EU refugee crisis is part of path to WW 3

We get daily threads saying that ww3 is just around the door, does anyone have an eta because all this doom porn is just recycled propaganda.

a reply to: Robert Reynolds

I thought I was trying to convince someone who didn't understand. And if you do, someone else might not.

I understand why you have your opinion, but why are you so sure that you have the whole story?

Too obvious… What the hell right do a bunch of nations have to determine another's fate and not include them in the discussion?

.

a reply to: intrptr

But with whom would they talk? Assad? He started this mess, in case you've forgotten he was very cruel when his people took part in the Arabian spring. Poisened children with gas is not acceptable behaviour from any ruler...

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: intrptr

But with whom would they talk? Assad? He started this mess, in case you've forgotten he was very cruel when his people took part in the Arabian spring. Poisened children with gas is not acceptable behaviour from any ruler...

The uS always uses some contrived excuse to start the real 'mess'. Destroying whole countries and killing millions (all told to date in the ME) by comparison is somehow acceptable to you? How many children have to die for that "Humanitarian" reason?

Me thinks you listen to the Main Stream media too much. You're too nice to be promoting it.

a reply to: intrptr

I just have a different opinion. And no the Irak war which started the whole MEast issue wasn't acceptable, but that was a different story wasn't it?
Assad is a dictator and the rebells are there, for exactly this reason. Like it or not.
Since they don't have a politically established leader, who should represent Syria in these talks?

I think these governments that let in all these refugees knows there's going to be terrorists among them, and when they start getting violent that will give them the excuse to clamp down and pass a bunch of laws they wouldn't have gotten away with on their own peaceful citizens. Gun confiscation, curfews and the like.

a reply to: intrptr
You're not necessarily right - that's the only point that I'm really making. I understand that many people turn their backs on the MSM and then suddenly have all the answers, but often they still look at things from a very narrow perspective.

Look at the history of the Middle-East. Not just since they've been oil producers.

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
a reply to: intrptr
You're not necessarily right - that's the only point that I'm really making. I understand that many people turn their backs on the MSM and then suddenly have all the answers, but often they still look at things from a very narrow perspective.

Look at the history of the Middle-East. Not just since they've been oil producers.

When you get old enough you realize the same lies get played over and again. My generation witnessed the lies about Vietnam, why we were there, who the enemy was. And after all, it was about the fargin profit made from protracted warfare and the militarily strategic location.

The commies didn't 'take over', the country didn't get swallowed up by the Russians or Chinese… see?

In the Middle East it is primarily about oil, and other resources. What people just don't get is how greed drives the elite to ever more, for the military its about conquest, for heads of state, power. For you and me, the consequences.

War is waged for territory, resources and control. Every reason otherwise else is cover for the masses. Twisted around to mean the opposite, like "intervention" instead of 'invasion', for instance. Thats how you know.

By the way, history is written by the victors. Try reading the opposite of what they say…

The American Native peoples weren't heathens, savages and murderers, either. They just got painted that way to justify wiping them out.

a reply to: Peeple

And no the Irak war which started the whole MEast issue wasn't acceptable, but that was a different story wasn't it?

Actually its still the same_exact_war going on till this day…

The whole gulf war. Thats where you need to read between the lines. The "first" Gulf war, Operation Iraqi freedom, Surges, and the war against "ISIS", the same exact country, the same exact war. The thing empires don't get (and history reflects this) is that countries and peoples can be militarily defeated and occupied, but never completely subjugated. The people will never accept occupation by foreign armies in their own land

Neither would you, I imagine.

They hide this real war for these countries in the ME and Africa real well, censoring the reality, we just hear about the bombing campaigns, we generally don't see it on our screens. But you can't hide the streams of refugees, they aren't censored. Their numbers tell the real toll of warfare and destruction.

a reply to: intrptr

That was a good answer.
You're right.

a reply to: intrptr
Trying to base an argument on your age acquired wisdom is assuming, simplistic, ill-befitting grown-up debate and verging on cringe-worthy.

Do you think that The Crusades were about oil as well?

The 'great game' between the Russian and British empires?

The Nazis?

Genghis Khan?

All about greedy men in suits?

a reply to: Peeple