OT: the one thing I congratulate Trump for

[PeteWasLucky]

His decision about Qatar.

[TT]

PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 9.6.2017 klo 21:56:
> His decision about Qatar.
>

Please elaborate.

[*skriptis]

PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> His decision about Qatar.
>
>


Yes it's good but Qatar are second biggest bad guys, but saudis
are even worse with their wahabi ideology.

95% of all suicide bombers are wahabi Sunni Muslims which is
official Saudi ideology.

I hope Qatar is only the beginning so I support it.


--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

> PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 9.6.2017 klo 21:56:
>> His decision about Qatar.
>>
>
> Please elaborate.
>

How about watching some news instead of movies?

No, in fact, you're free to do as you wish. Fuck the news if you
enjoy the movies. Time is limited for everyone of us.


But that's the problem. You're misinformed, badly informed and
prone to prejudices, yet you're vocal in political discussions,
with your mind probably being stuck in "the movies mindset" with
those black and white concepts.







--

[Gracchus]

Life isn't a cabaret at all. It's a film noir cityscape.

[PeteWasLucky]

> Please elaborate.

Qatar is the smallest most rich country in the region and they have been financing terrorism and instability in the entire area since Clinton and Obama.
They have been working hard to destabilize Egypt and financing opposition groups to get Moslem brotherhood back in power. This is what they were asked to do during the previous adminstration. Clearly the sisi visit to US worked to explain to Trump the pressure he has been facing from these groups.
Obama never accepted sisi after he removed the Moslem brotherhood from power.
Qatar is doing the same thing in Syria financing opposition that led to empowering of Isis.

Sisi warned the world many years back that the powers working against Egypt are destined to terrorize the whole world.

[*skriptis]

PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Muslim brotherhood doesn't really terrorize anyone in the west,
they have that nasty clerical ideology and want to impose
political Islam in Islamic countries. Bad, but not the worst it
is for us. Sure we should support Sissi, Gadaffi types against
Muslim brotherhood.

Get rid of Muslim brotherhood but crack down on main bad guys,
Saudi Arabia then.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4584294/Saudi-soccer-team-
refuse-stand-London-victims.html






--

[*skriptis]

Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

If it is a film, you definitely qualify for the villain role, with
your "North Koreans might nukes us, so let's nuke them
preemptively".

Terrible attitude, from a civilian. I'd like to emphasise that.
Civilian.
Of course president and leadership would think in different terms,
protecting the country and their imperial interests etc.


But to have civilian prone to warmongering to that extent, terrible.

It's kinda ironic that so called rednecks and other hardcore Trump
supporters, who are considered trash, are amongst most sensible,
rational and peace loving people in the USA.

And liberals are eager to start wars and have people killed.



--

[PeteWasLucky]

http://www.emannabih.com/the-link-between-muslim-brotherhood-and-isis/

[Gracchus]

On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 1:30:03 PM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> > On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 12:30:02 PM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> >> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
> >> > PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 9.6.2017 klo 21:56:
> >> >> His decision about Qatar.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Please elaborate.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> How about watching some news instead of movies?
> >>
> >> No, in fact, you're free to do as you wish. Fuck the news if you
> >> enjoy the movies. Time is limited for everyone of us.
> >>
> >>
> >> But that's the problem. You're misinformed, badly informed and
> >> prone to prejudices, yet you're vocal in political discussions,
> >> with your mind probably being stuck in "the movies mindset" with
> >> those black and white concepts.
> >
> > Life isn't a cabaret at all. It's a film noir cityscape.

> If it is a film, you definitely qualify for the villain role

That's appropriate. Nearly everyone in film noir is morally compromised. The "good guys" are usually minor characters that get killed off early.

> with your "North Koreans might nukes us, so let's nuke them
> preemptively".

> Terrible attitude, from a civilian. I'd like to emphasise that.
> Civilian.

> Of course president and leadership would think in different terms,
> protecting the country and their imperial interests etc.

> But to have civilian prone to warmongering to that extent, terrible.

I'm on the West Coast. The North Korean bastards will be able to reach me long before they can get the politicians in D.C. So "civilian" or not, the threat has personal relevance. Not only that, I think it's worth the risk even though I may end up getting vaporized by their kamikaze retaliation. So you see, the greater good concerns me above all else. :)

> It's kinda ironic that so called rednecks and other hardcore Trump
> supporters, who are considered trash, are amongst most sensible,
> rational and peace loving people in the USA.

> And liberals are eager to start wars and have people killed.

Aside from your statement being ridiculous at face value, how do you conveniently overlook that two RST Trump supporters (and your comrades-in-arms) made posts that share my position on this?

[*skriptis]

It's a difficult topic.
Concern is a legit thing.
And it's your government's job.


But this is rst and common folks discussion. The only point I was
making was isis nutjobs comparison that Stephen made and that's
completely, imo, ridiculous, and in a broader sense serves as
justification for your own warmongering. Like, they're crazy so
we should bomb them.
It's a dehumanization thing that Nazis did with Russians,
justifying their aggression that way.

You really think north Koreans are even slightly irrational? That
they'd just wake up one day and launch something?
So you believe that?

Don't go into security, geostrategic and other issues, whether
they should be allowed to have such weapon etc. That's for your
government to deal with. Simply personally, do you think Kim and
his regime would ever ever attack first and for no
reason?

Mine is no, but if your answer is yes, ask yourself these questions.

Why aren't Indians, Russians, Chinese, or even Europeans concerned
with North Korean threat the same why you are?

And two, why do you think their propaganda glorifying retaliation
and showing U.S. cities in flames is more disgusting/threatening
than your officials talking publicly about "military" solution?
I'd call that equally disturbing.

Maybe their posture has something to do with your posture, ever
since GWB declared them to be evil country, together with Iraq,
Iran etc. So it's been 15 years that they're on a shot list.


We know how some of these countries fared, facing total
destruction by the neocons, like Libya. Iraq, Syria etc.


And you're surprised that they're so belligerent when in fact
they're simply defensive. If I was Kim I'd pursue the same course
equally. It's the only logical thing.


Maybe if Trump destroys neocons completely and America guarantees
Koreans their sovereignty and abides by non regime change policy,
they'd be willing to cease their activities. No games with China
will do the trick, as it's a security issue. For them, and
they're simply making you aware of the same threats they've been
facing.

Either give them safety, or you'll have to attack them. But it is
you who are bad guys then. Not them.


I'm not being neither soft, nor pro korean, but these guy don't
even seem to be anti-American, culturally and so, remember them
welcoming Rodman etc.

Very unlikely that they're crazed motherfuckers zombie/Borg types.













--

[bob]

careful, gracchus might be left coast CIA for all we know. :-)

> The only point I was
> making was isis nutjobs comparison that Stephen made and that's
> completely, imo, ridiculous, and in a broader sense serves as
> justification for your own warmongering. Like, they're crazy so
> we should bomb them.
>It's a dehumanization thing that Nazis did with Russians,
> justifying their aggression that way.
>You really think north Koreans are even slightly irrational? That
> they'd just wake up one day and launch something?
>So you believe that?

we should decipher between the NKorean gov't and the NKorean people
when we talk about the koreans.

>Don't go into security, geostrategic and other issues, whether
> they should be allowed to have such weapon etc. That's for your
> government to deal with. Simply personally, do you think Kim and
> his regime would ever ever attack first and for no
> reason?
>
>Mine is no, but if your answer is yes, ask yourself these questions.
>
>Why aren't Indians, Russians, Chinese, or even Europeans concerned
> with North Korean threat the same why you are?
>And two, why do you think their propaganda glorifying retaliation
> and showing U.S. cities in flames is more disgusting/threatening
> than your officials talking publicly about "military" solution?
> I'd call that equally disturbing.
>Maybe their posture has something to do with your posture, ever
> since GWB declared them to be evil country, together with Iraq,
> Iran etc. So it's been 15 years that they're on a shot list.

wonder if jim jong il spilled his coffee when bush gave that state of
the union speech? could see it now:
"huh? wtf? what did we do?" lol

>We know how some of these countries fared, facing total
> destruction by the neocons, like Libya. Iraq, Syria etc.
>And you're surprised that they're so belligerent when in fact
> they're simply defensive. If I was Kim I'd pursue the same course
> equally. It's the only logical thing.
>Maybe if Trump destroys neocons completely and America guarantees
> Koreans their sovereignty and abides by non regime change policy,
> they'd be willing to cease their activities. No games with China
> will do the trick, as it's a security issue. For them, and
> they're simply making you aware of the same threats they've been
> facing.
>Either give them safety, or you'll have to attack them. But it is
> you who are bad guys then. Not them.
>I'm not being neither soft, nor pro korean, but these guy don't
> even seem to be anti-American, culturally and so, remember them
> welcoming Rodman etc.
>Very unlikely that they're crazed motherfuckers zombie/Borg types.

bob

[Shakes]

On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 4:30:02 PM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Some good points.