« Previous ·
Home
· Next »
Filed under: Europe
Writing in the Washington Post, Fred Hiatt argues that the recent vote regarding genocide in Armenia by Turkey is actually a vote against democracy:
Imagine what the Armenian diaspora might have accomplished had it worked as hard for democracy in Armenia as it did for congressional recognition of the genocide Armenians suffered nearly a century ago. It's even possible that modern Armenia would be as democratic as modern Turkey. Things began well, with the honest election of a former dissident as president. But authoritarian tendencies soon emerged, the former dissident rigged his reelection in 1996, and things went downhill from there. As Freedom House noted last year, "all national elections held in Armenia since independence have been marred by some degree of ballot stuffing, vote rigging, and similar irregularities." Meanwhile, opposition politicians have been jailed, protests have been brutally suppressed, and broadcast media have been taken under government control.Armenia was sidetracked early on by a war with neighboring Azerbaijan over an Armenian enclave inside that country. The enclave is under Armenian control today, but a cease-fire has not given way to a peace settlement. Consequently, the two main Armenian American lobbying organizations in Washington have focused more on security questions -- opposing arms sales to Azerbaijan, for example, and opposing Turkey, Azerbaijan's ally -- than on promoting democracy in Yerevan. Armenia's rulers have known that, no matter how they trample on individual rights at home, the lobbying groups will cover for them here.
Here's the flip side, from a Greek perspective:
Today Turkey finds itself in a position where its value as an ally is countered by the political clout of Armenians within its allies. So time has run out. Turkey will, eventually, have to come to terms with its history or face the prospect of turning its back on the world that it set out to join in 1923. The only way that this can be achieved is if the Armenians and their backers make clear that the matter is moral and not political - because the issue is to honor the victims of the past, and not to undermine the common future of Turks, Armenians, Azeris and all the other nations of this troubled region. As for Turkey's allies, including the United States, they need only consider the simple part of the question: are you on the side of right, whatever the cost - or are you not?
What do you think? Should the U.S. side with Armenia or Turkey?
Social Bookmarking:
 del.icio.us |  digg |  technorati |  stumble upon |  furl |  reddit
Comments
Artfldgr says:
Go back and look through my posts and my logic on the maps.
Iran is in the enemies camp, and so there is no action necessary.
Iraq, and Afghanistan are in flux in war, so the natural action of seditious people would be stop.
The only country in the long line that is independent and can be swayed is….. drum roll please. TURKEY.
I don’t see many people claiming to understand all this making predictions that re working.
I said that since we are going to create this wall that they cant get through “every and any wacko act would be tried”. In desperation, they have to stop the door that is Iran from closing. (in fact, its Irans only strategic point!)
And for the first time (that I have seen) there is dissonance raging in Russian’s head!
Why the events that took place almost 100 years ago should complicate the today's international relations?
Because the communists want Iran to not be invaded, and have other options for the middle east.
In fact the clearest way to figure out whos a spy, would be to tally up their votes and what they do. after all, this is how senator fullbright, the guy that employed bill Clinton and let him study in communist russia instead of going to war in Vietnam…
Whose initiative was that to put it up? Fire the guy!
The dissonance is deafening!!!
Russian, you believe, but you are a useful idiot, and so you follow the message, but don’t know where the pipers are leading you!
This is the dissonance that causes a useful idiot to wake up (and we can only hope).
You see, the choice made by our poltiicans was to help the soviets. and one of the reasons that they are more powerful than they look is because unlike the US that is materially powerful, they have lots and lots of moles all over. People who earn their own keep and so don’t have to be funded by russia. Lennin refered to it as hanging us with out own rope.
Someone like you thinks that without the state, such things fall apart. they thought about that already, and so they are funded by the state that they take apart.
How? Well easy… socialist programs allow socialists to give money to socialists to foment more socialism with yor own money, regardless of what you believe or want!!! You see the power is in the money, and if they take it from you they take your power from you!!!!! your power of freedom is tied to your power to control what you do with your resources.. the most important resource being YOURSELF. People are a means of production, and communsits control ALL means of production. you’re a draught animal, and loving it.
Anyway.. this makes no sense right. You cant understand it Russian because you think that they are “doing the best they can”, that they “are on your side”, that the “state is here to help you”, etc.
Wrong, the first order of the state is to make a communist state. THEN it can get to the task of the other things. which it never does for fundamental reasons, that its not in its interests to do so, or else it will lose the power that it just stole.
What your not getting is that such a move by American politicos, will set the Armenian people against the US. that will put pressure on the leaders of turkey, and will cause islamics to be able to do something, and get more followers.
What you see as a mistake is a marvelous cui buono for communism!! Why arent you happy that this will keep the west from invading, and promote business in weaponry for russia?
The reason is that you have great wishes… but you chose the wrong side. you came in after the fight, and you figured the bad guy is always the stronger of the two. That the bad guy is always the one that pummels the butterfly… but the truth is that sometimes it’s a good guy beating on a cockroach.
Today Turkey is different, not that evil? Not hurting Armenians? No Ottoman Empire any longer, other people in power?
Lets keep moving forward.
No no no, not if move forward is WESTERN democracy, and not COMMUNIST democracy!
You cant tell when history is relevant and when its not. but they can, and they know how to use it.
Also the term genicide had not been in use in 1910-1915 and was introduced by UN later.
Close.. but no cigar.. your right that it was not in use… but it was not the UN… but Jurist Raphel lemkin, in his work “Axis rule in occupied Europe”.
The practice was a practical way to deal with enemies who would rather die than assimilate. The lesson is even taight in “the god father” movies. (its what starts the birth of the mob in the story. the son that escaped to live, fulfils the age old story of avenging their father). You can find stories from japan, china, the bible, Europe, and even Africa, that all tell of the bad that happens when you are good to enemies and let them live after they have sworn to kill you and have tried and you have beaten them.
No back power than. Or Chinese and Russins mat raise an issue of calling Mongol invasion in 1240 genocide too. And Mongolia will be in trouble.
Well, what about the kulaks? What about checks? The slavs?
What about the millions of Latvians, Estonians, and Lithuanians loaded into trains like cattle and hitlers enemies, and sent to the taiga? What about the Russians that then moved into their homes, taking their lands as Dachau? (I mean vacation homes).
However, it will not serve the communist socialists democrats to make russia take its rightful place at the TOP of the list!!!!!!! Throughout history, no other state has done so much to its own people, and to others!!!!
The idea was that if they did this, that turkey would pull out of the coilitino. Turkey was protected too much by the US and others, which is why the car from Sweden over all those open borders, failed to blow up and they were caught.
The BIGGER question for me is: will this wake up the useful idiots? Will it wake up Russian to realize that the game of global world domination as played by the soviets, has never stopped?
Doubtful.
However lets answer his question as to “who the assholes were”
House Foreign Affairs Committee…
And it’s a leftist feminist that started it. Carolyn B Maloney (D – NY)
http://maloney.house.gov/index.php?option=com_issues&task=view_issue_detail&issue=231&Itemid=35
H.Res. 106, which calls upon the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian Genocide.
H.Res. 102, condemning the assassination of human rights advocate and outspoken defender of freedom of the press, Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink on January 19, 2007.
Floor Speeches: April 23, 2007: Commemorating the 92nd Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide
Whats funny is that I knew what group did it before I looked, and I am the kind of person (as you yourself noted Russian) that doesn’t give any side leeway for bad.
Maloney is a BIG time feminist! So you can see where your support of them leads to a successful front implementing communist laws and generally supporting it.
Now, the only reason that I get to post these assertions, is that I don’t wait for laRussophobe to tell me to give credits. (have you notices Russian that I am always giving the creds to things? and yet most of the others, including you, cant remember where the origin of the things you internalize comes from!)
Carolyn Bosher Maloney (born February 19, 1948) is a New York Democrat serving in the United States House of Representatives for New York's 14th congressional district (map) since 1993. This district, popularly known as the "silk stocking district", includes most of Manhattan's East Side as well as Astoria and Long Island City in Queens. She is married to Clifton Maloney, and they have two daughters, Christina and Virginia. They have lived on East 92nd Street in Manhattan for many years.
I live in Astoria, long island city, ny.. : )
(she is part of the crowd using feminist lies to get rid of the Pakistani, and Bangladeshi black cabs that serve people coming off the train. They are making it a felony to stand out their since the presumption is that they are looking up catholic girls skirts. Meanwhile you cant see up a skirt from where they are, and so the feminist thing works for getting your way AND helping out the cab companies in the area not have any competition in areas they don’t serve!)
Maloney was dramatically outspent, but rode Bill Clinton's coattails into office./i>
However the real interesting thing is this…
In 2004 she faced her only serious challenge, from Bob Jereski in the Democratic primary. Jereski opposed the Iraq War while Maloney had voted for the resolution to authorize force. However, Jereski didn't qualify because his petition was found to have invalid signatures, leaving him 4 short of the 1200 required.
The dems wanted the war, because they didn’t figure out WHY the war, just like you. they thought it would be another way to make a boondoggle out of the state. they never thought that this vote would resuilt in a lot of the success of the destabilizing efforts of the communist regime being blocked!!! They figured that they could get us in, then get lots of nice things for pretending to get us out.
However, why did they change their tune? Because their leaders told them AFTER the fact what they should have done… so the rest has been them trying to set things right on the party plan.
http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=10535 is a article on the state needing to meet mothers needs (wealth redistribution – communism)..
and to see who she is included with: Media Resources: Working Mother Press Release 9/25/2006; Institute for Women’s Policy Research Press Release 9/1/2007; Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) Press Release 7/25/07; Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) Press Release 6/28/07
So her Communist credentials are in order.
So lets see who the klatch was who decided this…
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HE00106:@@@P
interesting list.. because it leaves out their affiliations.
But if you look at the ‘laws’ and things these people work on.. its lots of fluff for influence and statement purposes (like the turkey thing). the whole list of the sponsor, Rep Adam Schiff, reads like a list of the choices that communist countries would like.
Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to countries that withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Supporting the goals and ideals of observing the National Day of Human Trafficking Awareness each year to raise awareness of and opposition to human trafficking.
Calling upon the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian Genocide, and for other purposes
Expressing no confidence in the performance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and urging the President to request his resignation.
What about carol?
Calling on the League of Arab States and each Member State individually to acknowledge the genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan and to step up their efforts to stop the genocide in Darfur.
That’s code for… let the weapons in, but talk a lot about it.
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States Postal Service should issue a commemorative postage stamp honoring former Representative Shirley Chisholm, and that the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued.
That’s for her feminist credits.
Calling on the Government of the United Kingdom to immediately establish a full, independent, and public judicial inquiry into the murder of Northern Ireland defense attorney Patrick Finucane, as recommended by Judge Peter Cory as part of the Weston Park Agreement, in order to move forward on the Northern Ireland peace process.
That’s to get the state in trouble for interfering with the communist area of the IRA.
Calling on the United Nations Security Council to charge Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and United Nations Charter because of his calls for the destruction of the State of Israel.
Empty nothing, that’s good to express to her constituency so that they FEEL she is doing things to make the world better. however, calling on the UN does nothing does it? but that’s not the tack she took with Armenia and turkey!
Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should not order an escalation in the total number of members of the United States Armed Forces serving in Iraq.
Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should not initiate military action against Iran without first obtaining authorization from Congress.
Ah… remember I pointed above that she voted yes to it? so then what is this?
Honoring women's health advocate Cynthia Boles Dailard.
More feminist credit to maintain power the women give her…
(here is a useful idiot taking up that info and using it! http://womenshealthnews.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html)
Notice how many of the things she is doing is do nothing work? that she is not making laws that help anyone… but gets paid… wastes money on them… and most of them amount to getting consensus in congress so that it can put its foot in its mouth.
by the way… anyone care to read her oath of office? She swears as do others that they will not create laws that favor one over another and such!!! ALL feminist politicians are in violations of their oaths of office!!! But hey, who cares?
However if you trace it forward… H res gets re awakened in the senate as..
Sen Durbin, Richard // S.RES.106
Title: A resolution calling on the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian Genocide.
And the list reads like a who who of the most communist members of the senate!!
Sen Allard, Wayne [CO] - 3/14/2007 Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - 3/14/2007
Sen Brown, Sherrod [OH] - 3/14/2007 Sen Brownback, Sam [KS] - 3/21/2007
Sen Cantwell, Maria [WA] - 10/4/2007 Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [MD] - 5/7/2007
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - 4/19/2007 Sen Coleman, Norm [MN] - 3/14/2007
Sen Collins, Susan M. [ME] - 3/20/2007 Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] - 3/14/2007
Sen Dole, Elizabeth [NC] - 3/14/2007 Sen Ensign, John [NV] - 3/14/2007
Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] - 3/14/2007 Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 3/14/2007
Sen Johnson, Tim [SD] - 4/11/2007
Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] - 3/14/2007
Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] - 3/14/2007 Sen Klobuchar, Amy [MN] - 3/14/2007
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] - 3/14/2007 Sen Levin, Carl [MI] - 3/19/2007
Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [CT] - 3/14/2007 Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ] - 3/14/2007
Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] - 3/14/2007 Sen Murray, Patty [WA] - 9/18/2007
Sen Reed, Jack [RI] - 3/14/2007
Sen Reid, Harry [NV] - 4/18/2007
Sen Salazar, Ken [CO] - 4/16/2007
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 3/14/2007
Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [ME] - 3/14/2007 Sen Stabenow, Debbie [MI] - 3/14/2007
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH] - 3/14/2007 Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI] - 3/14/2007
However when you read the LATEST MAJOR ACTION.. 3/14/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Which means that it went back and is now Maloneys little prize.
All my info came from the foreign affairs website, and from the library of congress.
Now anyone want to lay out the connections between the committee on foreign relations and the council on foreign relations?
So now you know… this item was drummed up in January… voted on.. no noise… it was then drummed up again in march… no noise..
The realization of what is happening in the middle east and the threat it is to russia (communist) plans, and destabalizations (which give a lot of leftists a lot of milage here), makes them do an end round… and the ball in the lap of Maloney… suddenly in September… the whole thing comes to the top, and becomes a major issue of protest.
Anyone care to guess who paid the protestors to make noise in turkey?
After all, if it wasn’t for them, most wouldn’t have notices the work any more than the other drivel going on.
Sadly one only needs to look at the map and the few states in the most flux are the key states in this weapons and destabilization transport.
However, its when things get like this, that useful idiots might start to question things.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R236QSPKTRE23K
“So you'd like to... STOP BEING A "USEFUL IDIOT" “
A “useful idiot” is one who unwittingly aids the Socialist movement. It is purported (though unproven) that Vladimir Lenin coined the disparaging term to describe those people too damned stupid to realize that they are contributing to their own political demise. These are society’s Know-Nuttins that fasten the chain around their own necks. 99% of American citizens (both Democrats and Republicans) have been conned; they are “useful idiots” (or “Lemmings”) and they give us informed patriots (“Loose Dogs”) and our country a bad name.
Want to know who betrayed it? Let the famous Socialist, Norman Thomas, tell you: “The difference between Democrats and Republicans is: Democrats have accepted some ideas of Socialism cheerfully, while Republicans have accepted them reluctantly.” That’s who betrayed America you Americonned citizen – YOUR political party betrayed America. The same party that you will try to put into the White House in 2008. Man, if you had a brain you’d be brainwashed!
I never read this guy before a few weeks ago. I had already known my history very well and need not go on the journey of discovery.
But Russian, I too, yes me artfldgr, was a useful idiot. Because the young start from that place… from the place of santa clause and telletubby ideas, and if they get mature, they realize that those things don’t work, and the world is a messier place.
But here is a kick. Read this next paragraph, and check out the point of tracing back the problems of the west.
While it sounds phobic, its not. you CAN literally trace ALL the major problems of the west, to the issues of the socialists from the late 1800s onward!!
I have found through diligent study that virtually every one of America’s current major problems, if followed back to the origin of its virus, will lead to the actions of a socialist, or collection of socialists. If there is an exception to this, I have yet to find it. Our problems all stem from a secret oligarchy that is attempting to establish and rule over a bastardized global Marxist system. It is important to bear in mind that despite being wrongly perceived generally as a “share-the-wealth” system, Socialism is in fact a “control-the-wealth” scheme. A study of history will show that Communism/Socialism has never benefited the common man and woman in any industrial nation. It is always instituted by power-hungry people intending to control the flow of money and goods. No? Study the history of Marxism and show me one example of the life of the “proletariat” being improved by Communism. What you’ll find instead is about 100 million people murdered and untold millions more raped, robbed, tortured, and starved.
Go ahead… try… what you will find is that tons of it points back to a small group of people Hitler kicked out of germany. A group of people who put themselves together to answer the question of “who will save socialism from the west”, and then laid out how to do it to germany and Europe. But Hitler came and sent them packing. They set up shop at Columbia university in ny, and then proceeded to infect the country.
THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (CFR) is “the most powerful private organization in the world.” This according to 16-year CFR member U.S. Navy Rear Admiral, Chester Ward, who exposed the CFR agenda in his 1975 book Kissinger on the Couch which he coauthored with Phyllis Schlafly. Ward wrote that the CFR’s principal objective is to surrender “the sovereignty and national independence of the United States … to a one-world all-powerful global government.” [page 129] The goal is to create a global, totalitarian Socialistic state (code name: “New World Order”) based loosely upon the Marxist model. For my slower Generation X and Y readers deliberately dumbed down by the Federal education system (ignorant people are easier to manipulate), this translates to: “F**k America and f**k the U.S. Constitution!” (I figure it’s helpful to put it in language that our youngest Lemmings can understand.)
The person is not writing to be accepted as a journalist.. but they are writing the truth.. anyone remember that it was schafly that ended the gender entitlement from being added to the constitution.
The CFR came into existence in 1921, and its primary founder, Edward Mandell House, wrote that he essentially favored “Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx.” He wrote that the U.S. Constitution is “defective”, “obsolete”, “grotesque”, and that we have “outgrown” it.
MAndell was Woodrows Wilsons alter ego, and second self.
“An end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.” Richard Gardner in Foreign Affairs the official publication of that group.
So what you have is an organization in which the goals is world communism/fascism, for the most powerful people.. this to prevent others from prospering enough to join their ranks (there goes the neighborhood), or threaten their place.
They are not hiding this, they are open in this.
So there you have WHY it was done Russian… they don’t want the destabilization of the west to stop!!! Or else the slow march through the Americas and the west will slow or maybe stop.
One only needs to look at the membership list to see how powefful they potentially are. even if its only influence and commiserative power.
About the only thing that actually testifies to their power is that they are rarely mentioned in the news and such, but are in literally EVERYTHING.
Care to see a corporate member list?
American Airlines; American Express; Archer Daniels Midland; Atlantic Richfield; Bank of America; Bristol-Myers Squibb; British Airways; Chase Manhattan Bank; Chevron; Citibank/Citicorp; Dow Chemical; Dow Jones & Co.; Exxon Corp.; Forbes Magazine; Ford Motor Co.; General Electric; General Motors; Georgia-Pacific; Goldman Sachs & Co.; H.J. Heinz Co.; IBM Corp.; J.P. Morgan & Co.; Lazard Freres & Co.; Loral Corp.; Mercedes benz of North America; Merrill Lynch & Co. Foundation; Mitsubishi International; Mobil Corp.; Morgan Stanley & Co.; The New York Times Co. Foundation; Olin Corp.; Paramount Publ.; PepsiCo.; Pfizer; Price Waterhouse; Proctor & Gamble; Prudential Insurance Co. of America; RJR Nabisco; The Rockefeller Group; Salomon Brothers; Siemens Corp.; SmithKline Beecham Corp.; Sony Corp. of America; Summit International Assoc.; Texaco; Times Mirror; TRW; Xerox Corp.
Want to know where the new commitern went to after it dissolved and became the cominform (which is who promoted feminist communism).
So is capitalism even capitalism any more?
[anyone care to look and tell us which of all the candidates is NOT a member. let me let you in. none. All the candidates are members!]
Nothing I wrote above is tin hat… you can go look it up yourself in their own minutes.
All you have to do… is trace things back and not listen to the news media leftist idiots spouting stuff to make you FEEL what is right… just follow it from one place you start.. AND note that history unraveled is naturally a huge bunch of coincidences, and connections… that in itself is not the thing.
Look to what they do… for in actions, there can be little lying…
Russian.. you have been listening too much to what they say…
(which lets you misattribute and such endlessly… and their way, absolved you of thinking. )
And for those not shell shocked reading my posts.
http://shrinkwrapped.blogs.com/blog/2006/02/the_information.html
for some blog fun.
ShrinkWrapped
A Psychoanalyst Attempts to Understand Our World
Artfldgr says:
Aris, that was a great answer... i am way too verbose.. but at least i am interesting.
here is my answer to russian.. if you have the time.
===============================
China is more a capitalist country led by the Communists. The insignificant communist parties in other countries are marginal and do not have any influence. So, sleep unworriedly. Communism is dead.
Then I guess the Chinese didn’t get the memo from you.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
China Party Meets to Pick New Leaders
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9502E7DC1731F93BA35752C1A9649C8B63
The Chinese Communist Party began its most hallowed ritual today, a huge, weeklong meeting in the Great Hall of the People that will anoint the country's next generation of leaders and set its political and economic direction for years to come.
The congress, the 16th since a band of revolutionaries formed the Communist Party of China in 1921, is Jiang Zemin's final hurrah as party chief, capping a reign of 13 years.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
How is life down the rabbit hole hanging out with the “red queen” that has taught you to be able to believe many impossible things before breakfast.
Communism is NOT dead, not by a long shot when its being promoted in the west under other names and reformations.
Russia is not seaking world domination. You mixed her with the USA. How can Russia pretend for world domination if she does not have the appropriate capacity: economic, military, ideological?
And now we know your proxy. You are not determining anything from facts, but determining the outcome because you think your really really smart, and if you cant figure out a way for a group that you believe is the way you see it, then they couldn’t succeed. Therefore they are not a threat.
Time for another history lesson..
Capacity is not a proxy for capability. The US thought they had the capacity to take Vietnam (they did), but they lost because they walked away from the battlefield!!!
Think about that… lots of capacity, of the kind you think counts. But in truth they were missing a few other capacities. They lost the will.
Russians against the Afghanis… lots of capacity… but the afghanis had more will to fight. Same for the insurgents in iraq.
Care to read about the battle of Agincourt? The French outnumbered the British 5-1.
You, being a man of much smaller consideration, would think that the 1 would be the loser. 1000 men against 5000, and the 5000 are on their home turf, and the 1000 just got off the boats and a long march.
“The English had mostly unarmored and unmounted footsoldiers and longbowmen. A hard, relentless rain was falling, from which the English had no protection. The French attacked, charging down hill on their huge Belgian horses, armor rattling as the French knights charged the thin English line.”
Well, the French lost.
And not because of the brits!! You see the French were losing so badly that the English got bored of killing them!!! so the Scottish highlanders who were paid to watch the horses, oxen, and such, took up their hammers, and farm instruments (they were not allowed to have weapons), ran into the breech of the field to finish the job!
“The Highlanders soon made a sport of it, using the heavy timbers to flip lenghthwise down the narrow glen to smash the heads of the French knights. They used the pitchforks to skewer the knight and throw them high into the air. it was soon determined that the three-pronged fork was much more effective than the two-pronged fork, thus a rule was made banning future use of the two-pronged fork, despite repeated protests from the shortest of the Highlanders, a man by the name of Wills. “
Now you also know the origin of the kyber toss (it’s a sport now)
Care to re-examine the war between the Zulu nation and the british? Zulus? No they won. With spears, sticks, and such, against machine guns… they won.
Care to examine how the Vietnamese fought the war? They took our duds apart and made munitions out of them.
Vietnam didn’t have the capacity, the Zulus didn’t have the capacity, that day at Agincourt the british didn’t have the capacity.
Care to talk capacity about the british against Ghandi?
Your delusional, and that’s not ad hominem.
The work of the soviet union in the west, was planned to be SELF FUNDING… in other words, like a drone in a sci fi movie, its design was to be parasitical to the body politic it was attacking. Other than the seed capital to start it, its funded by money that it gets from what it takes over.
This was why the cominform (which came after the commintern), ordered that they should first start in taking over large not for profits, and large corporations… in this way, they could direct OTHER PEOPLES RESOURCES to their own personal ends.
Care to check out the META orgs that exist now today? they are organizations that link up the ideologies of literally hundreds of smaller charities, that ALL take a portion of the money they get from donations for things like clothing, and children and such, and redirect them towards socialist/communist/feminist programs.
VAWA is a gender law (in violation of the constitution!), and it has granted more than 5 billion twice towards ideological ends with no requirement as to where the money goes.
May I ask whats wrong with stoping Violence Against Anyone Amendment? Other than you cant make it sound as good when you prounounce it? Violence Against Women Amendment.
The feminist leaders say they are communist socialist… and here you are saying that they don’t havef the capacity. They do!! in fact you gave them more than 20 dollars!!!
In other words, they are answering the question the same way that lennin answered it. how would they hang the west? The west will make the rope for themselves, and hang themselves. (the origin of the concept of: give them enough rope and they will hang themselves with it).
Read the post in another thread at larussophobe today… its on propaganda and by geobbles. He shows that you don’t need capacity, and such.
Did chavez and castro and the other 14 men have capacity, mitliary ability, etc?
They had lies… and the willinness to use them on their own people (sort of. Castro was from where? Hitler was from where? Chavez was from where? Stalin was Georgian, no? so actually they are from other states, torturing their enemies while leading them).
Russia is strugling for survival and saving her identity.
And with a wave Russian goes back to sleep casting out the dissonance from his mind by not examining anything that may lead to a different ending than the one he WANTS to believe in.
Chill out and see you pshycoanalyst to get rid of your paranoia.
And all you have is the socialist concept of maligning your opposition, or making them self doubt as a manipulative way to win? Each and every time, you have no leg to stand on. you are not very well educated historically (as we shall see in a second), and your not able to debate well. so the only thing you can do, is use one of the many “false arguments” designed to win, by cheating.
Read this list and please purge all of them from your tactical quiver, ALL of them seek to win argument through means other than factual debate.
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
by saying “chill” you are implying that I am “excited and irrational”, but claiming paranoia, you are trying to confirm the false assertion in the prior part of your missive.
This might be categorized as a combination of Ad hominem, and Argument From Adverse Consequences (Appeal To Fear, Scare Tactics).
Ad Hominem (Argument To The Man) / Argument By Emotive Language (Appeal To The People) / Argument By Generalization / Argument By Pigheadedness (Doggedness) / Argument By Laziness (Argument By Uninformed Opinion) / Argument By Repetition (Argument Ad Nauseam) / Argument By Selective Observation / Argument To The Future / Equivocation / Disproof By Fallacy / False Cause / Inconsistency / Begging The Question (Assuming The Answer, Tautology) / Cliche Thinking / Common Sense / Changing The Subject (Digression, Red Herring, Misdirection, False Emphasis) / Causal Reductionism (Complex Cause) / Burden Of Proof (one of your most favorites)
Are all in your repertoire!
And in the next second, we will hear from Error Of Fact combined with Argument From Authority among others.
Russia annexed Baltic States in the certain geopolitical situation, when the WWII was going on, and that was a reasonable move. The fact the world swallowed that is the proof.
Stalin made a DEAL with Hitler before wwii started that carved up Europe.
The world didn’t swallow it… the world was too tired from fighting the Germans. The Russians were traitors to their own promises (as they have always been historically. Go ahead, research and tally it up).
WWII had not started yet when they claimed the Baltics. You have put the cart before the horse… (which is why your stuff doesn’t move)
So as I said, its an error in fact… which makes your assertion wrong, which then makes the second assertion based on the first one wrong due to its dependency on that.
About now others would be out of their depth… they would realize that they are arguing from a place that is a desert of information compared with the rich fertile area of facts that I know. whats worse is that your education skewed some of the stuff you DO have.
You can not ignore security concerns. Today's USA doctrine allows to start a preventive war if they feel that their security is threatened. And the USA invaded Iraq based on their security concerns.
Im sorry, but you see, we didn’t get to that point till after 75 years of socialism… and Gramsci’s long walk through the culture putting moral relativism, socialism, multiculturalism, etc. into play.
The old America said “you can go to hell your own way, and we ours”, but the NEW socialist America, does what the socialist soviet union has done..
Or do you think hitlers socialism was holding him back from invading countries that were NOT threatening her?
We do now how the Russians were being threatened by the Latvians, Estonians, and lituanians that you brought up a paragraph before..
You see.. the Latvians are a super race of people (much like the jews), and so, stalin saw the threat they were to mankind and russia, so he made a deal with his sociopathic other, Hitler, and took it.
Your trying to equivocate two things that are no where near the same…
Russia rolled into how many countries and denied them autonomy for more than half a century!!
May I ask the last country america took over and kept? Your showing how delusional you are when you can sit and ignore, Poland, Latvia, Estonia, lituania, slovakia, Czech, Georgia, kazakstan, Armenia, hungary, korea, the islands russia grabbed in the last 4 days of the war in the pacific having only been a part of that war for less than 24 hours.
And they did that in less than 100 years of existence…
Lets compare honestly now. America took france… how long before france was france again? America beat japan… how long before japan was japan? America held back north korea.. how long has south korea been an American province (how long has north korea been?). I can go on..
But you cant even look at the facts honestly.
Let me put this in perspective.. you live in your home.. there is a neighbor next farm over. That neighbor has done lots of things to harm you, and has made lots of statements of doing so in public, and has taken monies and given it to others to help fund them to harm you.
In this little microcosm, there are no police… there is no higher effective body to go to.
This person has threatened your family… has made materials to poison you and your wife and kids… you have the bills, receipts, and another land owner has told you they have seen it, and provided pictures and details, but begs you not to reveal them, or else they would be a target too… (and would be forced never to help you again to preserve their own interests).
You now find out that they have shipped in tons of resources from another area farther away, who also has declared to ruin you.
What do you do? do you sit there? do you go over and check it out (inspectors)? Do you spend a lot of time trying to deal with the person? what if they constantly lie?
What if you cant move? What will you do?
The doctrine is understandable, but I agree it was a step the US should never have taken since it changed our status to being the same as every other state on the planet!!!
However, if the result is turkey, iraq, iran, Afghanistan being a large line in the sand that stops weapons from russia from seeding the middle east, and Africa pitting people against each other to sell more weapons… well then maybe in the long run it’s the lesser of two evils.
Ever notice how good countries do after the US gets them and gives them back, and how good countries do when russia got them and never let go till it was near death and in danger itself and had to?
Nope.. I guess you didn’t… a night time photo of korea from space should settle that one.
And this happens TODAY! When political morals have changed to the better. THAN, when the WWII was going on, it was much more acceptable.
When political morals have changed for the better?
What egg did you just get hatched out of? The apex of political morals for mankind was 150 or so years ago in the US… its been down hill in de-evolution since.
If your going to make such an assertion, please back that up… WHERE do you see political morals being any different than in the past? china still has re-education camps, russia still murders its own to change outcomes. And instead of opposing this, the US has given up and started doing the same thing. after all, if you cant beat them, join em, right?
And annexation of the the Baltic states and some of the Finnish territory was adequate for Russia, like occupation of Iran by the joint Allied forces later.
Annexation is equivalent to liberation?
So you belive that the US will ANNEX Iran?
Again, your favorite false argument… Argument By Selective Observation / Argument From Spurious Similarity / and a few others.
Ok.. Russia tried to invade finland, but the finns beat them, so they didn’t get it.
Latvia and Estonia and lituania, were annexed. Kind of like America today making a deal with chavez, that he gets the south contenant, and the US gets the nortern part of south America, and then rolls tanks into mexico.
Now you know that we built gulags in iraq, and Afghanistan. And what we then did, since we are like the Russians. Is take the best and brightest, and put them into cattle cars, and send them off to labor camps to work for the American people. After that, we made gifts of the prime properties, castles, houses, estates, and things, to people in the republican party who helped. We forbid the iraqies to speak their native language any more.. and we made them second class citzens to the millions of Russians we moved into the country to insure that it would stay russian.
Yup… that’s sounds the same..
The population of the Baltic states experienced some kind of political repressions (arrests, deportations), based not on their nationality or etnicity, but on their loyalty and real or potential threat to the new regime.
WRONG. They were selected the same way that they are always selected. They took the teachers, the scientists, the authors, capitalists, and so forth.
Take a look at the time scale.. they rolled in and shipped them all out in two weeks!!!!
Read the story of Ruta U. she is the ANNE FRANKE of the Latvians. Except that Anne had it easy!!!
You have no idea of what you are speaking of!!!!! Your statements are false arguments again. Argument From False Authority / Argument By Generalization / Argument By Half Truth (Suppressed Evidence) / Argument By Laziness (Argument By Uninformed Opinion)/ Argument By Selective Observation / Bad Analogy
Back up what you say.. show us the information that leads you to the conclusion that since only Latvians from Latvia were shipped out it wasn’t because of their ethnicity.
Same like elswere in the USSR. And that was thousands not millions.
Your right.. because there weren’t millions of Latvians to kill….
Argument By Half Truth (Suppressed Evidence) / Argument By Generalization
in 1921 the Entente countries, the victors in World War I, recognised the independent Republic of Latvia. Thus, the leading world powers of the time recognised independent Latvia as an equal subject of international law.
March 25th holiday / On this day in 1949, a total of 43 000 people were deported from Latvia to Siberia - mainly prosperous peasants, regarded by the Soviet occupation regime as alien to communist ideology and the principles of collectivism.
May 8th holiday / For Latvia and the Latvians, World War II was a time of great suffering. Both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union violated international law by mobilising the population of Latvia in their armed forces. About 200 000 Latvian soldiers served in the forces of both occupying states, and about half of them (100 000) were killed in battle.
They were captured and slaughtered en masse! by the Russians who said Latvia was theirs (ignoring the independence granted in 1921), and that these soldiers constituted traitors.
On June 14, 1941 the Soviet occupation regime deported to Siberia around 15 000 people from Latvia, regarding them as ideologically opposed to the Soviet communist system.
In accordance with a secret protocol of the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of August 23, 1939, which apportioned Latvia to Moscow's sphere of influence, the country was occupied by Soviet forces on June 17, 1940. Latvia was under occupation by the Soviet Union (Russia) from 1940 up to 1941, when the country was occupied by Germany. In 1945 the Soviet occupation regime returned, and the Russian forces of occupation left their last military base in 1998.
So much for your claim that it was a wwii necessity…
And as I said russia never keeps its treaties.. since consensus is their weapon of choice.
August 11
Commemoration Day of Latvian Freedom Fighters.
The day of remembrance for Latvian freedom fighters is connected with the signing of a peace treaty between Latvia and Soviet Russia on August 11, 1920. The treaty ended the Latvian War of Liberation, which had begun in late 1918. In the war, one of the militarily strongest opponents of the idea of a free Latvian state was the Soviet regime, which had become established in Russia and planned to take over power in Latvia, too.
So, not only did russia ignore the recognition of independence granted to them by the states after WWI, but they violated their own treaty with them!!!!
And a bit more clarity as to the significance of the first day of December.
After World War II about 200 000 Latvians lived in Soviet Russia (later the USSR), having arrived both in the course of peasant emigration in the late 19th century, and as refugees from the fighting in World War I, since from 1915 the front passed through the present territory of Latvia. In 1937-1938 the communist regime in Moscow began a genocide against non-Russians living in the USSR, including Latvians. About 70 000 Latvians living in the Soviet Union were killed. The Latvian Parliament has declared the first Sunday of December as a day of remembrance for the Latvians killed in the USSR in the course of repression by Stalin's regime.
So much for your idea that its was to remove people agasint russia, the story that the Russians give.
Yeah.. they didn’t kill millions… what they did was kill almost half the population!!!
In percentage terms, it would be like killing 150 million Americans..
And then years later listening to people say.. it was ONLY X amount.
That was war and post-war period, some of them were nazi collaborators some fought against Russians and the others provided support and cover.
No, they were not nazi’s. They were occupied by Nazi germany AFTER it took it away from RUSSIA. So those Latvians of the military that were killed were NOT Nazis. And in fact, these people have a special dispensation from many countries that recognize that they were conscripted (another violation)..
Your not talking history knowledge… when will you relize that until you read and learn history in depth, that all your doing is re-spouting mostly bs propaganda..
You’re a classic intellectual. Not smart enough to understand, but smart enough to keep responding like a trained seal with the parties line.. who then say good russian, and you get your emotional yummy from them telling you your right, your on the side of good, etc.
However, you never questioned it. you never saw how it works, nor do you have any idea whaqts going on. all you have is the little sheets of paper they are handing you trhoug a slot.
I do not know what exactly do the Americans to those who is waging guerilla war against them in Iraq and Afganistan, and to those who provide logistic for them.
This is bolded as its proof from your own lips that you don’t know what your talking about. Since it contradicts what you were asserting before.
Americans do the same thing that they did in the gulf war that enabled these same people to go home and fight again!!!
If they are actively waging war, we capture them, and put them in a holding area for the duration. They get good food, exercise, religious materials, and basically sit out the war.
Unlike the Russians and germans, we don’t kill them and we accept the extra weakness that maintaining such things causes. After all, you need a place, you need food, supplies, medicine.
Remember when the CIA guy was killed early in the war? It was because the guerillas who were being held revolted and tried to escape.
Meanwhile, shall I direct you to pictures as to what they do to their own, journalists, non combatants, civilians, and military personnel?
Meanwhile, russia, china, and north korea, used American pows as guinea pigs in their biological warfare programs. Shall I dig out the names of the areas, the defectors, and such?
The Japanese did the same… there is a nice documentary about the bridge over the river kwai… the bridge is still there.. it was built with forced labor of prisoners captured.
Injured soldiers and such are considred to no longer be active combatants. The doctrine of JUST WAR that we follow does not permit us to continue to engage enemies that drop their weapons.
While this is a ncie thing, functionally everyone slips on this.. however, compared to other countries, and socialist countries, we barely slip at all.
Care to go over the details of the rape of Nanking?
I do not think they give them some kind of bonus.
Actually, we do. they can get education, and medical treatment that they cant get when they are not prisoners. We fly them to hospitals if they are hurt in battle, and they get American blood from Americans too.
What you don’t get is that a capitalist state ultimately has no use for war EXCEPT to keep worse things from threatening it. (if saddam, and iran, made a 100 year contract for exclusive oil for russia, is that open market, is that fair, is that doing business? no. THAT’S what the oil issue is about. However, the real issue is russias weapons, explosives, and military experts that they move over land with no risk).
It’s a fallacy that capitalists make out in war. Only a few do… and capatalists do not like the loss of revenue, the restrictions, the rising prices from that, and on and on.
However, fascists (corporatists), and socialists LOVE war… while painting the other side does. a side that will kill millions of its own to create control, has no problem killing enemies in any way shape or form. there is no way to morally and without dissonance, make it morally wrong to go to war, but slaughter through slow torture and labor your own people.
Read all the communist socialist stuff… its all REVOLUTION… not EVOLUTION, the latter being too slow for those who are already born, as they know that they will never reach utopia… so they pretend to speed it along, while the leaders use all the same techniques you have picked up to win arguments against the unarmed.
You have probably never met an armed debator who would take the time to debate with you for a long while and not give up so easy.
To most who know their facts, arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin is a dumb way to spend time.
However, I am from the old school… and I believe that you have value just by the fact that you exist. I work from there.
As about "Dachas" for Russians taken from poor Balts- all this is old widow tales. I am puzzled can how such a serious analyst like you believe in that sh*t.
Because my family is Latvian and those old widows were my grandmothers and granfathers and such. I wont tell you my last name, but if you looked on a map of Latvia, that was the area that my family had as landowners. The province is my family name, and the estate was taken over.
My grandmother and father hid in a pile of garbage when the Russians came in. my Grandfather went out, and they took him, and hung him upside down from a tree and eviscerated him. He suffocated on his own entrails.
My Grandfather was a butcher (you know, meats, sausage, and such), my grandmother was a research chemist (so much for feminists assertion women couldn’t).
All I have now is a small box of pictures… some medals, the family stories.. of which our current anti family culture has made sure my son doesn’t know any of where he comes from.
We were told we could get the land back, but we have no way of knowing how. My father doesn’t speak Latvian much any more. they never taught me since my parents came at a time when immigrants wanted to be Americans.
Maybe personal experience counts more than your fantasies.
My other uncle, not really related, was a school teacher. He was conscripted, and when he lost his leg under a german tank and survived, they took him and put him in a gulag for 8 years. I never saw him healthy, the war years scared him in a way that his body never seems to fill up and have mass again.
My great grandmother we couldn’t get out till she was over 90. after all, she was still able to work and the soviets needed that.
Care to spout more dreams against experience?
Are you for Turkey or for Armenia?
Both.. the old issue should die… its only brought up because it may destabilize turkey from following the plan to rid that area of soviet dominance through terror and weapons.
They voted today and decided to ignore that crap!!!
Turkey is not going to take over Armenia, and Armenia is not a war with turkey, the lines of state drawn about wwii are the lines that we have all tried to freeze… however, certain other socialist states have ignored that while the west tried to grant permanent recognition in hopes that that would protect these smaller states. Since Latvia is on topic, you can see how this pans out.
Do note that China has said its willing to go to nuclear war to prevent Taiwan from being recognized as such.
And why the USA congres got involved into yhis hystoric dispute. Wouldn't it be more appropriate for the Congress to discuss if the extermination of the whole American Indian tribes during the USA expansion to the West was genocide?
And now I know you did not read my post. You skimmed it and you didn’t “get” it, since the thing was all about answering your question!!!
The dissonance will not go away… and as I said, its what causes useful idiots to wake up if they cant brush it aside.
And now I can agree with you!!! not that it would be more appropriate, but both things are out of their contextual thing.
However, the enemy in this case is the US, and saying that doesn’t get them anything.
Here is why I said you may stop being a useful idiot. Because if you keep following that question, as I tried to lead you through, you will find out the sham.
Your right at the point where your about to find out that the sky on the other side of the water, is a wall, and there is a door, and there is a world outside that. (that movie, as was bruce almighty, an abstraction!)
Taking your statement farther, why not condemn the jews for the genocidal acts of king david in the bible?
Why not hit the Cambodians for the killing fields, russia for the gulags, china for the re-education centers, American Indians for Jamestown, south American inca’s for their own words telling how they did the same in victory.
Your about to realize that this was brought up to hit turkey and separate it from the US so that Russia can win and keep the door open.
You are on the edge of realizing that they are enemies to their own state!
As I said before… you cant resolve this because unlike other moves there was no preparation… the move had to come so fast, that the top dogs and fellow travelors ignored the useful idiots and acted.
If they had more time, you would have been fed some story or half truth that would have given you a mental out from the dissonance you feel now.
Just as you have a mental out for the people slaughtered by russia… you believe that it was enemies, and it was Nazis, and it was their own fault, and Russian state had to.
That makes it real easy to say that the truth is propaganda so that the propaganda becomes truth, and you don’t have to wrestle with the more uncomfortable option of understanding the nature of what your supporting and how they are USING you.
Your in the incomfortable position of realizing how they have the shackles on you.
If you recognize them for what they are, you then have to accept that you were duped, and supported something evil.
If you don’t, then you can blithely go on feeling superior, calling thinking people paranoid to shame them from waking you up, motivated (as goebbles said) to spread the truth/lie, and on and on.
Where do you find meaning when the meaning you had turned out to be a lie?
MOST people would rather preserve the lie..
Same question that the matrix is asking reality is asking of you!!!!
Do you want to see things as they are. seek out the facts and draw your own conclusions. You haven’t noticed that I haven’t told you that you have to agree with me.
All I ever said was that I wanted you to go out and stop listening to the propagandists, and start being very careful of what information you pour between your ears.
You wouldn’t accept life advice from a derilixt on the street, or a mugger tht just mugged you… why should you do that for someone that is doing the same to you mentally?
Look at my feminist quotes from the leaders… some are supreme court lawyers, one a senator, another a congresswoman, another was a large part of al gores campaign.
And yet, if you took most of those quotes. Then denuded them of where and such. and put them into a survey and asked if people agreed with the assertions. What would be the result?
THAT’S how far away they put you from reality (not just feminists, but any group playing this way). that people support the same people that say those horrible things, when they wouldn’t condone those sayings!!!!!
However, how many people have shaped their lives around this false stuff? how much do they have invested in it? and how much do they feel that the specific combinations of answers and such ARE what they are?
You are not the sum of your ideas. Every idea can change.. and from the time you’re a child to an adult it does. your body isn’t the body you started out with. it replaces itself almost completely a few times during your lifetime.
The other thing that happens when you wake up and such… is that you start to see the games for what they are. that they never prove their points. that their facts are almost always half truths. That they shame you to the right answer more than explain why it’s the right answer and what the results are and why that’s the result. That they always want something from you, promise to return thigns to you, and you never get anything. but the anticipatory state is more enjoyable than the reality of it.
Time to wake up Russian and see things for what they are…
Artfldgr says:
I apologize for not having the time to write articles about things that you can look up yourself if you didn’t overburden those you compete with.
This is a distraction and your debate style (which isn’t debate but games), creates so many side trails that in order to cover them all, one must write longer tracts.
I did list out to you false arguments… and rather going off and self reflecting and checking your behavior at the door, you hit with more of them.
Burden Of Proof:
the claim that whatever has not yet been proved false must be true (or vice versa). Essentially the arguer claims that he should win by default if his opponent can't make a strong enough case.
There may be three problems here. First, the arguer claims priority, but can he back up that claim? Second, he is impatient with ambiguity, and wants a final answer right away. And third, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
Your fast and free statements with nothing to back them up creates the burden of proof to cover all the bases that stem from that premise. if you included references,a nd facts in your arguments, that would limit the area and scope in which you can play games. If not, then all you do is pick a extended point I haven’t covered, and then say. HA! You missed this, its missing, and so I must be right. "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." its possible to step up from the situation and look at the tools your using in that situation. if your arguing with a taxi driver or merchant on the street, thse tactics are fine where anyting goes. But this is a forum for debate on issues and facts. I know its hard, but there really is a difference between what you FEEL and what a fact is.
“I know, Pfizer introduced Viagra. What kind of communist plot was that?”
And now you change sides when it’s convenient to make a point?
One second your railing against American hegemony and its corporatist ways, the next second in your zealousness to be quipping and use wit as a replacement for real thought (and not good wit at that). Technically I don’t give a whit about that kind of wit, from a twit.
You must think the people here are kindergartners. That a product is not a communist plot, but the money that should either go to workers or shareholders instead go for corporatist redistribution of wealth.
These companies violate capitalism by moving the battle for products from the table of innovation and such, to fixing the game through the state. they participate in the concept of communism, just as Ford did, when he said I want to own nothing and control everything.
It’s a case of Abilene’s paradox. (go look it up, im tired today)
The pharmaceutical industry has also been busy at home, spending an unprecedented $109 million on 800 lobbyists to ensure that the Medicare drug benefit passed by Congress in late 2003 specifically prohibits Medicare from bargaining with drug companies for lower prices on behalf of its elderly beneficiaries.
They helped it become socialist to make a power control base. Then they use their power to mold that socialism to what they want that gives them benefit. in other words, they are cheating both ends. They are so large because they are supported by the state (coporatism) and the state gives them socialist/fascist charity. Tax breaks, and other things.
So much for equal protection under the law. So they lobbied to put such largesse in place, because they need the states power to kill. So in collusion with the state against the small guys, these socialists, do what they always do!!! use social skill and social cache, favors, and back door agreements to get their end.
that’s a social end to a meritocritous process
That’s not capitalism, that’s socialism and capitalism mixed, which is fascism.
So the conspiracy, or rather the self interest vote, is not in the products they make, its in the abuse of the profits they make doing things that in a lassaize faire system would not be allowed.
In such a capatlist system there would be no progressive tax, no favoring one side in order to control outcomes. That’s the whole reason for the existence of a socialist state, to change the inputs and the values o fthe system to mold a different outcome that is based on some faulty idea that can be put in a book and written down, but should encompass all of life and the universe in its ability to dictate behavior and guarantee outcome.
Got that?
“To improve its image, Pfizer, the world’s largest drug company, has launched a new program--with the chirpy name "Pfizer’s Pfriends"--promising to offer uninsured Americans discount prices on prescription drugs. But the 43 million uninsured Americans should not expect real relief, since the uninsured now pay higher prices than those with insurance for both prescription drugs and medical care.”
Bribing you with your own money is socialism. whats interesting is these quotes are from a socialist site raling that that’s capitalism. But in capitalism the state and the companies are antogonists to each other, only in between socialism and capitalism, do they marry for mutual benefit against the people while claiming to work for the people who work for BOTH of those entities (the state and companies).
You missed my pints too.
No, I didn’t, I covered everything to absurdity. And I think you mean points, cause I don’t steal beer either.
A point that is not a point catches nothing, and so no one stops for it, it’s missed because it never was.
The threat to the USSR in 1940 was not from Latvia or Estonia, but from Germany.
Ah… totally ignoring EVERYTHING I wrote on the Molotov Ribbendorf pact. Ready… wake up… they had a meeting BEFORE the war to start the war, and take what they agreed upon in violation to treaties they had with the victim countries.
You do not read, you do not study, you just spew, and you never get off the circular track your on.
Argument By Pigheadedness (Doggedness):
Refusing to accept something after everyone else thinks it is well enough proved.
Argument By Repetition (Argument Ad Nauseam):
if you say something often enough, some people will begin to believe it. There are some net.kooks who keeping reposting the same articles to Usenet, presumably in hopes it will have that effect.
(I didn’t use the term net.kooks… but hey, if the shoe fits….)
Begging The Question (Assuming The Answer, Tautology):
reasoning in a circle. The thing to be proved is used as one of your assumptions. For example: "We must have a death penalty to discourage violent crime". (This assumes it discourages crime.) Or, "The stock market fell because of a technical adjustment." (But is an "adjustment" just a stock market fall?)
Three false argumentative methods in one small sentence.
Your point is not a point since its not based in any fact. Even wiki, notorious for not being perfect, isn’t as off track as you are.
The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, a title used herein as named for its negotiators, the Soviet foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov and German foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, refers to the officially-titled Treaty of Non-aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, signed in Moscow in the early hours of August 24, 1939, dated August 23. The Pact is known by a number of different titles. These include the Nazi-Soviet Pact, Hitler-Stalin Pact and German-Soviet Non-aggression Pact. It remained in effect until Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941 in Operation Barbarossa.
Your way off on a simple fact.. however the real fact doesn’t support your assertion. So you assume that everyone is as dumb as you and so use the same methods of “knowing” that you do, and so you can score points.
This is why socialists, who are not useful idiots, never get into these debates. Why fight a battle you always lose when the argument is forced to rely on FACTS.
In addition to stipulations of non-aggression, the treaty included a secret protocol dividing the independent countries of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine and Romania into spheres of Nazi and Soviet influence, anticipating "territorial and political rearrangements" of these countries' territories. All were subsequently invaded, occupied, or forced to cede territory by Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or both.
Many on the political left were outraged that the Soviet Union would make such a treaty with Nazi Germany, which was its extreme-right ideological opposite. Many Communists in Western parties repudiated this action and resigned their party membership in protest. Likewise, a number of Nazis were outraged by this treaty, and some party members went so far as to throw their party badges into the courtyard of the Brown House.
And like I said, wiki is not that reliable. Nazi’s are not extreme right to Socialists… Capitalists are… Nazi;s are in the MIDDLE.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was "The National Socialist German Workers' Party".
You can go here to read more, which you wont, but others will: http://ray-dox.blogspot.com/2006/05/american-roots-of-fascism-american.html
"Hayek's challenge was to argue that German Nazism was not an aberrant "right-wing" perversion growing out of the "contradictions" of capitalism. Instead, the Nazi movement had developed out of the "enlightened" and "progressive" socialist and collectivist ideas of the pre-World War I era, which many intellectuals in England and the United States had praised and propagandized for in their own countries."
Like Belgium and Holland when attacked France.
Ah… NOW I know what history your reading. Go to time magazine and check out the articles when WWII started. at that time no one knew about the secret agreement to carve up the world and violate all their agreements.
When Germany rolled out.. Stalin claimed that Germany was responding to French aggression. However that was all propaganda.
The takeover of Holland was somewhat a masterpiece. Hitler needed Holland to help with the invasion of France. With Holland, he could send a group of men on France unexpectedly. The Germans had 89 divisions, and 47 reserved divisions. Holland only had 4 army corps, 24 brigades, 14 regiments, and hardly enough planes to help put up a weak fight.
Germans snuck into Holland addressing themselves as students and tourists. They stole public uniforms, such as police, postmen, and railroad conductors. They transported these back to Germany. The Dutch braced for an attack and hoped that somebody would come to their aid. The Dutch army mined dams, set up pillboxes, and made road blocks. On May 10, 1940, the attack came. They were doomed.
Starting at 4 in the morning, Germans parachuted into the country using the stolen uniforms as cover. They were armed to the teeth, and were supplied with boats to cross any flooding caused by an exploded dam.
So far off that your “not even wrong” as wrong would still be in the same area of right.
And what does the above say about capacity? You know, your faulty reasoning in the last waste of time.
Imagine the same, but this time its Chinese in shipping containers? After all it was stalin who told the Chinese to build lots of small boats, and not big ones.
The point is that they didn’t waste resources (capacity), they snuck in and used only a few people to collapse it and leave the capacity to take the larger and better outfitted French.
Hitler's next stop was Belgium. He also needed this country to aid in his France invasion. On May 10, 1940, German soldiers marched into Belgium disguised as citizens just as they had in Holland. Then the real attack came. The Luftwaffe pounded Belgium with a tremendous amount of fire power as 2800 tanks rolled into the country along with infantry support. Half of Belgium's Air Force was destroyed in the attack, and Maastricht Bridge and Fort Even Emael was taken.
The second wave of the attack came from the Ardennes mountains(later to be used in the invasion of France and the counteroffensive Battle of the Bulge.). They came through the mountains in the southeast in between Meuse and Moselle. Also the supposed "most powerful fort in the world" Eben Emael was taken within 36 hours of the attack. The Germans were making it look easy.
Finally, on May 28 of 1940, the Belgium army surrendered unconditionally. Leopold caught the French and British supporters by surprise. French and British troops were rushed to aid the Belgium situation, but were now trapped due to King Leopold's actions. This came to be one of the most successful evacuations of the war as boats of all kinds assisted the troops. This would later come to haunt Leopold after the war as he was tossed from his thrown by his son. The Battle for Belgium was over in 18 days.
So much for Belgium… and the situation started their too with a large number of citizens living in the foreign state. Care to figure out how many the west have dotted all over? This is not fantasy… this is a historical fact that is a constant. From roman times and before, up to now, tricking people was the only way to defeat them. as a prepared enemy cant be defeated frontally.
Chavez, and castro were able to do with 16 people because they were able to get useful idiots to join in and give up their lives for the other persons cause and benefit.
The last and final step for Hitler was Luxemburg for his invasion of France. Hitler didn't want to take any chances. The country was an easy takeover for Hitler. If the Battle for Holland and Belgium was short, then Hitler made the conquest of Luxemburg look like a faint scream in the wind that was quickly cut off. The Grand Duchess Charlotte escaped to the United States out of Luxemburg.
Luxemburg was important to Hitler because it would put him in perfect position to take France. Luxemburg was surrounded by Germany on the east, and Belgium on the north and west. France was in the south of the country. This meant almost a circular assault on the country of France. Luxemburg was won with little resistance on May 10, 1940. Hitler was now ready for his assault on France.
You have not been reading the history that every other state knows, you have been reading soviet history. That’s why your ‘facts’ don’t match up.
And the proof..
"It was not Germany that attacked France and England, but France and England that attacked Ger- many," Stalin declared (Pravda, November 30, 1939).
Game, set, match…
To quote joe pesci in “my cousin vinnie”
Im trew with youse.
Your history, and your facts are not of this world, but of stalins imagination of what history should be so that the result in the future from then would go the way he wanted. Which is why rewriting history is referred to as Stalinism
I can tell you where your ideas come from… I have read the histories and such from many countries… and so I know who spouted what.
I will bet that you didn’t know that you incorporated a lie into your internal make up.
If a person, as socialists believe, is a sum of the ideas and facts that are held by the tabular rasa slate, then what does it mean if a large proportion of those things are lies and half truths?
And what does I mean if you fight to maintain the self you love, by defending the lies that you believe are a part of you and make you who you are?
You have a lot of thinking to do.
But I will leave you with a definition, since the term didn’t mean anything to you.
(again from wiki since they are good enough for this)
Cognitive dissonance is a psychological term describing the uncomfortable tension that may result from having two conflicting thoughts at the same time, or from engaging in behavior that conflicts with one's beliefs, or from experiencing apparently conflicting phenomena.
In simple terms, it can be the filtering of information that conflicts with what you already believe, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce your beliefs. In detailed terms, it is the perception of incompatibility between two cognitions, where "cognition" is defined as any element of knowledge, including attitude, emotion, belief, or behavior. The theory of cognitive dissonance states that contradicting cognitions serve as a driving force that compels the mind to acquire or invent new thoughts or beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, so as to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions. Experiments have attempted to quantify this hypothetical drive. Some of these have examined how beliefs often change to match behavior when beliefs and behavior are in conflict.
Social psychologist Leon Festinger first proposed the theory in 1957 after the publication of his book When Prophecy Fails, observing the counterintuitive belief persistence of members of a UFO doomsday cult and their increased proselytization after the leader's prophecy failed. The failed message of earth's destruction, purportedly sent by aliens to a woman in 1956, became a disconfirmed expectancy that increased dissonance between cognitions, thereby causing most members of the impromptu cult to lessen the dissonance by accepting a new prophecy: that the aliens had instead spared the planet for their sake.[1]
I have no more time for you.. what? did you think I am some weirdo that has lots of time to spend putting lipstick on pigs and trying to teach them to sing. (never try to teach a pig to sing, it frustrates you, and pisses the pig off), and lastly, never wrestle with pigs, the truth is that you both get dirty, but the pig likes it.
Time for me to wash off, and leave you to your lot in life.
Oh… and this doesn’t mean you “win”. You weren’t even on the game board (by your own assertions, facts, methods, and actions).
Its not even worth going through the rest of your posts… you have no ability to compare propaganda and facts and such. your so twisted up and such with what you think you know, that its resulted in the purpose that its designed for. Its designed to stop you from learning, growing,a nd being a participant. (what would your live be like if they convince you red is green and green is red? Driving would be interesting, no?)
Don’t believe what is said… that’s not the way to do it.. you don’t switch horses in mid stream because the other one is prettier. You get your own damn horse, and study, and invest the time. otherwise, get off the field where truth is the purpose.
Artfldgr says:
“Can you tell what would happen if Stalin did not sign the pact with Hitler? What if Germany attacked Poland and France and Britain thinking: "OK, Germany and Russia do not have Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Good! Russia will be next!" What if they let Hitler to take Poland without going to war? Didn't they play "phony war" when it happened and become active only when Hitler invaded France?”
YES, Hitler would not have invaded as he had no one on his side to “watch his back”.
And to address what you call “thinking”: your thoughts are way off, because the Molotov ribbendorf pact was SECRET, we didn’t find that out till EIGHT years later (how long did the war last?). So as far as others it had no influence. And in fact, knowledge of it during the war and critical years may have made your musings happen, rather than the opposite.
Your view is off, and can be shown by the phrase “Good! Russia will be next”. It implies that Germany was a victim, and that russia would have been a victim too if the two weak states would have teemed up for mutual protection. But that’s delusional… who would call germany the weak state?
In fact, the west hates war more than the communist east. Go down the list of the largest wars in the last century, and they were ALL started by the same kinds of desires, by the same poltical systems, and so forth. It wasn’t till the Iraq war that the west STARTED a war.
Your analysis starts from an imaginative situation that has no parallel in reality. So its not meaningful. What your not used to is debating with a THINKING person and not a FEELING person. that argument was all set to make me FEEL, and rely that I will not THINK.
So, Hitler takes Poland, than, to meet England's and France's expectations, overruns the Baltic states and at the same time invades Russia. And Russia is fighting Germany one on one with no allies? Good scenario for Britain and France?
Maybe, except that’s not how it happened..
Hitler took Half of Poland, and a few weeks later stalin collected his half. Stalin first took the baltics THEN Hitler took it from stalin when he attacked his “friend” (sociopaths concept of friends has to do with pragmatic usefulness. They were friends as long as they were useful to each other).
But lets see what history says.
Russo-German negotiations and underhand dealings from March to August 1939 were a very well kept secret for eight years, during three subsequent periods:
1. In the first period of Russo-German friendship from 1939 to the middle of 1941, no detail of these negotiations was disclosed. The different white, yellow and blue books, published by governments in 1939 display no knowledge of them. It was not known that Molotov and Ribbentrop signed not only a secret, but also an open agreement in Moscow on the 23 August 1939.
2. Even after the outbreak of the Russo-German war on the 22 June 1941, and until the end of war in 1945, both parties continued carefully to conceal their previous agreements, displaying a most striking similarity in their attitude in this respect. In his speech, made on the very day of the attack on Russia, Hitler limited himself to a most general and very veiled mention of an annex to the open agreement of the 23 August 1939:
... A special agreement was concluded in case Britain should succeed in inciting Poland actually to go to war against Germany, and in this case, too, the German plans were subject to a limitation entirely out of proportion to the achievements of the German forces.
Thus Hitler reproached Russia for having secured too high a price. Moscow turned a deaf ear.
3. After the war, in 1945, when the British and Americans occupying Western Germany took possession of the archives of the German Foreign Office, up to the end of 1946 their behaviour was different from their actions after the beginning of 1947. In the first stage, the German documents were used for the Nuremberg Trial in 1946, but nothing was disclosed that might have been considered to put the blame on Russia. But at nearly the same time, as President Truman made his famous speech of the 12 March 1947, Professor Harold C. Deutsch, who was officially entrusted with the research into the German archives, published in the Evening Star [March 10-13] in Washington a four-installment essay on Russo-German friendship from 1939 to 1941, and at the beginning of 1948 the State Department published the complete collection of documents, entitled NAZI-SOVIET RELATIONS, 1939-1941.
Now here is ANOTHER WAKE UP CALL…
During his hearing at Nuremberg on the 29 March 1946, von Ribbentrop stated:
... In March 1939 Marshal Stalin delivered a speech, in which he made certain hints of his wish to have better relations with Germany. At that time, I informed Hitler of this speech and asked him whether or not we could not see whether this hint on Stalin’s part had something real behind it. Hitler was at first hesitant; he then, however, became more and more receptive to this idea.
We should not be surprised to notice that Ribbentrop remembered this first step, when he met Stalin personally a few months later, in August 1939.
At first, Hitler was rather reluctant to enter into partnership with Russia, as it was contrary to the general lines of his policy, and he hoped that Poland might eventually become amenable.
So it was not Stalin who was the reluctant bride, but Hitler. It was not Hitler that hinted, and manipulated the situation, but stalin taking advantage of Hitler to start the war and to then get spoils without blame. (after all, what did they get?).
So STALIN took the first step, and turned it frmoa major disagreement that could be solved between germany and poland, to a pact to cut them up and screw them. next on the road was the work of merekalov.
But while the uncommunicative Hitler was thinking over the possibilities suggested by Stalin and trying to ascertain Brauchitsch's reactions, the Kremlin was not certain whether Berlin would be willing to avail herself of these hints. For this reason Russia, after an open but general suggestion by Stalin, decided to knock at the door of Berlin for the second time, secretly and more explicitly.
On the 17 April 1939, the Russian Ambassador in Berlin, Merekalov, called on the Under Secretary of State, von Weizsaecker at the Foreign Office for the first time since he had taken office ten months before. Von Weizsaecker reported this visit to von Ribbentrop and Hitler [Nazi-Soviet Relations, 1939-1941 - p. 2]:
... The Ambassador thereupon stated approximately, as follows:
Russian policy had always moved in a straight line. Ideological differences of opinion had hardly influenced the Russian-Italian relationship, and they did not have to prove a stumbling block with regard to Germany either. Soviet Russia had not exploited the present friction between Germany and the Western democracies against us, nor did she desire to do so. There exists for Russia no reason why she should not live with us on a normal footing. And from normal, the relations might become better and better.
With this remark, to which the Russian had led the conversation, Mr. Merekalov ended the interview. He intends to go to Moscow in the next few days for a visit.
In diplomatic language, one cannot imagine a more stimulating suggestion to join in the dance - after six years of very strained relations and violent mutual provocations, particularly malicious and disparaging on the part of the Germans. This time, Hitler responded after ten days - mutely, but how expressively. In his famous speech at Reichstag on the 28 April 1939, in which he denounced unilaterally the Nonaggression Pact with Poland and the Naval Agreement with Great Britain, he said no word - for the first time - against Russia.
And for Stalin?
Stalin was double crossed before HE could double cross Hitler. He figured everyone would launch themselves at each other, and then when they have exhausted man, material, and emotional reserves, he would then roll in and take what was too weak to stop him. basically he figured after the two slugged it out and were down, he could come in and crush them.
This is why Russia signed the Pact.
Total made up bullshit assertion. You have NO idea as to why they would do that, since your don’t even have the facts of the timeline straight. Take a pieve of paper and a crayon, and then draw a timeline, and put events on it.
You have a traditional soviet, or socialist education. all your facts are disjointed and unconnected. They hang in the air and you have no ability to see them connected and how they interact. This makes it easy for you to make assertions by only looking at the pieces… but you don’t understand anything really.. if you did, then your anwers would not fall on party lines. And the party wants your answers to be the answers they want them to be, not what they are.
They all tried to oversmart each other, they all cheated: England and France, Hitler, Stalin... The upcoming combat promiced to be a mortal one. So, morals were put aside.
They all did not… Hitler and stalin certainly did, but france England and such did not. they didn’t even want to be in the war, and if Hitler would have actually stopped at some point he could have kept what he had and solidified his ownership, and start again later.
No one wanted to fight after their WWI experience. That is except the career revolutionaries, the socialists… (both Hitler and stalin were socialists…)
Hitler ordered Ribbentrop to agree on any Russian demand
Where is your proof, or is this another statement out of your ass?
http://www.electronicmuseum.ca/Poland-WW2/nazi_soviet_friendship/nsf_relations.html
It is indisputable that Russia was Germany's partner in provoking and initiating the 1939 war. It was Russia who, while encouraging the illusions of Great Britain and France by open negotiations from March to August 1939 about checking further German aggression, was at the same time involved in secret conversations with Germany, suddenly signed the Pact of the 23 August 1939, and after the German invasion of Poland on the 1 September joined Germany by attacking Poland from the east on the 17 September 1939. These actions are much more eloquent and conclusive evidence than any written testimony.
Compare the KNOWN facts with what you are a saying. 16 days separation and they BOTH attacked as planned… that destroys your assertion that “He wanted Russian uninvolvement when taking Poland”. In fact he wanted to insure that poland would fall by making it two against one. He was willing to have half of Poland if the win was a guarantee, than lose all of Poland on his own.
It was not Germany that attacked France and England, but France and England that attacked Ger- many,"
What Stalin said in Pravda, on November 30, 1939 was a diplomacy. Not a nice one, but... Who was a nice guy then?
Ok.. Then what bush said to get us into war wasn’t bad either, it was just diplomacy. How’s that? Or are some more equal than others?
You have a soviet concept of diplomacy, come to the table pretending to be honest, but lie lie lie to get what you want.
Can you or someone deal with an entity like that? Of course not, and now you know why no one wants to deal with soviet leadership unless they HAVE to.
Such an entity would consider detent and such to be a fools game. guess what. that’s what they think. In fact, the fact that the free countries don’t want war so badly, that russia can still play this fools game over and over and over. Otherwise the only alternative is isolation and the doctrine of the cold war.
If you had a ‘friend’ or someone that you want to deal with, and that person was a HABITUAL liar, and never kept their agreements and such… what would you do?
Either you deal and deal and hope that once in a while it works out (our current policy), or you don’t believe them, only deal when there is no other choice, and ignore them… (the cold war policy).
Its that simple.
The Russian train for England and France had already left because the did not want to jump in it on time.
Once again, you have all the facts totally wrong… go read something not Stalinist (revisionist). Stalin was a revisionist. He believed that he could rewrite how people were in the future by lying about the past. your proof that in principal it works to a degree… however, it makes broken people that cant converse and come together. which is GREAT for a sociopathic leadership that wants to hold power, since they are not in disagreement.
Stalin had the Pact with Germany signed. Stalin's goal was not to irritate Germany, to avoid hostilities with her and let her fight on the West to the USSR benefit (to have time to rearm, to built defensive lines on the newly aquired territories).
Smart? Smart.
Ah… you just contradicted your earlier assertions.. a fact is only a fact when you want it to be, and its anything you make up to get the end result you want.
Totally soviet.. power and win at any cost is the most important thing. not winning by merit. Your literally willing to say anything, evne if it is contradictory, to be perceived as winning the argument.
I can tell because you changed your tack. You no longer are using so many false arguments as before.
In fact, I would guess that your work here is kind of like body building for the cointel set. Your practicing cutting your teeth, and have lucked out that someone like me is probably the pinnicle of what you will go up against and that will engage you at all. (others will not bother to try to teach a pig to sing).
Smart? Smart.
Instigating the deaths of more than 35 million people, destroying the culture heritage and lives of millions more.. displacing more than 100 million homes and reducing a vast and glorious history and architecture spaning more than a 1000 years.
No.. not smart.. evil… destructive for no reason.. you sit there and crow about American imperialism, but you say being a trator, a liar, and a murderer of millions is SMART.
See what having no values does?
I mentioned Belgium an Holland just to show the similarity of their geostrategic role for France to the role of the Baltic states for the USSR in 1940.
Oh that’s what you were doing? well the baltics were NOT strategic states for USSR unless USSR was on a world domination kick. So again contradictory. they were the most imperialistic, and you have also shown that they were the most sociopathic guilt free traitorous liars that had ever existed in human history!
One does not have to be a military strategist to understand that if Germany attacked Russia, the blow to Leningrad, to take that important industrial and political center and to cut the USSR from the Baltic Sea would be through the territory of the Baltic states (like attacking France through Holland and Belgium). So taking Baltic states to secure the position was a strong move by the USSR.
No, one does not need to be a strategist to understand, but one might do better if one had a map.
Poland is to the right of germany, and Latvia is way north of that… if your assertion was true, then germany would go through Poland and through Belarus, not take the long way through three other sovereign states and fight battles there before battling their target.
And you are talking about shamefulness and trying to juge teh events from the year 2007. History must be judjed within the context and the time when the events happened.
Ah… now your projecting.. I AM judging them in the context and time, and you are using revisionist history that doesn’t let you judge in context or time at all!
Also I am not judging events, the truth that stalin was a sociopathic liar is easy to show. Over and over and over and over again. that it was STALIN that instigated the loose cannon Hitler.
Now let me mention something to YOU.
That SAME game is being played with the islamics. Russia learned that if they can get the leader of a regime who is a loose cannon, they can cause major war, and grab land and advantage, and the loose cannon will get ALL The blame. After all, if a person talks a nut job into killing a family, will anyone believe the head case that someone told them? now apply this history of germany with islam and iran…
Oh.. so you have putin, a stalinist manipulating a racist head case of a large country into war… EXACTLY the same as wwii. : )
I recommend you to read these 2 links to have a real feeling of how and why it was in 1939, when the Pact was signed.
Ah… pointing to a revisionist is not a way to go.
The thing is full of whats commonly termed HALF truths.. that the facts are mostly truthful but they leave the key information out.
for instance… your not even reading the revisionist history straight!
So what was bent to start with is a pretzel in your head when your done.
Whatever his conviction, it was deadly true that Britain and France were in no military position either to fight or to bargain effectively.
The history that you link to implies that everything happened after march 10 39.. but the annexation of the Sudetenland was weeks before the work of jozef lipski with rippendorp on oct 24 38..
So as I said.. this history your promoting is false. It starts part way into the story AFTER the most conspiratorial acts were committed or as they were being committed in secret!
Your source of history says this..
Nevertheless, Stalin, in his report to the 18th Party Congress on March 10, 1939, brushed aside Western forecasts of trouble over the Ukraine as designed "to provoke a conflict with Germany without any visible grounds.'' Declaring that the "non-aggressive" states were ''unquestionably stronger than the Fascist states,'' he argued that their failure to resist Hitler was motivated not by weakness, but by desire to embroil the Nazis with the Soviets. He warned against "war-mongers who are accustomed to have others pull the chestnuts out of the fire for them.''
He then proclaimed the Soviet Union's intention to stay out of a "new imperialist war,'' which was ''already in its second year, as he saw it. " The Soviet Political Dictionary of 1940 described Stalin's report as raising "the question of the good neighborly relations between the Soviet Union and Germany. This declaration of Comrade Stalin," the article added, ''was properly understood in Germany."
Ribbentrop stated:
... In March 1939 Marshal Stalin delivered a speech, in which he made certain hints of his wish to have better relations with Germany. At that time, I informed Hitler of this speech and asked him whether or not we could not see whether this hint on Stalin’s part had something real behind it. Hitler was at first hesitant; he then, however, became more and more receptive to this idea.
So I guess the people that were there and made the deal know less than your history source.. I guess that’s why they were hanged.
and he starts with all this czeck stuff.
On March 15 Hitler sent German troops to occupy Bohemia and Moravia…
But by that date, Hitler had already started fighting in other areas. so the half truth again is that he sets up an impression in you if you hadn’t known the history that came before… you get a swilled skewed image since parts are being cleverly dropped out so that you think the RIGHT way theyw ant you to.
This is why you keep coming up short when you are against a person that knows the history in detail, or to this move that he details, he had already annexed Austria.
There is not a mention of Austria at all in his history… and his history starts in 38… and the annexation of Austria is erased.
So your double wrong in that you say look at this history to learn.. but the history is like swiss cheese with the inconveniences where the holes are.
Yet from your own source you contradict!
On the night of August 19 the Nazi-Soviet trade treaty was signed. The next day Hitler telegraphed Stalin with a request that he see Ribbentrop on August 22 or 23. When he received Stalin's assent, Hitler pounded on the wall with his fists and shouted, "I have the world in my pocket!" On the night of August 23, 1939, the pact was concluded. It contained the provision which only totalitarians could insert, that it was to take effect as soon as it was signed.
The public text of the Nazi-Soviet Pact was simply an agreement of nonaggression and neutrality, referring as a precedent to the German-Soviet neutrality pact of 1926 (Berlin Treaty). The real agreement was in a secret protocol which in effect partitioned not only Poland (along the line of the Vistula), but much of Eastern Europe. To the Soviets were allotted Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Bessarabia; to the Nazis, everything to the West of these regions, including Lithuania. Each of the two signatories was to ask the other no questions about the disposition of its own ''sphere of interest." This nonaggression pact, coupled with the trade treaty and arrangements for large-scale exchange of raw materials and armaments, amounted to an alliance.
Though the author goes on and talks as if western emissaries knew about the pact and went home.. they DIDN’T till three years after the war had ended, and we got to look at the secret papers and such.
The foreign reaction to the Nazi-Soviet Pact and the annihilation of Poland was one of shock and rage. The Communist parties abroad, which had no official warning of the Soviet switch, reacted with confusion. On September 6 Thorez and other French Communists joined their regiments, calling for aid to Poland, only to desert at Moscow's behest a few days later. Harry Pollitt, the British Communist leader, wrote a pamphlet unfortunately titled "How to Win the War," and after two weeks both he and his pamphlet had to drop from public gaze. The German Communists in exile made strange noises suggesting that the Allies were worse than Hitler. The general line was that already stated by Stalin in March, that the war was an ''imperialist'' one for the redivision of the world. The Communists said much more about Allied than about Nazi ''culpability,'' and demanded ''peace.''
Stalin even tricked his own people.
So time for you to read the histories you recommend!! And then time to read the non revisionist ones.. the ones that don’t have a globalist agenda and wish to sweep the truth under the carpet for pragmatic reasons dreaming of a dystopian future utopia.
Artfldgr says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa
while wiki isnt great, its good enough in this case.
i wanted to show that your assertion as to latvia and lenningrad was wrong, as germany was first only trying to claim what used to be refered to as "white russia", the european area.
and the next paragraph tells the plan was in Mein Kampf, which was how long before the wars, and everything?
so how does your assertion mean anything when it was lebensraum that hitler wanted (and later stalin copied this!!! and gave the russian people such by starving people, gulags, and so forth. same thing, different person)
Hitler's Mein Kampf ("My Struggle") makes clear his intention of an invasion of the Soviet Union. In his book, he made clear his belief that the German people needed Lebensraum ("living space", i.e. land and raw materials), and that it should be found in the East. It was the stated policy of the Nazis to kill, deport, or enslave the Russian and other Slavic populations, whom they considered inferior, and to repopulate the land with Germanic peoples. This policy was called the New Order and was laid out in detail in Goering's Green Folder. The entire urban population was to be exterminated by starvation, thus creating an agricultural surplus to feed Germany and allowing their replacement by a German upper class. The German Nazi-ideologist Alfred Rosenberg, who himself believed Slavs were Aryan[citation needed], while preparing to implement these general ideas, suggested that conquered Soviet territory should be administered in the following Reichskommissariates:
Ostland (The Baltic countries and Belarus)
Ukraine (Ukraine and adjacent territories),
Kaukasus (Southern Russia and the Caucasus area),
Moskau (Moscow metropolitan area and the rest of European Russia)
Turkestan (Central Asian republics and territories)
Hitler had long wanted to conquer western Russia in order to exploit what he saw as its untermensch (subhuman) Slavic population. He had signed the pact simply for (mutual) short-term convenience. In addition to the territorial ambitions of both Hitler and Stalin, the contrasting ideologies of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union made an eventual conflict between them likely.
Stalin's reputation contributed both to the Nazis' justification of their assault and to their faith in success. During the late 1930s, Stalin had killed and incarcerated millions of citizens during the Great Purge, including large numbers of competent and experienced military officers and strategists, leaving the Red Army weakened and leaderless. The Nazis often emphasized the brutality of the Soviet regime when targeting the Slavs with propaganda.
==============
In preparation for the attack, Hitler moved 3.2 million German soldiers and about 1 million Axis soldiers to the Soviet border, launched many aerial surveillance missions over Soviet territory, and stockpiled materiel in the East. The Soviets were still taken by surprise, mostly due to Stalin's belief that the Third Reich was unlikely to attack only two years after signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The Soviet leader also believed that the Nazis would likely finish their war with Britain before opening a new front. He refused to believe repeated warnings from his intelligence services on the Nazi buildup, fearing the reports to be British misinformation designed to spark a war between the Nazis and the USSR. The German government also aided in this deception, telling Stalin that the troops were being moved to take them out of range of British bombers. The Germans also explained that they were trying to trick the British into thinking they were planning to attack the Soviet Union, while in fact the troops and supplies were being stockpiled for an invasion of Britain. As a result, Stalin's preparations against a possible German invasion in 1941 were half-hearted.[citation needed] The spy Dr. Richard Sorge gave Stalin the exact German launch date; Swedish cryptanalysts led by Arne Beurling also knew the date beforehand.
The Germans set up deception operations, from April 1941, to add substance to their claims that Britain was the real target: Operations Haifisch and Harpune. These simulated preparations in Norway, the Channel coast and Britain. There were supporting activities such as ship concentrations, reconnaissance flights and training exercises. Invasion plans were developed and some details were allowed to leak.
The Germans also studied Napoleon's invasion of Russia.[citation needed] Napoleon had led a half-million man strong army along a central path leading to Moscow when he invaded in 1812, but from the beginning had faced stubborn resistance from Russian defenders, who burned the area they left in a scorched earth policy to deny their enemies food and supplies. The Grande Armée was also badly damaged by hit-and-run attacks by Cossacks and conventional Russian forces operating in small units that attacked their flanks. Napoleon did capture Moscow, but withdrew after a severe winter in the burned-out capital.
At Hitler's insistence, the German High Command (OKW) began to develop a strategy to avoid repeating these mistakes. The strategy Hitler and his generals agreed upon involved three separate army groups assigned to capture specific regions and cities of the Soviet Union. The main German thrusts were conducted along historical invasion routes. Army Group North was assigned to march through the Baltics, into northern Russia, and either take or destroy the city of Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg). Army Group Center would advance to Smolensk and then Moscow, marching through what is now Belarus and the west-central regions of Russia proper. Army Group South was to strike the heavily populated and agricultural heartland of Ukraine, taking Kiev before continuing eastward over the steppes of southern Russia all the way to the Volga and the oil-rich Caucasus.
Hitler, the OKW and the various high commands disagreed about what the main objectives should be. In the preparation for Barbarossa, most of the OKW argued for a straight thrust to Moscow, whereas Hitler kept asserting his intention to seize the resource-rich Ukraine and Baltics before concentrating on Moscow. An initial delay, which postponed the start of Barbarossa from mid-May to the end of June 1941, may have been insignificant, especially since the Russian muddy season came late that year. However, more time was lost at various critical moments as Hitler and the OKW suspended operations in order to argue about strategic objectives.[citation needed]
Post a comment
TrackBack
TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/432
|
