5 Year-Old Boy Detained At Airport For Hours Due To Trump Ban

Global hegemony, by whatever means, has been America's raison d'etre since the end of WW2, despite whatever nuances, distractions and claims of 'freedom and democracy' America might invoke to justify her actions.

 

History. Muslim armies invaded the Holy Land in the 600s and colonized it.

Bashing the Bible isn't a defense for your argument.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm wondering why you lack such basic understanding of post-WWII US foreign policy to realize much of American foreign policy was dedicated to stopping Communist expansion.

- - - Updated - - -

I lived in a racially diverse inner city area for nearly 30 years. It's not difficult to spot someone with a bad case of sheltered white suburbanite with rose-colored glasses.

 

You never surprise me. Perfectly said !

 

Ah yes, Communist expansion. Is that anything like US expansion? Tell us, which country has done the most bombing, invading, overthrowing of democracies, destabilising legitimate governments, buying elections, funding terrorists, supporting genocidal dictators? The answer, my friend, is not Russia. That's your 'foreign policy' and nobody trusts America. The biggest threat to world peace is America, and under Trump that threat has grown exponentially.

https://www.good.is/articles/the-world-is-afraid-of-americans

 

LoL... Are you seriously trying to justify the fake Jewish state today by trying to say the lands historically belong to Jews? Are you really?
Because then the one in the first place should leave home is you purple:

Source: wiki...

 

And correspondingly another infant child supposedly
washes ashore off the Spanish coast.
Which case is worst of the two supposed evils?
For one is alive to live yet another day while the other
w/o his/her own permission left this world unable to
possibly assist in making it a better and safer place
in which to live in.

Wake up America!
For not only are they using our own laws and freedoms against us in an attempt to accelerate the US demise, especially along racial and religious lines,they yet again
return to playing on,not only ours,but the entire worlds sympathy/sympathies.

 

STOP! Sit down! Take a deep breath! THINK! READ my reply again!

How in God's name can you equate all of that with "a Muslim"?
Furthermore: Do you see a Koran in her arm - or a Bible? Do you see a Green (muslim colour) flag behind her - or Red White & Blue! Do you see a Kalashnikov hoisted up to her shoulder or an AR?

 

It's the first alternative, I'm sure.

 

Ta. It's going straight to the top of my list of to-do's.

 

Gods and guns. That combination never worked out well.

 

Why you would think it is virtuous to destroy another form of government is a quagmire subject in itself. There is no way you can defend that notion as being "goodly". But I'll leave it for another time. Meanwhile I'd like for you to explain to me how "Operation TP Ajax" was 'stopping Communist expansion'. Or the illegal invasion of Irak.

 

I guarantee that you'll get nothing in response but McCarthy-era propagandist rhetoric about the 'Great Communist Conspiracy'.
The following was reported in The Guardian in 1999, quoting declassified British Foreign Office joint intelligence committee documents from 1968:

The Soviet Union had no intention of launching a military attack in the West at the height of the Cold War, British military and intelligence chiefs privately believed, in stark contrast to what Western politicians and military leaders were saying in public about the "Soviet threat".
"The Soviet Union will not deliberately start general war or even limited war in Europe", a briefing for the British chiefs of staff-marked Top Secret, UK Eyes Only, and headed The Threat: Soviet Aims and Intentions-declared in June 1968.
"Soviet foreign policy had been cautious and realistic", the department argued, and despite the Vietnam war, the Russians and their allies "continued to make contacts in all fields with the West and to maintain a limited but increasingly political dialogue with Nato powers" ..

Rogue State, William Blum, London, 2006

 

So it was wrong for the Allies to destroy Nazi expansionism? Are you aware how many bodies those Marxist regimes piled up? US foreign policy in the Latin Americas was all geared toward stopping USSR-allied Marxist movements.

Why would you leave US foreign policy stopping Communist expansion for another time when that's precisely what the topic is?

Operation Ajax? Bound to happen when you cozy up to the commies and consolidate power: http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/mossadeq.htm

"After Mohammad Mossadeq gained the office of Prime Minister of the Majlis he demanded to be also made Minister of War. As Minister of War he would have direct control over the army. When the Shah demurred on granting Mossadeq's demand again public demonstration persuaded him to do so.

When Mossadeq was made Minister of War he immediately started replacing the officers of the high command who were loyal to the Shah with ones who were loyal to him. The dismissed officers became the nucleus of a coup d'etat which deposed Mossadeq.

The involvement of the U.S. government in the downfall of Mossadeq stemmed in part from the support that Mossadeq was receiving from the Iranian Communist Party, the Tudeh Party. Reza Shah had banned the Tudeh Party but it still functioned on a clandestine basis. The U.S. government feared that a victory for Mossadeq would lead to a strong influence of communists in the government of Iran and an eventual drawing of Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence. The Soviet intelligence agency OGPU (later the KGB) had recruited some high level officials and had penetrated separatist movements of the Kurds and the Azerbaijanis as well as the trade unions of Iran. When Qavam es-Saltanah became prime minister of Iran in the period after World War II when British and Soviet military occupation of Iran ended three representatives of the Tudeh Party were made members of Qavam's cabinet."

How was the invasion of Iraq illegal? It was dumb and shouldn't have been done, but illegal? That's post-USSR. Globalist control of the Middle East is what I believe motivates US foreign policy in the area currently. Thankfully, Trump against Globalism and "nation-building."

It's Iraq, not Irak. العراق that's the equivalent of an English Q at the end. This is the Arabic equivalent to K : ك

 

Thayer Watkins? Who might that be then? Oh, and by the way, it might be worth reminding you that it was Soviet Russia which sacrificed over 20 million lives in defeating Nazi Germany. By the time America showed up (two years late), Germany was already in retreat.

 

That we, the common citizenry, were not aware of the truth is no surprise. But here we are today and we knew prior to the invasion (thanks to the UN inspection results) that there were no WMD's in Irak and we are equally aware that Russia and Putin pose no threat. But will the west carry on throwing shapes and intimidating war? It does look that way. Where are these Democratic principles we're told we live by?

 

There aren't any 'Democratic principles' left; it's all about global hegemony, and any pretence to democracy is a carefully orchestrated illusion. 'Our way or we'll bomb you' is America's guiding principle.

 

You are EXTREMELY uninformed.

* The NAZIS were anti-Communist.
* The Muslims (including the 5-year-old boy) are not Communists.
* Operation TP Ajax had nothing to do with Communism.
* Mohammad Mossadeq was no Communist. He lead Iran's Democratic government while the Shah was nothing more than a figure-head with nothing to say about the running of the country.

The rest of your reply is so utterly insane that I refuse to itemize it point for point.

NOTE:

The Arabic letter translates to "K" in my language. If that bothers you then you are out of luck.

 

Reminding might be a bit harsh. That part of history has been censored across the pond. You won't find it being taught in their schools.

 

Wait snakestretcher,in many European cultures
Iraq is Irak,or K is used at the end.
As for the invasion of Iraq,or the toppling of the
Hussein regime being legal,it was legal because
Hussein continued to defy one UN resolution after
the other,or/the world community´s decision.
In actuality he brought his fate and that of the Iraqi
nation on himself for his continued defiance of UN
resolution after resolution.

 

I am afraid so.

True enough, but they have managed to motivate the notion by clearly stating, "You are either with us or against us". So in that way any treachery they mete out can be considered preemptive.

 

FIRST. Saddam complied with the UN by destroying the weapons in question.
SECOND. The first inspection team was riddled with CIA spys and so Saddam did not allow it access.
THIRD. The UN realized that Saddam was correct and so sent a second inspection team. This team was allowed to complete its mision from Saddam's side .... but was refused by the US government.
FOURTH. The US did not have permission to invade Irak, thus they invaded illegally. The UN said it was illegal.
FIFTH. In conclusion it was, therefore, the US that was not in compliance with the UN.

 

Yeah, and that explains why we're bombing the crap out of Venezuela right now.

Don't be so eager to your friend's xenophobic outbursts, bob.

That part of history is not censored across The Pond and young people are taught about our allies' contributions to the war effort against the Nazis and their allies. It might go in one ear and out the other because they're too busy pursuing the trivialities and distractions of youth, but that's not their teachers' fault.

If the "progressives" in academia neglect to teach our youth anything, it's about the horrors that snake's comrades imposed on the unfortunate millions who were imprisoned behind the Iron Curtain. The Gulag, the Laogai, the re-education camps are all inconvenient facts that you'll never hear him talk about when he's bleating about how America is the most evil nation that ever existed.

 

There is something in what you say, yes I will agree. But whereas you see it as the distractions of youth I see it as intentional down-playing by the educational system itself. The American school curriculum seems to be geared (in most part) to spoon-feeding American, political propaganda and leaving out details that would shine favourable light on non-American achievements, particularly nations that played leading or important roles in American well-being. There is a patronizing tone taken whenever another nation’s attributes are mentioned, if they are mentioned at all.

No, I don't say that it is either. It is the fault of those who decide what is to be taught in American schools. Teachers are merely following orders.

You are not being completely honest now. If there is anything Americans love to talk about it is Hitler and/or Communism. I have lived in the US and I overhear what American tourists have to say, all summer long.

 

I've always found it interesting how people separate the two Gulf Wars when in fact the first Gulf War resumed the instant the Hussein regime violated the terms of the ceasefire agreement that brought a temporary halt to that conflict. When Saddam's Tikriti mafia violated those terms, Gulf War I resumed.

While I'm splitting hairs, it's also interesting how the opponents of the war pretend that the terms of the Gulf War I ceasefire agreement was limited to WMDs, when in fact, they covered a variety of issues.

PS. As you're probably aware, the UN has never ruled on the legality of the war, and quite frankly, this argument is somewhat silly when you think about. When the Hussein regime violated the terms of the Gulf War I ceasefire agreement, Baathist Iraq resumed the state of war that existed prior to the ceasefire agreement. In light of that, the arguments about the legality of the war are rendered moot, since the Hussein regime resumed Gulf War I long before Coalition troops responded in 2003. Evidently, some people don't understand how ceasefire agreements work and what the violation of a ceasefire agreement constitutes - war.

 

You know what´s fuuny?
Is the insuation that America went to war,any war for
that matter,
B/c of oil.,b/c it just so happens that America happens
a westernized,an industrial nation.
Tell that lie to a veteran.
We didn´t live or die for oil,but rather what we believed
in.
Values,principles,not only our own,but those that will
hopefully later follow in our footsteps.
In other words,mildly meant.what the governments
reasons are,its interests,must not be those of my own.
You want to know what interests me most?
It´s once again,in one piece btw,seeing the faces of
those that are most dear to me after living and breathing
hell on earth.
Did you happen to be there personally,or learned by word
of mouth,having your nose in books?
You had to be there in order to formulate an opinion.