Iv'e read somewhere that this has happened before.
What has happened before?
Topic: Drone Air strike kills 15 civilians (on their way to a wedding) in Yemen - page 2. (Read 7728 times)
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
January 04, 2014, 06:27:06 AM
What has happened before?
January 03, 2014, 11:55:28 PM
Iv'e read somewhere that this has happened before.
January 03, 2014, 02:59:17 PM
Nobel peace prize winner President Obama? Can't be!
January 03, 2014, 01:32:40 PM
Nobel peace prize winner President Obama? Can't be!
January 03, 2014, 09:55:06 AM
So you are saying the tyrrany of the majority in the EU is worse than the tyrrany of the majority within an individual member state?
Tyranny is wrong anywhere and by anyone. Be it by the EU or be it by anyone else.
In the same way you think the EU has no right to impose such and such laws on Poland. I however, say that Poland has no right to impose such and such laws on it's own people.
No. EU don't have any right to impose laws on Poland. Poland is a sovereign nation, where the people of Poland can chose their laws. If the majority of Polish people want a certain law, then they should get it, regardless of what the EU think.
I hope the UK really gets out of the EU soon. I really don't see the benefit at all.
January 03, 2014, 09:46:57 AM
So you are saying the tyrrany of the majority in the EU is worse than the tyrrany of the majority within an individual member state?
Tyranny is wrong anywhere and by anyone. Be it by the EU or be it by anyone else.
In the same way you think the EU has no right to impose such and such laws on Poland. I however, say that Poland has no right to impose such and such laws on it's own people.
No. EU don't have any right to impose laws on Poland. Poland is a sovereign nation, where the people of Poland can chose their laws. If the majority of Polish people want a certain law, then they should get it, regardless of what the EU think.
January 03, 2014, 07:37:48 AM
Ban Ki-Moon is the secretary general of the United Nations but he does not represent all the countries in the world.
You are right. He represents the peoples of the world, not the countries.
To clarify the secretary general's role, from http://www.un.org/sg/sg_role.shtml:
Quote
a spokesman for the interests of the world's peoples, in particular the poor and vulnerable among them.
[...]
The Secretary-General would fail if he did not take careful account of the concerns of Member States, but he must also uphold the values and moral authority of the United Nations, and speak and act for peace, even at the risk, from time to time, of challenging or disagreeing with those same Member States.
[...]
The Secretary-General would fail if he did not take careful account of the concerns of Member States, but he must also uphold the values and moral authority of the United Nations, and speak and act for peace, even at the risk, from time to time, of challenging or disagreeing with those same Member States.
January 03, 2014, 07:31:24 AM
Ban Ki-Moon is also the secretary general of the United Nations. He represents all the countries in the world. Where are your sources that Tymoshenko is corupt?
I don't care what he is. He is still biased.
Here is one:
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/Ukraine_seeks_Tymoshenko_funds.html?cid=37361918
It's not only the Cypriots who are getting their money taken away, but everyone holding fiat. Besides, Cyprus was bankrupt, should they have let the banks collapse so that everyone lost all their money?
The Cypriot crisis was solely caused by useless EU regulations.
Explain.
Facepalm. Legalizing things is a good thing. In those cases where they are doing that they are doing the people of the EU a favor and saving them from being done over by their own governments.
This is what I exactly meant. If 90% of the population from a particular country doesn't want a particular law, then the EU has no right to impose it on them. No matter whether you think it will be a good thing or a bad thing. It is up for the citizens of a nations to decide it. You have no voice there. Period.
So you are saying the tyrrany of the majority in the EU is worse than the tyrrany of the majority within an individual member state? In the same way you think the EU has no right to impose such and such laws on Poland. I however, say that Poland has no right to impose such and such laws on it's own people.
In fact, almost all places you could live draconian and unjust laws will be forced upon you. I don't think those laws will be less draconian and more just in Russia than in the EU.
January 03, 2014, 03:51:31 AM
Ban Ki-Moon is also the secretary general of the United Nations. He represents all the countries in the world. Where are your sources that Tymoshenko is corupt?
I don't care what he is. He is still biased.
Here is one:
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/Ukraine_seeks_Tymoshenko_funds.html?cid=37361918
It's not only the Cypriots who are getting their money taken away, but everyone holding fiat. Besides, Cyprus was bankrupt, should they have let the banks collapse so that everyone lost all their money?
The Cypriot crisis was solely caused by useless EU regulations.
Facepalm. Legalizing things is a good thing. In those cases where they are doing that they are doing the people of the EU a favor and saving them from being done over by their own governments.
This is what I exactly meant. If 90% of the population from a particular country doesn't want a particular law, then the EU has no right to impose it on them. No matter whether you think it will be a good thing or a bad thing. It is up for the citizens of a nations to decide it. You have no voice there. Period.
January 03, 2014, 02:12:17 AM
Ban Ki-Moon is the secretary general of the United Nations but he does not represent all the countries in the world.
January 02, 2014, 12:20:49 PM
Ban Ki-Moon has criticized the Tymoshenko-trial. I'm not saying he could not be wrong or even lying, but where are your sources?
Ban Ki-Moon is from South Korea, an American puppet state.
The share of GDP taxed in Russia is actually a little higher than the unweighted EU average. In the EU it is possible to voice dissent publicly without being punished.
The income tax in Russia is 13%, where as in some EU nations it can reach 61%. Energy giants like Gazprom and Rossneft are heavily taxed in Russia, and that's why the total tax revenue of Russia is higher.
Smaller countries have surprisingly large amounts of influence in the EU. As a puppet of Russia, all Ukrainian policy will be decided in Moscow. In the EU parliament, MEPs are directly answerable to their constituents and as such their positions depend more on their ideology than the country from which they are from.
Tell that to the Cypriots.
Borders and other immigration-stopping boundaries are immoral and not liberal at all. Immigration is a sign of more freedom, not less. Thinking you can stop homosexuality by just passing a law is naive, besides accepting it gives more personal freedom.
May be. But those are the internal issues within a country. The EU should stop pressurizing their member states to legalize everything.
What the EU should stop doing is wanting to regulate everything. That's what the EU should stop doing, not trying to stamp out ridiculous moral laws.
January 02, 2014, 03:08:14 AM
Obama should stop droning on people, this is why other countries hate us cause we think were doing the right thing without thinking thoroughly and it comes back to bite us in the ass.
"Droning on people". I like that. Better than "Obama should stop exploding baby's head on their way to a wedding". Yep. Much more snappy.
Haha, My news reporter said that, So I say it.
January 02, 2014, 02:49:57 AM
Ban Ki-Moon has criticized the Tymoshenko-trial. I'm not saying he could not be wrong or even lying, but where are your sources?
Ban Ki-Moon is from South Korea, an American puppet state.
The share of GDP taxed in Russia is actually a little higher than the unweighted EU average. In the EU it is possible to voice dissent publicly without being punished.
The income tax in Russia is 13%, where as in some EU nations it can reach 61%. Energy giants like Gazprom and Rossneft are heavily taxed in Russia, and that's why the total tax revenue of Russia is higher.
Smaller countries have surprisingly large amounts of influence in the EU. As a puppet of Russia, all Ukrainian policy will be decided in Moscow. In the EU parliament, MEPs are directly answerable to their constituents and as such their positions depend more on their ideology than the country from which they are from.
Tell that to the Cypriots.
Borders and other immigration-stopping boundaries are immoral and not liberal at all. Immigration is a sign of more freedom, not less. Thinking you can stop homosexuality by just passing a law is naive, besides accepting it gives more personal freedom.
May be. But those are the internal issues within a country. The EU should stop pressurizing their member states to legalize everything.
January 01, 2014, 08:48:00 PM
What on earth are you basing this statement on? At least Yanukovych is corrupt enough to jail Tymoshenko, in what was at best a political trial. At worst Tymoshenko is the victim of deliberate persecution by Yanukovych.
That depends on which media source you are reading. According to the one I have access to, Tymoshenko is not only corrupt, but she is also one of the world's topmost corrupt leaders.
What is the EU's "stick" against Ukraine?
Compare the EU visa regulations for citizens from Moldova and Ukraine. You will understand.
I'm saying Ukraine as a country would have greater independence under an EU hegemony and I'm saying that its people would enjoy more personal liberty under an EU hegemony.
I think it is the other way around. In EU you have banks taking away cash from people's savings accounts. Is this what you call more personal liberty? The price of gasoline in the EU is among the highest in the world. VAT is astronomically high, and so is income tax. Personal liberty in the EU is just an illusion.
And the argument that Ukraine will have greater independence under the EU is laughable. It is just 3 or 4 big nations which hold all the power in the EU. The remaining states don't have much of a voice. That's why countries like Hungary and Poland are being forced to accept mass immigration from third world nations and legalization of homosexuality, although 90% of the population is against it.
Smaller countries have surprisingly large amounts of influence in the EU. As a puppet of Russia, all Ukrainian policy will be decided in Moscow. In the EU parliament, MEPs are directly answerable to their constituents and as such their positions depend more on their ideology than the country from which they are from.
Borders and other immigration-stopping boundaries are immoral and not liberal at all. Immigration is a sign of more freedom, not less. Thinking you can stop homosexuality by just passing a law is naive, besides accepting it gives more personal freedom.
So there is less tax and more personal freedom in the European hegemony. Hence Ukraine should lean towards the EU rather than Russia if it is forced to choose. Europe is the lesser of two evils, but still of course horribly wrong.
Dont fuck with Russia. Period.I believe they also have High tech weaponry, dont believe the movies that you watch.
January 01, 2014, 05:03:31 PM
Obama should stop droning on people, this is why other countries hate us cause we think were doing the right thing without thinking thoroughly and it comes back to bite us in the ass.
"Droning on people". I like that. Better than "Obama should stop exploding baby's head on their way to a wedding". Yep. Much more snappy.
January 01, 2014, 04:54:42 PM
What on earth are you basing this statement on? At least Yanukovych is corrupt enough to jail Tymoshenko, in what was at best a political trial. At worst Tymoshenko is the victim of deliberate persecution by Yanukovych.
That depends on which media source you are reading. According to the one I have access to, Tymoshenko is not only corrupt, but she is also one of the world's topmost corrupt leaders.
What is the EU's "stick" against Ukraine?
Compare the EU visa regulations for citizens from Moldova and Ukraine. You will understand.
I'm saying Ukraine as a country would have greater independence under an EU hegemony and I'm saying that its people would enjoy more personal liberty under an EU hegemony.
I think it is the other way around. In EU you have banks taking away cash from people's savings accounts. Is this what you call more personal liberty? The price of gasoline in the EU is among the highest in the world. VAT is astronomically high, and so is income tax. Personal liberty in the EU is just an illusion.
And the argument that Ukraine will have greater independence under the EU is laughable. It is just 3 or 4 big nations which hold all the power in the EU. The remaining states don't have much of a voice. That's why countries like Hungary and Poland are being forced to accept mass immigration from third world nations and legalization of homosexuality, although 90% of the population is against it.
Smaller countries have surprisingly large amounts of influence in the EU. As a puppet of Russia, all Ukrainian policy will be decided in Moscow. In the EU parliament, MEPs are directly answerable to their constituents and as such their positions depend more on their ideology than the country from which they are from.
Borders and other immigration-stopping boundaries are immoral and not liberal at all. Immigration is a sign of more freedom, not less. Thinking you can stop homosexuality by just passing a law is naive, besides accepting it gives more personal freedom.
So there is less tax and more personal freedom in the European hegemony. Hence Ukraine should lean towards the EU rather than Russia if it is forced to choose. Europe is the lesser of two evils, but still of course horribly wrong.
December 31, 2013, 11:51:56 PM
Obama should stop droning on people, this is why other countries hate us cause we think were doing the right thing without thinking thoroughly and it comes back to bite us in the ass.
December 31, 2013, 11:14:58 AM
What on earth are you basing this statement on? At least Yanukovych is corrupt enough to jail Tymoshenko, in what was at best a political trial. At worst Tymoshenko is the victim of deliberate persecution by Yanukovych.
That depends on which media source you are reading. According to the one I have access to, Tymoshenko is not only corrupt, but she is also one of the world's topmost corrupt leaders.
What is the EU's "stick" against Ukraine?
Compare the EU visa regulations for citizens from Moldova and Ukraine. You will understand.
I'm saying Ukraine as a country would have greater independence under an EU hegemony and I'm saying that its people would enjoy more personal liberty under an EU hegemony.
I think it is the other way around. In EU you have banks taking away cash from people's savings accounts. Is this what you call more personal liberty? The price of gasoline in the EU is among the highest in the world. VAT is astronomically high, and so is income tax. Personal liberty in the EU is just an illusion.
And the argument that Ukraine will have greater independence under the EU is laughable. It is just 3 or 4 big nations which hold all the power in the EU. The remaining states don't have much of a voice. That's why countries like Hungary and Poland are being forced to accept mass immigration from third world nations and legalization of homosexuality, although 90% of the population is against it.
December 31, 2013, 10:57:35 AM
Oppressive can be a finicky term, but is there any doubt that Yanukovych is rotten to the core? Though a government in Ukraine of any kind that is not mired in overt corruption is hard to imagine.
Tymoshenko is more corrupt, when compared to Yanukovych.
The EU has only applied soft pressure, by offering a trade (and implied association deal) with Ukraine, whereas Russia is using Ukraine's reliance on Russian gas to force their hand. A deal with the EU would still leave the Ukraine free to deal with Russia, but a deal with Russia would not make the country free to deal with the EU.
As I said, I don't agree with what Washington is doing, but the Kremlin is just as bad...if not worse.
As I said, I don't agree with what Washington is doing, but the Kremlin is just as bad...if not worse.
There is nothing like Soft Pressure. Both the sides are trying to force Ukraine to ally with them. The Western media however, would like to paint this as blackmail by Putin, and carrot and stick by the EU.
The point is that Ukraine is in a power vacuum between two behemoths. Staying independent and neutral in such a position is a balancing act the divided and fragile state of Ukraine is capable of doing. They could split the country into two halves by plebiscite in every county or region.
Otherwise they could join one side (east or west) and force the other half of the country. So arguing which is better between Brussels and Kremlin, how could you make the argument that Ukraine would be more independent under a Kremlin Hegemony than a Brussels Hegemony?
Kremlin has resorted to military force time and time again. While Brussels has had a few brushes between demonstrators and police. They still still allow a ton more dissent by both protesters and media viewpoints than the Kremlin has allowed ever.
I'm saying Ukraine as a country would have greater independence under an EU hegemony and I'm saying that its people would enjoy more personal liberty under an EU hegemony.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
December 31, 2013, 10:57:08 AM
The war in Iraq is over, and the war in Afghanistan is ending, but unmanned aerial drones continue to wage an expansive war on terrorism. Obama has ratcheted up his predecessor’s tactic of deploying unmanned aircraft into Pakistan and Yemen to kill supposed terrorists (even U.S. citizens). Since Obama took office, media outlets have reported more than 300 drone strikes in Pakistan targeting al-Qaeda or the Taliban, outnumbering the Bush administration’s drone strikes five to one. Supporters say the strikes are an efficient way to kill militants, while critics say the strikes kill too many civilians, spur terrorist recruitment, shirk judicial oversight, and represent an abuse of presidential power. This map, which is based on data from the New America Foundation, displays the location and kill count of reported drone strikes since 2004 and shows that Obama has greatly extended the drone program.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/06/obama_drone_strikes_the_president_ordered_more_than_george_w_bush.html
Fucking hell, and that's just Pakistan.
Jump to: