Russian Official says Israel is pushing US toward Iran War: Anyone want to attempt to prove him wrong ?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2012 4:29 PM GMT
    Nikolai Patrushev, head of the Kremlin's Security Council made this statement,

    Think about this, in the US this man's comparable position and other such department personel, particularly under Bush contained several Dual Israeli Nationals during the Iraq war,

    I wonder if that is the case with the Obama administration during this run up to Iran War ?

    Anyone want to do some research on that?

    Anyone think that Russia and the International community isn't well aware that Israeli Dual Nationals are the originators or primary members of several US Foreign Policy or Foreign Policy related think tanks and Washington Advisors as well as news commentators ? Do a google search on that subject.

    Anyone think that Russia and the International community isn't well aware that the US 'unbiased' Israeli/Palestinian peace negotiating team, contains Several Israeli Nationals or at the least Israeli Lobby AIPAC/think tank influenced team members? Do a google search on that subject.

    Anyone think that Russia and the International Community isn't well aware that this infusion of Israeli Dual Nationals through the Israeli Lobby AIPAC is behind the US Veto's of any UN actions in dissagreement with Israel?

    The US condemns Russia for Vetoing condemnations of Syria over Syrian Demonstrator Deaths, and all 14 of the UN Security Council is against the US Veto over any motions condeming of the Israeli's killing of Palestinians and their illegal theft of Palestinian lands for settlements.

    Anyone see any hypocrisy here? or is hypocrisy OK because a Bible story tells us we 'should bless Israel to receive a blessing' so 'the ends justfies the means' ?

    This is what favoring one nation over another brings about, this is what religion in politics brings about. George Washington warned us against favoring any nation over another, anyone want to look that up ?

    Anyone really think we should be taking on wars for another country's interests because our politicians need their Israeli Lobby AIPAC/Afiliates money and influence for their election campaigns ?

    Anyone think its Anti Semitic to point out this widely known ,hypocritical and glaring problem leading us to yet another war ?

    Maybe Russia and Iran should have an active and wealthy Lobby, marching up and down the halls of congress seeking acquiescence over inconvenient truths they don't want known, you know, some group like the 'anti defamation league' that can create some kind of ANTI this or ANTI that accusation to shut up and discredit the truth tellers.

    OH THE IRONY of all this and how expensive this system has become to US Foreign Policy/War interests. No damn wonder Russia can make and substantiate such an accusation.

    Again, would anyone like to prove the Russian Officials statement wrong ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 15, 2012 5:46 AM GMT
    No challengers yet to this Russian Officials claims ? are we to think that silence means agreement ?

    I'd sure like to see someone try to disprove this Russian !!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 15, 2012 12:02 PM GMT
    when you play only one note all the time, people don't even bother to listen to you. You were your own worst enemy.

    yawn.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 15, 2012 3:05 PM GMT
    Upper_Cdn saidwhen you play only one note all the time, people don't even bother to listen to you. You were your own worst enemy.

    yawn.




    Aren't you a Canadian ? And your 'yawning' about a subject that has killed hundreds of thousand and and left close to that number injured, Since war is now being pushed on the US again I hardly think the subject is something merely to 'yawn' about. The push for war should be on top of our list of important subjects to expose the truth about.


    Is it your country in terrible debt and your country's citizens suffering because of war expenses ?

    Is it your country that is about to go to war again?

    Here in the US we have a very strong and wealthy force pushing for more war and our Candidates for President are nonchalantly beating war drums and most ignore it. This subject happens to be at the base of our economic problems because of ever increasing military and war debt expenses, the far right want to ignore these unecessary costs because their funders (the military industrial complex) need war to enrich themselves, so instead they attempt to blame Social safety net programs as the sole basis for budget overspending.


    So Canadian pick a far less important subject to "YAWN" about.




    Anyone care to prove this Russian Official wrong about who is pushing for our nation to go into yet another war ?



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 15, 2012 3:26 PM GMT
    Nikolai Patrushev heads the Russian Security Council and therefore represents the Russian government. The Russian government has its own interests, we have ours. Interesting that while Patrushev gave his opinion, he gave nothing more so there are no "facts" to comment on.

    If he did and if Russia cared, they could go before the UN Security Council, but they don't.

    In the same interview he stated that the only reason the US has taken a stong stand on Syria is that Syria has not ended diplomatic relations Iran. Russia remains a strong ally of Syria.

    For a proponent of the rights of the people of the region, I wonder why you accept the Russian government's opinion on the Iran crisis and yet ignore their stand on Syria.

    In the end, the Arab states could care less about the Palestianians. If they did, they would develop it, or they would cut off oil until it was established with security.

    Regarding President Washington's foreign policy, if you read his Farewell Address, he is not an isolationist. He warned against permanent foreign alliances, but saw the need for temporary alliances. Part of this was specifically due to his recognition that as he stated: "Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter." (We had almost no Army or Navy to speak of while he was President and economically were we not a major player on the world scene.) At that time Britian and France were involved in American politics. His isolationist position therefore doesn't apply when we are the only superpower.

    Meanwhile, when he came into office, the US had a treaty with Morocco, the Dutch and Sweden and while he was President, he signed the Pinckney Treaty with Spain and another with Great Britian -his position is not as simple as you state.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 15, 2012 5:37 PM GMT
    webster11111 saidNikolai Patrushev heads the Russian Security Council and therefore represents the Russian government. The Russian government has its own interests, we have ours. Interesting that while Patrushev gave his opinion, he gave nothing more so there are no "facts" to comment on.

    If he did and if Russia cared, they could go before the UN Security Council, but they don't.

    In the same interview he stated that the only reason the US has taken a stong stand on Syria is that Syria has not ended diplomatic relations Iran. Russia remains a strong ally of Syria.

    For a proponent of the rights of the people of the region, I wonder why you accept the Russian government's opinion on the Iran crisis and yet ignore their stand on Syria.

    In the end, the Arab states could care less about the Palestianians. If they did, they would develop it, or they would cut off oil until it was established with security.

    Regarding President Washington's foreign policy, if you read his Farewell Address, he is not an isolationist. He warned against permanent foreign alliances, but saw the need for temporary alliances. Part of this was specifically due to his recognition that as he stated: "Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter." (We had almost no Army or Navy to speak of while he was President and economically were we not a major player on the world scene.) At that time Britian and France were involved in American politics. His isolationist position therefore doesn't apply when we are the only superpower.

    Meanwhile, when he came into office, the US had a treaty with Morocco, the Dutch and Sweden and while he was President, he signed the Pinckney Treaty with Spain and another with Great Britian -his position is not as simple as you state.



    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As for Russia's backing of Syria, I'll make no excuses or even try, Syria's dictatorial leaders are definately in the wrong and need to be taken down from power as is the protestors desire. Once that happens lets hope they can make a transition to more democratic principles in their government for the sake of their citizens.


    Regarding 'accepting Russians opinion' re; Israel's pushing the US toward war with Iran: my point is that Russia is yet another country verbalising the reality, that Israel is pushing for the US to take on war with Iran, the same as they did with Iraq. There is little doubt who is pushing for war, listen to our Republican candidates promoting war in the same sentences they make claims of supporting Israel.

    Do you make claims that Israel isn't pushing the US toward war with Iran ?





    Regarding George Washingtons statement of avoiding taking sides and becoming entangled with other nations fights. Our entanglement with Israel is the perfect example of the results of his warnings. How many times have you and I read or heard from Washington DC the statement or similar that, "there is no light between Israel and the US" ? Do you think for a minute that such servile statements aren't for the speaker to garner support and backing from the Wealthy Israel Lobby AIPAC and their affiliates ?

    We support Israel at the expense of the Palestinians, We Veto any attempts at bring Israel around to fairness toward the Palestinians, recently the US stood alone in the UN Security Council as the other 14 voted against Israels actions.
    We thereby Isolate ourselves right along with Israel and for what good purpose? The abuse of the Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli's is the most often brought up conflict by Middle Eastern country's and exactly why the US is hated there.

    Do you think our US Foreign Policy standing in the Middle would be worse off if we cut off support for Israel until such time as they stop the Illegal Settlements on Palestinian Land ? You know much of our aid to Israel ends up being used by Israel to 'guard' and 'police' the illegal settlements. Kind of hard to say that it isn't when USA is stamped on some of those canisters shot at close range at Palestinians protesting the settlements on their land.

    Just as Washington warned about entanglements with other 'states' our carte blanche support of Israel is exactly why we have problems in the Middle East. There is no more glaringly obvious reason.