The Guardian: Nato is a threat to Europe and must be disbanded

[Serb]

Too tired, it's 5:38 here. Time to sleep.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sandman
Saddam and Rummy were chums as well.

Once upon a time. But Chirac and his people were on the take from Saddam big time. There is also no question that France supports the fascist Arabs and opposes the democratic Arabs.

[Barinthus]

Originally posted by Serb
So what? You think we should be happy about the fact that you still maintain the alliance which was created to fight Russia?

Wrong. NATO was set up to act as counterweight against the Soviet Union. Which no longer exists. There were even talks about Russia joining few years ago. Russia is a very paranoid nation which makes sense when you examine her history of invasions and internal civil disorders.

The States are more concerned about Mid-East and Asia, that's what those bases are for. The concern in Russian matters is more of related to the central government being able to keep her nuclear stockpile under guard and keep corruption from overwhelming the country.

Nobody wants a lawless Russia which would be a real menace here.

Plus you re-elected King George II. That makes things even worse.

I did not elect for him and also Putin actually wanted the 'King' to stay on for 4 more years.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Barinthus
Nobody wants a lawless Russia which would be a real menace here.

MARINE APCs APPEAR AT ANTI-WAR PROTEST IN WESTWOOD

LOS ANGELES, November 9, 2004 - At 7:50 PM, What were first reported to be tanks and now identified as Marine APCs showed up at an anti-war protest in front of the federal building in Westwood.
The APCs circled the block twice, the second time parking themselves in the street and directly in front of the area where most of the protesters were gathered.

Enraged, some of the people attempted to block the APCs, but police quickly cleared the street.

The people continued to protest the presence of the Marines, but after about ten minutes they drove off. It is still unclear as to why they were deployed to this location.

Photos and Video (be patient) here

http://la.indymedia.org/archives/archive_by_id.php?category_id=3&id=740

[Serb]

Originally posted by Barinthus


Wrong. NATO was set up to act as counterweight against the Soviet Union. Which no longer exists.

If Soviet Union no longer exist and NATO was set up to act as counterweight against the Soviet Union, then why the hell NATO still exist?

[notyoueither]

Actually, Serb, it has functions other than targetting the SU (and Russia). Currently, perhaps most importantly, it gives some assurance against agression between member states.

[notyoueither]

Oh, and it also gives NATO members some safety in numbers vs state sponsored terrorism. If anyone wants a lesson in that, they should ask the Taliban.

Incidently, I think we should lend Russia any support we can to aid you against state sponsored acts of blowing up children as a well. Have Russia give us the case and point us to the state that sponsored the murder of the children, and I'd happily go along with NATO support for Russia escorting that regime to the dead pile.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


MARINE APCs APPEAR AT ANTI-WAR PROTEST IN WESTWOOD

LOS ANGELES, November 9, 2004 - At 7:50 PM, What were first reported to be tanks and now identified as Marine APCs showed up at an anti-war protest in front of the federal building in Westwood.
The APCs circled the block twice, the second time parking themselves in the street and directly in front of the area where most of the protesters were gathered.

Enraged, some of the people attempted to block the APCs, but police quickly cleared the street.

The people continued to protest the presence of the Marines, but after about ten minutes they drove off. It is still unclear as to why they were deployed to this location.

Photos and Video (be patient) here

http://la.indymedia.org/archives/arc...ry_id=3&id=740

Above: Tank Stopped by Demonstrators on Wilshire Blvd.

This story is the same as for part 1:

Despite the one-day notice, about 400-500 people came to the Westwood Federal Building on Tuesday night to protest the start of the second U.S. attack on the people of Fallujah, which had been officially launched on the previous day. To my own recollection, this is a record number for a demonstration called on such short notice.

As usual for such short-notice demonstrations at this location, most of the group stood on the sidewalk along Wilshire Blvd. waving signs and shouting to oncoming commuters in cars and buses, who frequently expressed their support by shouting and blowing their horns, and (much, much less frequently) expressed opposition. Smaller groups were stationed on each of the other three corners of the Wilshire and Veteran intersection, and as the lights changed some of these groups would parade across the intersection, making themselves still more visible to traffic.

About 7:30pm, two tanks barreled past going East on Wilshire, rounded the corner onto Veteran going South, and disappeared.

About ten or fifteen minutes later, two tanks (apparently the same ones) appeared again going East on Wilshire and stopped for the light there. Demonstrators immediately stepped in front of the lead tank, blocking its path, and started to chant "U.S. Out!" at the soldiers, whose heads and torsos were clearly visible and who evidently exchanged a few words with protestors.

The soldiers seemed amused and not really unfriendly. Unfortunately, a few of our protestors chanted "murderers!" at the soldiers, although in general I think we were more sophisticated than that, realizing that many soldiers are victims themselves who were recruited through propaganda, guile, and economic incentives that the very poor can find it difficult to refuse.

I have no idea why they were there, and neither did anyone else that I asked.

Both tanks were surrounded on three sides by protestors for about three or four minutes until the LAPD showed up and placed themselves between tanks and protestors, and cleared the protestors who were blocking the front tank out of the road. I did not witness any brutality as this occurred, nor am I aware of any arrests having been made.

The tanks then proceeded to turn right onto Veteran and disappeared from view.

Our protest continued following this incident. If sending tanks driving by was meant to intimidate us, it definitely did not succeed, and in fact had the opposite effect.

Thus, we citizens of conscience in Los Angeles have joined people around the world in expressing our public opposition to a U.S. policy of dealing death and mayhem to the citizens of Iraq in general and to those of Fallujah in particular.

bit of a difference in the bolding, eh? Here's the pics:










"Tank Commander Negotiates Terms of His Surrender"


"Police Protect Tank from Demonstrators"

http://www.la.indymedia.org/news/2004/11/118943.php

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Agathon
Who really wants war these days apart from the Americans, a few disgruntled African leaders and Al Qaeda?

Even the Indians and Pakistanis seem to be giving peace a chance.

India cannot even rule itself there is cival war in half of the states in India that where wageing on for 30 or more years. When India try to knockout than key defence outpost of Pakistan over half of the America train special forces where kill in the first minutes of combat in the heliocopter landing zone and the rest where pin down by heavy machine and mortar fire from the outpost than other ground troops behind the outpost. When India sent jetsfighter like 2 to help the special forces 10 Pakistian jet fighter show up to block they move, plus Pakistian SAM and anti-aircraft guns battery where arm and ready. The India PM called off the plan invasion as the Pakistian knew they invasion plan as my Intelligence Department gave it to Pakistian.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Oh, and it also gives NATO members some safety in numbers vs state sponsored terrorism. If anyone wants a lesson in that, they should ask the Taliban.

Incidently, I think we should lend Russia any support we can to aid you against state sponsored acts of blowing up children as a well. Have Russia give us the case and point us to the state that sponsored the murder of the children, and I'd happily go along with NATO support for Russia escorting that regime to the dead pile.

Russia will give that Muslim Republic full interindent from Russia as the Russia army mortal is total destory while the Muslim Freedom Fight mortal is good. 80,000 Russia troop in that republe donot have the mortal to carry out than attack on anyone. They where not pay for the last couple month(like 2 years), far away from home, fighting than war they donot believe in draft against their will.
Draft evadeing is on the raise in Russia. Plus their outnumber the Freedom fight 10 to1, plus have heavy weapon, tanks, and planes and yet they are beaten men.

[CharlesBHoff]

The budget debit and trade debit along with the dumb tax cuts of Bush will destory America. Our National Debt is now over 37% of GNP and raiseing. The Clinton budget surplus diappear due to Bush unwise tax cuts.

[Last Conformist]

National debt at 37% of GNP? Tsk. Newbs.

[Barinthus]

NYE, your posting before the one quoted below - right.

Originally posted by notyoueither
Oh, and it also gives NATO members some safety in numbers vs state sponsored terrorism. If anyone wants a lesson in that, they should ask the Taliban.

Incidently, I think we should lend Russia any support we can to aid you against state sponsored acts of blowing up children as a well. Have Russia give us the case and point us to the state that sponsored the murder of the children, and I'd happily go along with NATO support for Russia escorting that regime to the dead pile.

I completely agree. Terrorism is something the entire civilized world should be united against. However the defining of who is terrorist and not - that can be problematic. But in the said case, it is clear that those who carried out the bombing are terrorists.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Straybow
Your opinions on voting match half the voters, at best. Your hatred of Bush much less than that.

Dang pinkos.

In the rest of the world the hatred for Clinton wasn't mainstream, except in the places against which he directly went to war (Serbia for example).

Today, the hatred for Bush is an ordinary perk of all mainstream left parties (even in the US), and a great many right-wingers also hate Bush. In non-American political landscapes, the hatred for Bush is mainstream. The hatred for Clintonwasn't.

Or do you think Bush's international popularity is comparable with Clinton's?

[Drake Tungsten]

How could you hate Clinton? He never did anything (other than employees)...