Listen Liberals, Russia is not our Enemy

How do you mean this, Camlok? Your statement doesn't make logical sense.

Are you saying that American interests are "war crimes" by definition. Or are you saying that every action taken by the American government has been a war crime.

The second option is clearly factually incorrect. There are many actions taken by the American government in the past 4 years that haven't broken international law under any interpretation. There are several examples of American action with which you probably agree.

Please clarify your point.

The floor is yours, Max.

Really? Camlok.

Did the US break international law by providing aid to Haiti after the earthquake there? Note: I am asking you specifically if this broke international law... I am not asking your opinion about whether you approve or not of this effort.

Your claim is that every American action is a war crime. That is the only question at issue here.

Please, Max.

"Cheap labor has always been at the heart of U.S. -Haitian relations, ever since the Haitian Revolution in 1804. It was actually a slave rebellion, the first and still the only successful one in modern history. The U.S. sided with French colonialism as the U.S. economy was based on slavery at the time and Haiti represented the first "dangerous example." - Ricky Baldwin
============

"When the full and true story of Jean-Bertrand Aristide is finally told, it will portray a noble and humble man who gave of himself honorably to serve the interests of all the people of Haiti. His only failure was his inability to overcome the brutal and corrupt power of the U.S. and its determination to see him fail. " - Stephen Lendman
=======

Why does the US owe Haiti Billions? Colin Powell, former US Secretary of State, stated his foreign policy view as the "Pottery Barn rule." That is - "if you break it, you own it."

The US has worked to break Haiti for over 200 years. We owe Haiti. Not charity. We owe Haiti as a matter of justice. Reparations. And not the $100 million promised by President Obama either - that is Powerball money. The US owes Haiti Billions - with a big B.

The US has worked for centuries to break Haiti. The US has used Haiti like a plantation. The US helped bleed the country economically since it freed itself, repeatedly invaded the country militarily, supported dictators who abused the people, used the country as a dumping ground for our own economic advantage, ruined their roads and agriculture, and toppled popularly elected officials. The US has even used Haiti like the old plantation owner and slipped over there repeatedly for sexual recreation.

Here is the briefest history of some of the major US efforts to break Haiti.

In 1804, when Haiti achieved its freedom from France in the world's first successful slave revolution, the United States refused to recognize the country. The US continued to refuse recognition to Haiti for 60 more years. Why? Because the US continued to enslave millions of its own citizens and feared recognizing Haiti would encourage slave revolution in the US.

After the 1804 revolution, Haiti was the subject of a crippling economic embargo by France and the US. US sanctions lasted until 1863. France ultimately used its military power to force Haiti to pay reparations for the slaves who were freed. The reparations were 150 million francs. (France sold the entire Louisiana territory to the US for 80 million francs!)
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Haiti/Why_US_Owes_Haiti_Billions.html

http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Haiti/Haiti.html

The question was about whether the US Aid to Haiti in 2010 was a war crime. Which you didn't answer. But I get the game you are playing.

Just out of curiosity. Can you name a country that is not a war criminal?

That is a terribly lame response that is not usually of you, Max. I can't name a country that has come anywhere close to the over 70 illegal invasions since WWII that the US has racked up. That's over 70 war crimes of the most heinous of all war crimes - the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation.

All, that's ALL the resulting crimes that are committed as a result of these supreme war crimes, the number one war crime, falls upon the shoulders of those initial war criminals.

Not a lame excuse at all, Camlok. I am merely challenging your extremism to see how it works when applied fairly. It is very easy to make a point if you apply it myopically, but if it has any value it should apply universally. Taking your points to their logical conclusion is perfectly fair.

Russia has invaded a lot of countries since WWII. North Korea has only invaded one, but I think they are pretty evil.

The F-35's problem is people keep expecting it to be an air superiority fighter, largely because of Obama's untrue claims about it when he was scrapping production of our real air superiority fighters.

No one considers the B-52 a failure because it can't out dogfight an F-86F. This is because no one expects the B-52 to be an air superiority fighter to begin with.

The F-35 is a perfectly good replacement for a stealth F-117, for a Harrier Jump Jet, or for a ground-attack-configured F-16.

For air superiority, what we really need to do is resume production of the F-22. And prosecute all the corrupt politicians who canceled F-22 production to begin with.

Are you still crying because we dronestriked your terrorist buddies?

Get used to it, because we're going to keep on dronestriking them.

No JTT, the only terrorists here are you and your 9/11-perpetrating buddies.

Korea is Korea. The fiction the US created in the south is the same fiction the US tried to create in Vietnam, another of the myriad massive US war crimes. When Korea reunites there will only be Korea.

If the dictator, Kim Jong Il, who heads a brutal, repressive, authoritarian regime takes over all of Korea... that would be an example of "reunification". He has made it clear that this is what he wants.

Would you be OK with this?

You are a product of the US propaganda system, Max. A Californian lady of Korean background was raised on the same propaganda as you. She hated the North and everything about it. Then she went to the North and discovered that the people were just like everywhere else - they wanted the same things in life as everyone else. When she returned to the south and started to speak out, she was imprisoned, had to be "saved" by US officials.

The brutal US and the brutal, right wing dictators that the US installed in the south murdered untold numbers of people because they had tendencies towards the left, meaning they wanted Korea for the Koreans.

Same thing in Indonesia, where the US overthrew the neutral Sukarno and put in the, again, brutal, right wing Suharto. Then the US State Department
supplied death lists to the military and over 750,000 people were murdered. Then the US gave these animals, that they had nurtured the go ahead on East Timor and the results were similar.

All so the greedy Americans could steal these people's wealth.

Ok Camlok. I have learned better than to argue with you. I just want to get this point straight.

You are claiming the government of South Korea is more repressive than the government of North Korea? I assume that this means that if Korea is unified under the rule of the current government of North Korea, namely Kim Jong Un, that this would be a good outcome?

Is this correct (please answer a clear "yes" or "no").

I looked up your "Californian lady of Korean background" story. Are you talking about Laura Ling? (Again this is a "yes" or "no" question... please answer clearly before elaborating).

I don't recall. I read this some time ago.

Max, notice how certain small, defenseless countries have a reputation for being repressive. Why? Because they are being terrorized by the USA.

Russia and China are pretty big and aren't really defenseless. They both have pretty crappy human rights records.

There are many countries; Jamaica, Bermuda, Costa Rica for example, that are small and defenseless yet aren't repressive dictatorships.

I don't think the facts match your rhetoric.

You do know the problem with anecdotal evidence, Max. Just look at the US and its interactions with countries - virtually always a brutal, right wing dictatorship, after a moderate, democratically elected government has been overthrown.