It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The global phenomenon of using sport supporters for wars

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 06:46 AM
Lately things in the middle east have become more tense and the level of discussions on this forum went inversely proportional to this rise.
We, and I put myself in tho I try to dig deeper, are making shallow analysys and often unsourced claims and proceed to introduce some false dichotomy to support own arguments, rather than detailing them.

I have no doubt we are all victims of the heavy propaganda coming out of every news outlet, and most news are recycled infos we talked about in the last 2 years presented like "evidence", "surprising" etc.

Understanding who's speaking the truth is easy: the answer is no goddamn one. So by taking for granted that a source is saying all is necessary to draw a conclusion is falling for propaganda. And in a day where 1 out of 3 news comes from unnamed officials or debatable jihadi figures it is very dangerous.
There are a lot of similarities with the years before WWII, but there are also a lot of differences, the first and most important is the balance in sphere of influences. At the time there were many peers so it was a battle for hegemony, today we have hegemony so it is a battle for carving a space in it.

Now, from my general view the imperialistic modus operandi of the western countries is wrong and unfair mostly given the history of the world since 1945. It's my opinion, I can discuss it, but I don't have to prove it, I can only make analogies and describe the differences in the context around them. I don't believe that we the people have any power to change our country foreign policy when there is a much bigger scheme in the making, so I symphatize with the people and distrust the governments of every side by default.
For facts however it isn't enough to think you believe so, it's important to give the context in which a certain belief is developed. Today we are facing a shallowing trend in the media where questioning is bad, the official voice is the only truth and the reasons behind certain moves are for moral or religious issues.

We are losing quality also because the general trend is to support "one" coalition and pretend there is a common enemy, or even two!
ISIS is the tool to keep the narrative away from questioning where side A is morally in danger or not. We root for a side because we have not to deal with morality when there is a threat like Daesh.

Well, I say # off. ISIS doesn't exist, it's all about the geopolitical control of the area and this travesty of Islamic State is simply a way to never discuss the real issues. #s like "moderate terrorists" or "is not fighting ISIS enough" were born in this new Truman show we live in.
Shills are working harder these days on the Internet, not just this site, I feel we should refrain from repeating ad-libitum the false mainstream narrative without questioning. I feel we should put our nationalism aside and concede our brain an evaluation of the facts, and then honestly take a side. If you want to take a side because "it always has been yours" or "because the other is worse" or "because I gan here and I lose there" or whatever else, do it RESPONSIBLY.

You are entitled to root for the west, but don't pretend is for anything but KEEP control and perpetrate economic debt and straight theft.
You are entitled to root for the east, but don't pretend they are good and should be the new hegemony to solve our problems.

Both sides stinks, the only reasonable expectation for the people is that many more sphere of influences get some power and work as a political opposition to each other by bribing us with some liberty. Actually whatever balance requires the west to LOSE influence in some areas, so there is no way for me to "root for the west" if the objective is keep control of the middle east and keep MENA in chaos, surround Russia and China (look at NATO countries and look at TTP countries) to threaten them rather than subtly concede until some power is still left, to keep a separation between Russia and Europe and to enforce TTIP that would basically render countries slaves of corporations without appeal.

So no, I'm not a Putin or China fan, I'm not a fan at all of anything, it's just that I'm really angry that our governments are acting desperately and wasting all our resources to keep a strangle on parts of the world so we can continue to pay our "freedoms" with their asses. Our foreign policy is not for the people, is for the elites and this is evidenced in every statistical analysys done in the last 10 years about wealth distribution.

So unless you are in the .1% and want the world power balance to be what is demanded by the west, there is simply no way you can be on the right side.

If you got down here, thanks for reading.

P.S. Since I'm morally forced into a position, I would like to publicly demand to be paid as a shill, don't know who does this stuff, but feel free to pm me

posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 08:00 AM
a reply to: Mastronaut

You are missing the point.

Everyone has a plan and an interest.

I think they are slowly subduing the Middle East and Israel will be like the pervading influence, the Middle Eastern emerging Super Power for want of a better term. I am seeing the big picture now quite clearly regarding the plans the Western Cabal and their allies have for this region.

Russia just be appearing to hold onto the old order of Assad in Syria. They have their own motives. Assad is their man and he lets them have a strategic military outpost there.

The IS have really achieved their aims now in terms of usefulness to the West as an utterly destructive and stabilising plague. Now they can bomb the plague to pieces as all objectives are met. It is just a repetition of the modern formula.

It will be interesting to see the way that the Western and Russian interests being at loggerheads plays out in the finish. There will ultimately come the crunch where one loses out to the other. I think Russia will lose out ultimately. The West and allies is now very big. All out war between the West and Russia is not realistic because of the nuclear spanner in the works.

Personally the side I have picked is the side of universal flesh and blood. I can't stop their insanity, but I can resist it and not participate. That is what I do.

posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 08:12 AM
a reply to: Mastronaut

I see an awful lot of this sort of thing myself, and I think that for the most part your analysis is on point.

I would like to add a few things, however.

First of all, a lack of support for ones own government, whose actions one might disagree with on a moral basis, and owing to the lack of effectiveness those actions can expect to achieve over time, is NOT tacit support, soft support, or even loosely implied support for terrorists. The number of times in the media, that I have heard a reasonable call for a root and branch examination of the Middle Easts various problems, shouted down as a pacifist or apologist position, are beyond any easy attempt to count. This is absolutely intolerable, and is intellectual dishonesty of a stupendous proportion.

I for one am against bombing targets in the Middle East, because I know that statistically, it is impossible for bombing alone, or for that matter an overt military operation to be successful at achieving the death of the cultist sect known as IS. The reason for this, as I have explained many times, is that organisations like IS recruit the broken remnants of families ripped apart by stray ordnance, by what is considered acceptable collateral losses. Every bomb which drops and kills a non combatant by stander, creates a certain number of terrorists, simply by creating broken, emotionally traumatised people, who are ripe for being snatched up, trained to gain revenge, and unleashed on the world. It is a fundamentally stupid approach, and so is a militarised invasion of the regions effected, for largely the same reasons.

I am all for EFFECTIVE measures against IS, like cutting off their funding from other nations, and sending in covert operators to silently and invisibly move amongst the enemy, and sew terror within their ranks by way of assassination, sabotage, and deconstructing the enemies appearance of power within the region. I am all for setting up small units of under the radar operatives to penetrate behind enemy lines, slaughter entire compounds worth of soldiers while they sleep, and then vanish into the sand like so much dust on a stiff breeze. But mobilising a visible military force, who call dropping thermobaric weapons a "surgical" approach, is not a tactic which will work, either long term, or short term. It will always make the problem worse, and always has in the past, as has arming rebel groups in the area, and being surprised when the enemy wind up with those supplies in their armoury.

And yet, my position is often misrepresented as apologist, or pacifist, because I disagree with reducing the Mid East to nothing more than smoking, glass filled craters. We have to be prepared to accept that nuance, sophistication, and intellectualism are NOT evil things, that there ARE grey spaces between all the obvious lines in the sand, that people are NOT statistics and that each innocent life matters. Unless we can find a way to remove the terrorists without harming the innocent and creating more terrorism in the doing of it, we cannot possibly hope to actually solve the problem in any way, shape, or form.

For discussion to improve in quality and usefulness on these subjects, a greater degree of intellectual honesty is required, and that is why the propaganda is so dangerous. It says that patriotism means abandoning all your own critical thinking, or better yet never developing any, so that you can more easily be driven toward an end which makes no sense, given the stated aim of an action or policy. It says that looking at matters objectively, rather than through the lens of posturing and pontification, honestly rather than observing all things through the messy window of ones own national interest, is borderline terrorism itself. It is designed to denude our ability to think for ourselves, or at least make us less likely to voice our legitimate concerns about the way our governments are prosecuting this battle.

If we allow propaganda to prevent us from using our greatest strength, our minds and our wits, we allow terror to be used for the rest of our days, as a club with which we will be beaten over the head for all time to come, and that is not a situation that I want to leave behind me when I am gone in years to come. I want my son to grow up in a world where these problems, although they may come up from time to time, are solved rapidly, effectively, and without causing more problems than the solutions to them solve. There seems little hope of that yet.

posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 12:34 PM
Two brilliant posts in a row so far. S&F to you Mas and a star to you TB.

I really don't have anything to add unfortunately you chaps pretty much nailed it.

Have a pint on me

new topics


log in