Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

State of the world, state sponsored terror, terror and war in general

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Here's a more recent example. Morally repugnant but they are still doing it - for the profits of course.


    JAN 5, 2015

    Russia Is Still Ukraine's Largest Trading Partner

    Russia and Ukraine have essentially been fighting an undeclared war for most of the past year: thousands of people have been killed and hundreds of thousands displaced as Russia-backed separatists (aided in numerous instances by active-duty Russian soldiers) have fought against the central government. It’s been a total disaster, and is probably the closest thing to a full-scale interstate war that Europe has seen since the dark days of the 1940′s.

    ...

    Given the fact that they’re shooting at each another, however, and given what the Ukrainian government has said about its desire to economically sanction Russia, it might be somewhat surprising to learn that Russia is still Ukraine’s single largest trading partner. No that isn’t a typo, it’s based on data from...


    http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadom.../#1f33970b106e
    Last edited by KC; 03-03-2016, 02:30 PM.

    Comment


    • ^^ It's not about us trumping anything.

      It's about our avowed values actually being reflected in our actions, and actually being willing to sacrifice a little for them. We just have to hold OURSELVES to that higher standard.

      It's not interfering to stop selling weapons to despots. It's interfering when we deliberately facilitate the sale.

      Comment


      • It's about our avowed values actually being reflected in our actions, and actually being willing to sacrifice a little for them. We just have to hold OURSELVES to that higher standard.
        I don't disagree but that doesn't answer the base question..what gives us the "right"?

        While I agree with upholding our avowed values...what "right" do we have to impose them on that other entity?

        An example...Rhodesia now Zimbabwe, the West believed that the system they had was wrong (doesn't matter why for this conversation) but was regulated, well run, people had plenty and a good education system and medical system.

        The world imposed it's views, supported a rebel force that eventually overturned the standing government and the country fell to war and massacre for decades with the loss of many lives infrastructure has fallen apart and its a mess.

        Now...what gave us the right?

        I didn't like their former system, felt it morally wrong...but it worked, was peaceful and orderly.

        The one that replaced it remains, what amounts to a dictatorship and is responsible for the misfortune that has befallen the country.

        Maybe we should have left it alone and let it evolve on its own.

        Something to consider...

        Comment


        • The "right" comes from being rational creatures responsible for our actions. We don't need any other right, because exercising our right to sell, or not, based on our own standards is not an imposition in any way.

          Think about it this way - would you sell your second-hand gun to a guy who you knew didn't let his wife out of the house and once beat one of his teenage kids so bad he had to be hospitalized, just for "talking back"?

          No?

          Saudi Arabia is that guy.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by highlander View Post
            The "right" comes from being rational creatures responsible for our actions. We don't need any other right, because exercising our right to sell, or not, based on our own standards is not an imposition in any way.

            Think about it this way - would you sell your second-hand gun to a guy who you knew didn't let his wife out of the house and once beat one of his teenage kids so bad he had to be hospitalized, just for "talking back"?

            No?

            Saudi Arabia is that guy.
            It's not that I don't agree with what you're saying but I disagree with the analogy.

            Think about it this way - would you sell your second-hand gun to a guy who you knew didn't let his wife out of the house and once beat one of his teenage kids so bad he had to be hospitalized, just for "talking back"?
            That is a choice "we" as a person, as a country we can choose not to sell to a country that doesn't fit our values.

            Where it changes is when we feel we have the "right" to impose on them how to govern, what constitutes "fair", freedom of speech etc. Our value system basically.

            In our own country we have the right to uphold it and if that is a decision not to sell...fine. But that is here...not in their country.

            T

            Comment


            • OK, that's a different argument, and I don't think anyone is advocating invading foreign states to impose democracy or capitalism or whatever here, although it has been practiced by the US with typically poor results.

              That said, intervening in what is effectively an ungoverned country is a different thing, (provided you didn't create the anarchy yourself), as is intervening in an "internal" situation where the they in the "their country" you reference is not all of "them".

              For Example, Saudi Arabia is essentially a few hundred or thousand actual Saudis (the house of Al Saud) governing 50 million Arabians generally for their own benefit.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by highlander View Post
                OK, that's a different argument, and I don't think anyone is advocating invading foreign states to impose democracy or capitalism or whatever here, although it has been practiced by the US with typically poor results.

                That said, intervening in what is effectively an ungoverned country is a different thing, (provided you didn't create the anarchy yourself), as is intervening in an "internal" situation where the they in the "their country" you reference is not all of "them".

                For Example, Saudi Arabia is essentially a few hundred or thousand actual Saudis (the house of Al Saud) governing 50 million Arabians generally for their own benefit.
                i have to agree - things are indeed black and white. until they aren't.

                the difficulty is that things don't go from black to white or from white to black. they evolve between one another in increments sometimes so small as to be indiscernible.

                which makes it difficult - if not impossible - to make black and white decisions and know with certainty whether they are totally right or completely wrong decisions.

                we can only make decisions and take action - individually and as countries - based on the information available at any particular point in time along with an intuition - or a hope - as to which direction the increments (which include our decisions and our actions and our inactions) are accumulating.
                "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                Comment


                • A strongly worded letter. That seems to be suficcent punishment for attacking a hospital and shooting the medical personnel and patients as they fled the buildings.

                  "According to the Associated Press, more than a dozen U.S. military personnel have been disciplined over mistakes that led to the October bombing of a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan. Forty-two people were killed; no criminal charges have been filed.

                  The punishments, which have not been publicly announced, are largely administrative. But in some cases the actions, such as letters of reprimand, are tough enough to effectively end chances for further promotion. The military has previously said some personnel were suspended from their duties but has given no further details."

                  http://gawker.com/more-than-a-dozen-...d-o-1765389829

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by kcantor View Post
                    Originally posted by highlander View Post
                    OK, that's a different argument, and I don't think anyone is advocating invading foreign states to impose democracy or capitalism or whatever here, although it has been practiced by the US with typically poor results.

                    That said, intervening in what is effectively an ungoverned country is a different thing, (provided you didn't create the anarchy yourself), as is intervening in an "internal" situation where the they in the "their country" you reference is not all of "them".

                    For Example, Saudi Arabia is essentially a few hundred or thousand actual Saudis (the house of Al Saud) governing 50 million Arabians generally for their own benefit.
                    i have to agree - things are indeed black and white. until they aren't.

                    the difficulty is that things don't go from black to white or from white to black. they evolve between one another in increments sometimes so small as to be indiscernible.

                    which makes it difficult - if not impossible - to make black and white decisions and know with certainty whether they are totally right or completely wrong decisions.

                    we can only make decisions and take action - individually and as countries - based on the information available at any particular point in time along with an intuition - or a hope - as to which direction the increments (which include our decisions and our actions and our inactions) are accumulating.

                    I believe the house of saud would be approaching 80-90,000 by now.


                    I'm back. Totally wrong again.

                    It says 15,000 here:

                    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Saud



                    I'd read this book ( " Sleeping With the Devil " ) back in 2003/4 or so. He provided a population number. I see that he was forecasting growth from 30k to 60k within a generation.

                    Very interesting book - Atlantic's version:


                    The Fall of the House of Saud

                    Americans have long considered Saudi Arabia the one constant in the Arab Middle East—a source of cheap oil, political stability, and lucrative business relationships. But the country is run by an increasingly dysfunctional royal family that has been funding militant Islamic movements abroad in an attempt to protect itself from them at home. A former CIA operative argues, in an article drawn from his new book, Sleeping With the Devil, that today's Saudi Arabia can't last much longer—and the social and economic fallout of its demise could be calamitous

                    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...f-saud/304215/

                    ~
                    Last edited by KC; 17-03-2016, 09:55 AM.

                    Comment


                    • It's possibly all about those seeking power and domination through any means and using religious ideology and/or common enemy propaganda to suck in a bunch of followers.

                      "they are mortal enemies, despite their common rhetoric. "

                      Radical Islamist Terrorism in West Africa

                      Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and its affiliates launched an attack in Mali in November 2015, one in Burkina Faso in January, and now in Ivory Coast earlier in March. On March 16, Boko Haram attacked a mosque in Maiduguri, Nigeria, killing at least twenty-two people. The CFR’s Nigeria Security Tracker shows that Boko Haram has been associated with more than 150 deaths since January 1 but before the March 16 mosque attack. Even in Senegal, a genuine democracy where the opposition comes to power through elections, there is concern about signs of radical activity.

                      There is no evidence of AQIM and Boko Haram tactical or strategic coordination; indeed, at least in rhetoric, they are mortal enemies, despite their common rhetoric. AQIM, like the broader al-Qaeda of which it is a part, is international in scope and violently hostile to the West. Its leadership appears to be Algerian. Boko Haram is focused on the destruction of the Nigerian state rather than war against the West. It appears to be centered in the Kanuri ethnic group, and while its rhetoric is hostile to the West, it has yet to attack Western facilities or installations.

                      http://www.newsweek.com/radical-isla...-africa-439108

                      Comment


                      • Very interesting article.


                        The Truth About Muslim 'No-Go Zones' and Ali Gharib | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com

                        ...
                        Also, in his attempt to smear Emerson, Gharib has discredited himself. He wrote in The Nation about “so-called no-go zones in Europe, purported Muslim enclaves where governments dared not go,” and asserted that “they don’t exist”; the same day, the MailOnline reported that “Austrians fear parts of Vienna are becoming no-go areas after a father was attacked by a ‘Sharia patrol’ when he told them to stop threatening his wife and daughter for not being correctly dressed.”

                        That’s by no means all. Evidence for Gharib’s claim that no-go zones “don’t exist” simply doesn’t exist, and the evidence that they do is abundant. Several of the jihad terrorists who murdered 130 people in Paris in November 2015 had come from Molenbeek, an area of Brussels with a high Muslim population. The New York Times reported on November 13, 2015: “Belgium’s home affairs minister said that the government does not ‘have control of the situation in Molenbeek.’”

                        There are other no-go zones elsewhere in Europe. Soeren Kern reported in the Gatestone Institute on August 1, 2015: “Spiraling levels of violent crime perpetrated by immigrants from the Middle East and the Balkans are turning parts of Duisburg, a key German industrial city, into ‘areas of lawlessness’ — areas that are becoming de facto ‘no-go’ zones for police, according to a confidential police report that was leaked to the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel.” And in Sweden, according to a Breitbart report on October 27, 2015: “A Swedish journalist attempting to make a movie about the residents of a Swedish no go zone and their habit of throwing stones at police has herself been attacked and had stones thrown at her as she attempted to film. ‘They thought we crossed the limit and that we were standing on their land,’ journalist Valentina Xhaferi told Swedish newspaper Expressen.”

                        French no-go zones have been reported about in mainstream publications for over a decade:

                        David Ignatius wrote in the Washington Post on April 26, 2002: “Arab gangs regularly vandalize synagogues here, the North African suburbs have become no-go zones at night, and the French continue to shrug their shoulders.” This was reprinted in the New York Times the following day.
                        ...

                        graphic 20-minute documentary (in French) about the no-go zone in Clichy Montfermeil, a suburb of Paris, can be viewed here. At around the 3-minute mark, the video shows what happens when French police enter the area….

                        These are not just high-crime areas where large numbers of Muslims live. They are areas in which Islamic law increasingly prevails. Kern also quotes French journalists speaking about the prevalence of Sharia in these areas:...

                        https://www.algemeiner.com/2016/03/2...nd-ali-gharib/

                        Last edited by KC; 23-03-2016, 08:28 PM.

                        Comment


                        • as many have said, terrorism and its attraction may be more about a particular mind set than either religion or circumstances...

                          http://www.macleans.ca/news/world/wh...ering-degrees/
                          "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by kcantor View Post
                            as many have said, terrorism and its attraction may be more about a particular mind set than either religion or circumstances...

                            http://www.macleans.ca/news/world/wh...ering-degrees/
                            Very interesting.

                            Comment


                            • Dion quietly approved arms sale to Saudi Arabia in April: documents
                              STEVEN CHASE
                              Ottawa — The Globe and Mail
                              Published Tuesday, Apr. 12, 2016 4:54PM EDT

                              http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle29612233/

                              Comment


                              • Boko Haram Increasingly Uses Kidnapped Girls As Suicide Bombers : NPR

                                http://www.npr.org/2016/04/13/474049...uicide-bombers

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X