Originally posted by audas

Originally posted by dooper
A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable.

Russia and the US agree on that.

So - since Israel was the one threatened with extinction - turn them loose!

Simple problems only require simple solutions.

The Iranian Mullah government seems to be begging for destruction. Let them have it.

Now, if we could just let South Korea . . .

Short memory there tiger - the US and Russia may agree on a return to the table to discuss nuclear disarmament - and Russia may not want to see proliferation - however that is a long way from accepting a US or Israeli invasion of Iran.

Remember two things - Russia and Iran are infinitely better at politics that the US - the US barely has a machivellian (in the true sense of the term) in their collective diplomatic body. The Russians have also stated very clearly and emphatically that there will be repurcussions for the Georgia trouble cause be the US. Further it has been made abundantly clear last week that Russia fullfilled its cotnractual obligations agreed to last year with Iran to supply the s-300.

Russia will supply and arm Iran with whatever it needs as will China - China would not be adverse to sending troops - Iran can be resupplied through the caspian with whatever it needs from either of these countries - HENCE AMERICAS ATTEMPTED COUP -

Israel goes into Iran - you can kiss good-bye to your entire lifestyle - a Hamburger in the US will be 300 dollars - and that is how you will be defeated - your lifestyle will kill you.

Originally posted by SuperViking

Originally posted by audas

Originally posted by dooper
A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable.

Russia and the US agree on that.

So - since Israel was the one threatened with extinction - turn them loose!

Simple problems only require simple solutions.

The Iranian Mullah government seems to be begging for destruction. Let them have it.

Now, if we could just let South Korea . . .

Short memory there tiger - the US and Russia may agree on a return to the table to discuss nuclear disarmament - and Russia may not want to see proliferation - however that is a long way from accepting a US or Israeli invasion of Iran.

Remember two things - Russia and Iran are infinitely better at politics that the US - the US barely has a machivellian (in the true sense of the term) in their collective diplomatic body. The Russians have also stated very clearly and emphatically that there will be repurcussions for the Georgia trouble cause be the US. Further it has been made abundantly clear last week that Russia fullfilled its cotnractual obligations agreed to last year with Iran to supply the s-300.

Russia will supply and arm Iran with whatever it needs as will China - China would not be adverse to sending troops - Iran can be resupplied through the caspian with whatever it needs from either of these countries - HENCE AMERICAS ATTEMPTED COUP -

Israel goes into Iran - you can kiss good-bye to your entire lifestyle - a Hamburger in the US will be 300 dollars - and that is how you will be defeated - your lifestyle will kill you.

The AMERICAN PEOPLE don't have a Machiavellian bone in their collective bodies, no, but the American government certainly does. You need look no farther than Kissinger and Brzezinski. That the government of the US is very realist and pragmatic vis-a-vis the very naive and idealistic populace is exactly why conspiracy websites like this exist- because Americans are by and large too dumb to understand power politics.

I mean, seriously, Kissinger is seen as a supervillan on these boards, when the guy had probably the best and most rational view of international relations in the US since World War II.

No, if it came down to a the populace of the US voting on policies vs the populace of Russia voting on policies, Russia would obviously win. But at the top? Nah.

Originally posted by audas

Originally posted by SuperViking

Originally posted by audas

Originally posted by dooper
A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable.

Russia and the US agree on that.

So - since Israel was the one threatened with extinction - turn them loose!

Simple problems only require simple solutions.

The Iranian Mullah government seems to be begging for destruction. Let them have it.

Now, if we could just let South Korea . . .

Short memory there tiger - the US and Russia may agree on a return to the table to discuss nuclear disarmament - and Russia may not want to see proliferation - however that is a long way from accepting a US or Israeli invasion of Iran.

Remember two things - Russia and Iran are infinitely better at politics that the US - the US barely has a machivellian (in the true sense of the term) in their collective diplomatic body. The Russians have also stated very clearly and emphatically that there will be repurcussions for the Georgia trouble cause be the US. Further it has been made abundantly clear last week that Russia fullfilled its cotnractual obligations agreed to last year with Iran to supply the s-300.

Russia will supply and arm Iran with whatever it needs as will China - China would not be adverse to sending troops - Iran can be resupplied through the caspian with whatever it needs from either of these countries - HENCE AMERICAS ATTEMPTED COUP -

Israel goes into Iran - you can kiss good-bye to your entire lifestyle - a Hamburger in the US will be 300 dollars - and that is how you will be defeated - your lifestyle will kill you.

The AMERICAN PEOPLE don't have a Machiavellian bone in their collective bodies, no, but the American government certainly does. You need look no farther than Kissinger and Brzezinski. That the government of the US is very realist and pragmatic vis-a-vis the very naive and idealistic populace is exactly why conspiracy websites like this exist- because Americans are by and large too dumb to understand power politics.

I mean, seriously, Kissinger is seen as a supervillan on these boards, when the guy had probably the best and most rational view of international relations in the US since World War II.

No, if it came down to a the populace of the US voting on policies vs the populace of Russia voting on policies, Russia would obviously win. But at the top? Nah.

Except that in replying to me you have clearly misread my post - I specifically said in the TRUE meaning of Machiavelli.

Further singling out a single player does not render your entire diplomatic core for all time somehow brilliant - it merely highlights the dearth of capable players - especially since he was allowed to get away with it - and more importantly you should realise by now that Kissingers primary role was to look after Israel - so hardly a relevant response.

In reply however - the bumblings of everyone from Albright to Rumsfeild and even McNamara have smacked of utilitarian force oriented big stick small carrot policies - this is fundamental and obvious.

The US does not have a deft touch in its entire arsenal - THAT is why we all know so much about how corrupt they are, how Israel has managed to hijack their entire foriegn policy, how incapable they are of subtetly - sorry -

One other point on Kissinger - he was also a meglomaniac - all he was interested in was his own personal career and power (of greater service to Israel) - everything he did was by the sledge - if he was ANY GOOD AT ALL - if he was even remotely Machivellian - then we would not even know his name....


Worth asking - Have you even read "The Prince" ? - be honest


[edit on 7-7-2009 by audas]

Originally posted by najapi
With Russia and China you have to look at what is in it for them, each nation will act in it's own best interest and I think both those countries will be rubbing their hands at the prospect of a United States in it's death throes, not that I think that is where we are at yet.

The idea that the whole world is against the USA and UK is a fantasy, firstly all the major European powers have been falling over themselves to be the USA's new best friend. It will be interesting to see what happens when the Lisbon Treaty is ratified and we get a new EU President, will it be a staunch Atlanticist like Tony Blair or a "staunch Europhile" like Felipe Gonzales? The previous quotes are a shot at sarcasm, Felipe Gonzales is as much an Atlanticist as anyone else... basically the people with the power in the EU at the moment are putting their money on the USA. Why? maybe shared values stand for more than we thought.

The reality is that the USA is still a powerful, dangerous nation and is still seen as a beacon of democracy by many, looking at the IMF list of advanced economies I can't see many of them turning their backs on the USA just yet. The UK being the EU's fourth biggest contributor and having the third highest GDP would I believe limit the chances of the rest of the EU turning on us.