    Thanked in
    608 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Þoreiðar View Post
    Some historians seem to differ:
    - "In 1965, 42 percent of all herbicide spraying was dedicated to food crops."
    - "In South Vietnam alone, an estimated 10 million hectares of agricultural land was ultimately destroyed."
    You are playing with numbers here and what was deemed agricultural lands and military objectives. The delta region of South Vietnam was in the hands of South Vietnamese government it is a largest rice producing region in Vietnam and the target of North Vietnam. Protecting the rice fields was one of the main goals of the US military objective as it secured a food source for the South Vietnamese. Most of the agent orange was sprayed on the boarder regions near Laos and Cambodia that is dense forest and mountains. I knew several Vietnam vets that were involved in those operations, I used to hang out at VFW post a lot and vets talk about things with other vets that will never go public. Trust me there was no intent to use agent orange on humans and they did not know the affects at the time and those vets who handled it without protection have healthy children, though they themselves have suffered health effects from it.

    Sure, but Canada and Brazil are some of the most sparsely populated countries on Earth. Vietnam was heavily and evenly populated. That such heavy spraying would affect large parts of the civilian population, was a given.
    They would not have been using it to clear land for agriculture in Canada or Brazil if they knew it was so toxic. Vietnam's population is mainly on the coastal plain and not spread evenly. Even the farming area's of the delta region is sparsely populated as like farming areas everywhere in the world and it is small villages and farm fields, not cities and towns.

    You can even go to YouTube and watch old film footage of battles in Vietnam and look at the terrain in the background. The Vietnam war was a guerilla war being waged by the Vietcong and NVA armies, they did not risk open war in settled areas often. I often use the Vietnam war as a example of how men with small arms can actually take down a major military force with jets, helicopters and tanks. The idea is to control the rural areas thus starving out the cities and towns, that is why the US was actually protecting the food source and helping the South Vietnam government to increase food production with more modern farming practices, we did the same in Central America in the 80s. Since one of the goals was to increase food production it would not make sense to use herbicides on crop lands.

    2,4,5-T seem to be the most toxic of the two components of agent orange.
    Agent orange was a "cocktail" of popular chemical herbicides used at the time, the bonding of the chemical elements is what made it toxic. As dumb and rough as I seem, I do have a degree in horticulture science from a well known university that focuses on agriculture of various types and we actually went over agent orange because it was a topic at the time due to law suits filed by veterans.

    As stated I'm not for any US involvement in any foreign wars unless directly threatened, however please do not try and twist facts and keep the debate honest.

    If I were in charge of the US, I would simply cut off all foreign aid to all of the world and quit feeding these third world shitholes and let them starve and kill each other, Israel included and would be first to be cut off. Their populations would lower and we would not have the problems we do with being invaded. You have to think of the world on more micro level and use examples to explain how things work. An example is if you are a farmer and you get rid of all the rats on your property and the farm next to you does nothing and lets the rats breed you will always have a rat problem. I know some humanitarian idiot will say " oh, SpearBrave you are comparing these people to rats ", well I have seen these third world people and I can honestly say I would rather have rats then them and perhaps cockroaches would have been a better term.

    The US policy of feeding all these once low population shitholes is actually far worse than the military actions if you think about things in the long term. I am not advocating any kind of genocide or mass murder, I'm just stating these people need to learn to be self reliant and do as nature commands and only breed to carrying capacity of the lands they inhabit.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  2. #62
    Senior Member Thorolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Online
    Friday, January 25th, 2019 @ 01:24 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Maryland Maryland
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Religion
    My religious ways are odd.
    Posts
    505
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    I really wish we would stay out of this sort of thing. It is just waste of time and money attacking Syria. We would be way better off just not getting involved and letting the middle east gas, bomb and shoot each other.

  3. #63
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    The Horned God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 30th, 2017 @ 09:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Irish
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Ireland
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Posts
    2,248
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    This is not a black and white case. Pentagon documents have revealed how support for so called rebels is actually the result of the intention to destabilize a country for example.
    Which documents specifically are you referring to?


    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    The killing that follows is not an accident here. And in the Iraq case for example - it's not just about Syria, like you're now trying to frame it, you were talking about dictators in general - the US went to war. On purpose. That means you will kill people, including civilians; that's not merely accidental.
    Is it not reasonable in your view, to call the deaths of the 3 Assad soldiers killed in the airbase the other day accidental, given that destroying the base was necessary in order to save civilian lives?

    To not act in that situation is to condemn civilians to an unspeakable death by poison gas. Therefore to not act is not a morally valid option.

    Any soldiers who are killed while the only valid moral option is being performed can be said to have been killed accidentally in my view.

    Perhaps the more usual term for these kind of deaths in war is "collateral damage". That's fine I don't see any significant difference between the terms "accidental death" and "collateral damage". I use them interchangeably.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    On the other hand, the goal of Assad's war is not to kill civilians, but to win. His morals might be questionable, but he is trying to win a war and any killing of civilians is in this case either collateral or at worst a means towards an end.
    That is the same rationale that Stalin used before he starved 7 million Ukrainians to death and sent 20 million of his own people to the gulags, "the ends justified the means". If killing civilians ever becomes an internationally acceptable means to an end in war, the world is doomed. Doomed.

    If that is Assad's modus operandi then he is a moral monster and the U.S has every right if not an actual obligation to do everything necessary to take him out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    The problem with civilians dying in a war is that they stand in the way of what you're trying to achieve. The concept of intentionality looses its purpose. Morality is degraded to the 'amount of f*cks given' about their lives. Both the US and Assad have to make choices in which they weigh the consequences for civilians against the amount of success they will gain to reach their political goal.
    I refer you to my previous paragraph. The only moral currency in war is lives, not "what ends you want to achieve". If what you want to achieve will clearly kill many more people than not achieving it then you have no right to move in that direction, not unless you are a legitimate government acting in defense of your nation. That is not what Assad is. That should be self-evident.



    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Those three soldiers is not what I was referring to and you damn well know it.
    No I don't know what you were referring to, I only read words not minds. What were you referring to Iraq, Libya? If so spit it out.



    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    So when chaos follows, a well intended 'oops' is enough to justify for it, even if you do it over and over again?
    If one is repeatedly forced to act in order to prevent war crimes from taking place then yes, repeated intervention into failed states is justifiable. Always assuming of course that one carries out those actions in good faith based on the best intelligence information available at the time.

    Every case is different of course but in general if you are acting to neutralise a mass murderer yet in the course of that action and in spite of all reasonable precautions to avoid it, some civilians are killed, then the argument can be made that the greater good was served.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    It seems rather that everything that is happening in the Middle East is the result of an intentional destabilization caused by the US. Even the rebels in Syria complained that Obama gave them just enough support to stay alive, but not enough to win.
    They did win though didn't they, so that's a rather moot point. You are reading too much RT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    And even following your position, the danger for a situation like you describe was never as big as it has become after US intervention by going to war in Iraq and supporting terrorists in Syria.
    Saddam was another moral monster and his sons who would have followed him were even worse. Iraq is far better off without them. Iraq just needs to get rid of ISIS now and learn to solve their tribal differences democratically. If other countries can do it Iraq can too. Iraq is a far more hopeful place now than it was under Saddam imo.

    America unseated saddam before he grew powerful enough that his sabre rattling caused major anxiety and instability in the region, which it surely would have done if he thought he could get away with it. So, for the good of OPEC and by extension the world economy he had to go.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    You've completely failed to understand my point. It was about your position not taking into account the levels of 'evil' that can be achieved by other means. That's where you're superficial, because you reduce the entire situation to a black and white opposition between 'vicious dictators versus just wars'. A just war can be even more vicious, dixit Carl Schmitt.
    Name dropping Carl Schmitt doesn't get you far. What is Carl Schmitts argument against the premise of "just war"?

    Even if a just war is vicious that doesn't make it unjust. A knife fight is more vicious than a fistfight but if you see a child being attacked with a knife and you have a gun it is reasonable to defend him is it not? The is analgous to the situation in syria right now.



    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    How about the entire american tradition of geostrategy of, let's say, the last 100 years?
    The last 50 years has been the most peaceful time in all of recorded world history!

    I don't think it is any coincidence that this period coincides with one where the worlds superpower was a parliamentary democracy. Whatever America is doing they seem to doing relatively good job at keeping the peace. A multipolar world would be far more dangerous and less stable.


    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Originally Posted by Roybatty
    Pretty much any bomb is a chemical weapon. Whether it maims and kills you fast or slow, poisons you or blows you apart, what's the difference? Being mowed down by some aggressor's weapons, no matter what they use is still a nasty way to go.
    This is a good point. The reason we are so horrified by the images of children choking on gas, is because it is actually less horrifying than what happens usually. We can be horrified because we see these images on the news. We don't even get the chance to be horrified by what happens usually, because the images of children torn to pieces, by legal bombs, are too harsh to show.


    Who's this "we" you are talking about? Roybatty isn't horrified by any of it. In fact he couldn't care less. They are all just "wogs" to him. He said so a couple of posts up. I suppose he'd lift the century old ban on chemical weapons if he had his way...

    But in anycase inspite of what you and Roy might think, the civilised world has ruled differently. Poison gas is banned by the geneva convention. This is for several reasons. First, it is largely indiscriminate. It generally disperses over a wide area in the atmosphere carried by currents and killing whomever is in its path. Used in a city it is impossible for it not to kill innocents.

    Second of all, many forms of poison gas, such as the mix of sarin and chlorine reportedly used in this attack, damage the eyes. This leads to long term visual impairment in the survivors. Bullets and even shrapnel tend to be far less indiscriminate and destructive to the sense organs.

    It is for these reasons 196 countries including Syria chose to sign the Geneva convention banning chemical weapons. The fact that Assad does not feel bound by the convention signed by his predecessors is just more evidence that he is not a legitimate ruler and is beyond the pale of world opinion.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    This is becoming more and more ridiculous. First you introduce morality and intention as a way to discriminate between different types of killing and all of a sudden it's the relative amount of casualities that determines how bad it is.
    I don't see any contradiction at all. The morality of a situation lets you know if you have the right to act. For instance if you have been attacked you have the moral right to defend yourself.

    The the number of possible casualties for a given course of action (so far as that can be calculated) informs the decision on which action is best to take.

    Moral justification for action is weighed in the balance against possible casualty count all the time at least by democracies it is. by dictators like Assad, not so much..

    As for me being ridiculous well really that's rich. It is you who are looking ridiculous trying to defend the use of chemical weapons. Weapons that are banned by virtually every country in the world for the last 100 years!

    You and Roybatty together would be laughed out of every town hall meeting in the developed world if you tried that tack. And rightly so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Anyway, this discussion isn't going anywhere when you present yourself as the ultimate judge of moral standards.
    Yeah I am the ultimate judge of moral standards. It's just me and... the 196 countries that have signed the Geneva Convention!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Edit: your numbers are also misleading. The worst case was in a single area in South Vietnam and in a single year: a number of deaths aren't given, but over 300 000 anual diets (for civilians) were destroyed. And even comparing these numbers with the total casualties in a larger area and over a longer stretch of time is simply a misuse of statistics.
    Ok. I don't claim to be an expert on the Vietnam War. And it is not my intention to defend every international action that the U.S ever took. In hindsight going into Vietnam was probably a mistake. That is the orthodox view anyway.

    That still doesn't mean that the use of agent orange, when it was still assumed safe for humans, is the moral equivalent of using sarin gas. That is just a nonsense view and I've wasted enough keystrokes showing why it is nonsense already.
    Close observation may result in feelings of horror, wonder and awe at world you find yourself inhabiting.

  4. #64
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    The Horned God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 30th, 2017 @ 09:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Irish
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Ireland
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Posts
    2,248
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorolf View Post
    I really wish we would stay out of this sort of thing. It is just waste of time and money attacking Syria. We would be way better off just not getting involved and letting the middle east gas, bomb and shoot each other.
    The problem with that is that the world runs on oil and the middle is where most of the oil is. If the oil states get drawn into a shooting war the oil supply will be disrupted and world economy, including the U.S economy will be screwed!

    There would be a world recession the like of which would make the last ten years look like an economic boom.

    That's why you can't afford to just ignore the middle east.
    Close observation may result in feelings of horror, wonder and awe at world you find yourself inhabiting.

  5. #65
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    The Horned God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 30th, 2017 @ 09:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Irish
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Ireland
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Posts
    2,248
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    I'm not the one peddling fantasies about the "safety" of horrendous chemical agents. You are. So why would I want to be exposed to something I know and already clearly stated is inherently unsafe? You're the one claiming AO is near harmless.

    Put your money where your mouth is or be a cowardly fiction peddlar. Simple choice.
    No I never said that agent orange was harmless. You are trying to twist my words, you weasel.

    You are to one who drew a moral analogy between to use of agent orange and Sarin gas.

    You must have the short term memory of a goldfish.



    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    There isn't a nice way to murder people.
    No, but some ways of dying are worse than others. I presume you would agree with that?

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    Unfortunately entire generations of video-game playing idiots are growing up thinking that war is just some extended simulation of life without consequences. Being blown up doesn't necessarily result in a quick, clean death either. It very often results in loss of limbs and grievous body injuries. Nothing nice and clean about it at all, so kindly stop pretending that it does
    I never said that being blown up was pleasant. Never said that. All you can seem to do is strawman every point I make. I said that poison gas used against civilians is a recognised war crime, which it is. The fact that you could defend it's use against civilians is nothing short of outrageous.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    And if you're truly so outraged and concerned about how "agonizing it is to die from respiratory failure", that time honoured US tradition of torturing people through water-boarding should outrage a fragile little flower such as yourself, yet you're quite schtumm about it. The Geneva convention (which you so conveniently cite) addresses torture as well, yet amazingly you forget to address that point.
    The U.S has never actually killed anyone with water torture though have they? The subjects (terrorists all btw) can end it at any time if they agree to keep answering questions. To compare the limited use of waterboarding by the U.S against known terrorists to the indiscriminate use of sarin gas by Asaad against civilians is a ludicrous analogy even by your standards Roy.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    The facts are that the US has and continues to use chemical agents in warfare against regions and countries which did it no harm whatsoever, with dire consequences for civilians in those countries.
    They haven't used sarin gas though have they? Agent orange is not the equivalent of nerve gas, are you really so dense that you can't see that?

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    Their actions have nothing - zilch - to do with defending the USA. It's about brutalising and destroying those countries and civilisations for Wall Street Profits, the out of control military machine and the Internationalist, Global cabal of financiers and industrialists who are all involved in this racket.
    Show me the evidence that that is the case and we might be getting somewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    It is a global racket, with many stakeholders from around the world. The US is their tool of choice.
    This is the "jewspiracy" again is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    So stop pretending that you care about it - because you're here inventing fantasy excuses for the Globalist & US Murder machine.

    Nonsense. Someone has to keep order and standards of human decency in the world. I'd rather it be the U.S than China/Russia.

    If you think otherwise you are a fool, you're a turkey clamoring for Christmas.

    Btw, I do care about it. Just because you are dead inside and feel nothing at all when you see the bodies of children choked to death it doesn't mean that we are all the same as you.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    PS - Other countries aren't morally any better than the US in these regards. The difference is simply in the scale and magnitude of the USA's operations, and in the fact that the US is by far the most active global terrorist.
    lol! You sound like Noam Chomsky! You and that aged jewish intellectual have a lot in common. You should email him.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    It is utterly ridiculous that you have the audacity to come here and spread obvious lies and propaganda in favour of the Internationalist (because that is what it really is) Murder Machine and invent excuses for them, and portray them as moral beings. They're not.
    Your defense of Assad, a morally bankrupt tyrant and the puppet of Putin, another morally bankrupt tyrant is what is ridiculous.

    Quote Originally Posted by RoyBatty View Post
    A spade is a spade. War is hell. Those who export wars around the world are terrorists.
    But tyrants who murder their own people with poison gas are not terrorists, they are just fine by you. At least as long as they stay friends with your mate Vladimir Putin...

    I have to say I find your love of dictators to be completely idiotic and baseless. If you hate the west so much and like Putin so much how come you aren't living in Russia now? Serious question.
    Close observation may result in feelings of horror, wonder and awe at world you find yourself inhabiting.

  6. #66
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Argos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    4 Weeks Ago @ 05:04 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Politics
    natural order
    Religion
    pagan
    Posts
    148
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    31
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    President Trump seems to be freed from any IQ.
    "Denk ich an Deutschland in der Nacht, dann bin ich um den Schlaf gebracht. Ich kann die Augen nicht mehr schließen und meine heißen Tränen fließen!" (Heinrich Heine, "Nachtgedanken")

  7. #67
    Senior Member RoyBatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Last Online
    Wednesday, August 23rd, 2017 @ 08:34 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Paleface
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Gender
    Occupation
    Arbeit Macht Frei
    Politics
    Rightwing / Socialist
    Posts
    2,415
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    12
    Thanked in
    12 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Horned God View Post
    No I never said that agent orange was harmless.
    You were inferring that it wasn't much cause for concern. Now you seem to be backtracking. Nowhere left to turn and run it seems.

    AO was used as a chemical weapon on Vietnam. - FACT.
    Even today Vietnamese people suffer the consequences of being CHEMICALLY POISONED BY THE USA. - FACT.

    The USA uses chemical weapons against countries it commits acts of aggression against. FACT.

    That dispels the nonsense you were previously spouting.

    The US has no business lecturing other countries on "chemical weapons", or any other BS for that matter.

    The entire "chemical weapons" nonsense is a US / EU / Globalist charade and excuse put forward to destroy and jihad Syria today, Iran tomorrow, Central Asia the day after.


    No but some ways of dying are worse than others I presume you would agree with that?
    Well... I never claimed otherwise but I fail to see how dying from, or being attacked by chemical means is much different to ones limbs and organs blown off.


    I never said that being blown up was pleasant. Never said that. All you can seem to do is strawman every point I make. I said that poison gas used against civilians is a recognised war crime which it is. The fact that you could defend it's use against civilians is nothing short of outrageous.
    The USA blows up civilians with impunity on a daily basis. That fact doesn't seem to bother you at all, because all you seem to care about is "how horrendous chemical weapons attacks" are as if this is some kind of special kind of offense. And apparently, this deserves some kind of "US World Police response".

    What utter tripe.

    You can't claim to abhor chemical attack terrorism yet applaud or claim that bombing people, as the US does 24/7, is somehow less evil and more moral.

    And therein lies the hypocrisy of your stance.

    In any case, it is by no means proven nor even likely that the Syrian Govt used chem weapons, either recently or some years ago when the Obongo regime attempted to use a similar incident as an excuse to attack Syria.


    The U.S has never actually killed anyone with water torture though have they?
    That's a pretty bold statement and claim - one which you cannot hope to prove.
    It's laughable that you even make such claims.

    Another bizarre conclusion to be drawn from such a statement is that it's OK to torture people, "as long as they don't die". That's just crazy man.


    They haven't used sarin gas though have they?
    So what. They've certainly used white phosphorus.

    Agent orange is not the equivalent of nerve gas, are you really so dense that you can't see that?
    Straw man argument. I know it isn't the equivalent of nerve gas. It has different properties introducing a different kind of hell to people. That doesn't make it any less horrific.


    This thejewspiracy again is it?
    Jews, A-rabs, "Christians", Shabbos goyim. They are an International Den of Thieves and Bandits.


    Nonsense. Someone has to keep order and standards of human decency in the world I'd rather it be the U.S than China/Russia.
    The flaws with that theory is that Congress is filled with bandits, thieves, whores and psychopaths and expecting such a cabal to uphold standards of human decency is akin to putting the Vatican in charge of acting out against sodomy and pedophilia.

    It just doesn't work. Even an amoeba could understand that.


    lol! You sound like Noam Chomsky! you and that aged Jewish intellectual have a lot in common. You should email him.
    I could care less about Chomsky. And even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    your defense of Assad a morally bankrupt tyrant and the puppet and Putin another morally bankrupt tyrant is what is ridiculous.
    Both of them are a whole lot better than the Bush or Clinton clans, Miss Lindsey or McCain.


    But tyrants who murder their own people with poison gas are not terrorists, they are just fine by you. At least as long as they stay friends with your mate Vladimir Putin...
    You're just spouting MSM fantasies here. Try again.


    I have to say I find your love of dictators to be completely idiotic and baseless. If you hate the west so much and like Putin so much how come you aren't living in Russia now? Serious question.
    I find your love for faggot, kike, jihadist & nigger loving democracy much more disturbing.
    ~ **** Democracy! It's 2 wolves and 1 sheep deciding what's for dinner.

  8. #68
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    renownedwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Online
    Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 @ 02:07 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    Wales
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Religion
    Germanic Heathenry
    Posts
    814
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    Anybody actually care if Syrians die or not? The faux outrage from the alt-right is almost comedic. You all really think 'America First' actually entails isolationism in the face of other global expansionists rather than securing precious commodities via aggressive actions? Trump is probably more shrewd in this respect regarding this incident, and he has same problems as post-brexit Britain in that the government by large is populated with globalist traitors and opportunists which will do their best to screw it all up when they can.

  9. #69
    Senior Member North Vinlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Online
    Thursday, December 28th, 2017 @ 09:01 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Canadian
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Gender
    Politics
    Ethnic Nationalism
    Posts
    349
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    What global expansionists pose a threat to the USA? What precious commodities is Trump supposed to secure at the expense of American lives?

  10. #70
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    renownedwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Online
    Tuesday, August 13th, 2019 @ 02:07 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    Wales
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Religion
    Germanic Heathenry
    Posts
    814
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    Lol! Both Russia and China perhaps? Most certainly oil and natural gas. You think Trump wouldn't use American lives to ensure US dominance? Any leader worth his salt would when necessary. Plus 'merica being little more than an insolvent mega-corp, want's (needs) to be top dog, they aren't going to leave the rest of the world a vacuum to occupy.

Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Samson Option: Israel's Missiles on on European Cities
    By Ralf in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Monday, March 12th, 2012, 08:48 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: Thursday, April 14th, 2011, 02:20 PM
  3. Spy Photos Reveal 'secret Launch Site' for Iran's Long-range Missiles
    By Guntwachar in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Saturday, April 12th, 2008, 11:52 AM
  4. Russia Sends Tor-M1 Missiles to Iran
    By Agrippa in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Wednesday, November 29th, 2006, 05:08 AM
  5. Swastika-Shaped US Base
    By Yavolod in forum The United States
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Friday, January 27th, 2006, 10:10 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •