TexasRangersFan
Active member
- Messages
- 185
- Likes
- 47
Why not? They don't appreciate our efforts. Why should we have to travel 7000 miles to fight in a conflict most Americans cannot adequately explain in a land that most could not identify on a map?
When we fought WW2 it was clear who we were fighting and why. When we fought in the Korean conflict it was clear we were fighting because the communists invaded South Korea.
Very few people can explain the current situation.....it get's confusing between the Kurds, Shiites, Sunnis, Alawites and the Christian minorities.
We fight the Taliban in Afghanistan and aid them in Syria.
We aid ISIS in Syria but fight them in Iraq and Yemen.
Saudi Arabia is our 'friend ' and we sell them billions of dollars in military equipment and buy their oil but they support terrorism in Palestine and Al Qeda in Afghanistan. We help keep their country free and prop up their monarchy, but they execute homosexuals, stone women to death for 'adultery' and won't allow women to vote or drive.
Assad was never a threat to the U.S. or the West, but for some lame reason, Obama and Hitlery find it necessary to bomb Syria and kill Assad. Destabilizing Syria is strengthening ISIS and Al Qeda...as well as the WILL of every boy and young man that loses a family member from our bombs. Every time we drop a bomb we create 10 more terrorists. If you have nothing to live for, then you have nothing to lose.
I wonder if anyone has ever considered that fact that maybe the reason they are fighting is because the WEST is there? If we were gone, then a major reason for their ability to raise money and soldiers would not exist.
We are not there for freedom. We are there because ISIS is a threat to the gas pipeline that global interests want to build across the ME and north to Europe. Building it will make globalists billions of dollars a year and reduce Europe's reliance on the pipeline from Russia.
We are not mercenaries. But that is how we are treated by Obama and friends. It's just that Americans would balk at the idea of sending soldiers to fight and die over a pipeline for Europe, so they have to sell the idea of freedom and oppression. How do you think Hitlery and Bill got 300MN for the Clinton Foundation in the last few years? Because they are bought and paid for.
How do you think Obama made his money? He was a poor senator from Illinois and now he is worth 30MN? Yeah, he sold a book .....but first time authors only make .25 or .50 for every book sold. It's not a lot and he did not sell 30MN worth of books.
They 'bought' influence in Washington so Obama, Hitlery and Kerry would send troops to the ME to fight ISIS and clear them out so the globalists could make billions.
There are relatively few Middle Eastern nations that are assisting in the fight against the Taliban and Isis. It's their survival that is at stake, not ours. If they don't want to fight them, why should we? We are not mercenaries. It's funny. Many years ago when I was in high school and college I learned about Knights and Samurai Warriors that were 'hired guns'. They would travel from town to town (castle to castle) and fight for whatever king would hire them and then they would travel to the next town for the next fight. I always thought that was a bit odd and barbarian, but that is not too far removed from how we are acting today. It's just that we are applying the 21st century version. ... Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen etc... BTW, I did a stint in the Army, so I can complain.
85% of the Afghans want us gone from their country. And I don't think we are much more popular in Iraq or Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East.
Jordan and Egypt seem to be the only civilized, reasonable nations in the area. They are good people. Nothing that the U.S. or any other nation from the West does will create lasting peace. If we aren't careful WW3 is going to start in Syria.
We just need to vacate the area and let them figure it out for themselves. They have existed just fine on their own since before Jesus and prior to the Pharaoh driving Moses out of Egypt .......they don't need our help now.
Thomas Jefferson warned us about 'foreign entanglements' 240 years ago. He was a smart man. I wonder if he was psychic?
Last edited:
TexasRangersFan
Active member
- Messages
- 185
- Likes
- 47
I am going to assume that if Trump wins that there will be an emotional reaction to a political event promoted by the liberal media.
So, I believe that the stock market will drop and gold may rise a bit.
And I think the 'moves' will be even greater if we do not have a clear winner Wednesday morning.
There were warnings last week of a potential terrorist attack on Monday in Virginia, Texas and New York. If it happens and it is a major attack it may influence the markets on Monday and Tuesday during the voting cycle.
But.....they distribute these warnings every three months and nothing happens.
They did not warn us about the bombing at the Boston Marathon or the nightclub in Orlando, Florida. So, chances are nothing will happen.
BTW...the Mexican peso has been rising and falling with Trump's popularity. They are scared to death Trump will build a wall and shut the borders. Illegal aliens have been crossing the border at record rates the last few months. They feel the need to get in now before the door slams shut.
If Trump wins, the peso goes down against the dollar.
If Hitlery wins it goes up against the dollar.
One more thing...if Hitlery wins...buy gun stocks...Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Colt etc....
There will be a run on guns between now and Jan 20th. and slightly beyond. The next two quarters, maybe three will be excellent if she wins. People are afraid she might try to create restrictions on gun sales or ammunition. Gun sales have been crazy in the U.S. the last eight years. Obama has been the best gun salesman in gun history. Gun rights are a State right, not a Federal one. But people react adversely to any idea of losing their rights.
Last edited:
Hi TexasRangersFan - your feelings behind your post on US / western policy in the Middle East seem really genuine, and you sound concerned with peace and freedom in the region.
That's all fine, but surely wrong. The foreign policy of any country is the furtherance of its own national interests, not other people's. Our strategy in the Middle East can be seen as a campaign to destabilise aggressive hostile regimes. Some regimes have been toppled externally some internally and some are currently neutered by insurrection and civil war - Iraq, Syria, Libya for sure. Maybe also Egypt, Tunisia, the Yemen, Turkey. And let's not under-estimate how Russia feels obliged to ramp up its commitment to Syria, right at a time when they can least afford it and would rather be possibly committing to other fronts.
Its a dirty game, but I'd rather be on the winning side.
That's all fine, but surely wrong. The foreign policy of any country is the furtherance of its own national interests, not other people's. Our strategy in the Middle East can be seen as a campaign to destabilise aggressive hostile regimes. Some regimes have been toppled externally some internally and some are currently neutered by insurrection and civil war - Iraq, Syria, Libya for sure. Maybe also Egypt, Tunisia, the Yemen, Turkey. And let's not under-estimate how Russia feels obliged to ramp up its commitment to Syria, right at a time when they can least afford it and would rather be possibly committing to other fronts.
Its a dirty game, but I'd rather be on the winning side.
Pat494
Legendary member
- Messages
- 14,614
- Likes
- 1,588
Not too bad an assessment for an American. But dare one just add the most important point driving the USA further into bankruptcy ?
You guys are not seeing the bigger picture and anyone who mentions the elephant in the room is labeled anti- Semite.
Well I am not against the existence of Israel but do object to such a small nation calling the shots. Yes their enemies in The Middle East have been neutralised and by who ? See the picture now. Was umpteen billion spent wisely ? Well consider it then. The US would be a lot better off investing in the USA and letting the rag heads run wild fighting each other.
You guys are not seeing the bigger picture and anyone who mentions the elephant in the room is labeled anti- Semite.
Well I am not against the existence of Israel but do object to such a small nation calling the shots. Yes their enemies in The Middle East have been neutralised and by who ? See the picture now. Was umpteen billion spent wisely ? Well consider it then. The US would be a lot better off investing in the USA and letting the rag heads run wild fighting each other.
joseph1986
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,899
- Likes
- 90
Texas ranger fan
C.I.A concluded during the cold war era whoever controls the middle east would essentially control the world. This based off of oil and how easily the arab tribes could be divided and influenced. The problem is that the cost of oil production is increasing with decreased amounts of oil. Hillary Clinton during her years as secretary of state proposed that the 21st century will be the pacific era....hence why U.S. is propping up south korea, japan and vietnam. However, we now have a guy in the phillipines who completely went AWOL and the Chinese are snickering with amusement. So complain today about the arabs and tomorrow you will complain about the Filipinos. The reason why the U.S. is in the middle east is so that you can travel to any country and not get harassed, your universities diplomas are ranked top in the world, your communication systems are never suspended, you can hunt down criminals that are a threat to your national interests without any other country's intervention and a host of other luxuries. Could they do a cleaner job in exercising power? Yes but this is as good as it gets and when it comes time for the U.S. to kneel down to the next super power you or your children can look back at what a great run you guys had.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...war-united-states-britain-soviet-union-213983
C.I.A concluded during the cold war era whoever controls the middle east would essentially control the world. This based off of oil and how easily the arab tribes could be divided and influenced. The problem is that the cost of oil production is increasing with decreased amounts of oil. Hillary Clinton during her years as secretary of state proposed that the 21st century will be the pacific era....hence why U.S. is propping up south korea, japan and vietnam. However, we now have a guy in the phillipines who completely went AWOL and the Chinese are snickering with amusement. So complain today about the arabs and tomorrow you will complain about the Filipinos. The reason why the U.S. is in the middle east is so that you can travel to any country and not get harassed, your universities diplomas are ranked top in the world, your communication systems are never suspended, you can hunt down criminals that are a threat to your national interests without any other country's intervention and a host of other luxuries. Could they do a cleaner job in exercising power? Yes but this is as good as it gets and when it comes time for the U.S. to kneel down to the next super power you or your children can look back at what a great run you guys had.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...war-united-states-britain-soviet-union-213983
Pat494
Legendary member
- Messages
- 14,614
- Likes
- 1,588
Ah yes - the next super power ? Life under China will be a bed of roses. Ask the Tibetans and others what they are really like. We are stuck with poor leadership from the USA because it is the lesser evil. Reminds me of a dinosauer - all muscle and very little brain power.
Israel plays a great hand - of course this is in their own interests, but just their existence (through western intervention) has diverted Arab concerns and power away from the west for decades and it has not brought about unity of action in the region by any means. Good luck to them I say.
Oscar Reed
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,485
- Likes
- 739
UK, USA or China spread around the world whats the difference?
Pat494
Legendary member
- Messages
- 14,614
- Likes
- 1,588
The BIG difference is that the UK can't enforce anything being small whereas the other 2 plus Russia can do much as they like. On that basis alone the UK is a better bet for the 3rd world.
Forgot to comment on this. WW2 is especially misinterpreted in terms of foreign policy - partly because its history has been written by the victors - ourselves. We have been able to hoodwink ourselves about who it was for and who it was against so that the principals involved all get to look good.
sminicooper
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,148
- Likes
- 329
A very interesting statement! Care to expand on it?
joseph1986
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,899
- Likes
- 90
2016 in my view is a a loss for the media not trump. It just completely came apart where even an average american can see the bias. You want to see how deep the rabbit hole goes...every news person who said matt lauer went overboard was and is part of the clinton web....this is 90% of most people we consider journalists *ucking scary man
wackypete2
Legendary member
- Messages
- 10,211
- Likes
- 2,058
AGREED.
CNN has asked the DNC (Democrat National Commitee) for questions to ask Trump in the next interview and provided topic suggestions...from wikileaks.
Peter
Pat494
Legendary member
- Messages
- 14,614
- Likes
- 1,588
Hillary says what she thinks will get her elected. She forgets when the media is recording her words and then later points out the holes in her statements. There were NO sniper bullets peppering the airport when her flight came in etc. - careless or what.
Her appeal to the black and Latino vote may also backfire as the whites are then pushed towards Trump.
Her appeal to the black and Latino vote may also backfire as the whites are then pushed towards Trump.
Mr. Charts
Legendary member
- Messages
- 7,370
- Likes
- 1,200
So the FBI now says no further action against Hillary.
European markets go up.
US$ goes up.
US equity markets gap up.
It looks pretty obvious to me that the world thinks she will win and therefore feels safer under her leadership than under that neo-fascist ignoramus.
European markets go up.
US$ goes up.
US equity markets gap up.
It looks pretty obvious to me that the world thinks she will win and therefore feels safer under her leadership than under that neo-fascist ignoramus.
Well, its a vast subject as is obvious when we're talking about a global war, but there are some misleading impressions that have grown up around it. One would be that WW2 was a war against Hitler, or a war against the Nazi party. This detaches the German state and people of the time from responsibility and makes a wonderful moral cause, while exempting Allied statesmen from blame for failing to take preventive actions.
From another perspective though, WW2 was just an extension of Germanic militaristic expansion on the continent that started with the foundation of Prussia. Prussia, and then the German Empire, were virtually continuously at war with their neighbours for 200 years, and the aim was expansion, not self-defence. Bear in mind that the 1940 invasion of France was the third occasion in a single lifetime that German troops had marched on Paris and the 5th war between the two states.
timsk
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,716
- Likes
- 3,418
Oooh, careful Richard - dangerous talk!
As a reminder to all what happened with the referendum, the daily chart of the FTSE100 above shows the run up to June 23rd - and then the day the result is announced. In other words folks, load up ya shorts!
Tim.
dbphoenix
Guest Author
- Messages
- 6,954
- Likes
- 1,266
Although we also tend to diminish or even ignore our responsibility for creating the situation that made the National Socialist Party possible by the intolerable conditions we imposed after WWI, in much the same way that we ignore our culpability for the Mid-East situation via Sykes-Picot.
We are, in a larger sense, reaping what we've sown.
