USA planing for WW#3?

While that may be true of SOME Poles , 50 % are just scroungers , taking advantage.exploiting what ever government social benefits they can grab.

Once again ,. spoken like an idiot , ignorant of Britain's obligations to Poland when Germany invaded Poland.

Go learn .


....

 

Melanie Phillips might read up on some nuclear physics. Giving Iran the right to enrich its own uranium for its own reactors is not at all tantamount to giving it the right to make nuclear weapons. The major problem of the Manhattan Project, besides getting a bomb to stay together long enough to sustain the Chain reaction, was getting pure enough U235. Reactor fuel is good at 3%, bombs require purity into the 90's

Oh, and I think Plutonium is made in reactors, it's not derived from purification at all, though it might need to be purified at some stage in the manufacture.

Iran has every right and even necessity to make it's own reactor fuel, so its power grid can't be held hostage to either Russia or America

Iran is not Korea, a generations long regimented garrison state which maintains its power mainly on the basis of a constant threat, (which we are kind enough to renew for their leader's propaganda convenience every few years). Iran is a state whose main wealth is in a resource whose world supply and price is almost totally controlled by their worst enemy. They cannot afford, like the Koreans foolishly have, to bankrupt themselves getting a weapon whose use would only result in their own obliteration.

They do probably WANT a bomb, yes, but only to keep India and Pakistan, (as well as Israel) from invading them. Their greatest mistake IMO has been to not adopt the Israeli solution. Most diplomats accept without question that Israel not only has the bomb but is possibly the third largest nuclear power in the world. Yet they've never, AFAIK, exploded one, anywhere, nor even admitted they have one. They simply don't say they DON'T have one either

Call me an anti-Semite for stereotyping, Jews ARE clever.

 

I am talking about Germans from Germany. German lost out being the official language of the U.S. by one vote. They began coming when the U.S. was still a colony, and didn't stop speaking German until after the sinking of the Lusitania. Their connections to Germany was very strong, and the ones I knew had one parent from Germany, and another parent who was a four and five generation German American.

As for Americans cheering British cities being bombed, you really don't know anything do you? Americans never cheered, but Roosevelt promised the American people we would not be dragged into another European war. He did help Britain though by starting the Lend Lease program, which destroyed our neutrality and put us on Britain's side.

We did the same thing in WWI. Roosevelt was in charge of the Navy and Churchill the British Admiralty, and they must have made a deal between them so that we were secretly sending arms to Britain. The passenger ship the Lusitania was packed with arms, that's why it sunk when hit by a German sub. The question is of course, did the British notify the Germans that the ship was carrying arms, after all having Americans killed would force us to enter the war? Knowing the British, especially in an era when they considered their own men dispensable, I don't doubt it.

 

Now yes Jeannette, the state Department does Obama's work and Obama think he is the champion of universal Islam/
It is no longer playing with fire but rather atoms. As you said above and I concur if Iran goes Nuclear so is all the Muslim Terrorist organizations.

 

And killed millions of his own country men in a great purge.

Not good for the occupied nations who saw their homes trampled by tanks, soldiers, sent to prisons, starved, stunted under terrible economics.

Wise. But without people to steal from how will communism ever work?

We did none of those things but have the power to do so. We left Europe, and gave her nations a Marshall Plan. Even offered it to you.

No it won't

Gang of commies huh? Raiding the capitalist mall market? It does sound familiar. Occupy Wall street right?


eh...got to go to work. pick this up later in the car probably

 

Hilary's had a bit of Middle age spread ,Frump meets the press.Very unflattering.

 

We are getting ready to take over the world unless we get one......no two million dollars! muhahahaha

 

The world is very different after mid 20th century. You are correct. If it weren't for our war budget, there is a 99.9% chance you would be speaking German right now. Very different indeed.
Youre welcome.

 

Not German but Euro English --


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The European Commission


The European Commission has announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the EU, rather than German, which was the other contender. Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had room for improvement and has therefore accepted a five-year phasing in of "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make sivil servants jump for joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of the "k", Which should klear up some konfusion and allow one key less on keyboards.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f", making words like "fotograf" 20% shorter.

In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent "e" is disgrasful.

By the fourth yer, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".

During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and everivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer.

ZE DREM VIL FINALI COM TRU!

Herr Schmidt

 

Yep, small wars where necessary, other coercive means otherwise to achieve the same ends. What are the ends? To afford the psychopaths who run things more power and wealth at the expense of the rest of the world.

 

Now this is the right thing to say, America is the one that is planning for wars, not Russia, Russia plans for peace not war. Who wanted to take a military action against Syria ? Russia??? or US? and who worked to solve the problem peacefully? US??? or Russia?

- - - Updated - - -

Who is arming the terrorists in Syria? Russia???

 

US is not planning wars, US is doing wars right now... The War in Afganistan, The War in Iraq... The Wars in Syria, Lybia was maded by active US patisipation.

Peasefull US president Obama got Nobel premia... and so... He began 2 wars at the same time (Afganistan, Iraq)... What it means? How he got the premia? Why is Obama peasefull? Obama is warfull president...

 

USA is most aggresive country in the World.

 

This is why US made WW2.
Every nation in the World became poorer, the British Empire collapsed, but US Empire to be the only one to be much richer at the END of WW2 than at its start

The same reason push US to make WW3!!!

 

Yes it was all hushed up later on.

"There was a large proportion of American citizens and many within the US government who felt that America should join the war on the side of the Axis powers, predominantly Nazi Germany. The likes of Joseph Kennedy (US Ambassador to to Britain) thought it better to ally with what he felt would be the new power in Europe for trade reasons - as did Prescott Bush (grandfather of the previous president George W.) who provided various banking facilities that helped Hitler rise to power and steel and mining until 1942. Henry Ford, a raging anti semite and anglophobe, sold armed vehicles to Germany quickly and efficiently while dithering and outright refusing to do the same for Britain. All of this attitude was to change,of course,when Germany declared war on the US.

There were those who also felt it was time that the old imperial giant were "taught a lesson" and brought to it's knees, for no American business venture could expand abroad in the most lucrative areas since Britain was already there with it's vast Empire and own business pursuits. With Britain defeated the US could take it's place.


Also, do not forget that there were many American citizens who were of German birth or heritage - some even returned to the Fatherland at the outbreak of war. On top of which the largest Nazi rally outside of Germany took place in Madison Square Garden.







[
The New York Nazis (wink)

 

Americans love wars - it was born in a bloody war + foundations are soaked in blood.

Niall Ferguson,(historian) recently analysed America’s attempts at world policing as a sort of ham-fisted imperialism perhaps he wasn’t far out.
. Americans love war. They -indulge in talking abt 'Founding Fathers, democracy and liberty simply to hide their darker side.

It was born of war. Its borders were extended by war and its foreign policy has always been belligerent. America’s vast military establishment seems to roam the world seeking wars to fight, even when their outcome must be disastrous, as in Iraq. This may imply an imperial spirit or merely an instinct to “dominion”.

But it reflects a nation addicted to battle.
America’s leaders justify their wars as “to defend democracy and expand freedom’s sphere”.

But both democracy and freedom were confined to the heirs of the early colonial settlement. America’s many enemies were expected to submit to whatever rule was ordained for them, and it was rarely freedom or self-determination . the long-term patterns of America's development look broadly similar to those of other large, successful nations”.

. Foreign settlers( Dutch/Spanish/French etc.) were defeated or bribed and Indians brutally repressed. .... America was a nation born of crude force

The monuments in Washington’s Mall celebrate only five wars, the revolution, the civil war, the second world war, Korea and Vietnam. They omit the politically incorrect wars of continental conquest, against Spain, France, Mexico and, above all, the Indians


=====


=====

 

Did a citizen of the once # 1 colonial empire in the world just flamed Americans for being warmongers? I guess the Nazi cereal boxes you get your "historical facts" from dont discuss your own history do they ?

 

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree does it? Seems to me like the americans aren't much different than europeans. Funny how you mentioned the bloody wars against the spanish and french, as if those had their hands cleaned from their own colonial adventures.

 

Well, if you've listened to most Americans you'd realize that they really do consider themselves very different to everyone else. Pity that you failed to understand the rest of my post : never mind . Lets see if you can understand what this thread is about.


"
"Since World War II, the American war industry has never stopped growing. Eisenhower, in his farewell speech 50 years ago when he left the White House to Kennedy, warned against the increasing power of the American arms industry: "We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." His prophecy comes true on a daily basis


In the ensuing 50 years, this industry has expanded enormously to encompass far-flung economic realms. Prophecies of the United States' decline as a superpower were not premature, but they sometimes seemed like watching a theater performance. Superpowers do not exit the stage and call to congratulate the winner with Anglo-Saxon politeness.


The American economy relies on this gigantic war machine. The policy of peace that some Democrats support is based on a different economics, but the way is long and hard, and it seems it is more difficult to beat China and India on this field. Even the president who became a symbol even before having done anything in office, and received the Nobel Peace Prize simply because he fulfilled Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream, doesn't have a good speech for the data on stagnant growth and unemployment; he has no response to America's decline.
When a bank chairman is replaced, the bank's investment policy is unlikely to change drastically. The president of the United States is like the chairman of a huge bank, and the differences between him and his political rivals are really dwarfed when they are viewed from the bloody morasses of Vietnam and Iraq, or even our own.
For years, the "peace camp" has pinned its hopes on an American president who will come and extricate us from the occupation. This folly also reflects Israel's dependence on the United States in general.


It is convenient to forget that no other country in the world has received a gift of $100 billion since its establishment 63 years ago. It is convenient to forget that for decades, Israel has been the pipeline through which the United States funded the American arms industry:

The money it disburses goes through Israel and back to those industries. It is convenient for our gentle doves to forget that the Israeli project is first and foremost an imperial one, through which the United States - whether by stick (bombings deep inside Egypt, the destruction of Beirut, the starvation of Gaza ) or by carrot ("We'll pressure them if you are nice to us" ) - continues to rule the region.


True, it is sad to see the "liberators of Libya (Iraq/Afghanistan etc ) denying the 44-year-old military dictatorship in Palestine.


(a Jewish view -Haaretz )



http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/president-of-the-blood-bank-1.386926

 

::

Off Topic.



Zzzzzzzz:

 

Oh we understood your post alright, we just see it for what it is, a typical pretentious European fart, you think it smells like roses but it stinks just like any other fart

ta ta

 

And in both WW1 and WW2 the first thing you did was come crawling to us, begging us to intervene. Churchill even invented the so-called 'special relationship' as an added inducement to get us into your war with the Germans. Be careful what you wish for, next time you might get it.

 

I'm starting to think that a little US withdrawal IS in order, just so we can make them come crawling back to us yet again to intervene in the chaos that is sure to develop without the US keeping the peace. I'm sick of us not getting recognition for the stability that we have provided since WWII, and a temporary withdrawal might get us that recognition.

 

Because we have the most to take and therefore the most to defend

 

All of these dirty looks being cast upon the US! We didn't start the fire! For as long as "civilization" has existed, this has been the way of the world. Pick any nation that has held world dominion in the past, and see that the sword is the ONLY guarantor.
The big idea with America is to do it as cleanly as we can, in spite of our own corruption. Does anyone think that China would be "gentler"?
We take so much for granted. For the simplest "labor saving devices" that you have laying around the house, making your life easier, our military has to keep access to rare earth elements open and functioning. This means that mines have to function in places where the population is evolved very little beyond cave men. The stuff has to be shipped through places where we keep discovering deadly viruses, like the West Nile and other nasty hosts.
You had better believe that if the US wasn't in the role of dominance, the next guy would rape and pillage his way to the title. It's the way of the world, and the world doesn't care if you get over it or not.