Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So just because Trump changed his mind the world has changed? What do you think would have come out of the Whitehouse if Clinton was in?" What has Clinton got to do with anything? She is not President and Trump is. Irrespective of that, I don't recall any former Administration being so amateurish with their external communications. Even Ronald Reagan had the good sense to manage his communications diplomatically. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"do you mean the country that was founded in 1991 on a policy of moderation, mediation and calmness or are you blurring your destinction between the soviet union and the modern state of russia? either way they always been open to diplomacy while the yanks, historically, have always favoured a yee-ha gung-ho shoot first ask questions later policy " Bloody hell we're in agreement  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"do you mean the country that was founded in 1991 on a policy of moderation, mediation and calmness or are you blurring your destinction between the soviet union and the modern state of russia? either way they always been open to diplomacy while the yanks, historically, have always favoured a yee-ha gung-ho shoot first ask questions later policy Bloody hell we're in agreement "no we're fucking not | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Irrespective of that, I don't recall any former Administration being so amateurish with their external communications. Even Ronald Reagan had the good sense to manage his communications diplomatically. " yeah .... i remember her madge, mrs twatcher and the UN praising ronnie raygun on his good sense and high level of his diplomatic communication when he invaded and annexed Grenada in 1983 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"do you mean the country that was founded in 1991 on a policy of moderation, mediation and calmness or are you blurring your destinction between the soviet union and the modern state of russia? either way they always been open to diplomacy while the yanks, historically, have always favoured a yee-ha gung-ho shoot first ask questions later policy " That will be the same hung ho country that air dropped food in to Berlin so they didn't starve The same country that fed the Russians under that wonderful social experiment called communism You really need to get out more,... Free your mind and may be just may be you might stop to think for a minute | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Irrespective of that, I don't recall any former Administration being so amateurish with their external communications. Even Ronald Reagan had the good sense to manage his communications diplomatically. yeah .... i remember her madge, mrs twatcher and the UN praising ronnie raygun on his good sense and high level of his diplomatic communication when he invaded and annexed Grenada in 1983 " The same Maggie Thatcher who freed us from uncontrollable unions, and ended the winters of discontent | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Irrespective of that, I don't recall any former Administration being so amateurish with their external communications. Even Ronald Reagan had the good sense to manage his communications diplomatically. yeah .... i remember her madge, mrs twatcher and the UN praising ronnie raygun on his good sense and high level of his diplomatic communication when he invaded and annexed Grenada in 1983 " .... and the excellent and entirely transparent diplomatic communications ronnie raygun displayed throughout the iran-contra debarcle | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Irrespective of that, I don't recall any former Administration being so amateurish with their external communications. Even Ronald Reagan had the good sense to manage his communications diplomatically. yeah .... i remember her madge, mrs twatcher and the UN praising ronnie raygun on his good sense and high level of his diplomatic communication when he invaded and annexed Grenada in 1983 .... and the excellent and entirely transparent diplomatic communications ronnie raygun displayed throughout the iran-contra debarcle" The UN is impartial, unless of course you think America can influence every member of the UN | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Funny how we are now more inclined to believe Putin overTrump " That is the point of the post. And we feel more inclined this way because Russia is talking about moderation, investigation and diplomacy whilst the WH talks aggression, bombing and retaliation. Todays meeting between Russian Ministers and the Tillerson team will highlight one thing very dramatically in my opinion. Tillerson and his team are amateurs at this game and the Russians will lay out the Syria story in such a way as to make the Americans look clueless (which incidentally they are). Russian knows intimately what is going on the ground in Syria because they have been at this game for the last 5 years. The Americans do not have any clear policy on Syria and the Russians will highly likely bring that conundrum into sharp focus. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Funny how we are now more inclined to believe Putin overTrump " Not me .I wouldn't believe a single word Vlad says .Trump played a blinder, he has completely reframed the American news cycle and rebranded himself the only world leader brave enough to stand up to Russia.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Funny how we are now more inclined to believe Putin overTrump Not me .I wouldn't believe a single word Vlad says .Trump played a blinder, he has completely reframed the American news cycle and rebranded himself the only world leader brave enough to stand up to Russia. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Funny how we are now more inclined to believe Putin overTrump Not me .I wouldn't believe a single word Vlad says .Trump played a blinder, he has completely reframed the American news cycle and rebranded himself the only world leader brave enough to stand up to Russia. ""Only world leader to stand up to Putin". What are you smoking? Russia have had sanctions put on them, been kicked out of the G8 by majority of the west...if anything its russia that is the one and only one standing up to the west and good on them. Im ashamed and embaressed to be part of one of these countries taking it up the arse from america and doing what they tell us to do. I want to see proof from the US that Assad did that chemical strike and it wasn't a false flag or the rebels. If the investigation shows it wasn't Assad which im confident it wasn't then im sad to say (as i was supporting trump because of his no intervention approach to middle east and better relations with russia in run up to election) but what he did firing middles at a sovereign nation and killing people makes him a war criminal and should be punished accordingly along with bush and blair. What ever evidence they think they have needs to be shown to the world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i don't ... i think both the current american and russian governments are equally monumental bellends " And who would have made a good POTUS for you, JayZ Beyoncé, The Kardashians Or the lying witch Hillary | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Funny how we are now more inclined to believe Putin overTrump That is the point of the post. And we feel more inclined this way because Russia is talking about moderation, investigation and diplomacy whilst the WH talks aggression, bombing and retaliation. Todays meeting between Russian Ministers and the Tillerson team will highlight one thing very dramatically in my opinion. Tillerson and his team are amateurs at this game and the Russians will lay out the Syria story in such a way as to make the Americans look clueless (which incidentally they are). Russian knows intimately what is going on the ground in Syria because they have been at this game for the last 5 years. The Americans do not have any clear policy on Syria and the Russians will highly likely bring that conundrum into sharp focus." Russia the world doves lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i don't ... i think both the current american and russian governments are equally monumental bellends And who would have made a good POTUS for you, JayZ Beyoncé, The Kardashians Or the lying witch Hillary" I want Will smith to run next time.The fresh prince in the whitehouse would be awesome  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Funny how we are now more inclined to believe Putin overTrump Not me .I wouldn't believe a single word Vlad says .Trump played a blinder, he has completely reframed the American news cycle and rebranded himself the only world leader brave enough to stand up to Russia.
"Only world leader to stand up to Putin".
What are you smoking?
Russia have had sanctions put on them, been kicked out of the G8 by majority of the west...if anything its russia that is the one and only one standing up to the west and good on them.
Im ashamed and embaressed to be part of one of these countries taking it up the arse from america and doing what they tell us to do.
I want to see proof from the US that Assad did that chemical strike and it wasn't a false flag or the rebels.
If the investigation shows it wasn't Assad which im confident it wasn't then im sad to say (as i was supporting trump because of his no intervention approach to middle east and better relations with russia in run up to election) but what he did firing middles at a sovereign nation and killing people makes him a war criminal and should be punished accordingly along with bush and blair.
What ever evidence they think they have needs to be shown to the world.
"Okay, is Trump perpetuating hostilities in a horrific civil war he knows nothing about that's already claimed the lives of almost half a million people? You bet. Yet in attacking Assad, Trump is not only doing wonders to improve his shoddy image as an isolationist with no moral integrity whatsoever, but he's also setting fire to this ironclad Russian bridge that's been undermining him since day one.As far as strategy goes, this is actually brilliant. It's just a shame he had to kill 16 people in a country he doesn't care about to do it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i don't ... i think both the current american and russian governments are equally monumental bellends And who would have made a good POTUS for you, JayZ Beyoncé, The Kardashians Or the lying witch Hillary" America had the chance to elect Ron Paul but went with Obama instead. Ron Paul always talks sense especially on foreign matters. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"............ Okay, is Trump perpetuating hostilities in a horrific civil war he knows nothing about that's already claimed the lives of almost half a million people? You bet. Yet in attacking Assad, Trump is not only doing wonders to improve his shoddy image as an isolationist with no moral integrity whatsoever, but he's also setting fire to this ironclad Russian bridge that's been undermining him since day one.As far as strategy goes, this is actually brilliant. It's just a shame he had to kill 16 people in a country he doesn't care about to do it......." There is a big problwem with your analysis. Russia have a strategy and that strategy is to support the government of Syria against attacks and invasion by ISIS, foreign fighters and terrorists. Their strategy is founded on the well founded principles that the loss of a strong leader in an Arab country results in a power vacuum and the rise of fundamentalism. Proof of this has been seen in recent years in both Iraq and Libya and Syria already has Islamic factions each other as well as the Assad regime. It does not take much imagination to see the outcome of regime change in Syria. Does having this strategy mean that you are 100% right? Probably not, but it is a well thought out strategy with a defined purpose. America has no such strategy. They want to punish people who are fighting Islamic terrorists on the basis of evidence provided by Islamic terrorists and they now want regime change but have no strategy as to what happens after regime change. Quite simply the American strategy is that they dont have one other than to react to unproven incidents and allegations without actually thinking through the short, mid and long term consequences. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Russians have described the rhetoric coming from the US Government is primitive and loutish. How the world has changed with the Russians calling for calmness and diplomacy whilst official US lines are about violence, retaliation and outright threats. " i think its interesting because thats not exactly the way they have acted in ukraine.....  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"............ Okay, is Trump perpetuating hostilities in a horrific civil war he knows nothing about that's already claimed the lives of almost half a million people? You bet. Yet in attacking Assad, Trump is not only doing wonders to improve his shoddy image as an isolationist with no moral integrity whatsoever, but he's also setting fire to this ironclad Russian bridge that's been undermining him since day one.As far as strategy goes, this is actually brilliant. It's just a shame he had to kill 16 people in a country he doesn't care about to do it....... There is a big problwem with your analysis. Russia have a strategy and that strategy is to support the government of Syria against attacks and invasion by ISIS, foreign fighters and terrorists. Their strategy is founded on the well founded principles that the loss of a strong leader in an Arab country results in a power vacuum and the rise of fundamentalism. Proof of this has been seen in recent years in both Iraq and Libya and Syria already has Islamic factions each other as well as the Assad regime. It does not take much imagination to see the outcome of regime change in Syria. Does having this strategy mean that you are 100% right? Probably not, but it is a well thought out strategy with a defined purpose. America has no such strategy. They want to punish people who are fighting Islamic terrorists on the basis of evidence provided by Islamic terrorists and they now want regime change but have no strategy as to what happens after regime change. Quite simply the American strategy is that they dont have one other than to react to unproven incidents and allegations without actually thinking through the short, mid and long term consequences. " The American stategy is the same stategy Russia used in the Ukraine. Its known as a non linear war.The underlying aim,is not to win the war, but to use the conflict to create a constant state of destabilized perception, in order to manage and control. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"do you mean the country that was founded in 1991 on a policy of moderation, mediation and calmness or are you blurring your destinction between the soviet union and the modern state of russia? either way they always been open to diplomacy while the yanks, historically, have always favoured a yee-ha gung-ho shoot first ask questions later policy " But let's be honest, American wars make much better movies and video games than russian wars. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Who said this and in what context?... “I needed to make sure that I clarified, and was not in any shape or form any more of a distraction from the president’s decisive action in Syria and the attempts that he is making to destabilise the region and root out ISIS out of Syria.”" Spicey you're fired!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i don't ... i think both the current american and russian governments are equally monumental bellends And who would have made a good POTUS for you, JayZ Beyoncé, The Kardashians Or the lying witch Hillary I want Will smith to run next time.The fresh prince in the whitehouse would be awesome "That could be fun, at least the tunes would be good Summer summertime  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"do you mean the country that was founded in 1991 on a policy of moderation, mediation and calmness or are you blurring your destinction between the soviet union and the modern state of russia? either way they always been open to diplomacy while the yanks, historically, have always favoured a yee-ha gung-ho shoot first ask questions later policy But let's be honest, American wars make much better movies and video games than russian wars. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"............ Okay, is Trump perpetuating hostilities in a horrific civil war he knows nothing about that's already claimed the lives of almost half a million people? You bet. Yet in attacking Assad, Trump is not only doing wonders to improve his shoddy image as an isolationist with no moral integrity whatsoever, but he's also setting fire to this ironclad Russian bridge that's been undermining him since day one.As far as strategy goes, this is actually brilliant. It's just a shame he had to kill 16 people in a country he doesn't care about to do it....... There is a big problwem with your analysis. Russia have a strategy and that strategy is to support the government of Syria against attacks and invasion by ISIS, foreign fighters and terrorists. Their strategy is founded on the well founded principles that the loss of a strong leader in an Arab country results in a power vacuum and the rise of fundamentalism. Proof of this has been seen in recent years in both Iraq and Libya and Syria already has Islamic factions each other as well as the Assad regime. It does not take much imagination to see the outcome of regime change in Syria. Does having this strategy mean that you are 100% right? Probably not, but it is a well thought out strategy with a defined purpose. America has no such strategy. They want to punish people who are fighting Islamic terrorists on the basis of evidence provided by Islamic terrorists and they now want regime change but have no strategy as to what happens after regime change. Quite simply the American strategy is that they dont have one other than to react to unproven incidents and allegations without actually thinking through the short, mid and long term consequences. The American stategy is the same stategy Russia used in the Ukraine. Its known as a non linear war.The underlying aim,is not to win the war, but to use the conflict to create a constant state of destabilized perception, in order to manage and control. " Bloody hell thats complicated, when has that ever been the norm | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Russians have described the rhetoric coming from the US Government is primitive and loutish. How the world has changed with the Russians calling for calmness and diplomacy whilst official US lines are about violence, retaliation and outright threats. " just in the interest of fact... at the UN there was a resolution stating there should be an independent enquiry into the chemical attack... russia veto'd..... everyone else voted for... even china (who normally have russia's back...) they abstained which would have allowed it to go ahead... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"and since i am guessing it won't be shown on RT... here is a video of the russians veto'ing the resolution... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae80m8Efk7M" Despite the CNN comments at the end, wasn't this a resolution to condemn Syria for the attack? Of course the Russians would veto such a condemnation. TBH I am somewhat confused. Sergei Lavrov has spent the day demanding an impartial investigation so I don't really understand why Russia has allegedly vetoes just such an investigation. This all sounds a bit wrong - one way or another. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"and since i am guessing it won't be shown on RT... here is a video of the russians veto'ing the resolution... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae80m8Efk7M Despite the CNN comments at the end, wasn't this a resolution to condemn Syria for the attack? Of course the Russians would veto such a condemnation. TBH I am somewhat confused. Sergei Lavrov has spent the day demanding an impartial investigation so I don't really understand why Russia has allegedly vetoes just such an investigation. This all sounds a bit wrong - one way or another." Simple really ! There is an independent and impartial investigation ,and then there is a UN investigation ! The latter is never impartial ! 
How can it be if the starting point is a resolution condemning Assad for it ?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"and since i am guessing it won't be shown on RT... here is a video of the russians veto'ing the resolution... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae80m8Efk7M Despite the CNN comments at the end, wasn't this a resolution to condemn Syria for the attack? Of course the Russians would veto such a condemnation. TBH I am somewhat confused. Sergei Lavrov has spent the day demanding an impartial investigation so I don't really understand why Russia has allegedly vetoes just such an investigation. This all sounds a bit wrong - one way or another. Simple really ! There is an independent and impartial investigation ,and then there is a UN investigation ! The latter is never impartial !
How can it be if the starting point is a resolution condemning Assad for it ? "The resolution actually compelled Syria to cooperate with an independent investigation.... there was no condemnation of Assad in the way it was worded for the benefit of the Chinese not using their veto But you then hit upon an issue which is if you don't believe the United Nations are not independent enough then who exactly would you think are? Remember it was the Dutch who did the lead investigation of the downing of mh17 with Malaysia and Australia... and yet Russia went to great lengths to try and rubbish that report | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"and since i am guessing it won't be shown on RT... here is a video of the russians veto'ing the resolution... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae80m8Efk7M Despite the CNN comments at the end, wasn't this a resolution to condemn Syria for the attack? Of course the Russians would veto such a condemnation. TBH I am somewhat confused. Sergei Lavrov has spent the day demanding an impartial investigation so I don't really understand why Russia has allegedly vetoes just such an investigation. This all sounds a bit wrong - one way or another. Simple really ! There is an independent and impartial investigation ,and then there is a UN investigation ! The latter is never impartial !
How can it be if the starting point is a resolution condemning Assad for it ?
The resolution actually compelled Syria to cooperate with an independent investigation.... there was no condemnation of Assad in the way it was worded for the benefit of the Chinese not using their veto
But you then hit upon an issue which is if you don't believe the United Nations are not independent enough then who exactly would you think are?
Remember it was the Dutch who did the lead investigation of the downing of mh17 with Malaysia and Australia... and yet Russia went to great lengths to try and rubbish that report "That is the problem ! Too many interests at stake, so I don't see who could do it ! But I ,(personal reasons) have no trust in the UN whatsoever ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
