Dr.Dross

Her words: "Russia and the Russian people are taking the brunt of the war against terrorists." A boldfaced lie! They are fighting for the dictator Assad and threatening to shoot down American aircraft defending the rebels. They have stolen the Crimea from the Ukraine and threaten to forcibly annex the rest of that country. They threatened the United States with war if Hillary was elected. Russia is not our friend. Kiraseer's friend, but not our country. She is a clear and present danger to our national security, if not a traitor for what she has written. And Trump better reconsider who he admires and calls friend.

jimahrens Loc: California

She has a right to post whatever she wants you post yours.

Dr.Dross

I never said she did not have the right to post what she did, pay attention: I merely asked why she did.

jimahrens Loc: California

If you read the post you would know .

Dr.Dross

Sorry, but do you have dementia? Obviously I read her thread. I will speak slowly and loudly now. (Sorry, just a joke. I look very old and get that response from most millennial clerks.) Her motivation is the "why"? Russia is still very clearly our enemy and has proven itself to be with Assad and the Ukraine an enemy of freedom. In two posts she applauds Russia, as if the country is a defender of liberty instead of its proven enemy. Why post favorably for Russia? Nothing in either of her threads praising Russia had anything praiseworthy. Why side with our enemy is the question?

Loki Loc: Georgia

You post anti-American trash all the time. Why are you different? Regarding the Crimea, you have no idea of history. The Crimea was a part of Russia for hundreds of years until the late 1950's when Kruschev, (himself a Ukrainian) just sort of gifted it to Ukraine. The population of Crimea is about 70% ethnic Russian who wanted to be part of Russia, as they have been for centuries. To a lesser degree, the same can be said for Donetsk. The rest of the country in Ukrainian, but has constantly threatened war with Russia. At least in the matter of the Crimea, the Russians have a pretty good case, once more...... reclaiming Crimea, which overwhelmingly supported the action, since the population is overwhelmingly Russian, and until Kruschev's inexplicable action about 50 years ago, was a PART of Russia. At any rate, this is none of our business. We need to pay attention to our own borders, not those of Russia.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Hey, doc, have been brainwashed by the corporate owned media monkeys. Did you read my post on President Obama's Syrian Red Line in the Sand: An american Diplomatic Disaster:

The Russians are in Syria by invitation of the internationally recognized legitimate Syrian government of Assad. The US is there arming and supporting outside terrorist organizations illegally. It is NOT a Syrian civil war as obammy, Washington and their monkey media would have you believe. Again, the US is sticking its nose in where it does NOT belong.

"The twisted reality was acknowledged by no less an authority than Vice President Joe Biden during a talk at Harvard in 2014. Biden answered a student’s question by saying Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had “poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad.” The result, Biden said, was that “the people who were being supplied were Al Nusra and Al Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadis coming from other parts of the world.”

The risks from these tangled alliances were also highlighted by a Defense Intelligence Agency report in August 2012, warning the Obama administration that the growing strength of Al Qaeda and other Sunni jihadists in Syria could lead to the creation of “an Islamic state” whose militants could move back into Iraq where the threat originated after the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

The DIA said Al Qaeda’s growing strength in Syria “creates the ideal atmosphere for AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq] to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi and will provide a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy, the dissenters [i.e. the Shiites].

“ISI [Islamic State of Iraq, forerunner of ISIS, also known as the Islamic State] could also declare an Islamic state through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory.”

Despite the prescient DIA report and Biden’s blunt admission (for which he quickly apologized), President Obama failed to put a stop to the strategy of supporting Assad’s opponents. He let Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey continue funneling weapons to the most extreme elements of the rebellion. Meanwhile, the U.S. government insisted that it was only arming “moderate” rebels, but those groups were largely subsumed or controlled by Al Qaeda’s Nusra and/or ISIS, a hyper-violent spinoff from Al Qaeda.

In Syria, rather than cooperate with Russia and Iran in helping Assad’s military defeat the jihadists, the Obama administration has continued playing it cute, insisting as Secretary of State John Kerry has said recently that armed “legitimate opposition groups” exist separately from Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front.

In reality, however, the so-called “moderate” rebels around Aleppo and Idlib are Al Qaeda’s junior partners whose value to the cause is that they qualify for CIA weaponry that can then be passed on to Nusra as well as Nusra’s key ally Ahrar al-Sham and other jihadist fighters."

http://consortiumnews.com/2016/02/18/risking-nuclear-war-for-al-qaeda/

Think--What is the US and its so-called "allies", Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, motive for wanting Assad gone? It is all about a gas pipeline and sale of gas to Europe and Assad has sided with Russia.

Robert Parry has also penned this, "the endless drumbeat of Western media reports about 'Russian aggression' results from a clever demonization campaign against Putin and a classic Washington 'group think' rather than from a careful intelligence analysis."

"The real narrative based on actual facts would have acknowledged that it was the West, not Russia, that instigated the Ukraine crisis by engineering the violent overthrow of elected President Viktor Yanukovych and the imposition of a new Western-oriented regime hostile to Moscow and Ukraine’s ethnic Russians," Parry argued.

He continued:

In the up-is-down world that NATO and other Western agencies now inhabit, Russia's military maneuvers within it own borders in reaction to NATO maneuvers along Russia’s borders are "provocative." So, too, is Russia's support for the internationally recognized government of Syria, which is under attack from Islamic terrorists and other armed rebels supported by the West’s Mideast allies, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and NATO member Turkey.

In other words, it is entirely all right for NATO and its members to invade countries at will, including Iraq, Libya and Syria, and subvert others as happened in Ukraine and is still happening in Syria. But it is impermissible for any government outside of NATO to respond or even defend itself. To do so amounts to a provocation against NATO—and such hypocrisy is accepted by the West’s mainstream news media as the way that the world was meant to be.

I ask you doc, what would/should be the US reaction to the Russians instigating and financing a violent overthrow of the Canadian government, then amassing huge amounts of military hardware along its southern border and then conducting a propaganda blitz through the media telling its people and the world that the US was the aggressor and provoking war?

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

WOOOW ,, what a stretch , even for you .. Grab another round , smoke another joint then get back to us in a few days .. do you enjoy being a fool or does it just come naturally ?? don't answer , save it for your next dumbass post !!

America Only Loc: From the right hand of God

Why do you have knee pads on when stating you want to be in front of Obama? Got some Lip Service for him do ya?

pafret Loc: Northeast

Why did you include that veiled threat against Trump in a post complaining about KiraSeer? What has he to do with Kira? You forgot to include neocons and conserviturds -- please be careful to include all of these bitch points lest we begin to believe you are not serious.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Why is the US and NATO continuing to build up troops and armaments along Eastern Europe and Russia's border? Why is the US still in Syria arming the terrorists and provoking Russia who was invited there by Assad? WTF!

Hopefully Trump will put a stop to this insanity.

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

Dr., I wouldn't go as far to call her a traitor, but I don't understand why she has this thing for Putin. I responded to one of her posts, calling Putin a thug. I recalled his aggressive actions with three former Soviet Republics, the fact that he is a former KGB spy, has managed to accumulate billions of dollars since gaining power, is hostile to American interests all over the world, and backs the most vicious dictator in the Middle East, Assad. She has mentioned that she knows him personally, which leads me to believe that she may be a Russian national. If I were a Russian, I'd hate the sob just the same!

saltwind 78 Loc: Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

Loki, What you say is true, but when the USSR broke up, the Ukraine gave up it's nukes for a promise from Russia to respect it's borders. Putin doesn't respect international pacts. I don't understand why the Donald trusts Putin. Trusting this thug always carries a huge price!

buffalo Loc: Texas

Putin's aggressive actions? What about what the US has done in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Ukraine... and now Syria? How peaceful are these nations now? Obammy accused Assad of using chemical weapons on civilians and called it a "red line". After obammy promised a two-three day “surgical strike,” reports showed he was in fact planning a full scale invasion of Syria. Top secret documents and Pentagon and CIA insiders revealed that the US framed Assad for the chemical weapons attack. Furthermore, according to American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, the obammy administration was funding and training al-Nusra, an al-Qaeda-linked Syrian rebel group. One solid proof which shows that the Syrian administration was not responsible for the sarin gas attack is a video in which two Syrian rebels can be heard coordinating an attack on a building. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_zNQfDr_1o

I would be highly suspicious of the US monkey media propaganda that paints Assad as a brutal dictator. Has he become an impediment to US corporate and Saudi greed...er...interests?

Patrick Buchanan penned this piece in August of 2016. Although, I do not agree with the US even being involved at all,especially militarily, he does offer a clearer understanding of the situation and its complexities:

"The debacle that is U.S. Syria policy is today on naked display.

NATO ally Turkey and U.S.-backed Arab rebels this weekend attacked our most effective allies against ISIS, the Syrian Kurds.

Earlier in August, U.S. planes threatened to shoot down Syrian planes over Hasakeh, and our Iraq-Syria war commander, Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, issued a warning to Syria and Russia against any further air strikes around the city.

Who authorized Gen. Townsend to threaten to shoot down Syrian or Russian planes — in Syria?

When did Congress authorize an American war in Syria? Is the Constitution now inoperative?

That we are sinking into a civil war where we sometimes seem to be fighting both sides is a tribute to the fecklessness of the Barack Obama-John Kerry foreign policy and the abdication of a Congress that refuses to either name our real enemy or authorize our deepening involvement.

Our Congress appears again to have abdicated its war powers.

Consider the forces that have turned Syria into a charnel house with 400,000 dead and millions injured, maimed, and uprooted.

On the one side there is the regime of Bashar Assad and its allies — Hezbollah, Iran and Russia. Damascus buys its weapons from Moscow and has granted Russia its sole naval base in the Mediterranean. And Vladimir Putin protects his interests and stands by his friends.

To Iran, the Alawite regime of Assad is a strategic link in the Shia crescent that runs from Tehran to Baghdad to Damascus to South Beirut and Lebanon’s border with Israel.

If Syria falls to Sunni rebels, Islamist or democratic, that would mean a strategic loss for Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, which is why all have invested so much time, blood and treasure in this war.

If they are going to lose Syria, Assad, Iran, Hezbollah and the Russians are probably going to go down fighting. And should we decide to fight a war to take them down, we would find ourselves with such de facto allies as ISIS and the al-Nusra Front, an affiliate of al-Qaida.

Have the hawks who want us to target Assad considered this?

The American people would never sustain such a war in the company of such allies, with its risks of escalation, to remove Assad, who, whatever we think of him, never terrorized Americans or threatened U.S. vital interests.

Years ago, Assad dismissed Obama’s demand that he surrender power, then defied Obama’s “red line” against the use of chemical weapons. He is not going to depart because some U.S. president tells him he must go.

As for the Syrian Kurds, the YPG, they have sealed much of the border with Turkey and fought their way ever closer to Raqqa, the capital of the ISIS caliphate. But what has elated the Americans has alarmed the Turks.

For the YPG not only drove ISIS out of the border towns all the way to the Euphrates; this summer, with U.S. backing, they crossed the river and seized Manbij.

Turkey’s fear is that the Syrian Kurds will link their cantons east of the Euphrates with their canton west of the river and create a statelet that could give Turkey’s Kurds a privileged sanctuary from which to pursue their 30-year struggle for independence.

If, when the war ends in Syria, the YPG is occupying all the borderlands, Ankara faces a long-term existential threat of dismemberment.

After recent terrorist attacks on his country, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recognizes that ISIS is a monster with which he cannot live. Thus, this weekend, he sent tanks and Arab troops to drive ISIS out of the Syrian border town of Jarablus.

Now Turkish troops and their Arab allies are moving further south into Syria to expel the Kurds from Manbij. Joe Biden, visiting Turkey, told the Kurds to get out of Manbij and back across the river.

How does the U.S. protect its interests while avoiding a deeper involvement in this war?

First, recognize that ISIS and the al-Nusra Front are our primary enemies in Syria, not Assad or Russia. Geostrategists may be appalled, but the Donald may have gotten it right. If the Russians are willing to fight to crush ISIS, to save Assad, be our guest.

Second, oppose any removal of Assad unless and until we are certain he will not be replaced by an Islamist regime.

Third, we should assure the Turks we will keep the Kurds east of the Euphrates and not support any Kurdish nation-state that involves any secession from Turkey.

America’s best and wisest course is to stop this slaughter that is killing a thousand Syrians a week, use our forces in concert with any and all allies to annihilate the Nusra Front and ISIS, keep the Kurds and Turks apart, effect a truce if we can, and then get out. It’s not our war."

Loki Loc: Georgia

I was not talking about the whole Ukraine. Most of the Crimea WANTED this annexation. The Crimea is overwhelmingly ethnic Russian. Donetsk less so, but still a slight majority. I suppose it is nationalism. As I said, for most of the past several centuries, the Crimea WAS Russian. It was unilaterally given to Ukraine, as I said, by Nikita Kruschev, a Ukrainian, back at the height of the Cold War.
Purin appears to be more willing to work with the West than most of his predecessors. My concern is not Putin, but his successor[s].