http://www.iraqwar.org/germanreport.htm
(Report on no Ethnic Cleansing in Kosova before bombings)

Sanders used the same standard issue NATO propaganda lines for convincing folk that bombing Serbia indiscriminately.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5

The Taliban offered Osama up to the US and we refused to even talk about it.


Sanders voted for giving power over to the president and throwing more money at the military for war in Iraq. If he was anti-war he wasn't anti-war for long.

Edited 4/11/2016 01:06:12

I have joined and I will run for party leader.

In serbia there was a terrible ethnic cleaning, not intervening would create the same thing that happened in rwanda.

Idk about the afghanistan offering bin laden to the US, I'll need to read more to know about that; If they really did, the war was in fact useless. If they didn't, the war was necessary principaly to show that terrorism on that scale wouldn't go off unchecked.

So you choose to ignore a official German intelligence report in favor of major media groups? Typical leftist interventionist.

#BernieGang

not intervening would create the same thing that happened in rwanda.

You know, America stands up for what's right. That's why strategically useless countries like Ethiopia and Eritrea can fight a bloody, pointless, antigeneven, inconclusive war whose effects are still being felt today (for example, Ethiopia sponers violent Islamic extremism in Eritrea, and Eritrea has such a demographic problem after that war that they shoot anyone who tries to flee the country), but when stategic countries on some petrol are invaded, then it's time to take over another, even more startegic and petrolic country that resists against American bullying, then it's time to call a freedom war.

Edited 4/11/2016 01:59:00

^Yea, that's true, arguing against that is pointless and stupid.

I'm mostly against invervention in any country if it doesn't have an outstanding reason to do it like a genocide or something on those lines. That comes in part from the proven fact that interventions makes things worse 90% of the time, so if you're making one, you better have a good reason.

The intervention in Yugoslavia had it's problems as well, but the big problem has been solved, and the region is better off now then it was before.


About Rwanda, if I'm not mistaken, at the time France sent a few troops there, but they did not intervene in any way, just protecting strategic interests.

The intervention in Yugoslavia had it's problems as well, but the big problem has been solved, and the region is better off now then it was before.

Absolutely not.

Slovenia now is just another border to block, and now instead of giving money to Serbia, it is given money from the EU, also, Slovenia had literally 10 days of war to get independence. Croatia, it had minimal fighting in its borders, so it was easy to rebuild, and instead of giving money to Serbia, now it gets money from the EU. And that's pretty much all the "good" that came out of it, the countries that weren't really intervened.

The Federation has mostly been rebuilt, but Sarajevo will not come back to its old honour for a very long while. Banja Luka was wrecked, and many Republican villages were literally wiped off the map, along with all industry in the Republic. And the Republic (along with third countries like Brchko) has not been funded by NATO rebuilding programmes, unlike the Federation, so is still a dirt poor country in the mountains, getting scanty rebuilding funds from Serbia and Russia, both poor-ish countries themselves.

Serbia is one of the poorest countries in Europe, it's better than the Republic, but not by much. Scanty Russian funds to rebuild it, that's all it got.

Voyvodina was in the same boat as Serbia in the war, despite many there who actually wanted independence like Kosova. But they were bombed just like everywhere else, and the independence movement lost faith, and saw Serbia as the good country, that they should stick with.

Montenegro was mainly left out of the bombings; the ports were blockaded, but that's it. It got independence in 2006 and stole the Euro, and now profits by being a relatively (in Europe) business-friendly country, with a 9% flat rate income tax. It's national airline was privatised a few years ago.

Kosova suffered the same wrecking as everything else did, through both Serbian and NATO.

Macedonia peacefully got independence, it left before the real war began. Now there are problems with Albanian-Sunni nationalism in Macedonia and the poor site now has stopped getting money, getting in trouble with Greece, hated by Bulgaria, it's grown terrible.

And in 1989, this country, Jugoslavija, was a great country to go on a vacation to, from the popular seaside Istria, to a Vardar vineyard.

Why should I be party leader?
With my policies, our country will be pulled out of our backwards stances and will turn out nation into the model of progress.

On the atrocious comments made by Paugers,
The Tea Party believes that Islam and its affiliates are a direct threat to America based. Perhaps not thr majority of Muslims would bomb a tower and kill thousands, but Islam has created these terrorists and therefore we have a job as Americans to be aware and stop all attempts at keeping our children safe. Therefore, banning Muslim entrance into the US until we can figure out what's going on makes sense and should be done.

Should immigration for Muslims be halted forever? I'd say absolutely. America was founded as a Christian nation first and foremost and I guarantee if thr founding fathers could have predicted that Muslims woulf be coming into America in the thousands, stealing precious, appreciated American jobs that they would have never allowed it. Therefore, yes the Tea Party believes Muslim immigration must be halted indefinitely.
For the first part, banning everyone to stop a minority of them from tearing apart the country is quite inefficient and blocks many honest Muslims from entering the country. Also, "we have a job as Americans to be aware and stop all attempts at keeping our children safe." If I read that correctly, we should stop all attempts at keeping our children safe. By that comment, we should let all Muslims in no questions asked and no terrorism screenings either (not what I advocate), since not doing so would be an attempt at keeping our children safe. Either that, or you just mispoke. Regardless, such comments are an atrocity which blemishes our nation.
On the second part, you make a dangerous assumption that Muslim extremism will happen forever. Muslim extremism is not a permanent threat if we deal with it correctly. Much like Nazi Germany and the USSR, they are threats for their oown time. What the status quo is for today should not be assumed to be the same forever.

ON second list of comments,
Responding to Binks, I believe that the US must increase our military presence especially in the Middle East and other regions of the world to ensure the safety of all in these areas and that that democracy and the free market can operate without complication. If we go through and increase our military presence, a larger military will be necessary creating not only jobs there but hundreds of thousands of more industrial jobs for Americans and placing more reliance on American oil companies so as to keep the revenue in the US and JOBS in the US.

Having a larger military will place less concern in being able to handle our overseas presence and thus be able to focus on tbr demands if average Americans who seek a return to classic traditions and a better nation for our children to grow up in.
Two words for the first part: Cold War. How well did it work? America becomes a struggling economy while Asia in general begins to surge, particularly China and Indian subcontinent. Many proxy wars ensued, with many countries in financial ruin. History is bound to repeat itself if ignored. Blindly sending your ideology and enforcing it costs lots of money which could have been used for different projects.
For the second part, this is utter madness. A large military presence will not ensure stability and good relations. For example, Iraq is in utter disarray after years of incursion. Will more military incursion into the region be enticing for Iraqis? Their homeland is in chaos, thanks to military interventionism in the 90's and 2000's. Also, the blind spreading of influence of American ideals has not always been good for stability. Remember Vietnam? Not many on the homefront supported the spread of capitalism. You know why? They don't like watching their children dying for what they see as a dead cause.

ok... that seems more logical (lol).
Retort to amended statement:"stop all attempts at harming our children."
Terrorism isn't the only threat to our future. Also, blocking all threats is impossible. Threats will sneak by. Small terrorist cells, are manifesting in other lands. Blocking immigration won't help, due to the internet, and believe me, blocking threats on the internet is a continually arduous task.
Also, with such a loose mouth, should we trust a man like you to hold an office of great importance?

Edited 4/12/2016 01:26:44

Comments like those usually result in the immeadiate destruction of their campaign.

Let me show you this man, he's called Donald Trump. He's a genius.

Just me?

Ususally does not mean always.
Also, Paugers, care to elaborate on "bad reasoning."
I retracted the second part of the statement.
Lastly, 2 votes out of 5 may be quite a lot, but it isn't a majority. More people have a differe,t first choice than those who have you as your first choice.

Edited 4/12/2016 01:29:24

Also, I demand a vote for party leader.

I vote for myself.

these are my political views
*fuck israel, leave it to its own fate
*use drones only in the event of a war
*grow foreign help spending
*let everybody work, no work visas
*take private land but only for things like windfarms or research and give money to those your taking the land from
*let the FBI spy on people, if your not doing anything wrong what does it matter to you
*make national teaching standards stricter(like in finland), education is the future of the world and from what ive seen the education in the US is pretty lousy
*dont make companies have employment quotas, just employ the most qualified
*stop companies from donating to campaigns, some companies will ind other ways but some will also be discouraged
*make companies serve anyone
*limit legal suing powers, everybodys suing everybody for ridiculous things and the only people who are winning from this are lawyers
*shrink the american space programme or change it completely so that its more efficient
*gay marriage legal
*rid the death penalty, too risky, if it turns out you were wrong about the person there is no going back
*implement a carbon tax (fucking tony abbot, removing the carbon tax in Australia)
*no photographic identification for voting
*always give welfare to those without a job but give less if they arent looking for work and more if they are
*legalise marijuana
*gtfo of the middle east including israel
*fracking legal but heavily discouraged and only in areas without people
*prochoice, the fetus isnt a human yet
*take references to god out of american legal stuff, 17% of america isnt christian
*open borders
*no torture
*decrease military spending a shitload
*no gerrymandering
*government healthcare for all, unless its something ridiculous like going to the doctors for a cold or going to the doctor if you stubbed your toe, if you go to the doctor for something like that you have to pay for that yourself


EDIT: just thought of another 3:
*make guns illegal
*slash college costs
*alternative vote not electoral college

Edited 4/12/2016 22:06:03

i you want to see those things above in america vote for me
CHUCK NORRIS 2016!!!!

i vote for myself