US 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria, blame it on Assad govt'

lol @ evil imperialists. Only you, Kojirou, need to put the word evil before imperialist.

I'm not sure what your comment has to do with what I said, but imperialism and invasion are two different things. The only non-imperialistic action here is not lending anything but perhaps refugee and medical aid to Syrians if you wish. Imperialism, as defined by the Dictionary of Human Geography, is

For example, if Afghanis were allowed all the same rights in America as Americans, it would not be imperialism. It would be annexation. An example of imperialism would be Hillary Clinton sitting down with Tantawi and explaining to him what he has to do to keep the funding coming directly to his military from the US, even if those actions are not in the interest of Egyptian people, who have no ability to punish Tantawi or Hillary.

You seem to have this notion that I support the idea of the US providing military aid in the Middle East as long as it supports something I support. This couldn't be farther from the truth. I only point out interventions and non-interventions to point out how inconsistent those decisions are with the laughable notion that your foreign policy has any regard for spreading freedom, fighting dictators, fighting terrorists, etc. That's something a lot of American citizens - excluding you - actually believe. It also clarifies how correlated those foreign policy decisions are with the potential profits for a certain class of American companies which oddly fly the "money is free speech" flag at election time. Again, the Iraq charade makes this clear, even if those companies subsequently were too idiotic to seal deals in Iraq. It's not the only reason, but even a loose correlation is more evidence than there is for the other laughable reasons the white house spews out.

The real question you should be asking is how can so many US voters continue to support something where 100% of the citizens pay 100% of the costs, but only receive a microfraction of the income/return. It's clear why the "0.01%" support this structure, but it's not clear why anyone else would support that structure unless:

- They think they are going to become part of the 0.01% (LOL!!); or,
- They have irrational ideologic beliefs they are pursuing.

I'm not even sure why you seem offended about it. It's blatantly clear from your posts that you recognize your country as imperialistic - the only difference we have is that you don't consider it to be immoral or illegal.

 

It's not so much my pro-hegemony bend as my philosophical belief that ultimately, good and evil are personal things. I don't really hold nations, or ideas, to be good or evil, something I've mentioned before - I don't think Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia were evil, I think they had evil men, and that's not because of what they believed, but from the deeds they did. Imperialism, governments, countries, these are all power, or various representations of power. And power can be used for good or evil, depending on the men who use it. This doesn't mean that all ideologies are equal, but it does mean that some are more effective than others.

 

Waiting on texxx to answer these simple questions.

 

Their domain uses GApps, so the MX records are a bit messed up in the email header

 

I wouldn't put it past us. But, it really doesn't make sense that we'd engineer something like this and then look so reluctant and indecisive when the plan comes to fruition. If Obama was looking for a pretext to enter the war, why did he first say 'wait until we get all the facts' and then later come out with this weaksauce of giving guns to other people and proposing no fly zones that would never get a moment's consideration from Russia? Shouldn't he have come out Bush-style and bring some shock and awe on Assad if this was Obama's fabrication? So, I find this news suspicious because I'd have to think Obama and the whole administation plus a lot of guys in the UK are all much dumber than I realized. Somewhat dumber, ok; but this defies logic.

 

And then there's always this

UN accuses Syrian rebels of chemical weapon usel

You guys act like if this were true the government would ever admit it.