War after war, whether is new one?
HISTORY REPEATS
1812 + 65 = 1877 Falling Osmanli colonialism
1877 + 64 = 1941 Falling of Fascist colonialism
1941 + 64 = 2005 Struggle against totalitarian modes,
for democratization.
You can look on //www.genevo.org/p2i.htm
Table 16.
1938 the Munich agreement brought " the world to the Europe ".
In 64 years army of the USA and coalitions will
conduct antiterrorist operation, which has brought protection against terrorism and peace for all.
What else is necessary for USA and Europe to do to create final peace?
well, let\'s see, for starters - acknowledge that there is more to the world than just US and Europe and their will is not going to be imposed on others without a fight.
you cannot bully people into submission any longer - within our own country we have been steadily quashing rights to bully the dissent into silence.
mankind needs to learn to work together, rather than trying to impose their way on each other. history will continue to repeat itself until the lesson is learned - extreme fundamentalism and forceful domination are not acceptable.
QuoteWar after war, whether is new one?
HISTORY REPEATS
1812 + 65 = 1877 Falling Osmanli colonialism
1877 + 64 = 1941 Falling of Fascist colonialism
1941 + 64 = 2005 Struggle against totalitarian modes,
for democratization.
You can look on //www.genevo.org/p2i.htm
Table 16.
1938 the Munich agreement brought " the world to the Europe ".
In 64 years army of the USA and coalitions will
conduct antiterrorist operation, which has brought protection against terrorism and peace for all.
What else is necessary for USA and Europe to do to create final peace?
England runs democratic colonization policy,
do you hear this for the first time?
Attack to London by Iraqi insurgents is possibly
connected with their strategy of anticolonial war.
Their calculation is connected with discredit of policy of
London in Iraq and disengagement of English armies.
For US government leaving of England from Iraq
would be disintegration of a coalition and individual
opposition to the world community.
64 years ago governments of the Europe convinced people
that barbarians live in Russia ;D, now Asia.
What in your opinion destruction of Iraq is justified by?
War in Iraq goes against presence of colonial armies.
If London refuse democratic colonization of Iraq
and accelerate disengage of armies, political positions of armed
democratls which are supported by London and Ankara will
weaken in Russia.
do you read or just respond? nothing i said implied that there is anything remotely justifiable in the war in Iraq - if you\'ve read the rest of this section of the board you\'d know that. the fact is, that does not justify the attack.
attacking Iraq, though wrong, does not offer license for terrorist attacks. nothing does. it is very wrong of us to be in Iraq. the only remotely justified presence is in Afghanistan, if that, because they were supposedly going after the master mind of the 9/11 attack on NYC - Osama binLaden. fact is, they\'ve lost the thread on that one and Bush had an agenda to go into Iraq to start with, they started orchestrating a reason to go there from the moment he took office.
that is wrong and we should never have done it. but, we did, and London among others, including Denmark and Italy, etc. supported us. they were seduced by the lies that our government put out and now they\'re stuck trying to find a way to salvage what is left of Iraq and get out.
that being the case, while i agree with the Iraqis\' right to protest and fight against our presence there, i do believe that a small but deadly fringe element is using that as an excuse to try to wreak havoc in the supposed mission of their perversion of Islam.
in this particular case it is not England and Colonialism, Oleg281, it\'s the US and Imperialism. most truly put, it\'s the result of a Corporate take over of US government.
About what international sympathy London asks?
London tries to present attack of insurgents
as world tragedy. Fifty person was lost, whereas
democrats divided people in Iraq and tens person daily perish. The world tragedy is played by democratic colonialists in Asia.
1938-1945, London kindled war against new Russian type of the device of the state, as a result 60 mln.people was lost.
2002-???, London has kindled war against developing Asian type of the device of the state.
How many should be lost, your opinion?
Quote1938-1945, London kindled war against new Russian type of the device of the state, as a result 60 mln. people was lost.
2002-, London has kindled war against developing Asian type of the device of the state.
please offer specific statements and not pseudoclever inuendo. this incident is not retribution for or response to WWII, though it may be a long term residual effect, yes. but in that regard every war, as you imply, is in some way developed by exploitation of a residual effect. that doesn\'t make it either right or tolerable.
in addition, random acts of terror are not an "acceptable" form of warfare - they are murder for the pure intention of terror and mayhem. they do nothing to further their own cause, and in fact they do the opposite.
London isn\'t calling for international sympathy - it is rightly getting it from the international community, who are outraged by this insanity. it isn\'t the number of people, it is the random killing of people going about their own business.
while i know it is popular to call these people insurgents, they are not really insurgents in my personal opinion. there are, in my belief, only a very few insurgents in Iraq, but they are fueled and abetted by a large group of terrorists fanning the flames of the insurgency for their own end. these are merely terrorists with a proclaimed totalitarian agenda. it is these terrorists who attacked London, not an insurgency. they are not fighting within one country for their own liberation or rule, but rather attacking worldwide seeking a wide ranging level of chaos and regression under their totalitarian regime.
do not take this to mean i condone the war in Iraq, i most heartily do not. the US had no business doing what it did and as a US citizen i am appalled and ashamed.it\'s a new world my friend, and you need to take what your history has taught you, put it in your back pocket, and examine the changes within society around the globe before applying platitudes. it is a serious situation and perhaps you\'re too young(?) or too self-involved(?) but whatever the case - it\'s not really as simple as you\'d like to imply.
again, let me state you are misusing the word colonization - it is not colonization that is taking place, it is imperialism. please review the words and learn their meanings if you\'re going to apply them. it does make a difference in taking you seriously.
To stabilize a situation in Iraq and region it is possible having revived
the Iraq national state. An example in development of the state -
achievements of Iran and other Asian countries.
I offer some of measures below:
1. An immediate deducing of armies of the USA and coalitions.
2. Creation of uniform national army.
3. Deportation of the democratic government.
4. Giving authority to leaders of Iraq.
5. The organization of elections of authorities.
6. Payment in current 5 years for destruction of the state by the countries-invaders.
7. S.Husejn\'s rehabilitation and clearing militarian captives.
8. Nationalization of natural riches for the term of not less than 3 years.
9. Amnesty to participants of the armed pro-American formations.
The USA and coalition can do nothing about it and then
after a while new war begin.
---------------------------------------
HISTORY REPEATS
www.genevo.org/p2i.htm
whether you like the war or not, an election did take place in Iraq and the Iraq government is trying to stabalize. i realise as well as anyone that the US and others currently are too deeply involved with that government and that removal of US and other troops does need to take place, as soon as possible.
the answer of when is "as soon as possible" is up to several factors but so long as the so-called insurgents continue to blow innocent Iraqis up the occupying countries have their excuse for staying. for some reason that simple fact seems to evade the people doing the bombings.
Sadam is not going to be rehabitated. democracy is not likely to be shoved back out - the Iraqi people have exercised their right to it and it tends to be a genie that is hard to put back in a bottle. deportation of the democratic government isn\'t a winning solution - unless you\'re advocating a regression to an extremist Islamic Fundamentalist totalitarian regime, which is not what the majority of the Iraq population want. that might be able to happen eventually, by force, but it would be a fools paradise because there would be constant insurgency and interference from the rest of the world. any sort of extremist fundamentalist totalitarian government is doomed to eventual failure because people do not like living that way. it is not a natural or appropriate way for any creature to live.
if you\'re really in support of the concepts you seem to advocate, what are you doing here? this site and the musicians available on it are far from being in support of fundamentalist totalitarianism. their music is very far from something that would be viewed positively by such a regime. you can\'t eat your cake and have it too.
:oHatred is connected with democratic colonization,
this is a cheap moral substantiation which
colonizers are covered by. 8)
Despite attack in London the government of England refuses
to tell the truth about Iraq and garbles the facts.
Without democracy the English government became profascist
and conducts a society to demoralization. Truth is hided from the people,
it is done to keep colonial financial streams.
Why should other people suffer from the colonial government of England? >:(
democracy is not colonization, unless you foster it as such.
you are still confusing colonialism and imperialism, by the way.
corporate greed not exclusive to colonialism. democracy simply makes it easier for anyone who so chooses to pursue their greed, or their personal aim whatever it may be. it may not be perfection but having lived in a military dictatorship i can tell you i will not take militant fundamentalism as righteousness - it\'s the same as militarism. it\'s a bully telling the world what to do. at the moment we have one pretending to run a democracy - but when properly managed with people actually making the effort to vote and be active, the concept of democracy in action is a beautiful thing.
england is not the only liar. nothing justifies what was done 7/7 or 9/11 - nothing.
so far, you\'re singing the same lyrics over and over so i\'m going to say thanks for the chat and wish you PEACE.
You think how the Europe before 1938 - communism bad,
fascism - good. The campaign on the East - will rescue the Western society.
In Asia there is their own society. Terrorists are situated where invaders are. If to invade one more country terrorism will grow.
you\'re assuming again - poor idea. i actually believe that some forms of communism, such as Marxism, if done truly might work. it wasn\'t that it was communism, it was that it was corrupt and totalitarian.
Asia has serious problems - take a serious look at how people within their societies are dealt with if they speak out against some facet of their government.
as a physicist i would think you\'d see that there are complexities that take time to unravel - that absolutes are a rare commodity - and that in humans it just doesn\'t exist humans are by their very nature unstable and unpredictable.
invasions are wrong - i agree. however, terrorism is predicated on something far more sinister than retaliation for attack and if you\'re too naive to see that then i worry for you. 9/11 was not a retaliation for an attack. it was the brainchild of someone who felt slighted by his own country\'s shift toward more western ways. he faught alongside the US to remove Russia from Afghanistan, then wanted the US out of Saudi Arabia. i\'m not saying he was wrong to want his government to live up to what they had told their citizens, but anger with them over that is no justification for the campaign of violence and terror he has spawned.
anyway, as i said, i\'m not really interested in taking this too much further because you\'re bent on seeing things in a naive and simplistic manner when life is a hell of a lot more complex than that.
if you could wave a magic wand and have the US and everyone else out of Iraq (and i believe they should get out) the terror would not stop - because the terrorists want control of the place for themselves as a base of operations for continued agression against other Muslim majority countries to try to rein them in and force them to a ridiculous and oppressive Islamic law that is nothing like what Mohammed intended at all.
PEACE to you.
i thought i\'d offer you a little insight into my perspective on the *-cough-* president of the US and the war in Iraq.
(http://gkg-arts.com/Pinocchio2.JPG)
the "prayer" is a little hard to read in the image, so let me help you out:
"Our Father,
who stole the White House,
Dubya be thy name;
thy cronies come,
thy will be done, on Earth as she cries in vain.
Give us this day,
our daily bombs,
and direct our trespasses, as we preempt those,
who may not be like us,
and lead us not into redemption,
but deliver us some oil.
In the name of the Power,
the Arms,
and the Corporation,
now and forever
ALL MINE."
Attack to London in a threshold of the summit of the G8,
has broken a new wave of democratic colonization,
has strengthened anticolonial resistance
and became significant event in struggle
with the international nazism and profascism.
The reason of terrorism in London.
Democracy in England is constructed on the basis of totalitarian
control over the person. Therefore the society supports
state policy and is out of internal political problems. Such society is used
by the government for promotion of colonization and development of Mother country.
It is not possible to defend antifascist and anticolonial opinions
in such system.
Terrorists who attacked London and terrorists which work under covering of London in their countries - are people with different points of view.
Terrorists who are supported by London are armed democrats in their native land, they are helpers to
London in it's democratic colonization, a treacherous column. London supports dissidents specially
to destroy other states and colonize them.
These invited democrats regret about happened attacks to London directed
against democratic colonization of developing countries and the countries of the third world.
Rigid administrative selection of persons who define a policy of the state, and ideas discussed in a society. For realization of these problems the society and its citizens are controled.
In a totalitarian society there can not be equal rights for citizens, that we can see on an example of structure of authority in England.
Ideology of terrorism is the anticolonialism.
Against what ideology English government struggles?
And what ideology advances?
May be colonialism? ;D Iraq?
I think, that the terrorism in England is connected with occupation of Iraq,
and London does not wish to disengage armies because it is possible to get
a loss of profit for the English companies in Iraq.
Whether war will have been thrown to the territory of England? :-[
HISTORY REPEATS
www.genevo.org/p2i.htm
thank you for overstating the obvious and following it with a play of your broken record.
i\'ll be around when you have something interesting and substantive to say.
With falling of English ideology of military colonization in Germany (in 1945) and with growth of national-liberation movements, distribution of ideology of democratic colonization had become an answer to the challenge of the epoch. U.Cherchill was the founder of the international development of idea. The essence of the idea consisted in creation of democratic elections on the basis of interests of colonialists. Financial resources and the advanced political technologies provided visibility of the democratic elections and a victory of representatives of colonialists. Now the erroneousness of Cherchill's idea as a tool for suppression of anticolonialism is obvious on an example of civil and emancipating wars in Iraq. But the English government won't be able to put U.Cherchill to prison, he has died.
we had elections and democracy long before Churchill... do a little research and stop trying to be so clever - get into the facts and worry less about the turn of your phrase.
people around the world for over 200 years have examined the american system of democracy and attempted in one way or another to apply the practice. the world\'s first development of the concept of democracy was in Athens, by use of an Assembly and a Council.
research leads to greater understanding. i don\'t claim to understand even 10% of the world\'s realities, but i do my best to research them if even only scratching the surface, before i attempt to speak on one of them.
later-gator
Englishmen have been put into frameworks of support of a struggle of colonialists,
it is also democracy. It is the democracy refined from reality.
The government of colonialists spreads nazism in a society,
having delegated to the England the maximum right - to define destiny of people.
In front of London there is a question: system democracy for the sake of safety
in the interests of colonialists, or freedom in the interests of people and releasing
occupied countries from democratic colonization.
US government reflects with an interest
about what will be in London, the center of world ideology?
In fact if London fall, it will be necessary to change the policy.
England which made so much for nazism, has remained out of work after occupation of the Europe by nazis. Hitler not only ignored interests of England but also "put to the place" his neighbour. To Hitler it was enough, and further - to the East.
There was no second front. The England-American front was urgently opened and question about repartition of the Europe was rised then.
Hitler\'s policy was based on
political views of London in many respects. Hitler headed a policy of colonization.
So " the policy of pacification" actually was a policy of the consent with
Hitler\'s actions, but it was replaced by policy of treachery to Hitler after, though
ideological views of London have not changed.
Iraq (2002) was disarmed and was ready to cooperate with the United Nations, S.Husejn was deceived, now terrorists protect the country from democratic colonialists.
1. The economy of Germany after defeat in the First World war was completely under the control of the English capital (reparation, credits).
By 1932 Englishmen did not know what is more favourably for England - credits or reparations, and democratic elections passed under the control of the English capital.
2. Hitler has won democratic elections owing to support of London.
Money come also directly from abroad: English oil king Deterding, a friend of Hoffmann and Rehberg, supplied Hitler with currency on a regular basis (he gave 10 million of dutch guldens once).
3 England never consider seriously to Hitler. Hitler was a hope as a force which is capable to control people.
4 When war began? Was Czechoslovakia occupied after partition of Poland? England initiated war.
5 Hitler was not going to occupy England. Hitler understood, that England is the leading colonial power, and England understood that there must be no friends in war for colonies.
Military actions against England had inconsistent character.
Luftvaffe never undertook concentrated attacks to the British radar stations, and they had huge value for defense of the country. Hitler counted, that having transferred bombardments on cities of England he will compel London to go for negotiations. Negotiations about what?
6. The second front was conducted in Africa in trying to solve colonial problems.
Only people\'s liberation movements and USSR battled against colonialism. For England the main thing was preservation of owned colonies and repartition of the Europe.
7. 60 million person was lost because of a colonial policy of England which come to deadlock.
your writing is rambling and disjointed but are you now somehow trying to lay blame for the loss of 60 million Jews down to England? get a grip.
yes, there were individuals and companies in England and the US that supported Germany - at least early on. there were those in France and other countries as well. some supported Germany right to the end. that does not mean that the governments of those same countries maintained support - they did not. initially they tried to "wait and see" etc - and the US was brought into the war kicking and screaming as they didn\'t want any part of it at first. it was seen as a European problem by many American people, because the scale of the atrocity was not known.
you cannot lay the blame for WWII and the loss of 60 million Jews down to England. what you can rightly put it down to is the fanatical fundamentalism of a group of Germans who wanted Aryan domination. much like the Islamic fundamentalists of today, however they managed to get their champion elected and started their strategy in a somewhat legitimate manner. that didn\'t last long, though.
Falling of pro-English authority in democratic
protectorates approaches falling of authority in mother country.
In the English society where there is a leadership of mercenary interests
and concentration of authority at financial circles,
colonialists represent safety from acts of terrorism
as the basic condition of preservation of their democracy.
Safety is provided by indifference to colonized
people, unauthenticity of the information, neutralization of opposition,
development of political apathy in a society, the statement of fear for the life.
now there is something we can agree on.
England with the out-of-date antinational form of the board, being
in a precritical condition, being nuclear empire, represents
the basic danger to the world from itself.
Danger is represented also by the foreign policy of England, loosening
the peace relations, developing and aggravating political conflicts.
Before disarmament of England, with a purpose of prevention of occurrence armed
conflicts provoked by England, it is necessary to consider England as a possible aggressor.
It is necessary to conduct defending policy as protection against English colonialism
and to redirect weapons from politically illiterate conductors of war
to their source. England should know that it will not avoid responsibility any more
for kindling of war and for colonization. Disarmament of England
and transfering all authority to democratic bodies would remove military
intensity in the world.
Disarmament of England?! now you\'re talking bull again. ain\'t gonna happen and so far as the highest danger to world safety goes, two things are far higher a danger than dumpy old England - US Military Industrial Complex, and Extremist Fundamentalism insanity.
sorry - you spoke reason for a minute but then you dropped the thread of it and went back to bullshit propaganda and i\'m not gonna participate in that.
Main principles of English democratic colonization which invaders of Iraq follow by, Hitler sounded 64 years ago.
" We shall declare, that we are compelled to occupy, operate and pacify, that it is done for the sake of the population; that we provide order, communications, feed. We should represent ourselves as liberators. Nobody should guess, that we prepare the final order, but it will not prevent us to take to necessary measures - to send from the country, to shoot - and these measures we shall accept. We shall operate as if we here only temporarily ".
After S.Husejn disarmed the country, and democratic colonialists occupied Iraq, Iraq insurgents use the remained means of conducting emancipating war - terror for emancipating the country.
Democratic colonization goes to a counterbalance to own development of the countries of Asia.
Using natural aspiration of people to an establishment of a free society,
and backwardness of system of the state and local management, before occupation, democratic colonialists aggravate contradictions arising on this way, collide a society together to irreconcilable opposition.
HISTORY REPEATS
www.genevo.org/p2i.htm
Similarities are not present, except for:
1. In opinion of London in Sudetes in 1938 human rights were broken,
and Czechoslovakia threatened the peace in the Europe.
In opinion of London in Iraq in 2003 human rights were broken,
and Iraq threatened safety in the world.
2. London lobbied occupation of Sudetes in 1938 and Iraq in 2003.
3. Military force in these operations is assigned to the most armed countries
during corresponding times.
4. Sudetes and Iraq had become the important strategic and raw resource.
5. London shifts the responsibility for occupation on the countries-allies.
Attitudes before the allied countries change.
The policy becomes internal matter.
As well as 64 years ago a priority policy of London is a struggle for
human rights in the East.
Does similarity comes to an end on this?
With strengthening a role of England in Asia and colonization of Iraq, the question about restoration the status of democratic Hong Kong and an aggravation of contradictions between London and Pekin rises. China a developing socialist country having complex times of perfection of a control system. England – country with aspiration of restoration of colonialism in the form of democratic and military-political in APR. The greatest danger is represented with idea of profascist disinformation by London and presence of nuclear weapon in London.
In the USA people supported ideas of Freedom during formation of a state system. With coming to international scene the government of the USA has changed idea of Freedom under influence of London to the doctrine of Democracy. Democracy has become the system of the modern control over the person in the hands of colonialists. In international relations it is a form of colonialism.
Civil emancipating war in Iraq becomes regional movement of people and the governments for Freedom from Democratic colonization.
Emancipating movement of provinces against England is connected with colonial
form of board in Mother country.
The English democracy which arisen in 13 century as the form of colonial board
served interests of barons and peers, in modern England - to the same noblemen.
Provinces are practically as dominions and protectorates. Struggle of English
provinces is conducted for free participation in government against
limited democracy.
Development of English democratic colonization threatens also to safety
of the world. The state with the out-of-date form of board where the lie can
become the reason of war should not have the nuclear weapon.
Asia has appeared not ready to oppose lie and hypocrisy,
therefore democracy in Asia is shown in the worst form,
as imposing of colonial standards, suppression of freedom,
destruction of culture and morals.
Anticolonial war in Iraq is directed to restoration
of statehood, free development of a society.
O.K. Being that this is a discussion Form, I think if this ever was a discussion it\'s moved well passed that now. I think all points have been aptly made and we are now into blog area or worse. Let save bandwidth for actual discussion. Time to give this a rest.