Barack Obama in 2002:
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income … A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. … He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. …
But I also know that Saddam can be contained … I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaida. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. …
Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells. .. Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.
Barack Obama in 2014:
In a region that has known so much bloodshed, these terrorists are unique in their brutality. They execute captured prisoners. They kill children. They enslave, rape, and force women into marriage. They threatened a religious minority with genocide. In acts of barbarism, they took the lives of two American journalists – Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff. …
America, our endless blessings bestow an enduring burden. But as Americans, we welcome our responsibility to lead. From Europe to Asia – from the far reaches of Africa to war-torn capitals of the Middle East – we stand for freedom, for justice, for dignity. These are values that have guided our nation since its founding. …
When we helped prevent the massacre of civilians trapped on a distant mountain, here’s what one of them said. “We owe our American friends our lives. Our children will always remember that there was someone who felt our struggle and made a long journey to protect innocent people.”
That is the difference we make in the world. And our own safety – our own security – depends upon our willingness to do what it takes to defend this nation, and uphold the values that we stand for – timeless ideals that will endure long after those who offer only hate and destruction have been vanquished from the Earth.
See also:
- Full text of speeches: 2002, 2014
- Compare:
- Barack Obama – written in 2007
- Iraq – written in 2006. The names have changed, but little else.
- Middle East in 2014:
- white man’s burden
- American exceptionalism
- permanent war economy
- Notes on the American Empire
Abagond 
Why did he win the Nobel Peace Prize again?
LikeLike
Rhineheart fooled us all. Even the Nobel Peace Prize committee.
LikeLike
i mean Rindheart
LikeLike
he has more flags now
LikeLike
but everyones really starting to hate us americans and we are just involved in everything regarding a war its been since vietnam on steady since i was a kid literally the us has pretty much been at war constantly in one way or another wtf
LikeLike
damn americans always drinking and fighting
LikeLike
damn americans always drinking and fighting
At least they are not boring like us Canucks. I find Yanks to be quite entertaining, good or bad or in between!
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Entertaining”. Like a horror movie.
LikeLike
Why would anyone expect Obama to be able to single-handedly stop the Military Industrial Complex? Unrealistic, given the profit motive. Perhaps he’s biding his time so he can live through his second term. Perhaps he has seen so much at the top, that he realizes the office of the president is not where unlimited power actually lies???
The white masses seem to buy into the ISIS videos without questioning their legitimacy. Why do Americans still trust videos from government, of so-called beheadings? Why would ISIS want to taunt any nation with videos? Why is everything always captured for providing proof to the public? What about what’s being done in the dark by American politicians? What about American crimes against humanity — here and in other countries — that the public doesn’t see videotaped?
LikeLike
anonymous royalties to disney lol
LikeLike
“Why would anyone expect Obama to be able to single-handedly stop the Military Industrial Complex? Unrealistic, given the profit motive. Perhaps he’s biding his time so he can live through his second term. Perhaps he has seen so much at the top, that he realizes the office of the president is not where unlimited power actually lies???”
Why would anyone expect Obama to end the Military Industrial Complex? That’s unrealistic because it’s only one of many power based groups he had to “sleep” with in order to become the POTUS.
No one becomes POTUS since Jimmy Carter because of good ideas, morality, intelligence and a longing for peace. People like are really that would not be permitted within a thousand miles of the White House. Men only become occupants in the Oval Office because they’re willing to follow orders and do the bidding of their powerful and rich masters standing in the shadows, pulling their strings.
Obama is only the latest best supporting actor in the recent episodes of Masterpiece Theater’s horse and pony show. Entertainment (for the elite) bought and paid for with blood.
LikeLike
“But as Americans, we welcome our responsibility to lead” 😦
LikeLike
The Thing Most Political Assassination Victims Have In Common
(Curated by Rollie Williams at Upworthy)…Live together in harmony? Peace on earth? Love one another?
http://www.upworthy.com/the-depressing-thing-most-political-assassination-victims-have-in-common?c=ufb2
LikeLike
Ways of preventing groupthink Posted July 8, 2013 http://forfreepsychology.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/ways-of-preventing-groupthink/
“Some experts believe that groupthink also has a strong hold on political decisions and military operations, which may result in enormous expenditures of human and material resources. These scholars, including Janis and Raven, attribute political and military fiascos, such as the Bay of Pigs Invasion, the Vietnam War, and the Watergate scandal, to the effect of groupthink.
More recently, Dina Badie argued that the invasion of Iraq by the United States was driven by groupthink. According to Badie, groupthink was largely responsible for the shift in the U.S. administration’s view on Saddam Hussein that eventually led to military action in Iraq. After 9/11, “stress, promotional leadership, and intergroup conflict” were all factors that gave way to the occurrence of groupthink. Political case studies of groupthink serve to illustrate the impact that the occurrence of groupthink can have in today’s political scene.”
LikeLike
v8driver — what’s with the comment “anonymous royalties to disney?”
You added a “lol” — but did nothing to add to the discussion at hand.
LikeLike
anonymous i personally am not
guy fawlkes maskes pay royalties to disney
and sideways at abagond
just another what’s the literary device called
damn man i have to explain myself>
who are you
LikeLike
v8driver — Who can read your mind — who even wants to?
Yes, man, if you want to be understood, please explain yourself…
LikeLike
@Anonymous.
On the other hand, some of us have no trouble believing in the evil deeds of IS and of the USA and of the UK.
Also, maybe take the time to read and get to know the commenters here. Each has his or her own style. Some are easy reading, some are stream of consciousness, some are pretentious BS…
LikeLike
Props to abagond for posting this, even though Obama is a Democrat.
LikeLike
@ Pumpkin
My post on ISIS:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/08/11/islamic-state-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9/
LikeLike
@ v8driver
He is also wearing a flag pin now.
LikeLike
But these are two different situations. The Desert storm war was about oil and Bush pushed the US into a completely unorganised, ill-planned, costly war from an emotional response spewing a bunch of muscle flexing propaganda to satisfy the anger everyone felt after the shock of 9/11. I think ISIS is a different kettle of fish. People are being killed, displaced, beaten and tortured. Now I’m not some right wing airhead but when American did nothing during the war in Rwanda when the US did nothing after its defeat during the war in Somalia, everyone was disgusted the US turning their backs on genocide. But when the US does step in, people don’t like that either. I dunno.
LikeLike
@V8 I can drink as well as others each our own case of 12 beers and we never get into fighting. I don’t know if it’s weight and tolerance or what not but alcohol does the really nothing to me. Doesn’t calm me all the way nor does it trigger me.
LikeLike
Ironically Exxon and Mobil are now 1 Entity lol……. I had no idea that just 12 years ago they were two independents.
LikeLike
@ Ebonymonroe
I disagree. Obama is doing just what he criticized Bush for: making an emotional appeal to drag the US into an ill-planned, open-ended war.
The cornerstone of his appeal is the beheading of two Americans. That is emotional. It is certainly not rational: the beheadings were in revenge for US bombings – which Obama now wants to use to excuse further bombings! Wow. Talk about flimsy excuses for war.
In international law the US has the right to defend its allies (Turkey, Iraq?) and prevent genocide (Yazidis), but beyond that (going into Syria) it needs to take it to the UN or negotiate with Assad. Otherwise it is acting as a rogue nation, no better than ISIS itself.
LikeLike
^^^The desert storm war was about oil as was the war on terror.
@Abagond
Well, I agree that the UN’s brand of “help” is a much more the answer to helping those that have been affected. But Abagond, what do you suggest should be done about ISIS?
LikeLike
I only say this from the perspective of a situation like Rwanda. It’s been said if only the UN would have stayed a huge percentage of deaths could have been prevented. And while that’s true, the issue of the regime still wouldn’t have been addressed. To this day the militias in the Congo are committing some of the most atrocious acts the modern world has seen. Kidnapping children and violently turning them into child soldiers, ransacking villages and going from home to home brutally torturing innocent families, dismembering, gang raping, sometimes both at the same time. The US only just sent in a few troops to help over there a year or two ago. And this regime is being funded by billion dollar corporations for the minerals in the region that are used in over 90% of cell phones. Meaning right now, almost everyone of our cell phones contains the bread and butter of this militia.
I’m no expert on war or US policy, so this is more me picking your brain, but, don’t you feel it’s best for the army to step in with things like this to nip it in the bud? Yes it’s a cycle, desert storm created Bin Laden, Bin Laden birthed 9/11, Bin Laden’s actions created the war on terror and the war on terror created ISIS.
But what about the people? And if they’re (ISIS) allowed to take over Iraq, they could spread into other territories and consume much of the Middle East, hurting more people as they go.
LikeLike
try 15 beers and 750ml of vodka add a 1/4 of cocaine and then maybe we can talk
LikeLike
and you will find over time that its different as tolerance goes up sometimes i can act a fool on 2 drinks if i have gone with out alcohol for 2 weeks, other times, generally speaking 12+/- units ie one shot, wine, or beer over 1-2 hr is generally in the yellow getting towards redline territory
LikeLike
12 beers please
LikeLike
i’ll give you 18 hrs and that’s a ounce
LikeLike
see what happens then
LikeLike
that was a monday for me for a minute
LikeLike
You’re leaving out the smoking gun Abagond. THe fact that the strategy is to arm rebels to not only fight ISIS but to assist fighting Bashar Assad and the Syrian government. You can’t tell me you missed that.
LikeLike
I’m not sure if you have anything on the affordable care act. But that has also drastically changed , what we thought it would be from them until now.. check this out… (“The Kronies” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGgY5V4YZZ4#t=35)
LikeLike
@Kiwi. I’m sorry , but I don’t see the success in destabilizing Libya, Iraq, or Syria. They say “well we need a leave behind force” I don’t think we have enough troops or $ for that. Also I’m sorry but we created ISIS and are arming them. They are the ones that gassed the Syrians in 2013, John McCain was seen in pictures with top ISIS leaders just a year ago. John Kerry is just as bad and Obama is a puppet. If we go to war with Syria , Russia might get involved as an ally of Syria. I don’t like the smell of any of this.
LikeLike
btw V8 I think you need a V8 instead of 2 ball games. wth. You trying to kill yourself?
LikeLike
@Kiwi well I think Obama’s “red line” was attempted to be exploited when he in early 2013 stated that if Assad were gas his own people in Syria that would have been a deal breaker.. Low and behold a few months later it was reported that Assad and the Syrian government has indeed gassed his own people. That was challenged by many independent reports including UN investigators. Now maybe that foiled their plans and didn’t want it to be another WMD caught lying fiasco, because I believe the UN security council would strike them down. You also, if I’m not mistaken, need approval from congress to strike a foreign country, unless there is some eminent threat. Insert isis beheading U.S. and British Citizens. Now maybe Obama can act without the support of either the Syrian government, the UN security council , Or Congress. Who has many dirty players themselves including John “The salesmen for the Military industrial complex McCain” and Lindsey Graham , who has said not to get any help from Assad in his own country. Unreal.
LikeLike
Obama also has some demon horns if you check out the blue curtains right above his ears in the pic above. I’m sure that wasn’t intentional. Maybe god’s way of warning us of deception.
LikeLike
I know right.. that’s what I did.
LikeLike
Here’s the comments where Obama spells out the plan to fight and eradicate ISIS. He said we have to give Support to the syrian opposition. Well Isis is among the syrian opposition. He also said he would work with the Iraqi government and failed to say he would work with the syrians. I think that pretty much backs up my claims of looking to oust Assad… here it is.
“… Our objective is clear: we will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy.
First, we will conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists. Working with the Iraqi government, we will expand our efforts beyond protecting our own people and humanitarian missions, so that we’re hitting ISIL targets as Iraqi forces go on offense. Moreover, I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my presidency: if you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.
Second, we will increase our support to forces fighting these terrorists on the ground. In June, I deployed several hundred American service members to Iraq to assess how we can best support Iraqi Security Forces. Now that those teams have completed their work – and Iraq has formed a government – we will send an additional 475 service members to Iraq. As I have said before, these American forces will not have a combat mission – we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq. But they are needed to support Iraqi and Kurdish forces with training, intelligence and equipment. We will also support Iraq’s efforts to stand up National Guard Units to help Sunni communities secure their own freedom from ISIL control.
Across the border, in Syria, we have ramped up our military assistance to the Syrian opposition. Tonight, I again call on Congress to give us additional authorities and resources to train and equip these fighters. In the fight against ISIL, we cannot rely on an Assad regime that terrorizes its people; a regime that will never regain the legitimacy it has lost. Instead, we must strengthen the opposition as the best counterweight to extremists like ISIL, while pursuing the political solution necessary to solve Syria’s crisis once and for all.
Third, we will continue to draw on our substantial counterterrorism capabilities to prevent ISIL attacks. Working with our partners, we will redouble our efforts to cut off its funding; improve our intelligence; strengthen our defenses; counter its warped ideology; and stem the flow of foreign fighters into – and out of – the Middle East. And in two weeks, I will chair a meeting of the UN Security Council to further mobilize the international community around this effort.
Fourth, we will continue providing humanitarian assistance to innocent civilians who have been displaced by this terrorist organization. This includes Sunni and Shia Muslims who are at grave risk, as well as tens of thousands of Christians and other religious minorities. We cannot allow these communities to be driven from their ancient homelands.
This is our strategy. And in each of these four parts of our strategy, America will be joined by a broad coalition of partners. Already, allies are flying planes with us over Iraq; sending arms and assistance to Iraqi Security Forces and the Syrian opposition; sharing intelligence; and providing billions of dollars in humanitarian aid. Secretary Kerry was in Iraq today meeting with the new government and supporting their efforts to promote unity, and in the coming days he will travel across the Middle East and Europe to enlist more partners in this fight, especially Arab nations who can help mobilize Sunni communities in Iraq and Syria to drive these terrorists from their lands. This is American leadership at its best: we stand with people who fight for their own freedom; and we rally other nations on behalf of our common security and common humanity.
My Administration has also secured bipartisan support for this approach here at home. I have the authority to address the threat from ISIL. But I believe we are strongest as a nation when the President and Congress work together. So I welcome congressional support for this effort in order to show the world that Americans are united in confronting this danger.
Now, it will take time to eradicate a cancer like ISIL. And any time we take military action, there are risks involved – especially to the servicemen and women who carry out these missions. But I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil. This counter-terrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist, using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground. This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years. And it is consistent with the approach I outlined earlier this year: to use force against anyone who threatens America’s core interests, but to mobilize partners wherever possible to address broader challenges to international order. “….
LikeLike
So the USA trains people like bin Laden because they had to “get the commies,” even if it meant supporting dictators, and murderers.
Then they support corrupt and brutal regimes that trample the rights of their people.
Then they fund and support an illegal occupation of Palestinian land, and contribute to the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Iraq from bombing and sanctions.
It’s not right to station USA troops in Saudi Arabia or to fund Israel to the tune of billions of dollars as they continue to S**T on the Palestinian people.
It’s not right to starve the people of Iraq with economic sanctions that kill hundreds of thousands of children.
It’s not right that the USA uses most of the world’s resources, and maintains military installations and troops in over 700 locations.
If the USA makes it “Us Against Them” they can hardly act surprised if and when those on whom they’ve declared that war take them at their word and decide they have nothing to lose by taking as many of them down as they can.
And the reason no one is willing to just say “Stop it” is because in the world of power politics to do such a thing is for PUSSIES.
Real men hit back. Even if terrorists are able to pull off more attacks against the United States or be-head more people from USA
The USA will ultimately find and kill them. They have the weapons and the ability to kill more of them than they can kill of you.
And that’s all that seems to matter to most yanks. Killing them will not create peace. New freedom fighters replace old ones.
If the USA wish to minimize the likelihood of terrorism being deployed against their nation, they must insist that their nation turns from the policies that have given rise to those grievances.
If, on the other hand, the USA’s main concern is to show them how BADDDDDDDDDDDDDDD they are, then maybe this wouldn’t matter much to them at all. And in that case, they would set out to show those other kids who was boss..
That kind of behavior is messed up when kids engage in it. When adults with explosives do it, it becomes deadly.
Unless the USA begins to fundamentally alter the way they as a nation operate around the world, they are in for years of violence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ah @ Kiwi.. another smoking gun.. On september 10, 2013 EXACTLY one year before this speech , which occurred on september 10 , 2014. Obomba gave a speech about bombing the Syrian Government. We were arming ISIS to fight them back then.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbIrm42zYTU)
LikeLike
The occupation in Palestine is a moral issue with civil rights angles, not a legal one. It’s unclaimed territory. They didn’t sign because they didn’t want to recognise Israel.
LikeLike
some how ray rice jumped over here
LikeLike
and, no, dave… that was also back in 09
the last time i cut myself which is also a picture of on another thread here was pretty much the last time i had a night like that
LikeLike
that’s a lie maybe 3 times like that since then ie that much dope and booze
LikeLike
Maybe he should stop the wars and change his name to LA Bamba. That would be much better.
LikeLike
yeah that’s why your saturday night special comment struck me, like no canadian said ever lol
LikeLike
Here you go v8 (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51RmnwDESoL._SS500_.jpg)
LikeLike
Im drivin a 4 banger now but its a bmw lol just a 95.
LikeLike
The oil thing is a major consideration in many of the recent wars of opportunity/convenience/profit started by industrialised nations. But it’s not just oil revenue, its also about supply security.
But the oil thing is only a part of what makes war “necessary”. It is, in itself, a massive, profitable industry. Governments and the arms trade have shared a bed since the beginning of time. It is a market that can be boosted whenever required, merely by choosing a target and an excuse. The Military Industrial Complex is actually a thing, not just a lefty activist catch-phrase. And then there are all the peripheral private contracts…
War is rarely about overtly grabbing land and redrawing borders these days, although that still happens. It is more often a business venture and a tool of domestic politics. I blogged on this aspect a while back:
http://www.buddhuu.com/glory-war-marketing/
LikeLike
@ Ebony @ Kiwi
What the US should do:
– help defend its allies (Turkey, Iraq?),
– lean on Saudi Arabia to cut off money to ISIS,
– lean on Western arms dealers not to sell arms to ISIS,
– push for peace in Syria.
That is what a Nobel Peace Prize winner would do, you would think.
The US should NOT cross into Syria in pursuit of ISIS without UN approval. That would weaken peace in the Middle East long-term, meaning more headaches down the road, and confirm ISIS propaganda.
But that is just me. And probably, more or less, Obama circa 2002.
US leadership does not think like that. The US was built on war, what Martin Luther King, Jr called militarism. It has a structural need for war, as Anonymous and buddhuu point out. Both CNN and Fox News have “experts” pounding the drum for war. The BBC, New York Times and others use these very same experts. What they do not tell you is that these experts are in bed with the defence industry. See Lee Fang’s piece in The Nation (link listed below). Obama’s own proposals are heavily militaristic, as were President Johnson’s in Vietnam.
The US is the world’s biggest arms dealer and the countries in the Middle East are its junkies. An enduring Middle East peace would be a disaster. As bad as the NRA is, the defence industry is even worse. The oil industry also gets rich off of an unstable Middle East.
King:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2013/01/02/martin-luther-king-jrs-riverside-speech-against-the-vietnam-war/
Fang:
http://www.thenation.com/article/181601/whos-paying-pro-war-pundits
LikeLiked by 1 person
un convocation hands international recognition and legitimacy to the statist non-govenrmental organization deemed isis/isil its from a real cynical point of view a hardline sectarian internal thing, not to say i would do well under sharia or should women have to get circumcised etc, clearly there is some human rights issues there
the us will fight as hard as the purse strings will allow considering the econmoy and how many active military are on duty abroad now it’s pretty much stretched thin and also china is in the background with the leverage over us due to their investment in government finance (bond etc) issues.
LikeLike
it would be nice to see some islamic countries step up and make public statements about it something other than the uk and us talking we’re gonna blow this and that up…
LikeLike
Ed Wasserman, dean of the UC Berkeley Graduate School for Journalism:
http://www.thenation.com/article/181601/whos-paying-pro-war-pundits
LikeLike
Jeff Cohen, an associate professor of journalism at Ithaca College.:
http://www.thenation.com/article/181601/whos-paying-pro-war-pundits
LikeLike
@abagond:
The UK’s BBC should not be considered a reliable or impartial news source. While it has yet to plumb Fox’s outrageous reactionary depths it is drifting that way. None of our mainstream media are reliable. Possibly the closest we get to honest reporting are The Guardian and The Independent newspapers, but those have their own issues with fact-checking and both have their own agendas – as do many of their independent contributors.
One of the BBC’s most annoying failings at the moment is its biased reporting of the Israel/Palestine situation, and its continual and deliberate refusal to report huge popular protests against government and in support of Scottish independence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would agree with that Buddhuu! But I would put forward RT as a great alternative source for reliable reports in the mainstream media. It covers many of the things you’ve highlighted as lacking from the BBC…
LikeLiked by 1 person
v8driver said:
Yes it would, but there are issues that make this a relatively rare occurrence.
In many countries there is a degree of tacit public sympathy with IS’s (and other groups’) general anti-west agenda, even though most of the people would not actually want Islamic State descending upon their own neighbourhoods. Governments tend to tread cautiously in the hope of alienating the smallest possible number of people.
Also, in Islam there is a principle of “70 excuses”: a turn-the-other-cheek analogue. Muslim people are sometimes reluctant to condemn other Muslims when speaking with non-Muslims. As it was explained to me, “70 excuses” like many other things, isn’t actually something that came from The Prophet himself, but from a later scholar. Nevertheless, it is a widely accepted principle and it has been cited (to me) as one reason that condemnation from Islamic people and states is sometimes not forthcoming, or not expressed to non-Muslims.
The friend who explained this to me is Bangladeshi, not Middle Eastern/Arab, so whether the same attitudes hold across that distance I do not know, but this is, approximately, what I was told when I asked why Muslim people, as individuals, are not often seen and heard speaking out publicly.
The Muslim Council of Great Britain does issue statements condemning violence committed in the name of Islam, but even this sometimes seems like an exercise in going through the motions with little enthusiasm.
My Bangladeshi friend says that within the UK Muslim communities there is no overwhelming consensus about the rights/wrongs of IS or about how to address the situation. That said, there does seem to be a general feeling that western interference is very widely resented.
LikeLike
Kwamla said:
Well, yes and no. Certainly RT can be relied upon to offer critical perspective on the actions of US and UK governments etc, and I do check them out. However, their toeing of the official Russian line is so transparent. They do offer a balance to the BS from Fox and the BBC, but opposing biased sources do not combine to give objectivity.
LikeLike
Of course, just like any mainstream media source they have their own agenda and biases. Which media outlet doesn’t? But their polical coverage, views and analysis is far more open and inclusive than other media sources you could care to mention. This is also reflected in the subjects covered in weekly reports and documentaries they show.
I can learn far more about how the battle for Scotland independence is progressing on RT than I can on the BBC right now!
LikeLike
Kwamla said:
Yes, indeed. The BBC have done a truly risible job covering the Scottish referendum. Staggering bias. There’s a petition to get their political editor suspended for violation of the BBC’s charter.
LikeLike
I admit I had some hope that things would be different under Obama but things have actually gone even worse. In 2011 he signed the law that gives him the powers to arrest and detain anyone, anywhere around the world, at any time for as long as he sees fit, WITHOUT any trial (Naomi Wolf et al.). That is not too democratic, is it?
There is a real threat of WW3 as we speak in Europe, thanks to US financed and organized coup in Ukraine (wikileaks: in 2006 US called present president Poroshenko “our man inside”; Victoria Nulands Fuck EU phone call, her speech in Washington Press Club 31.12. 2013 etc.) were Obama is BS:tting about the suverenity of that country, while he has now announced that when US air force bombs “ISIS” in Syria, the Syrian government can not response in anyway because if they do, USA will bring down that regime. So Syria has no suverenity in Obamas eyes at all.
Mind you, ISIS is funded by US and its allies and it was designed to bring down the Assad regime in Syria. Who believes that Obama is going to bomb them in Syria? Mark my words, USA will bomb the government troops and president Assad in Syria.
So Irak and ISIS are just excuses to attack on Syria. You will see. There will be few more thousand US service men dying in a war which is made by this government and this president for the oil and gas of the Middle East. Don’t believe me? You don’t have to. You will see soon enough.
LikeLike
@Abagond
Thank-you for clarifying your position. I agree with you. But if they were going to defend its allies, wouldn’t they have to send troops in and take on ISIS troops? Meaning, go to war?
LikeLike
The first of this for me is just like the 911 op pretext
we conveniently have yet again some bad mulsim abrabs in the middle east that we need to ,not talk to,not try to understand and heal , but to just kill period.
ah now we don’t have to pay any more attention to black people being beaten and murdered so regularly by american police that some of them are rioting,
nope off the news cycle
its iraq ,afrganstans,syria thousands of miles away where I(white american)
can kill and rape and steal without consequences or accountability.
No we are not going to deal with imgration right now ,you come here because you actually believe the propaganda we put out about equality and justice ,suckers
we don’t care if your a child by yourself ,wer’e sending you back,etc etc.
that first speech is consistent with how obomba is now ,he feels and thinks just like the other members of the corporate elite community,
perhaps i need to do a pysch profile of this group oh yeah socio and psychopathic.
as to news sources,why still depend much less trust established institutional sources proven to not just be bias but socio and psychopathic from racism to sexism consumerism and any other patho-ism you can think of.
good news ,while I just heard and read a scathing critique of internet use by ralph nader I still think if used correctly and even if not it still is a revolutionary new medium that increasingly is making prior medium’s archaic and obsolete.
and while as usual most the commenters here including our host are posting insightful and informative comments
v8driver semi coherent semi off topic ramblings are confusing annoying and require my regular skip and ignore procedure be used frequently.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@mbeti that mess is from ray rice
LikeLike
@buddhuu
actually there is condemnation of ISIS in many Muslim-majority countries (including by Saudis—which is really ironic) and by Muslim scholars and organizations. Since, the West isn’t interested, people have to make the effort and find these statements themselves…but there are plenty on the net…….
Another interesting note is that of the name—this group (ISIS) has different names and now some countries such as France (Washington Post.com) are considering dropping the “Islamic” term from the name as this could be misunderstood as legitimizing/validating the groups ideology…..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/09/17/france-is-ditching-the-islamic-state-name-and-replacing-it-with-a-label-the-group-hates/
De-legitimizing hate groups and hate ideology is a good start…..
By the way, I agree with comments by TheHipHopRecords that unless the U.S. government fundamentally changes its foreign policies—the cycle of violence is not going to stop. The U.S. enables violence.
Changing the FP will mean the U.S. will lose in the short term—but the world will gain in peace…..and who knows—since with peace comes prosperity—the U.S. may make economic gains in the long term…..
LikeLike
@kiwi that’s interesting, but i think it’s more dependent on defense contractors than the nra and civilian attitudes on firearms in the us.
I doubt there’s anyway to really find out as a civilian, but how many russian vs chinese vs us firearms are being used in anger in the middle east would probably reveal a lot about the realities of these conflicts
LikeLike
@ Ebony
The US might have to send in ground tropps at some point, but that should always be a last resort: NO ONE likes having foreign troops on their soil, not even when they are from an ally.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
I think US militarism and its gun culture have a common root. The US was built on the gun.
LikeLike
Here is Bolivian President Evo Morales on Obama’s motives for war with ISIS (I generally agree with him since Obama has not made a good faith effort to avoid war and does it without UN backing):
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1F0yE6aV5ng)
LikeLike
I also agree. I think there was a plan to delegitimize Russia in the UN security council because they would have absolutely vetoed this. Obama didn’t even ask and part of that was trying to get Britain on board with the “beheading” videos. They were also occupied with the Scottish independence vote. I fear there will be a false flag attack soon to get boots on the ground there, and I hope it’s nothing too brutal. The difference is with social media and so many people awake they will be caught in the act.
LikeLike
Obama is bombing brown people again and he’s using your pension to pay for it.
LikeLike
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sYbOL1lyyg) Ron Paul’s what if speech
LikeLike
imagine you were them (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKfuS6gfxPY)
LikeLike
Reblogged this on .
LikeLike
I don’t think it’s that important to the American government which company specifically controls the oil, as long it is a part of the gobal economy. If it’s non-American companies, they still sell the oil on the world market and lower the prices for everyone. That is very different from the Cold War, when a military occupation of the Middle East by the Soviets seemed possible. That doesn’t seem likely for China in the foresseable future.
LikeLike
Kartoffel
I don’t think it’s that important to the American government which company specifically controls the oil, as long it is a part of the gobal economy.
———————————————————————————————
Exactly. It also don’t matter which “Arabs” form the governments since their only choices are to sell the oil or eat SANDwiches.
LikeLike
I agree if we’re talking specifically about the 2003 invasion. I think that was a aberration from the general American imperial policy and against it’s imperial interest. There specific buisness interest supported by the neo-conservative ideology prevailed over the imperial realism that I see in the Obama and Clinton era.
But the traditional engagement of America in the Middle East is about securing that it stays a part of the America-ruled economic sphere, not the interest of specific companies.
LikeLike
I agree that the American empire tries to protect and help the big companies, but buisness interest is not a monolith. The companies can have different and contradictory interests. Also I don’t think big buisness is the only thing that influences American foreign policy. Ideology and imperial self-preservation also play a role.
LikeLike
“America, our endless blessings bestow an enduring burden. But as Americans, we welcome our responsibility to lead.”
The Whitewashed Man’s Burden?
LikeLike