Assange doesn't have shit.

Olive Drab Green

Olive Drab Green

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
My point is, I believe you are falling into the fallacy of believing that everything is about us (as in the US). It isn't. Trouble in that region is nothing new and it has been simmering for pretty much forever.

Yes we have meddled in the region because the imperative of foreign affairs has always been to "protect the interests of the United States". That is not to say that everything we have done has protected our interests But I believe that we have meddled for that reason overall. It is all in how you define our interests. Historically, this has meant that we have supported many dictators because they protected our interest of a non-communist world. It was a wonderful goal but ended up bad. Wars always end up badly. They should - they are shitty things. I believe that they should be avoided.

But how best to avoid them? You can't turn back the clock and uninvade Iraq. You are here. It is now.

Empire building is a way you can look at it. The model was always open to that criticism. At best I believe it carried an implied cultural preachiness and superiority to it in a way that would particularly offend radical religious groups anywhere. They are not democratic. Democracy was what we were importing at the time. There was going to be a conflict but the conflict is not new. The US did not cause it. It was why we sought to export democracy in the first place - a bulwark of radicalism. Just because it seems to be failing doesn't make it responsible for all the regions problems.

Maybe it had elements of imperialism to it. Pretty much anything does. I think the policies of exporting democracy were well-meant. But sometimes the people won't do what democracy considers "the right thing". Sometimes they are pissed. Maybe the experiment is still going on. I studied under some critical academics who were promoting it. We knew the risks. They were discussed at length. I guess my point is, any new state is a risk and a struggle. Sometimes things have a momentum of their own and we can merely react.

It is not easy. Mistakes were made. But we were merely players in the game.

Oh, regime change. Regime change is not black or white. The US and every other international actor has taken this as an implied element forever. It is a complicated thing. WWII was about regime change. Other forms of "supporting it" might be to say kind things in the press. The entire concept of cooperation between countries hinges on not tolerating certain things. To ignore it would be to repeat the mistakes of the League of Nations which fostered WWII.

States have a right to protect their interests. Regime change is a tool. How you use it or even whether you use it is another thing.

Most of the world has come to support regime change in Syria. I do too. How to achieve it is the question.
Click to expand...
That was exceptionally put.
 
OddBall1st

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
The best way for Israel to deal with Iran is for them to actually want to solve the issues in the occupied territories.

Iran is in the middle of a silent cultural revolution since the end of sanctions, there's even Iranian men wearing headscarves to protest the fact women are forced to wear them.

We need to welcome Iran into the developed, rational world instead of mistreating them and forcing them onto the fringe.
Click to expand...

As soon as they stay out of Yemen and Somalia. They want both choke points and will never get them.
 
cat of curiosity

cat of curiosity

Well-Known Member
fuck assange, lets drone the bastard!

http://www.infowars.com/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-proposed-killing-assange-with-drone-strike/

Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton once proposed using a military drone strike to extra-judicially assassinate Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, a document published by the organization states.



The screenshot tweeted Monday cites a report from TruePundit.com claiming in 2010 the State Department explored ways to suppress the trouble-making Assange before he could publish damaging information on “conversations between State Dept. personnel and its foreign assets and allies.”

“‘Can’t we just drone this guy?’ Clinton openly inquired,” TruePundit.com reports.

While Wikileaks has not confirmed the veracity of the report, the Washington Examiner notes that during the same time the State Department was involved in discussions on what “nonlegal” methods were available to subdue Assange.

“…Emails previously released from Clinton’s private server reveal Anne Marie Slaughter, a former director of policy planning at the State Department, sent an email on the same day in 2010 on the subject of possible ‘nonlegal strategies’ for dealing with WikiLeaks. That email also notes that a meeting was held that day to discuss WikiLeaks,” reports the Washington Examiner.

Assange has been holed up at the Ecuadorian embassy in England since August 2012 for fear of retaliation by various national governments over the top level secrets he’s helped expose.

The latest claims come as Wikileaks is set to release new information Tuesday expected to be a major blow to the former secretary of state’s current presidential bid.



Calls to assassinate Assange have also been made on public television, most notably by former Fox Business commentator Bob Beckel, who suggested US special ops be used to eliminate the whistleblower.

Hillary Clinton strategist Bob Beckel called for WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange to be assassinated. #DNCLeak pic.twitter.com/9L2ixl24Er

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) August 10, 2016



“A dead man can’t leak stuff,” Beckel told Fox Business’ Eric Bolling in a 2010 interview. “This guy’s a traitor, he’s treasonous, and he has broken every law of the United States. And I’m not for the death penalty, so… there’s only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch.”
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
cat of curiosity said:
fuck assange, lets drone the bastard!

http://www.infowars.com/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-proposed-killing-assange-with-drone-strike/

Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton once proposed using a military drone strike to extra-judicially assassinate Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, a document published by the organization states.



The screenshot tweeted Monday cites a report from TruePundit.com claiming in 2010 the State Department explored ways to suppress the trouble-making Assange before he could publish damaging information on “conversations between State Dept. personnel and its foreign assets and allies.”

“‘Can’t we just drone this guy?’ Clinton openly inquired,” TruePundit.com reports.

While Wikileaks has not confirmed the veracity of the report, the Washington Examiner notes that during the same time the State Department was involved in discussions on what “nonlegal” methods were available to subdue Assange.

“…Emails previously released from Clinton’s private server reveal Anne Marie Slaughter, a former director of policy planning at the State Department, sent an email on the same day in 2010 on the subject of possible ‘nonlegal strategies’ for dealing with WikiLeaks. That email also notes that a meeting was held that day to discuss WikiLeaks,” reports the Washington Examiner.

Assange has been holed up at the Ecuadorian embassy in England since August 2012 for fear of retaliation by various national governments over the top level secrets he’s helped expose.

The latest claims come as Wikileaks is set to release new information Tuesday expected to be a major blow to the former secretary of state’s current presidential bid.



Calls to assassinate Assange have also been made on public television, most notably by former Fox Business commentator Bob Beckel, who suggested US special ops be used to eliminate the whistleblower.

Hillary Clinton strategist Bob Beckel called for WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange to be assassinated. #DNCLeak pic.twitter.com/9L2ixl24Er

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) August 10, 2016



“A dead man can’t leak stuff,” Beckel told Fox Business’ Eric Bolling in a 2010 interview. “This guy’s a traitor, he’s treasonous, and he has broken every law of the United States. And I’m not for the death penalty, so… there’s only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch.”
Click to expand...
lol, infowars.

you are not bright.
 
cat of curiosity

cat of curiosity

Well-Known Member
Olive Drab Green said:
I'm going to have to ingest one entire column of these. (If you don't know why, look up San Pedro Cactus)

View attachment 3797732
Click to expand...
very familiar with trichocereus pachanoi, as well as peruvianus and bridgesii. i still prefer lophophora williamsii...

i don't think that both of them combined will get you over threshold. you should try grafting lw to pereskiopsis spathulata...
 
Rizlared

Rizlared

Well-Known Member
Firstly, thank you for replying in a civilised manner, this should be 'the norm' but unfortunately I find it not to be the case in here.

I understand the points you raise but you appear to be middle East centric in your response.

Look at the US involvement in south America.

Look at the US involvement in Asia.

...and yes, look at the US involvement in the middle East.

Same pattern. If you covet the natural resources of a nation then you offer their leader a shit load of money (it matters not if that person is a ruthless dictator)

Enough money for him and his family to live in comfort. His offspring will be offered scholarships at Harvard or some such ivy league establishment.

Acceptance works well for him, non compliance always ends up bad.

You then send a team of people to assist in changing the status of that nation from third world to a developing nation.

This enables that country to leverage a shit load of debt in order to assist with that transition.

I studied Indonesia, amongst other natural resources you wanted their oil.

The IMF and World Bank then allow the country to be saddled with debt to facilitate the building of infrastructure such as airports, electric grid, oil rigs etc.

The contracts to do the work then go to American company's (Iraq... halliburton for example) and all the money loaned to that nation ends up back with the USA.

Typically the US favours an 80/20 split in favour of the US.

The now wealthy leader has to use large sums to prop up the military to ensure their support.

The indigenous people can't afford to fly, don't work on the oil rigs and can barely afford electricity. They are not the beneficiaries yet it is their natural resources that are being depleted.

If a leader doesn't conform, well then they discredit that individual and support financially the opposition until it is in a position to attempt to take over. Syria anyone? (side note, Genie energy were denied by the UN the rights to drill for oil in the Golan heights, granted to them by Isreal even though it's Syria's land...Google the major shareholders and board members of genie energy, tells a story in itself. You'll notice Rupert Murdochs name there so discredit anything you hear about Syria from any of his news outlets, conflict of interests. As a result of the civil war, genie energy have drilled and discovered oil in the Golan heights. Convenient war eh)

If they can't discredit and arm the opposition (as in Iraq) then they will assassinate (check out South America) Preferred method, bribe a bodyguard to plant a bomb on his helicopter or some such thing and make it look like an accident. The CIA are often first to the crash site. Coincidence?

Saddam knew these techniques...how? because you guys trained him at the school of America's (then in Panama before Noriega kicked it out, last I heard it was in Florida)

You wanted Saddam to take control of Iraq so he could fight Iran, that's why you armed him, because of the revloution and the kidnapping of all those americans. This happened as a direct result of regime change there in the 50s, operation Ajax, cause and effect. Oil again was the motive (actually, you were acting on behalf of the British but then shafted both Iran and Britain)

Ignore words like democracy, freedom.

Idealistic bollocks.

I'm not judging btw, I'm sharing information.

Every empire historically had acted in its own interests at the expense of the conquered.

You mention a few times "I believe..."

I don't just believe, I know everything I've typed to be accurate (actually, I'm trying to rush this whilst a bit stoned and typing on a phone so there may be an unintended inaccuracy I'm unaware of...it's possible) but the point is this is how the USA has been empire building.

It's a more subtle approach than the gunboat diplomacy favoured by the British in the past but we live in a more deceitful, duplicitous age.

Anyway, if you've read this far, thanks.

Peace
 
Rizlared

Rizlared

Well-Known Member
Salient point I overlooked

Couldn't use a bodyguard to assassinate Saddam because, as he knew it was what the US would try, he had body doubles and hand picked his bodyguards.

The bodyguard, even if he wanted to assassinate Saddam, couldn't be sure it wasn't his double.

Get that wrong and it was the end if his entire families bloodline, painfully.

Hence war is the only option left
 
Rizlared

Rizlared

Well-Known Member
Now, my experience of these forums is that public debate leads to ego bruising leads to dick measuring insult fests

I'm too old for all that bollocks.

I have a genuine interest in this type of subject matter so, please, if you wish to discuss with me further...pm me.

It removes the likelihood of silliness.

That said, I'm in the mood for light and fluffy so going to watch a movie.

Reply may be delayed
 
Olive Drab Green

Olive Drab Green

Well-Known Member
San Pedro contains enough mescaline to trip. It's made into Huachuma/Achuma. Thousands of years, now.

The Ayahuasca was pretty intense. I both want and fear that experience again. I have a few doses of this sacrament still in my fridge.

If I could get a hold of L. williamsii seeds or small cacti, I would.
 
Last edited:
Rizlared

Rizlared

Well-Known Member
choomer said:
Let's see.........
1 week, 4 1000+ Podesta email drops.

Yup, Julian is full of it. ;)
Click to expand...
never fails to amaze me that people who say he's full of shit....then go on to show support for

Wait for it..


POLITICIANS :clap:

As they never lie, nooooooooo

brilliant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top