Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because of the economic crises, their population is quite young which also accounts for the complacency. I recall that it's similar to the J&J vaccine and has the same blood clot problems.
I think they were talking about it the other day on the Russian news.
By the sound of it, it's the same thing, but the "purification process" is more thorough ( they explained in more details about the process.)
Sputnik V ( according to them) does not cause the blood clot problems because of this difference.
Obama previously concocted a fictitious group in NW Syria called the Khorasan Group and claimed they were plotting another 911 in NYC so that he could bomb Syria using the 2001 AUMF. At the time, he could've bombed Al Nusra Front aka Al Qaeda in Syria or Islamic State.
Congress has tried to repeal the law which is being used to engage in wars in perpetuity. The House passed the repeal. The Senate rejected it.
I would refer you to doing a news lookup to verify the information.
What information do I need to verify?
We all know what Syria was all about - don't we?
It was all about an attempt to hit Russian interests yet again, to remove Assad from power, to make Syria a major transit hub for Qatari gas on its way to Europe, and to finish off once and for all Russian supplies to European market, which would kill two rabbits with one bullet.
A. To deprive Russia of its revenues,
and B.
To put an end to a growing Russo-German union.
The "Khorasan group" as a "threat to American security" or "freedom loving democratic muslims suppressed by the secular monster Assad" - anything would do as an excuse to bring the American troops in Syria at that point.
From what I remember, the Saudi prince Bandar was the one who brokered the whole deal.
As the rumor has it, he has close ties in Washington.
And the mercenaries that flooded Syria to support the *civil war* there, were probably on his payroll too.
I don't believe that anyone ( other than Islamic brethren itself) purposefully "created Isis" as any kind of "project."
It's just any time the Western powers are attempting to use "Islamic warriors" against Russian interests, Islam tends to mutate, to radicalize and then the heads are cut off from ALL *infidels* - Russians and Westerners alike as the end result of it.
In fact, Moscow’s ambassador in Havana has assessed that the recent protests in Cuba are actually home-grown only, as living conditions have deteriorated due to the pandemic. Moscow doesn’t agree with the allegation by the Cuban president Miguel Diaz-Canel that Washington instigated the protests.
Interestingly, Putin penned an article in the weekend which is in the nature of an overture to the Ukrainian leadership. He has since annotated his own article and later also vowed that Russia will implement its liabilities concerning gas transit via Ukraine. This should bring the temperature down on the US-Russia face-off over Ukraine, and, possibly, give Biden administration some leeway to avoid sanctioning Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project any further.
Most important, American experts have noticed that the notorious cybercriminal group known as REvil, which the US intelligence estimates as based in Russia, has suddenly disappeared from sight online. The REvil is thought to be the group for the huge hack that hit the American services provider Kaseya just hours before the beginning of the Fourth of July weekend.
What information do I need to verify?
We all know what Syria was all about - don't we?
It was all about an attempt to hit Russian interests yet again, to remove Assad from power, to make Syria a major transit hub for Qatari gas on its way to Europe, and to finish off once and for all Russian supplies to European market, which would kill two rabbits with one bullet.
A. To deprive Russia of its revenues,
and B.
To put an end to a growing Russo-German union.
The "Khorasan group" as a "threat to American security" or "freedom loving democratic muslims suppressed by the secular monster Assad" - anything would do as an excuse to bring the American troops in Syria at that point.
From what I remember, the Saudi prince Bandar was the one who brokered the whole deal.
As the rumor has it, he has close ties in Washington.
And the mercenaries that flooded Syria to support the *civil war* there, were probably on his payroll too.
I don't believe that anyone ( other than Islamic brethren itself) purposefully "created Isis" as any kind of "project."
It's just any time the Western powers are attempting to use "Islamic warriors" against Russian interests, Islam tends to mutate, to radicalize and then the heads are cut off from ALL *infidels* - Russians and Westerners alike as the end result of it.
Which I ABSOLUTELY HATE to see.
You said that the abuse of 2001 AUMF to get around the legal constraints of declaring war through Congress or the UN was a hoax. Both Obama in the US and Cameron in the UK tried and failed to get war powers through their parliaments and failed. The Saudis originally offered Obama funding for US conventional invasion but Obama said that the Iraq war destroyed public trust in US intelligence and he rejected them.
There was an attempt to repeal the law to end the permanent deployment of forces overseas, but that was defeated by the Republican-controlled.
The Khorasan group is just one example. Having the Saudis, Qataris, and other governments finance and arm militia groups to destabilize other countries is another approach to getting US military deployed overseas. Libya was a major center for the US and other governments to train and arm militia groups to fight in Syria, Mali, Niger, and other countries.
After a militia group overran the US embassy annex in Benghazi where they were managing the operations, they could no longer hide it. The newswires had published the maps of all the foreign governments' armories around the embassy and described the operations in detail. The very next month, Obama signed an executive order authorizing the direct role of the CIA in training and arming terrorist groups for the war in Syria.
It's a "second Iran" only in a sense that it's going to be yet another theological state, based on Koran teachings.
But that's where the similarities with Iran end.
As for the rest - situation with Afghanistan is very different...
Yes, you right, ofcourse. I mean only theological.
You said that the abuse of 2001 AUMF to get around the legal constraints of declaring war through Congress or the UN was a hoax.
I did?
When?
No, it was some kind of misunderstanding Ichoro.
Quote:
Both Obama in the US and Cameron in the UK tried and failed to get war powers through their parliaments and failed. The Saudis originally offered Obama funding for US conventional invasion but Obama said that the Iraq war destroyed public trust in US intelligence and he rejected them.
There was an attempt to repeal the law to end the permanent deployment of forces overseas, but that was defeated by the Republican-controlled.
The Khorasan group is just one example. Having the Saudis, Qataris, and other governments finance and arm militia groups to destabilize other countries is another approach to getting US military deployed overseas.
Libya was a major center for the US and other governments to train and arm militia groups to fight in Syria, Mali, Niger, and other countries.
Ichoro, in all honesty I don't understand what you are trying to say.
That US gov. ARTIFICIALLY CREATES conflicts overseas in order to engage American military?
Is this it?
But what for ( if to follow this logic)?
What's the ultimate purpose of it?
Quote:
After a militia group overran the US embassy annex in Benghazi where they were managing the operations, they could no longer hide it. The newswires had published the maps of all the foreign governments' armories around the embassy and described the operations in detail. The very next month, Obama signed an executive order authorizing the direct role of the CIA in training and arming terrorist groups for the war in Syria.
Ichoro I am the least familiar with the whole Benghazi case.
But from little that I can see - "Multiple anonymous sources reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was used by the CIA as a cover to smuggle weapons from Libya to anti-Assad rebels in Syria.[30]:56[34][36][37][38]" only proves what I've said earlier; every time the West is trying to use "Islamic fighters" to hit Russian interests, it ends up as trouble for everyone.
Ichoro, in all honesty I don't understand what you are trying to say.
That US gov. ARTIFICIALLY CREATES conflicts overseas in order to engage American military?
Is this it?
But what for ( if to follow this logic)?
What's the ultimate purpose of it?
They do it to maintain and establish influence, expand markets and keep the MIC busy. Conflict generates huge revenue streams and since corruption is so rife in US politics the politicians and robber barons have an easy time making large sums of money.
In one form or another this has been the same throughout all of human history. Why did the Romans conquer Dacia? Tax revenue, specifically the silver mines in the mountains. Why did piracy take such a hold in the south China sea 1000s of years ago. Because somebody wanted what another somebody had.
That US gov. ARTIFICIALLY CREATES conflicts overseas in order to engage American military?
Is this it?
But what for ( if to follow this logic)?
What's the ultimate purpose of it?
The use of a paramilitary force is not new. Remember the Cuban exiles, Nicaraguan Contras, the KLA, and so on. There is an understanding that they're going to be backed up by the US or NATO if the effort falters. It creates the illusion that these are homegrown revolutionaries. Also.
For influence in another country since the military is often the strongest institution and coup d'etats often originate from that institution. The increased weapons sales and foreign aid is part of the influence.
I think there are similarities to the War on Drugs since the complicity of the US with major drug cartels was exposed in 2015.
EDIT: I stand corrected it was in late 2014 that the 15 year deal between the US and the Sinaloa cartel was revealed in the Mexican newspaper La Universal.
The use of a paramilitary force is not new. Remember the Cuban exiles, Nicaraguan Contras, the KLA, and so on. There is an understanding that they're going to be backed up by the US or NATO if the effort falters. It creates the illusion that these are homegrown revolutionaries. Also.
For influence in another country since the military is often the strongest institution and coup d'etats often originate from that institution. The increased weapons sales and foreign aid is part of the influence.
I think there are similarities to the War on Drugs since the complicity of the US with major drug cartels was exposed in 2015.
EDIT: I stand corrected it was in late 2014 that the 15 year deal between the US and the Sinaloa cartel was revealed in the Mexican newspaper La Universal.
and what else I hear from Russia/Tadjikistan on a subject, let me ask you again - are you saying that such thing as radical Islam ( and the danger of it) doesn't exist, that it's all the US gov. own invention?
and what else I hear from Russia/Tadjikistan on a subject, let me ask you again - are you saying that such thing as radical Islam ( and the danger of it) doesn't exist, that it's all the US gov. own invention?
Do I understand it correctly?
You might want to read up on Wahhabism and the role that the British and the Saudis had in its origin and dissemination. The topic came up again soon after the 911 bombing and all fingers pointed to the Saudi royalty. Yes, it means some of the radical clerics are working for Western intelligence and the fact came out during the blowback from European jihadist fighters returning from Syria and Libya.
You might also do some searching on historical news on the funding of maddrassas in Pakistan by Saudi Arabia and the USAID to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. You might still find online the textbooks these schools used to indoctrinate kids in Islam and to preach the killing of Soviet soldiers. I understand that the bad publicity from his caused the University of Nebraska's Center for Afghanistan Studies to close all access to the site.
By maddrassas, I am including the military training camps that were training teenage Pakistani and others to gain the physical fitness to deploy in a ground war in Afghanistan and to handle weapons.
If you can comprehend the above correctly, you'll understand who is behind the radicalization ...
By the way, Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted that the US started training the Islamic freedom fighters in Afghanistan in 1977, two years before the Soviet invasion, and said it was worth 911. This is not to absolve the Soviets who tried to impose secular values on poor farmers with deep religious beliefts and helped turn the population against the Kabul government.
Sorry, didn't look at your videos. I don't consider the Taliban and Hezbollah equivalent to terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS. They are popular militias which represents the local population politically and militarily and are in existence in response to foreign occupations. They may be harsh in their treatment of conquests, but the same can be said of the West and the communists.
Last edited by lchoro; 07-17-2021 at 05:21 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
