Watching the interview with General Clark after the Putin interview puts great perspective on the U.S.'s self-defined role in the Middle East, a role of armed intervention. How long have we and how much longer are we going to continue to destabilize entire governments that are no real threat to us, and put those nations into decades long economic and social chaos while claiming that we are saviors? When will we learn that every situation, in Clark's words, isn't a nail that needs a hammer?
The U.S. is just full of excuses to get involved in global warfare. Human rights, national sovereignty, weapons of mass destruction, vague threats to democracy, and the list goes on and on. But the real reason is money and power for the few, while the road to it is paid for by the masses.
You clowns really think Putin isn't a globalist or doesn't believe in armed intervention to put his agenda. You can't be that blinded by the anti-obama rage.
6 comments:
Putin gets the end game.
Watching the interview with General Clark after the Putin interview puts great perspective on the U.S.'s self-defined role in the Middle East, a role of armed intervention.
How long have we and how much longer are we going to continue to destabilize entire governments that are no real threat to us, and put those nations into decades long economic and social chaos while claiming that we are saviors?
When will we learn that every situation, in Clark's words, isn't a nail that needs a hammer?
better there than here.
Better there what?
The U.S. is just full of excuses to get involved in global warfare. Human rights, national sovereignty, weapons of mass destruction, vague threats to democracy, and the list goes on and on. But the real reason is money and power for the few, while the road to it is paid for by the masses.
You clowns really think Putin isn't a globalist or doesn't believe in armed intervention to put his agenda. You can't be that blinded by the anti-obama rage.
Post a Comment