You mean it's "not yet" mandatory. It will be. Or rather they won't even ask. They can get our DNA in all sorts of ways without our even knowing. And they have lots of data bases about us already. I doubt if they ever will bother asking our permission.
It is a part of the power balance in Lebanon and serves a peacekeeping and stabilizing role there. Far more peaceful that the Christian Philangists who massacred poor defenseless Palestinian refugees (under the direction of the Israelis).
Hezbollah is mostly funded and supplied by Iran but so what? Iran is a peaceful neighboring country that minds its own business.
The US has mercenary terrorist armies all over the world starting covert wars and trying to topple governments. Hezbollah is a model of restraint in comparison.
Well shame on the US public then, because they get fooled again and let themselves get dragged into senseless (but profitable for some) wars, again and again by their own government (both parties).
Not so "international" as all that. Russia will be overseeing it all.
This was a brilliant coup by the Russians. It accomplishes their objective of putting Russian troops within Syria with worldwide support as peacekeepers.
Not Iraq, not Afghanistan, Not Iran, Not Syria, Not Libya, Not Nicaragua, Not Panama, Not Grenada, Not Yemen, .....Not anybody.
Somehow it always seems to be the US invading other countries, overthrowing their governments, stealing their resources and setting up dictators to exploit them.
It is terrorism for superpowers to to invade poor countries.
What's obvious is that 3 weeks ago Cameron was pushing for military aid to the mercenaries who are behind all the violence.
Then when Parliament turned him down for that, suddenly he's asking for a similar amount of money supposedly for aid to refugees displaced by the violence.
Apparently he can't decide whether he wants to blow the Syrian people up or feed them.
Fifty odd million is peanuts. The real cost of recent wars has been in the trillions.
But don't worry, the money hasn't all been "lost".
Much of it has been simply transferred from taxpayers pockets into the pockets of the war merchants. Who in turn pay off the politicians, financiers, mercenary forces, and all the unseen others who keep the wars rolling.
He's saying he derives his authority to attack Syria (or any other country) not from his role as US president (the only office he holds) but as an agent of the "international community".
He was not elected by the international community, and his US mandate does not give him any right to act beyond the limits of the US constitution.
Admittedly he and Bush have already shredded the constitution, particularly the bill of rights.
But still he can't claim any sort of global mandate to invade Syria. Obama doesn't represent 98% of the world's population. He doesn't even represent 10% of the world's population. He doesn't even represent the US population when he creates and pursues wars in other parts of the world contrary to the will of the US people.
The US population doesn't want this war. And the world at large certainly doesn't want it either.
The real issue here is national sovereignty vs global control. Obama is championing the idea that some sort of central Globalist authority reigns over the sovereignty of all nations. And he claims to be the enforcer of that globalist authority.
That's right. It's all about toppling the legitimate government of a sovereign nation and replacing it with another puppet regime. Just like Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Chile, Guatemala, Argentina, Mexico, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Grenada, Panama, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Turkey, Yugoslavia, Venezuela, etc etc etc etc.
In other words the US is committed to toppling the Syrian government and putting its mercenaries into control.
No he doesn't. I live in France. Nobody supports Obama here. Nobody other than French President François Hollande, that is. And his own party doesn't even support his stance on the issue.
I think he deals more with wrecking economies through manipulation of currencies. But it wouldn't surprise me to discover that he had ties to covert military actions. Nothing causes sudden turmoil on a small nations currency values as much as the sudden appearance of a well armed mercenary insurgency. And if someone with a lot of capital to invest knows in advance that it will occur, they are in a position to make a lot of money overnight.
That's how the Rothschilds did it. Start a war and finance the arming of both sides, and at the same time use the threat of war to provoke controlled swings of both stock and currency markets that can be exploited to make billions.
Oh, those in control learned the lesson they wanted to learn long ago. They like things just fine the way they are.
The primary lesson that is not being learned generation after generation by the vast majority is that government is not there to serve the interests of the people. No matter how sincere it may have been originally, over time, government inevitably and invariably becomes corrupted and controlled by the banks and big business.
War is a terrible loss for society at large, but it is incredibly profitable for a tiny minority. And that minority runs things.
Continual warfare assures future markets for the weapons industry including the resale of aging and obsolete weapons to poorer countries, thus allowing for continual upgrades of the superpowers' homeland's arsenals.
But weapons lose their sales appeal when there are no wars. People start to insist on the money being used to improve their own standard of living. So, in order to keep things rolling, there has to always be at least the perceived threat of imminent war.
Constant war assures that neither Congress nor the public will push very hard for cutting down on the military budget. A frightened public is a cooperative public. There must be a continual "them or us" paranoia in order to satiate the huge, ever-hungry military industrial beast.
The wealth of the US didn't just vanish in 2008. Wealth, being a relative value always goes somewhere. When someone gets poorer somebody else get richer. The wealth that used to belong to the US middle class was gobbled up by bankers, financiers, and war merchants (arms manufacturers, service providers, constructors etc).
Contracts of the Pentagon’s top ten contractors jumped from $46 billion in 2001 to $80 billion in 2003, an increase of nearly 75%. Halliburton’s contracts jumped more than nine times their 2001 levels by 2003, from $400 million to $3.9 billion. Northrop Grumman’s contracts doubled, from $5.2 billion to $11.1 billion, over the same time frame; and the nation’s largest weapons contractor, Lockheed Martin, saw a 50% increase, from $14.7 billion to $21.9 billion.
And all that government spending came out of taxpayers pockets one way or another. Either in the form of higher taxes or disguised as price increases for energy or just general "inflation".
And when his turn came, Obama wasn't about to miss out on that gravy train. Wall street and the war industry were very generous to him at the time of his election and he had to return the favor by allowing them to loot the economy, and also by continuing the old wars and creating several new ones to keep their profits up during his presidency.
Obama surpassed both Bush and Reagan in defense spending, with the largest combined budget for the military since World War II (even when corrected for inflation).
How hypocritical can you get? The US is the world's greatest producer and exporter of WMDs including all sorts of poisonous gas and other chemical and biological weapons.
RayfromUSA Forum Posts (6,611)
RE: Will history be kind to Obama aka Barry Soetoro
Yes history will be kind.Much more than he deserves.
They'll hang him with a new rope.