It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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

Obama Warned to Defuse Tensions with Russia

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Obama Warned to Defuse Tensions with Russia


sounds like the Neo-cons have lost out to the radical element of the Globalist camp and want to regain leadership

for example the Soros camp has radicalized itself from the rationalists like Kissinger/Brzezinski
while the Bankers have taken a bigger role for themselves ...at the loss of prestige for the NeoCon-Military+Corporate octopus with a strong Zionist underpinning

so all three factions are at each others throats, with the neocon faction the strongest of the Trident (3 pronged) Shadow Government...seeing as how they control the Jihad Army of terrorists...


Obama seems to have way too many Puppet Masters pulling his strings
edit on th31147567495005422016 by St Udio because: spell




posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

This is the one underlying source of all of the present turmoil



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
What should Obama be doing in response to this Russian adventurism?


Russian adventurism?

Assad asked Russia to help them remove the terrorists from Syria.

The US funds, trains, supply's and backs militant groups embedded within these same terrorists, in Syria.

Assad has asked the US to leave Syria, because they are backing the terrorists.

... and you have the nerve to sit here and say Russian Adventurism ?...

I said earlier the situation is ''fkt''... its because of people like you believing/spreading the bullplop narrative.
edit on 5/10/16 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Agit8dChop

So, your answer to what the US/Obama Administration should be doing is to turn tail and run?

Interesting approach.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

When the US says "we hate ISIS", it is merely a case of self loathing.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Agit8dChop

So, your answer to what the US/Obama Administration should be doing is to turn tail and run?

Interesting approach.


are you delerius?

Syria is 1939 Poland and we the west, are the Nazi's

Your woefully misguided on who's who in today's fight



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 09:13 AM
link   
If he diffuses the tension : he has no spine
If he intensifies it: hes a war monger.

Kinda like, "why doesn't he pull out our troops already", and then "why did he pull out the troop so soon"
edit on 5-10-2016 by odzeandennz because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Agit8dChop

So, your answer to what the US/Obama Administration should be doing is to turn tail and run?

Interesting approach.


are you delerius?

Syria is 1939 Poland and we the west, are the Nazi's

Your woefully misguided on who's who in today's fight


Because I don't agree with you? LOL.

And you went Godwin too??? Priceless.

(You don't have an actual rational solution for the US here, do you?)
edit on 5-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Agit8dChop

So, your answer to what the US/Obama Administration should be doing is to turn tail and run?

Interesting approach.


are you delerius?

Syria is 1939 Poland and we the west, are the Nazi's

Your woefully misguided on who's who in today's fight


Because I don't agree with you? LOL.

And you went Godwin too??? Priceless.

(You don't have an actual rational solution for the US here, do you?)


How about doing what Sweden once did - stop initiating foreign conflicts and concentrate entirely on making life better at home for their citizens. Worked for them...


(post by Ohanka removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Obama doesn’t have the leadership capacity to take hold of the security state. No one does anymore. Obama remembers JFK. All he can do is probably defuse certain things before he gets out.

Though its actually a mystery here who is pushing this because it was the Army that told Obama that Assad was likely innocent in the poison gas fiasco the last time they were thinking about attacking Syria over that.

So it’s probably some left over neocons or that nutty defense secretary that’s pushing this madness.

The best thing Obama did in office was when he refused to attack Syria before.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 11:06 AM
link   
The problem with Obama is that he doesn’t have any strategic thinking capacity


When Kennedy had similar issues he resolved them such as the Cuban missile crises. Even Nixon resolved things.


Obama, because of his weak leadership ability never ever resolves anything. He leads from a vacuum and always leaves a vacuum...never resolving big picture issues.






edit on 5-10-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-10-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Velatropa24

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Agit8dChop

So, your answer to what the US/Obama Administration should be doing is to turn tail and run?

Interesting approach.


are you delerius?

Syria is 1939 Poland and we the west, are the Nazi's

Your woefully misguided on who's who in today's fight


Because I don't agree with you? LOL.

And you went Godwin too??? Priceless.

(You don't have an actual rational solution for the US here, do you?)


How about doing what Sweden once did - stop initiating foreign conflicts and concentrate entirely on making life better at home for their citizens. Worked for them...


Speaking generally, I don't disagree with you, although, I'm not sure that's the world we live in, anymore.

Like it or not, the US presence is an integral part of geopolitics.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

Thanks for making a string of general observations of which everyone is aware.

While you're reviewing elementary principles, you might remind yourself that the responsibility to protect is a universal standard in international policy. The Assad regime not only failed to protect its own people but waged war on them.

Yet, you laud one totalitarian regime backing up another's human rights violations.

That fact among others, points to the reality that you have zero basis to call me a "warmonger" ... take your pointless empty rhetoric somewhere else.

If you wish to discuss the point I'm making, address the question I asked: What is the solution AT THIS TIME to the situation in Syria? Practical, real-world, actions that you would recommend for the US/the Obama Administration.

I really doubt anyone is interested in your vague general opinions about geopolitics; do you have an answer to my question?

If not, please don't bother to address me with your mistaken projections in the future.

Thank you.

edit on 5-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Delusional. There is no "totalitarian" regime backing up another. Perhaps you mean Russia? Does not fall into the category of "Totalitarian state" outside of your globalist ideology.

Change America's international policy. America does not need to protect anyone, save for those who they have mutual defence treaties with. A good deal of those should probably be scrapped too.

The solutions, there are two. Leave Syria, stop supplying Islamist Sunnis who want to kill us with weapons and other supplies and allow the legitimate, internationally recognised government of Syria and it's allies (Russia and Iran) defeat the terrorists.

The second one is to help Syria, Russia and Iran defeat the terrorists in Syria.

You are openly calling for military intervention against a sovereign state which has not attacked America in any way. This is warmongering.

This pointless sabre rattling with the threat of military action against Syria certainly won't solve anything.

If you're so upset about human rights violations and civilian deaths, what exactly do you think will happen to the Shia and the Christians in Syria when the Sunni Fundamentalists take Damascus? If history, and what has already happened to said groups in Syria in rebel territory is anything to go by there will be a great amount of bloodshed.

Thank you for supporting an imperialist establishment who in turn support genocidal religious fundamentalists. Somebody has to do it I guess.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

dont even bother, some people are so wrapped by propaganda that any truth will fall on deaf ears



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




Should we turn tail and run? Let the Soviets Russians have a strong forward base on the Med?


as opposed to how many of yours...all over the world ?

But Im guessing you dont mind those. It's were the good guys are at.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

Putin's government doesn't qualify as totalitarian? LOL How about Iran?

Do you know what the word means?

So ... essentially, your take on current American foreign policy is that we should return to early 20th century isolationism?

Thanks for answering my question finally. I'll leave you to your own delusions.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Gryphon66




Should we turn tail and run? Let the Soviets Russians have a strong forward base on the Med?


as opposed to how many of yours...all over the world ?

But Im guessing you dont mind those. It's were the good guys are at.


Perhaps if you based your comments on facts rather than "guessing," or at least, had the decency to ask as opposed to making wild assumptions, I'd be more inclined to offer a thoughtful answer.

As it is ... no, I don't think geopolitics resolves to "good guys and bad guys."

That seems to be the consensus among some of you, however.

Carry on.



posted on Oct, 5 2016 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

North Korea is a totalitarian state. Stalin's USSR was a totalitarian state. Hitler's Germany was a totalitarian state. Imperial China and Japan were totalitarian states. Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge was a totalitarian state

Russia under Putin does not fall into this category.

One could argue it is an authoritarian state, I wouldn't agree but I can't deny there are factors that make it a compelling argument.

Iran is not a totalitarian state. Not by a long shot. But that most certainly is an authoritarian one. Although the current Islamic Republic is far superior to the tyrannical monarchy that preceded it.

is every country that opposes American Imperialism a totalitarian state?

Was France a totalitarian state for opposing the Iraq war?

What exactly gives America the right to decide who lives and dies in this world? Why do they, and they alone, have the right to violate the sovereignty of foreign powers? Russia and China will not stand for such aggression any longer. They've made that quite clear in Syria and the South China Sea.

America is an Empire. It doesn't care about human rights, it does not care about democracy. It cares only about expanding it's own influence and control.

if the American Empire cared so much about "human rights" and "democracy", then why is it such good friends with the Saudi Regime? What about the dictatorships of South America during the Cold War? Franco's Spain?

It's ideological propaganda. Saying the same thing that has been said for a millennia by various empires with different words.

The USSR did exactly the same thing. Only they were defending "Socialism"

At least our Empire, the British one, came out and declared itself for what it was.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join