Found 4 comments on HN
eternalban · 2016-06-30 · Original thread
> Yes, the United States replaced a friendly regime with a hostile one, that makes sense.

Read up:

https://www.amazon.com/Grand-Chessboard-American-Geostrategi...

> SS and NKVD [and "brutal"]

This sort of b.s. psychological manipulations could be passed around before the internet as agitprop but those days are over. SS ran concentration camps, among other things. Kindly point to documented events that would even remotely approach the atrocities of SS or NKVD. (Google may also have some nice ultra violent pictures for your viewing pleasure courtesy of US armed forces and intelligence services in Iraq. From what WAPO published back in the day, when select members of US congress got to see the unpublished pics after Abu Gharaib hit the fan, they emerged "shaken", "pale", and "speechless".)

> the western powers did arms deals with Iraq in the 1980s

And Israel funneled American arms to "hostile" IRI during the same period. Regardless, the essential requirement was, and remains, for instability in the region.

Shah was a nationalist and that didn't fit in with the Globalist agenda.

> brutal & mass murder

Even the sum total of all state violence of Shah's 37 year reign pales to utter insignificance compared to the 4 year record of any American president starting with the Atom Bomb dropping shoe salesman and culminating with the current Nobel Peace Prize winner.

> incompetent

Fairly, he suffered from grandiosity and talked too much. But you can google for declassified assessments of this man. Incompetence was never on the list.

Umn44 · 2016-02-23 · Original thread
>Advances in technology make privacy more important than it has ever been. Without privacy, there is vast opportunity for government to reach deep into our lives in the name of enforcement.

That was the plan for elites... you don't seem to understand our elites perspective on these matters.

"The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities."

'In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities effectively exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason."

"Today we are again witnessing the emergence of transnational elites ... [Whose] ties cut across national boundaries ...It is likely that before long the social elites of most of the more advanced countries will be highly internationalist or globalist in spirit and outlook ... The nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty... Further progress will require greater American sacrifices. More intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be undertaken, with some consequent risk to the present relatively favorable American position."

Written in 1982

http://www.amazon.com/Between-Two-Ages-Americas-Technetronic...

The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives

http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Chessboard-American-Geostrategic...

tiatia · 2014-08-28 · Original thread
I don't know where to start.

Crimea? Always was Russian. Once given as a "present" to Ukraine. Do you doubt that a second referendum would give a different result? What did the west do in and with Yugoslavia? What about the NATO expansion towards Russia? What would the US do if Russia starts fucking around with Mexico?

Read this book and understand the foreign policy of the US and all the conflicts happening near Russia (Georgia, Ukraine etc.) http://www.amazon.com/The-Grand-Chessboard-Geostrategic-Impe...

Or a little bit information from "the other side" http://www.vineyardsaker.co.nz/

The EU has nothing to do in Ukraine. And if people want to secede, why not let them?

Instead of the US/EU Freetrade agreement, the EU should have offered the deal to Putin and the problem if Ukraine does the deal with the EU or Russia would have been non-existent. A freetrade zone from Vladivostok to Lisbon would have been created.

tiatia · 2014-01-26 · Original thread
There are two forces clashing. US supported groups (That basically want Ukraine to be part of the EU) and Pro Russian groups (supported by good ol' Putin). Let's hope it all ends well.

This is the Bozo who thought it all up: http://www.amazon.com/The-Grand-Chessboard-Geostrategic-Impe...

Get dozens of book recommendations delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday.