One of the reasons why the cold war never turned into a hot one is because deep down inside the Americans always knew and still know that they are not good enough to fight the Russians. The rest is all a smokescreen. If they really are the greatest military power in the history of the universe – as they claim – why do they need an alliance of 28 against one? Where I come from 2 against one is cowardly, 28 against one is beyond the pale. Give me a break.

The Cuban crisis was a limited naval confrontation with no vital Russian interests at stake. To be really, truly a superpower you have to have great land forces. All the greatest military powers in history had superb land forces: Roman Empire, Napoleonic France, Germany, Russia, China. Exceptions are U.S. and Britain whose ground forces always sucked, being able to win wars only against third rate powers. In fact the greatest land war that U.S. has ever won was in 1865, against a limited opposition – themselves.

The US is steadfastly marching in the footsteps of Napoleon’s France and Hitler’s Germany vis a vis Russia. The funny thing is that the US is lesser of the three in terms of total military accomplishments, but this doesn’t stop them from fantasizing that they can succeed where the other two have failed.

They (the US) are also repeating the same mistake which the other two made: If you want to rule the world – you need only one ally – Russia. If you want to fail at taking over the world, you need only one enemy – again Russia. Both Napoleon and Hitler could have taken over the world if they were smart enough to incorporate Russia as an ally in their plans.

But I guess that’s the whole point of wanting to rule the world – not having to share it with anybody, especially not Russia. That is potentially a fatal mistake.

You got it man, Stalin and Hitler were the same and only US was morally superior to them both, which allowed them to make a decision free from any influence to ally themselves with the ones they have nothing in common with in terms of culture or shared values – the Russians.

Your story of Poland exchanging one occupier with another is bogus too. Russia liberated Poland from Germany. Or maybe according to your logic Germany pre-emptively liberated Poland from Russia, anticipating that Stalin would occupy them after WWII?

If Stalin was equal to Hitler how come the Americans choose Stalin as an ally, when they are culturally closer to Germany, even – or maybe especially – to the Nazi Germany than they are to Russia.

Americans back then understood – as opposed to you – that Nazi Germany was greater civilizational threat than Soviet communism. To reach that conclusion that one dictator is the same as the next is just totally devoid of any meaningful analysis.

WWII era Americans were capable of making the right choices and judging by what is going on today, they are no longer able of doing that. That’s why you’re ending up with Hilary or Trump as the next president. Some democracy you have over there.

Oh boy, you know how to turn any argument into a mess, don’t you? In 1918 Woodrow Wilson intervened in the Russian Revolution because at that time Communism was a number one threat – in US opinion. There was no Nazism back then to choose between the two which one is a greater threat.

In 1939 there was two to choose from: Nazism or Communism. US made the right choice. Stay with me on this one. In 1979 again there was a choice to be made – between Communism and Islam. US made the wrong choice this time and they are paying the price ever since and it looks like they’re going to continue to pay for that wrong choice for some time to come.

US likes to play those games. When they have two options – they choose the more likeable against the less likable and then they deal with the outcome by turning against the original “ally”. But that’s the game of the weak, because if you dislike both choices – go against both of them, or go against the one that you dislike more – but alone, without making the other one an ally, because you’re going to strengthen them and then you would have to deal with them later when they come out as a winner side by side with you.

Do you understand what I am trying to say here? You are not going to win any argument with me. You might know more useless facts than I do, but my logic is superior to yours. Have a nice day.

In 1939 the world allied against Germany, not against Russia. Which part of this you don’t understand? If Russia was the bigger threat they would have allied against them. Capisce?

You should actually know the answer to this one. The way you postulated your question whether the war against Nazi Germany 1933-1939 was unavoidable is like the choice was up to the Western Powers to make. It wasn’t. Germany made that decision for them and yes – it was unavoidable. I know, technically France and Britain declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland, but they didn’t actually attack Germany I guess out of fear that they might hurt some German sensibilities.

Remember the “Phony War”? Then Germany decided to put some reality into the “Phony war” by actually attacking France and Britain with total disregard as to whether they are going to hurt their feelings or not. As for the US, again it was Germany who declared war on them, not the other way around, so again, US had no choice there at all.

As for the current tensions with Russia, I don’t think that they will lead to war. It’s just a result of a failed Neocon plan to wrestle Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit. The problem with the Neocons is that not only their original scripts are awful, but when they come up with a sequel script – that’s not an Oscar winning material either. Remember Iraq invasion in 2003? The original rationale was WMD, when that didn’t pan out, then it was pure western humanism on display. They did it to remove a dictator and finally bring democracy to the yearning masses. How noble.

According to the Neocon manifesto, the post cold war objective of US is to prevent re-emergence of any challenger to American supremacy either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere. Just because Zbig said that the only thing missing from making Russia a superpower again is Ukraine doesn’t make it an irrefutable truth. What does Zbig know about anything. He still says that the choice US made in 1979 was the right one. Tell that to the 9/11 victims. Forget about suing SA for 9/11. Sue Zbig, it was that degenerate’s idea that started the whole thing.

You are right man. Every person that ever ended at the wrong end of the gun was innocent. This is due to the schizophrenic human nature. There is no rational way to explain how humans choose their enemies. Mostly it is first we kill them, then we feel remorse and analyze the causes and effect in reverse and come to the conclusion that since there are now dead how possibly can they have ever been an enemy and a threat to us. Does my argument make any sense to you? No? Well, now you know how I feel when I read your comments.

Let me guess something – you are a big fan of the Harry Potter novels – right? There was no magical moment between 1933 and 1939 when it downed on the Western Powers that they have to fight Nazi Germany.

It was a gradual process of realization. First they tried to appease the beast, throwing him untermenschland here, untermenschland there (you see both Chechoslovakia and Poland are Slavic) and then Hitler decided to invade the mother of all untermenschlands – Russia.

Then the west realized that they are running out of untermenchlands to appease Hitler with and unless they get their act together Hitler might see them too as untermensch potential.

I did not use logic in reverse chronological order to justify events that occurred before with the ones that occurred latter, I don’t know where you got that from. I can’t answer you any better than that. Sorry, end of discussion.

I am sorry, in which universe the west went to war against Germany? I thought it was the other way around. Sorry son, I am afraid that the public education system in the country you’re from is not good enough to prepare you for discussions like this.

The initiator of all hostilities was Germany, not the western allies. Poland had military treaties with both France and Britain which stipulated military assistance to Poland if Poland was attacked. Thus when Germany attacked Poland, it attacked all three of them – because Germany was aware of their military alliance. Do you understand the logic here my friend?

Same as is the case with NATO today. If someone attacked any NATO country, implicitly that’s a declaration of war against – say US, because of the famed article 5 or as I like to call it the 3 musketeers article – one for all, all for one.

Although Hitler hoped that Britain and France will chicken out of their military obligations to Poland (and he was almost right) – Britain and France did declare war on Germany – but halfheartedly and then did almost nothing for 8 months hoping for a miracle. The miracle came in the form of Germany actually attacking them after what’s known as the “Phoney War”.

In reality, the declaration of war by France and Britain against Germany was just a formality, because Germany was the initiator all the way.

Don’t get angry with me. I told you that your public education system has not prepared you for discussion on this intellectual level. It’s not that they didn’t teach you some useful stuff in your schools such as: “You are all special” and “You are all equal”, and I suspect that in the last few years they might have added to their curriculum another pearl of wisdom: “You are all exceptional”. That still has done nothing to enable you to intelligently discuss things.

Germany declared war on US on November 11, 1941. How do you suggest that US should have dealt with that? Ignore the declaration of war?

Nice try SolontoCroesus, but you’ll never convince me with your bull. You know why? – Because our starting positions are vastly different. You see, I don’t hate Jews, I think they are quite OK. Some of the greatest minds of humanity were Jewish: Einstein, Marx, Trotsky. The city I am from (somewhere in Eastern Europe) was 1/3 Jewish prior to WW2. Now there are none remaining thanks to Hitler, but the population has no bad memories about the Jews. They do have some bad memories about the occupying forces though.

But enough of that, instead I’ll tell you one of my favorite anecdotes about Stalin. Apparently when he heard about the mass rapes that the Red Army was conducting in Germany, Stalin said: – “Too bad that so many of our sons and daughters will have to be born in a foreign land.” God I love that man. Everybody has heroes – yours is Hitler, mine is Stalin. Anybody trying to portray the Nazis as innocent angels must have some serious issues. I hate to spoil it for you, but my hero won. Nice talking to you.

“Your hero Stalin seems to have conceded that Russians needed to impregnate German women to improve their intellectual gene pool.”

That’s right, he realized that impregnating German woman by Russian soldiers will improve the German gene pool since the offspring was staying in Germany.

Payback is a beach, they shouldn’t have touched Mother Russia. Another juicy nugget for you: When the Red Army soldiers conducted searches in the apartment blocks in Berlin, the brave German husbands would push their wives to open the doors – hoping that the women will distract the Russian soldiers with some amorous thoughts and thus prevent them from developing more sinister ideas – like killing the brave Germans.

In short, Russian rapists polluted the German gene pool.

Not possible. All Russian DNA is superior to the German. They won the war didn’t they? Who was the master race in the end?

Also I think Stalin was too lenient towards the Germans. He should have turned them into air pollutants – like they did it to the poor Jews. The ovens were already there, just keep them running with a new bio-fuel.

But I’m not aware that German soldiers went on sprees of rape and murder the like of the Russian rape of and estimated 2 million German women.

I think that claim is exaggerated. I think that the Germans were only jealous because the Russians were having greater success with the German women than the Germans.

You know which one is one of the most successful pick-up lines of all times? – “Frau komm”. It was used by the Red Army soldiers on German women. Apparently the German women found it irresistible and succumbed to in in a very large numbers. I don’t blame them, Russian charm is hard to resist.

Gorbachev was right about one thing (he wasn’t right about too many): By doing what they (Eastern Europe) did with their sovereignty after it was gifted to them by the USSR in 1991, they showed that they didn’t deserve it in the first place. If they wanted freedom so much, why did they sell it to the west immediately after they got it?

Perhaps the case can be made for calling Eastern Europe rape victims prior to 1991, and after that – they turned into whores. The act being performed on them is the same, the only difference is that now they are being financially compensated. I personally have more sympathy for rape victims.

The only country that will never give up their nuclear weapons is the one that invented them and they won’t do that for the same reason that they invented them in the first place: because they can’t fight a ground war. They have also came to the conclusion that as great as their navy is – it’s not enough to terrorize the world, so the nuclear weapons are staying. The Nobel prize winner shouldn’t be blabbing his hypocritical mouth about world without nuclear weapons when they themselves never intend to do anything about it.

It looks it’s very popular to blame Israel for a lot of things these days, but I think that if anybody doesn’t want peace in the middle east it’s not the Israelis – it’s the Palestinians. How so? It’s been 67 years since the establishment of the Jewish state. Perhaps they stole some land from the Palestinians, about 28000 km2 to be exact plus other Arab occupied territories for a grand total of maybe 40000km2.

The point is – it happens all the time – in the course of history countries lose territory, or gain, depending on multitude of circumstances. Mexico for example lost as much land to US as it was left with, but you don’t see any Mexicans blowing themselves up on US buses trying to get that land back.

Germany lost about 130000km2 of prime lebensraum to – of all countries – Poland. If you think it’s frustrating losing land to a superior power (Palestinians to Israelis), how must the Germans feel about losing land to a country that they can overrun in half a day with their eyes closed?

The land that Israel took from Palestine was not much, and it wasn’t a prime land by any stretch of the imagination – it’s a desert. If anybody has deserts more than they know what to do with – it’s the Arabs and endlessly fighting over another patch of it doesn’t make any sense. History is full of nations being wronged by other nations, historical injustices can never be all fully redressed. Sometimes you just have to move on.

A POS writes shite.

It takes one to know one.

Sure. Germany lost about 25% of it’s territory to Poland after WW2. Mexico lost around 50% of its territory to US and Palestine lost nearly 100% of it’s territory to Israel.

The example of Mexico is not appropriate.

I kind of both agree and disagree with you. It’s true – German claim on the land that they lost to Poland is stronger than the claim that Mexicans might have on the land they lost to US.

At the same time – if you saw a bank robber running away with the loot and you pull a gun on him and rob him – if you don’t intend to return the loot to the bank – your act has pretty much a moral equivalency of you robbing the bank yourself.

Since the US didn’t return the land that they got from Mexico to the natives, I am not sure that they can claim some moral high ground. Stealing from a thief is still a crime and doesn’t qualify you as a Robin Hood.

In case anybody has missed, the reversal of worker’s rights and benefits in the west started in 1991. Coincidence? Hardly. You see most concessions to the working class the capitalists made because of a threat of communist revolution. Once that threat was gone in 1991, the cruel capitalists realized it’s now safe to take away anything that they can from the working class.

Even the concessions that the US made during the great recession – the social security act – was not made because the capitalists have suddenly grown a heart. It was made because the October revolution at that time was very fresh in their minds and they were scarred it can happen somewhere else too.

Capitalism is an awful system. Even the Nazis knew this. That’s why they called themselves National Socialists, they didn’t call themselves National Capitalists or National Democrats. They knew that the word capitalism has very limited propaganda appeal for the masses. There is nothing appealing about Capitalism, unless you plan to exploit someone to death.

That’s the reason why the workers standards of living are plummeting, because the good old USSR is not around to keep the greedy capitalists scared and honest.

I think you missed the point completely. I wasn’t advocating socialism – that has been tried. I was merely stating that capitalism is regressing to its more primitive past. I think that anon understood 100% what I was trying to say, that capitalism needs some socialist elements – Scandinavian style, not wahhabi style capitalism (i.e. ultraconservative) like in US.

You are right. There is a contradiction there. If Scandinavia is going to be a shining example of what capitalism should look like – then regression of capitalism is not a worldwide phenomena. Although US is trying to bring the rest of the world in line with their austere vision of capitalist orthodoxy – and they are using various trade pacts to try to accomplish this.

Since the demise of USSR, capitalists are starting to think that there is no alternative to their system. This might or might not be true, but it’s not good that they are testing the limits of tolerance of the working men and women by stagnating their wages and benefits and their standard of living because they think that the Capitalist system has proven once and for all that it’s irreplaceable.

Do the fools in Eastern Europe really think that NATO was designed to protect them? Haven’t they learned from history how US “helps” their allies. If war broke out between NATO and Russia, the Americans will fight exactly like they did in ww2: Bomb endlessly for 4 years and if anybody asks them to do more they pretend that they are doing all they can. NATO is cannon fodder recruitment tool for US, it was designed to protect them, not Europe. I don’t see such generosity (protecting Europe) coming from people who like to show up late (1917 and 1944 instead of 1914 and 1939) and when they show up they don’t do all that much.

So – sweet dreams Eastern Europe – US is there to “protect” you.

Even the name of Ukraine is a dead giveaway that it was never meant to be an independent country. Ukraine means “Borderland”. Borderland of what? Borderland of Russia of course. It can not be a borderland of itself. There was another “Borderland” that received completely different treatment from the west.

This one was called “Krajina” – notice the resemblance? It means exactly the same in Serbian language – borderland. Krajina was a Serb enclave in Croatia and they never became an independent state supported by the west on account of the Serbs generally being uncooperative with the west’s agendas. If the Ukrainians sat down and really thought about it, the best choice for them is to return to being a borderland of what the once were.

The only country that needs nuclear weapons in order to impersonate a “superpower” is the one that invented them. China and Russia don’t need them. They can be (and are) superpowers without nuclear weapons. Gorbachev actually suggested to the senile one – I believe at the Reykjavik summit to get rid of all nuclear weapons. It didn’t happen and it won’t and we know who is the reason.

Relax y’all. This latest shooting in Orlando – It’s all Russia’s fault. How? Let me explain. The deceased individual who perpetrated the shooting claimed as motivation both ISIS and homophobia. This from a descendant of a nation where pedophilia is favorably looked upon – bacha bazi anyone? Not a very plausible explanation.

How does Russia fits in all this? Easy – Stockholm syndrome. When Russia invaded Afghanistan – it left traumatic genetically transferred traits on the future terrorist. Instead of siding with his own culture – which is supportive of gay relations – at least when it comes to young boys, he sided with the invader – Russia – which is one of the most homophobic countries in the world.

Just ask Obama for his rationale why he didn’t go to the Sochi Olympics. Because he took offense on the part of LGBT community and their treatment in Russia. So there you go. It’s all Russia’s fault. Case closed.

Reap what you sow. Islam wasn’t a problem until U.S. made it to be. It started when they decided it’s a smart idea to outsource their war against USSR – to Islam. I guess to a good capitalist everything looks like a resource to be exploited. So did Islam. A plentiful, widely available, renewable (at alarmingly fast rate) resource. So why not use it, right?

If you can’t fight your own wars you have no business starting them. Even the most appalling regime in human history – Nazi Germany had more integrity than that. They were able and willing to fight their own wars, not outsource them to someone that they thought they’re smarter than. OK, sure, Nazi Germany used some extra cannon fodder like the Romanians, Hungarians and other dumb Eastern Europeans, but for the most part they were the main fighting force.

Americans think that they are smart, that they can copy something from history – because it has happened before. The Roman Empire in their final stages outsourced their wars to the barbarians – and we know how that one ended. The barbarians wised up and sacked Rome. Nobody fights wars for someone else. Who is using whom here?

How cold have a person who loved Russians more than they loved themselves kill so many of them? It’s a big mystery. Stalin was a big contradiction. He adopted himself into the Russian nation, spoke the language with a Georgian accent for the rest of his life, sent at least hundreds of thousands to their deaths in the gulags, and yet he was a bigger Russian than most of them.

When Hitler rejected his feelers about possible truce after the initial onslaught, opting instead for war of extermination against the “subhumans”, Stalin apparently took great offense at this, and said something like: “Who is he calling “subhumans” – the great Russian people? He wants a war of extermination? He shall have it”.

His love for the Russians was on display again at the victory parade at the end of WW2 when the Red Army units were throwing captured Nazi flags and banners at his feet. For the great victory apparently he thanked only the “Great Russians”, leaving out the rest of the nationalities making up almost half of the Soviet Union.

I don’t think that the ambiguity about Stalin among ordinary Russians will be resolved any time soon. He did some horrible things to them, but maybe that though love was necessary and in the final analysis, he did won a war which made a difference between survival and annihilation.

One of the greatest curses for the western civilization has been the invention of multiculturalism. Made in the USA – it was designed to deal with the racism – primarily against blacks. So the idea was to import as many races from around the world as possible and in that way to overwhelm the original racists in US as to whom they should hate first. Brilliant idea.

But that’s just how America solves problems – make the original problem much worse until it starts to pale in comparison with the new problem that they created without ever solving either of them. At least they are trying to generate sympathy for themselves by drawing attention towards the magnitude of the problems they are facing. So that’s pretty much the solution. They are the martyrs of cosmopolitanism and the world is looking upon their struggles and admires them for their hard labor to make everybody happy.

MultiCULTuralism was born in USA in the ’60 as a propaganda response to the civil rights movement. It was implemented probably out of fear that Communism was winning the propaganda war of how we are all equal, all nations in the world should unite, we are all brothers and all that nonsense. You see Communists never did anything practical to implement those ideas. They were just talking about it. But they did manage to scare the living daylights out of the good old capitalists in US.

They got scared that the Communists will use the blacks in the US as a fifth column to radicalise them into a driving force for some kind of social revolution that could get out of hand and turn into system changing revolution. Enter multiculturalism. The idea was that by importing every possible race, nationality and religion (copycat communist internationalle) that they will show the American blacks that they can’t possibly be racists when they invite all those different groups to settle in America. Therefore there are no reasons for social upheavals which might lead to who knows what (communism).

It’s a different world these days, communism is almost gone and in this new light it can be seen that multiculturalism was overreaction. Both communism and multiculturalism share the same DNA – they are attempts at social engineering. One of them failed, I suspect the other one will follow suit too. Even frau Merkel said few years ago that multiculturalism doesn’t work – before she got overwhelmed with the refuges and went 180 in the opposite direction.

The same way that communists wanted to internationalize their movement, the same way the USA exported their “solution” to places where the problem didn’t even exist before. The way they are pushing the concept everywhere (primarily in Europe) it’s a perfect example in perfidy. By exporting the solution to a problem that doesn’t exist – you are creating the problem that it was intended to “solve”.

In the 60’s the USA had unique problem that no other developed nation had – how to deal with the legacy of slavery. By exporting the multiculturalism – they internationalized the problem. Now everybody has the same problem and US is not isolated and condemned for its historic legacy. Now the chances are much better that multiculturalism might first fail elsewhere and nobody will blame US for not being able to deal with the problem. Truly devious, while pretending to be the good guys all along.

Stalin was a clever chap. He knew that if he wanted to get any results from the Russians, the only way to get them going is to appeal to their national identity. Stalin knew that using himself as a motivating factor wouldn’t fly – the personality cult came later – after the war. He also knew that the Russians could find very little inspiration in communism too – so he resurrected all the historical national heroes like Kutuzov and Nevsky and Suvorov.

He was also aware how badly he screwed up by trusting Hitler, so at the beginning of Barbarossa, he locked himself in his dacha outside Moscow and spent the first 10 days in a drunken stupor and depression. When he saw members of the politburo approaching his dacha, he thought that they are coming to arrest him for treason, instead they were coming to ask him to pull himself together because the nation needed him.

In his first public appearance after the start of the war he addressed the Russians as: “Brothers and sisters” and the poor Russians thought – Holly cow we are even deeper in shit than we thought – he has never called us brothers and sisters before. Stalin did manage to unite the Russians in order to get the great victory, but he didn’t unite them using himself as a focal point – he used the appeal to their nationhood.

They even built a monument to this. It’s on Mamayev Kurgan and it’s called “Rodina mat zovyot” or “The motherland is calling”, and apparently it’s bigger than the statue of liberty. That’s the call that the Russians couldn’t ignore, not Stalin’s call or his personal appeal and charm. He didn’t ask them to do all the sacrifices for him, but for mother Russia. Maybe that’s why despite everything, they’ll continue to respect him.

He was also aware how badly he screwed up by trusting Hitler

You are right. I should have phrased that better. Stalin felt disappointed that Hitler outmaneuvered him at the start of Barbarossa when he wasn’t ready. But get this, he forced that failure to commit a suicide and then he denied him a proper burial place so his degenerate admirers (one of whom seems to be you) could never visit his grave and pay respect to that dog.

Whichever way the vote turns out, I doubt it that it will make too much difference for Great Britain in one crucial segment – it’s relation to US. The only difference the vote will make is whether Great Britain continues to be subservient to US via Brussel or directly and without any intermediary.

That has to be one of the ultimate indignities – to become a colony of your former colony – the situation that GB is now in relation to US. But then again, pretty much the whole Europe is in the same boat. The unwanted Euro trash that they exported for centuries to the New World has now come a full circle – to dominate Europe economically, politically and militarily and to be masters of their destiny the way Europe once used to be a master of the destinies of the millions of those unwanted impoverished former citizens that they let emigrate to the New World without shedding a tear over their departure.

For the first time in many (MANY!) years, Britain has done the right thing. To paraphrase Churchill: This is not the end, It’s not even the end of the beginning, but it’s perhaps the beginning of the end of the monstrosity called EU.

Now US has to find other ways to “unify” Europe. The only remaining tool for “unification” remains NATO. Maybe follow the example of other great “unifiers” of Europe like Napoleon and Hitler. Unifiers, occupiers – it’s all just semantics, the creators of EU know exactly what the plan was for Europe and whose interests it was supposed to serve.

This is not the time to cry over the exit of Britain. They were mostly spoiled whiners anyway, asking for ever increasing privileges compared to the rest of the EU members. What the EU had just experienced is comparable to an organ failure. So, perhaps this is the best time for some new and healthy organ to be transplanted.

The potential “donors”? Why, Turkey and Ukraine, of course? They have been the most enthusiastic EU wannabe members for some time now. Ukraine even went so far as to declare war on its own population in the hope of winning the imperial sympathies of EU, US, NATO.

Ukraine might be a good potential candidate, but Turkey is the absolute favorite. With a territory 3 times that of Great Britain, almost time and the half the population of Britain, and roughly one quarter the size of GB’s economy, Turkey can replace Britain as an EU member faster than you can say jihad.

The only downside to this arrangement might be that the newly amalgamated EU body will probably need anti-rejection drugs for the rest of its existence due to the potential incompatibility of the newly transplanted “organ”.

Maybe “Brexit” signals disillusionment with government policies that justify invasion of 3rd world countries and as atonement bringing significant numbers of refugees from the same war torn countries. Multiculturalism is a capitalist version of communism. Where communism called for equality among nations – provided they stay where they are – capitalists did one better, they created multiculturalism, which is a form of internal racial communism.

Capitalists could never agree to financial equality that communism was calling for, but racial equality – sure, why not, – as long as the primary carriers of that policy are the ordinary working class citizens. And if they object to that policy – they get labeled as the “bad” guys. How can you be against something so noble as racial communism?

Government always thinks that they are better than the people they govern – that’s why they climbed those stairs to power – because they think that they are morally and intellectually superior to the governed masses. They set policies that are never intended to affect them in any direct way, but the full impact of those policies are supposed to fall on the back of the inferior plebes.

“Brexit” showed that given the opportunity ordinary people can make better decisions than politicians, even if those decisions create some inconveniences for the ruling class as to how to implement them.

Do you realize you are wasting a valuable CNN watching time by writing you BS here? Go back to CNN, this is way above your intellectual level.

Why do the terrorists stage attacks against the west in the west? They try to show the true face of the west to the world. The true face of the west is not how they act at home – it’s how they act when they invade a 3rd world country – like savages. Even Putin said few years ago – “How can the west act like monsters abroad and pretend to be so nice domestically.”

One of those 2 faces is phony – either the image of the “nice” guy domestically – or of the acting monster abroad. The terrorists are betting that the image of the nice guy is fake and they are trying to prove it. They know about the depravities that the west is capable of domestically – from history – the holocaust. The terrorists are trying to prove that when it comes to savagery – the west is no better than them, and they are trying to force the west to act their savagery not only abroad, but also at home. It looks like they are not that far from succeeding.

The reason why I don’t buy conspiracy theories is because they have at least one major fundaMENTAL problem (besides being MENTAL as the block capitals suggests) – and that is that conspiracies are too labor intensive. When trying to explain any event – go for the simplest explanation – it works 99% of the time.

Logic follows the path of least resistance, not some elaborate devious, genius approaching schemes which are stuff of sci-fi books. Reality is usually bland and simple, it is not designed in Hollywood, it doesn’t have intricate plots and twists, it’s not a complicated mind bending puzzle that can be deciphered only by men of “superior” intelligence like Solonto fancies himself to possess. In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was. Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.

As much as I find your argument riveting, I am afraid I am a wrong audience for you, sport. Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy. See how well that sits with your fellow co-sufferers – the Muslims. And if you don’t make it back alive – that’s OK – the US could use a break. It has too many of your kind anyway.

Who said anything about visiting Israel? Are you stupid or something? Of course you should stay clear of Israel. Everybody knows by now that they are the biggest enemies of US in the middle east.

Go visit places like Iraq and Syria and Libya – an obvious beneficiaries of your country’s efforts to bring democracy to them. Don’t go as part of any organized group or anything. Just don’t forget to mention that you are Americans. I am sure that they’ll brake down in tears when they hear who their hostages – I mean visitors – are. Take with you your friends Helena and Jacues. They seem like a people who could use a trip like that too.

And don’t worry about Iran either. Except for few sanctions from US they have hardly benefited from any real effort by your country to bring democracy to them. Now if anybody would have taken seriously McCain and his singing endorsement (Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran) that would have been something that Iranians could’ve been grateful about.

Uh, no, I don’t think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing. That does not imply that the other days are cool precisely. They’re bloody hot as well, just somewhat less hot, since, yes, I did choose the most horridly hot days to use as an example, okay.

That’s just brilliant. Comparing the predictability of weather patterns based on observation of 2 days in a static weather zone to human behavior and likelihood that you can predict the veracity of replies of a large group of people based on statements from 2.

According to your logic when parents have a child, they should let it live for 2 days and then shoot it. Because after letting it sample life for that amount of time, why let it go through the same drag over and over again – 2 days is enough to find out what life is all about.

His/her life might prove more interesting than drooling and crying and sleeping like during the first 2 days, but then again it might not. Interviewing 2 people out of a 100 doesn’t prove anything one way or another. Interviewing all 100 of them might prove something but you still have to take into account their personalities. Your whole argument is bogus.

So far in response to the “clash of civilizations” between Islam and the west 4 major schools of thought have emerged as to how to deal with the Islamic world:

1. Keep bombing them and keep bringing them to the west. Major proponents of this policy are Hillary, Merkel and the rest of the western degenerate leaders under the influence of Washington. The rationale behind this policy is that “We hate their governments, but we love their people”. Gee, they must really, really hate their governments when in the process of replacing them, the west had killed millions of the people that they “love”. But western humanitarianism has no boundaries, what are few million casualties when the prospect of democracy is on the horizon. One day they’re going to be thankful for all the carnage.

2. Keep bombing them and stop bringing them over. Major proponent of this policy used to be Trump, although lately he is changing his tune. Not as humanitarian as policy No.1., but still willing to shed some blood for democracy. Major flaw in this policy is that although it still shows dislike for the governments in the Islamic world, it doesn’t show enough love for their people.

3. Stop bombing them and keep bringing them here. I haven’t been able to identify a major political figure behind this policy, but it seems to me that conspiracy theorists would theoretically support this policy in order to help their oppressed Muslim brothers who are suffering under the Jewish conspiracies – just like them.

4. Stop bombing them and stop bringing them here. This is the most appalling policy of them all. No humanitarianism here whatsoever. The proponents of this policy are not only reluctant to kill any Muslims in order to help the birth of democracy in their countries, but they don’t want to bring any of them over here to showcase them the wonders of western democracy. This additionally slows down the process of bringing democracy to the Islamic world. Because, you see, if they bring them over here, they’ll get so impressed with what democracy has to offer, that they’re going to communicate this to their compatriots back home and thus spur inevitable revolutions in the Islamic world – resulting in democracy. I believe that “Brexiters” are proponents of the policy No.4. Obviously, misguided and selfish group of people who have lost all their sense of humanitarianism.

Are you familiar with the word satire? I am actually for #4. It’s the only one that makes sense, the rest of them are baloney. As for me being a Jew – how I wish.

Russia wanted to put Turkey out of their misery as early as the Crimean war. I guess you could say they were in favor of assisted dying to the degenerate empire called “The sick man of the Bosphorus.”

Unfortunately, France and Britain stepped in to play the nurses to the “sick man” like in some bad porno movie. Anyhow, thanks to their intervention the “sick man” survived, but now is showing signs of mental illness. I just get kick out of Turkey being offended for having its actions against Armenia in WW1 called “genocide”.

The whole existence of the Ottoman Empire was genocidal, with the recipients being usually the European Christians. Remember Vlad the Impaler? Well, it turns out he learned his favourite method of capital punishment from the Turks and he often did practice it on them.

Thank God that Turks didn’t invent any major religion, because I suspect that they might have used a figure of a man with a pole in his bum as a symbol of that religion. Although given the present day circumstances, the gay community might have embraced a religion that uses such a symbol.

I think you’re delusional. Turkey a great power? Ha, ha. Remember the Balkan wars – specifically the 1st one? The three Balkan “powers” with combined population of less than half of Turkey population routed them in mere months. Nobody saw that coming. The western powers were predicting that Turkey – aka the Ottoman empire will squash the Balkan states with ease.

Some even say that the Armenian genocide which came 3 years later was a payback for the Christians of Europe kicking Turkey’s butt in the Balkan wars.

The situation hasn’t changed much these days. The 3, ok, make that 4 (although the 4th one – Montenegro doesn’t count for much) Balkan “powers” still have combined population of less than half than that of Turkey. Even though they can’t see eye to eye on any issue between themselves – when it comes to Turkey – I won’t be surprised if they unite in a blink of an eye. That’s how deeply the passions against their former tormentors run. And if I had to predict an outcome – I would say repeat of the 1st Balkan war. The fact that except Serbia the rest of them are NATO members wouldn’t even come under consideration.

What’s this zine for? For glorifying Turkey? Not even their own population has respect for them. If anybody benefits from papa-US it’s Turkey. If it wasn’t for them, you wouldn’t even exist as a country let alone beg to join EU. Sweet dreams on that one too, by the way.

You are not only divorced from reality, but even fantasy refuses to have an affair with you. That’s how far gone you are. Take you BS comments elsewhere, you expert on Turkish affairs.

This zine is not for that kind.

My kind is good. What kind are you, you filthy dog?

Multiculturalism or chaotic and unrestricted immigration breaks down social cohesion, and guess what – you need social cohesion if you want a united front against the government. In other words, multiculturalism is good for preventing regime change revolutions.

The message that the government is sending to their citizens via the uncontrolled immigration is: If you don’t like us – that’s too bad, we can replace you with someone who will love us – immigrants from the third world. Immigration takes away jobs from the natives and keeps them weak. Instead of outsourcing the jobs overseas, with immigration – the jobs are outsourced internally – to the newcomers.

The newcomers feel nothing but gratitude for the governments in their new countries and they are the population that the government can count on the most in terms of loyalty. Love is easy to buy, and love bought by the government from third world immigrants is way cheaper than trying to buy love from the indigenous population which demands ever increasing wages, social services and all kinds of other privileges.

Poland is a great example that religion is not only good for spiritual delusions but political as well. You see, Polacks believe that their great religion makes them equal with the western Europeans. Funny how vintage 1939 Germans didn’t think so. If Nazi Germany remained in power for few more years, Polacks would have been slaughtered like pigs to the last one.

Even now in post Brexit GB – one of the most targeted groups for racial hatred and abuse were the Polish. I guess that’s because the British – like their German cousins – think of the Polish as equal.

Religion is one of the most powerful tools for manipulation – in Poland’s case – it’s even easier, because the west doesn’t have to do anything at all, Polish use their religion to manipulate themselves with it on their own.

In their twisted minds they are the defenders of the western civilization against the wild hordes from the east – Russia. How does that make any sense? How can it make any sense to defend against civilization – the Russian one – compared to whom you are inferior? Who needs defending from whom?

If you compare Russian achievements in arts, science, not to mention military achievements – which one is the inferior culture? The only prominent civilizational products of Poland that I can think of are: Chopin, Marie Currie and Joseph Konrad. But yeah, keep on defending, Europe thinks of you as equals and they’re going to be very grateful to you one day. They might even elect another Pope from your ranks just to keep you believing that you’re equal.

That’s what I like about the Americans, that they are so modest. Where the Germans spoke about a 1000 years Reich, the Americans speak only of a 100 year American reign (of terror), hopefully with an eye on renewing that contract 9 more times in order to match their ideological predecessors’ predictions of longevity.

Other similarities that I’ve noticed? – Ubermensch = Exceptionalism. Need to contain bolshevism = Contain Russian “aggression”, and so on and so on.

I think that Putin was awfully generous. US will be considered a great military power (never mind superpower) when they start giving medals for bravery to the drone operators. Until then, it’s just a country with a lot of junk that it doesn’t even know how to use in order to win any war.

It seems that in Ukraine today conditions exist that might even result in another catastrophe like the famine of the 1930’s, to which some decided to give a genocidal name “Holodomor”. I suspect that in case of such an unfortunate scenario – the blame will be assigned again to the Russians.

Never mind that if there is one single character trait that all Ukrainians arguably possess is that they never know when it’s time to get on with the program. Rebelling against the collectivization in the 1930’s was what led to the famine then, and rebelling against the economic union with Russia in 2014 is what might lead to the possible collapse of Ukraine in the near future.

Both are examples of total lack of vision by the Ukrainians as to what course of action might be most beneficial to them as a “nation”. After all these are the same people who welcomed the invading Germans with flowers – as liberators in 1941 – the ones who were responsible for such pearls of wisdom as Slavs are untermensch and yet somehow the Ukrainians felt excluded from such generous descriptions by the Germans.

Like it didn’t occur to them that they might be Slavs too. Talking about delusions. It’s no wonder that the current generation of Ukrainians sees the west as “saviors” and the Russians as oppressors of Ukraine. It seems it’s in their DNA. What is wrong with these people? Are they even capable of learning anything from their mistakes from 80 and 70 years ago?

It’s a known fact that Stalin had no great love for the Ukrainians. For him, a peasant wanting to possess even a few cows and horses – was a sign of dangerous bourgeois tendencies that needed to be dealt with harshly. So he did, and the result was the famine. Although it seems that even he realized that he might have overdone the whole thing, so he penned up a piece called “Dizzy with success” in which he tried to blame the whole tragedy of the famine on overzealous commissars.

On the other hand, trying to portray the whole tragedy of the famine as being motivated by some kind of genocidal racism of the Russians towards the Ukrainians is beyond retarded. Yet, this seems to be the favorite way the Ukrainians like to interpret the whole tragedy. The main reason it happened was Stalin and the Russian people had no control over his actions. As for the Ukrainians welcoming the Germans as liberators – they were not entirely disappointed in their expectations. The Germans did liberate a large number of them – from their lives – so their unbridled enthusiasm for seeing the Germans as saviors was not completely unfounded.

About the “Canadian journalist”.- Of course he’ll be praising the bravery of the Chechen Mujahedeen. It takes a hero to recognize heroes. That a-hole once claimed that he has fired on Soviet troops in combat in Afghanistan. I guess if the Soviets knew what a fearsome warrior is fighting against them, they would have surrendered right then and there. The “Canadian journalist” is a total phony and I don’t know why he is even being published in this respectful magazine.

To put it bluntly, if the Communists had not been internationalist totalitarian mass murdering barbarians, Operation Barbarossa would never have happened at all.

That’s right man. The Germans actually invaded Russia to save the prisoners from the Gulag. They were in fact the greatest humanitarians the world has ever seen. How did anybody miss that?

Moreover, after WW II, Stalin did in fact export Communism to all of the countries vanquished by the Red Army, calling his totalitarian nightmare “liberation” (and many Russians continue to refer to “liberation” of those countries).

Ask any of the countries that had the pleasure to be occupied both by Germany and USSR and you’ll find out who did they prefer more. Take Poland for example – did they fare better under German occupation – some 20% of the population slaughtered by them -or under the Russians. But yeah, Nazis were great man, all they ever did was preemptively liberate countries that were about to be overrun by communists. Keep reading your propaganda, you don’t have the brain for this.

I would also note that Germany had numerous Slav allies (Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, parts of Yugoslavia, parts of Baltic States)

You are a moron, aren’t you? Only Bulgaria and Yugoslavia are actually Slavic and only Bulgaria and parts of Yugoslavia (Croatia) were ever Germany’s allies – vast majority of the Slavs were enemies of Germany.

You are absolutely right, the Polacks would have preferred the Germans as occupiers rather than the Soviets. Than what was the Warsaw uprising all about? They must have gotten confused or maybe just got tired of the German kindness.

Or maybe they staged the whole event knowing that the Russians were going to be their next masters and they just wanted to preliminary kiss Russian’s butts, pretending that they also hate Russians’ enemies.

Actually they were hopping to stage a little show of how they liberated themselves without Russian help – hence no need for Russian occupation afterwards. Unfortunately, Stalin was too clever for them and saw through the whole charade and let the Germans slaughter them before any ideas of Poland “self-liberating” themselves took hold.

But, yeah, life under German occupation was very joyful for Poland, I bet they still commemorate with nostalgia every September 1 when the Germans came to pre-emptively liberate them from the Communist menace.

Even Baltic States are joining EU and NATO due to the bad taste in their mouth of Soviet occupation.

I didn’t realize that the Soviet rule of the Baltic states was plagiarism of the Clinton/Lewinsky affair.

The fact that US is trying to elect a woman for a president is a sign of desperation. It looks they are desperately looking for any signs of hope, where none is to be found. So now they are going through the motion of electing “firsts”.

In the previous two elections they elected their first black president believing that the mere fact that he is black might bring some kind of hope. That turned out to be a pigment of their imagination (I apologize for the spelling – it was intentional). Now they might elect a woman president – again first – believing that this might bring some kind of change.

I suspect that in keeping with this trend, further down the road they might elect the first donkey and the first elephant – just to match the mascots of the parties, before they realize that electing firsts doesn’t do absolutely anything and that if they really want change and hope something more radical needs to be done than electing firsts.

I’ve read some researches and it’s interesting. It turns out that the purest Slavs are the Polacks – some 67% of their DNA is Slavic. Second came the Ukrainians, the Russians are only third in terms of the % of their DNA being Slavic- which is not surprising, after 200 years of Mongol rule and all other kinds of mixing up with everyone.

On the other hand, there are probably a lot of Eastern Europeans with some % of their DNA being Slavic. After all, it’s hard to resist the Slavic charm. Why, even the Germans can probably boast of some Slavic heritage (although I doubt it that they are inclined to do so) – thanks to some involuntary recipients of genetic material on the German side benefiting from the largesse of the Soviet soldiers liberating Germany from the Nazis – again probably involuntary liberation from the Nazis as far as the Germans are concerned.

It melts one’s heart to hear great humanitarians like you talk. If your nation was subjected to the German barbarism like the Russians were, I doubt it you’ll have so much sympathy for those swine.

I still think that the Germans got off way too easily. The Russians should have thrown the book on them, just keep the gas chambers churning until there are none of them left. Even some reasonable Germans admit that they deserved what they got, yet a gentle soul like you comes along and defends them.

Great humanist you are. Why don’t you go and cry over the carnage inflicted upon true innocents around the world suffering the brutal effects of imperialism of another great western humanitarian state – the US, instead of bemoaning the cruel fate of the Germans, you degenerate.

There’s no such thing as “Slavic DNA”.

Yes there is – R1a.

LOL – is that Lot of Lucidity? Go do some reading, son, instead of wasting your time here.

No, but I bet you look like one.

This column touches on subject such as communist propaganda. You know what started as capitalist response to a communist propaganda? – the multiculturalism. You see communism was supposed to be about economic equality, in a far distant future we were all supposed to be equal economically. That was the main stated goal of communism.

How did capitalism respond to that? Well of course capitalists would never even dream about offering economic equality – it goes against the basic principles of the system. What they offered as a substitute to economic equality was racial equality – multiculturalism. Inability to agree to even some degree of economic equality looks bad on the capitalists, the potential inability to agree to multiculturalism looks bad on to middle class and the working class in general – since they were supposed to be main carriers of this policy.

One of the main objectives of multiculturalism is to destroy the white middle and working class since they are the ones for whom multiculturalism brings extra competition for jobs and social services. From the ruling class capitalist perspective multiculturalism is acceptable – why? Because for them everybody really is equal in a sense that they don’t care what color and ethnicity are the ones that they exploit. Everybody is equal, but the ruling class is better than everybody and multiculturalism doesn’t apply to them.

I once read in one blog that diversity and equality and all that crap is a well-intended hypocrisy which after being practiced for some time one day will became a reality. That means that a lie after being practiced for some time one day will became the truth. That may be so, but when you deal with a lie – there are those who benefit from it and those that lose as a result of being the victims of that lie.

As a said before, this is a payback from the ruling class to everyone below them who might entertain the idea of asking for better economic equality. You want equality? We’ll give you one – racial and ethnic equality. Right back at you people. Let’s see who are the bad guys now, the good old capitalists to whom you are all equally worthy of exploitation, or you – the members of the great unwashed who might have second thoughts about such a noble concept like multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism is a form of communism. It’s a tool of oppression against the white majority anywhere in the world. Multiculturalism was invented in the U.S. in the 60’s – supposedly to deal with the issues of racism, the legacy of slavery and the apartheid in the U.S. – how noble – right?

In fact the main objective of multiculturalism was to prevent the communism from taking over the world. Remember, it was the 60’s and communism still looked like a viable idea. So by introducing enough communist elements, capitalism went into self-preservation mode, trying to prevent the main idea of communism from winning – the economic equality. Capitalists are economic bigots, who are trying to prevent the rest from becoming their equals. In order to combat this, with multiculturalism they are trying to portray the white majority as racial bigots who want to prevent other races from becoming their equals.

Who is a worse person – economic bigot or racial bigot? It’s a diversionary tactic. Keep the white underprivileged bogged down dealing with the nightmare of multiculturalism and this will prevent them from asking for more economic equality. As a result of this, they’ll be begging for more capitalist elements, never mind about communism winning over.

It’s been 25 years since the communism collapsed. The capitalist are feeling secure from that threat. The wealth gap is increasing, so is it the influx of third-world immigrants. Unrelated? I don’t think so. Multiculturalism is used to prevent the white majority from noticing the increase in wealth disparity and to prevent them from dealing with that issue.

What the capitalists are saying to the white majority is: “You want us to share our wealth with you? How about you sharing your wealth with your oppressed third world brothers and sisters? You don’t want to do that? Well, now you know how we feel about sharing our wealth with you.”

They say that the first casualty in war is truth. In that case, U.S. has nothing to worry about. They’ve put that baby to sleep long time ago.

People fail to realize that US is on a mission to bring prosperity to the whole world. The only way to bring peace is by waging more war. I know, I know there is a small contradiction in there, but that’s not US’s fault.

When the military actions by US don’t produce the results as planned and especially as advertised (and they never do), people should cut them some slack – after all their intentions were good. That’s what most Americans believe, that US is on a goodwill mission around the world and that everybody should get out of their way, especially those annoying Russians who are nothing but impediment in the grand plan to bring prosperity to the whole world.

The main difference between US and Russia that people should always remember is that US are the good guys. When they do terrible things like in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, that’s not because they’re evil, it’s just because things didn’t go as planned. When the bad guys (the Russians) try to do a good thing – like in Syria – that’s just to confuse the public. Their motivations are sinister, they are evil and there is some underlying purpose to their machinations trying to portray themselves as good. They remain the bad guys.

The actions don’t matter at all. Once you’ve become a good guy (although no one can ever tell when and where exactly US established their credentials as the good guys – probably not even they themselves), nothing you do can change this reality, even if no one else believes in it – as long as you do.

Nietzsche once said that God is dead. He also said that as a result of that – a new Ubermensch might emerge. I don’t know about God being dead, but it certainly looks like the Christian one is on his last legs.

Maybe the ruling elites in Washington are just ahead of the rest of us. The Muslim hordes invading the west could be the arrival of the Ubermensch that Nietzsche once predicted – happy to fill the void left by the dead God.

I still wouldn’t blame the Muslims for the chaos taking place – which is probably only happening as a result of having no normal mensch left in the ruling classes of the west.

Maybe it’s time for Trump to adjust to this new reality and start kissing Muslim babies (or babes?) at rallies if he wants to broaden his limited public appeal. Just kidding. I think the only one who brings a promise of hope and change in this election is Trump – he still might turn out to be a fraud, but for now, he looks like the last hope.

Economic power usually translates into military power. But it’s not always proportionate. The prime example of this is US. If, for example Germany had that kind of economic base like US, they would have had the military not to rule the earth, but to rule the solar system.

When you are not god at something – just throw billions of dollars at it and hope that it will be enough to fix the problem or at least that no one will notice the shortcomings.

The basic reason why US foreign policy seems incoherent and contradictory is because they want to achieve multiple objectives out of a single event. This schizophrenic attitude comes out of their belief that they are intellectually superior and can achieve what in theory is not achievable.

For example, in Syria they want to overthrow the legitimate government, using terrorists as allies, inflict some damage to Russia – economical, military as well as hurt their reputation, defeat ISIS, help their allies in the Middle East and on top of all this they want to be seen as “the good guys”.

Some of their objectives are mutually exclusive and they particularly clash with the last one – the desire to be seen as the ones doing the right thing, and in order to achieve that particular one, they play games like they are fighting the terrorists – when in fact they are not, because the other objectives are more important. While they are convinced that they are fooling everyone, the only ones who are fooled are themselves.

I think that the Dutch inquiry into the downing of flight MH17 is definitely credible for several reasons. The main one being that thanks to western technological superiority, the investigators were able to pinpoint the angle under which the rocket hit the plane – they were able to deduct this from the scratch marks left by the rocket on the plane.

They even factored in the wind that was blowing at the time (and still is) from a westerly direction – the one I like to call a propaganda wind – and which affected the flight path of the rocket.

If there wasn’t such a weather phenomenon present at the time of the downing of the plane, the Russians might have been able to fool the international community – without impunity and with total immunity – into believing that the rocket came from Ukrainian territory. Again, thanks to superior western technology, and the propaganda wind which helped the investigation to conclusively prove that no matter how you look at it – the rocket came from the Russian side.

I think that the Dutch outdid themselves on this one. Such a brilliant investigation. They got it down to a science. And they did it the old fashion way – the way that KGB used to do it in the old days – by using human intelligence.

I know I am being awfully generous referring to the UkroNazis as both human and intelligent in a same sentence, but give them some credit, will you. After all, who in their wildest dreams could imagine that Ukrainians might have some motive to lie about the whole thing? What could be in it for them to blame the Russians?

I mean, the whole investigation was based on Ukrainian eyewitnesses’ accounts of seeing the transport of the BUK system? Really?

I think the Dutch are on the roll here. I think that next they should reopen the case of Anna Frank. I think the Germans got framed on that one and I believe that a lot of people on this site would agree that the whole thing was a vast Jewish conspiracy. When the smoke clears, I believe the truth will come out that Anna Frank ended up in a gulag and it all got blamed on the innocent Germans who were too polite to deny it, because they are so western and civilized.

At first Americans tried to prove to the world how great they are by being mean – slavery, then they tried to prove how great they are by trying to be nice – multiculturalism. The third and final chapter in the saga is going to be multigalacticism. It’s going to work like this: NASA is already probing the space for alien life. Once they find it – they’ll invite them to immigrate to US, thus finally, once and for all they’ll be able to get an objective and unbiased feedback from the space aliens about what a truly great people Americans are.

Trump’s win represents hope for change for the better – on which he might or might not be able to deliver, but unlike his predecessor – he’ll probably at least try. It’s a win by people that have been constantly lied to by the establishment in order to continue on the “safe” road of status quo, rather than try something different.

Trump’s win is only nominally a republican win, because for all intents and purposes Trump is a third party candidate and his win is the closest that America has come to a revolution without actually going through one, although if he fails as a president, they actually might need a real one in order to fix things.

I suspect that the latter will be the case, because not only is something seriously wrong with American politics, I think that actually the whole western civilization is one giant rotten phoniness preoccupied with appearances rather than substance.

The establishment was rightfully scared of Trump’s win, because you run the greatest risk of really royally screwing things up when you actually try to fix them. So in this sense Trump might become the American Gorbachev, because the problems that America faces today are as monumental as those USSR faced in the 80’s and they might prove to be equally insurmountable without completely dismantling the whole system and starting anew. In any case I wish him and the decent Americans a success because so much hope and defiance was invested in his win by millions of ordinary and decent people.