Comments by "0IIIIII" (@0IIIIII) on "euronews" channel.

  1. Silver Collector Stolen land? Israel is a democracy and has never started a war of aggression with its neighbors. Where is this stealing?
    8
  2. This isn’t Gaza lol. This is Hezbollah, in Lebanon. There is no blockade of Lebanon.
    4
  3.  @hermanmunster714 this isn’t comparable to the US, it is laughable and insulting to compare the US’s neighboring nations to Hamas. Secondly, Israel has tough gun laws for a reason. If it made them lax like the US, we’d see these attacks be much more frequent.
    4
  4. The French aren’t fishing yet dingus, they’re merely chasing away the British fishermen so that the scallops can breed
    4
  5. Unfair comparison. The US is on another continent and is dealing with it's own issues like with the violence in Latin America.
    3
  6. Leavers are easily tricked.
    3
  7. Assad and his cronies are responsible for the Syrian Civil War, not the US. And don't delude yourself, Russia has been playing the same games throughout modern history.
    2
  8. colourmegone Yes you did "Russia didn't colonise the Middle East and India, the British did, just like the US is doing now".
    2
  9. colourmegone Funnily, I was only addressing your point about you saying that you " never actually said the US is colonizing India", when clearly you did.  In any case, the US isn't colonizing any country at all.  Or has Iraq been annexed since last I checked?
    2
  10. colourmegone Does it?  Or do those countries choose to cooperate with the US?  Is there even proof that the US is strong-arming them into following the US? What policies of Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan is the US allegedly determining for them? 
    2
  11. Amit Kewalramani The US did not initiate Libya either, that was Europe and the US intervened as requested.  Problem is, no one stayed behind to fill in Gadaffi's power vacuum.  But if they did, then you and others would probably be complaining about the injustice of the US occupying another Arab country.  As for Syria, the US is only arming certain sects that are not fighting against Assad, only against ISIS.  In any case ISIS, Assad, and Gadaffi are all bastards who threw their own countries into chaos when they acted like tyrants.  Afghanistan was a correct war worth fighting, the Taliban were despots who were harboring Al Qaeda. 
    2
  12. Raul Pinto It's complicated.  The US is not responsible for the entire Arab Spring.  The US isn't responsible for Libya or Syria either.  The US wasn't even directly involved with Syria.   
    2
  13. Raul Pinto Uh, not true at all.  The US was giving away milllions of dollars of aid to the Allies since the war's beginning, via the Lend Lease Act.  And the US opposed Japan since the the invasion of Manchuria, in 1931. 
    2
  14. There is no strict order to these things.
    2
  15. American Imperial No they're not they're just regular blokes who want a decent life.  These are people from all classes, who have lost everything and the government cannot or will not help them.  Imagine if you and your family lost your house, or your business.  It's truly tragic.
    2
  16. 10,000 people is the size of a small town. Chill people.
    2
  17. Ukraine ranks higher than Russia on all NGO reports like the Democracy Index
    2
  18. But leaving is retarded. Experts say it’s a bad idea to leave the EU.
    2
  19. Punishing Facebook and Reddit is always fun
    2
  20. But all the experts and politicians agree that Brexit is a bad idea.
    2
  21. colourmegone US is not colonizing any country, especially not India, since when has the US waged any war on India?  And Russia would do the same as the US, if Russia was not so weak as it is now. And the proof that Assad started the war, is the very existence and emergence of the FSA, comprised largely of Syrian military defectors, who have made it their mission to overthrow Assad and his Baathists.  How do you figure that the US started that?
    1
  22. colourmegone Oh are they?  And how is that?
    1
  23. colourmegone That doesn't mean the US is bullying those countries.  The ISAF have a presence in Afghanistan to stabilize the Afghan government, and keep it from falling into a failed state at the hands of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.  Surely you agree that a Western military presence, with the promise for Aghanistan to remain sovereign, is preferable to another Taliban government.  Iraqis too would probably prefer a US presence instead of an ISIL one.  As for Pakistan, the US gives millions of dollars worth of aid to Pakistan every year.  That does not look like the US is extorting Pakistan, which is what empires do. 
    1
  24. colourmegone By all means tell me what I am so obviously missing. 
    1
  25. colourmegone Can you explain what's wrong with the points I made?
    1
  26. colourmegone How am I wrong?
    1
  27. colourmegone Is that how you usually deal with someone you disagree with?
    1
  28. colourmegone Everything I posted is a fact.  Do you deny that the ISAF is in Afghanistan to defend the country from the Taliban?  Do you deny the fact that the US gives millions of dollars in aid to Pakistan?
    1
  29. colourmegone Afghanistan?  So what?  That does not change the current situation at all.  Fact remains that if the ISAF pulls out prematurely, then Afghanistan risks becoming another failed state controlled by the Taliban.  That is an outcome desirable to no one in the whole world, except the Taliban itself.  Therefore ISAF must stay, even if the US-backed Mujaheddin in addition to the Soviet War in Afghanistan is what destabilized the country in the first place.  Same thing for Iraq.  I agree that the Iraq War was stupid from the beginning, but now is not the time to pull out completely, because ISIS and sectarian violence are widespread and Iraq cannot deal with them alone.  Iraq needs the US to survive.  How else can and could Iraq take back the land and cities that ISIS has stolen from them?  And you are wrong to believe that Afghanistan is used as a staging ground to conduct drone strikes in Pakistan.  Pakistan itself is the staging ground!  Those drones fly right out of Pakistani airbases, with the consent of Pakistani authorities!  The Pakistani politicians cry about it but it's all a ruse.  Pakistan allows them to continue because Pakistan and the US both know that the drone strikes are an effective way to destroy the Taliban that are in Pakistan.  Pakistan's ineptitude and duplicity prevents them from dealing with the situation themselves, despite the fact that the Taliban has attacked Pakistan several times, namely with the recent 2014 Peshawar School Massacre.  You'd think Pakistan would go deal with those terrorist themselves, but they don't.  So the US does, and the sensible Pakistanis quietly allow it. 
    1
  30. colourmegone Of course Afghanistan was a failed state before the US invasion.  Afghanistan was locked in a civil war between the secular and Western-leaning Northern Alliance, and the despotic and hostile Taliban.  And the Taliban was winning and controlled more territory.  It was before the Soviet Invasion that Afghanistan was in OK shape.  Blame the Russians and the Soviets for the state of affairs in Afghanistan.  And do bear in mind how awful and tyrannical the Taliban were, and how they remain.  As for Saudi Arabia being responsible/complicit for 9/11...well if I can forgive the US for arming the Mujaheddin and inadvertently spawing the Taliban, then I suppose I can forgive Saudi Arabia for maybe sponsoring Al-Qaeda.  As I understand it though, it's complicated, and largely due to individuals, not the whole government.  When it comes to politics, I think all that can be helped is the big picture, it's not worth dealing or worrying about the smaller stuff. 
    1
  31. colourmegone Um...yes there was a civil war.  And the remnants persist to this day.  The Taliban are still out there, they are still waging war against the allied forces of the legitimate Afghan government and the ISAF. The Taliban and are still killing people and enforcing Sharia law.  They must be stopped because they are a menace and a threat to the world and to Afghanistan itself.  The only way that can happen is if the ISAF remains and helps the Afghan military and government.  Or do you have another plan on how to dispose of the Taliban?  Do you even want to dispose of the Taliban? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war_in_Afghanistan_%281996%E2%80%932001%29
    1
  32. colourmegone Oh really they were recognized internationally?  That's funny because only three countries ever recognized the Taliban government.  They were Pakistan, The UAE, and Saudi Arabia.  Now none of them do.  You can look it up if you don't believe me. 
    1
  33. The US is only guilty of the Iraq War, not the Arab Spring.
    1
  34. The US has it's own domestic problems that Europe and "other countries" don't have, such as Mexico's Drug War.
    1
  35. Sue F I think you're right, but I don't think the politics are that simple. 
    1
  36. 10,000 people is a paltry amount.
    1
  37. I like Stuff It's the size of a small town, why do you care?  There are already Muslims here, it's not like they're doing anything new. 
    1
  38. Raul Pinto How exactly is the US to blame for the dictatorships in Arab countries? 
    1
  39. Raul Pinto Yeah, so what?  ISIS didn't start the war in Syria.  And it was not me who started anything.  I'm 19, I couldn't vote.  It was the preceding administration that started the war, on false pretenses, and with majority but not unanimous support from the US public. 
    1
  40. Raul Pinto ISIS didn't start the war in Syria, therefore the US cannot be blamed for Syria with that line of reasoning, or any line of reasoning.  US did not intend to start, nor did they make a foolish oversight in starting, the Syrian Civil War, because neither the US nor ISIS started the Syrian Civil War.
    1
  41. Raul Pinto ISIS didn't start the Syrian Civil War, therefore the US is not responsible for Syria. 
    1
  42. Raul Pinto The war would never have been won without the Lend Lease Act.  US supplying the Allies, including the Soviet Union, was critical to the entire European Theatre.  And everyone knew it.  And it was no small sacrifice that the US made either.  Calling the US a neutral country means nothing, it was for all intents and purposes very important and more decisive factor in the war than France, for instance. 
    1
  43. Bonita Jones US will never collapse into a failed state like with Syria. 
    1
  44. BOSS ADAM How irrelevant, considering that the US is not an empire.
    1
  45. BOSS ADAM Has the US annexed Iraq since last I checked? 
    1
  46. BOSS ADAM If ISAF leaves Afghanistan, then what?  ISAF has a presence in Afghanistan to stabilize the Afghan government, and keep it from falling into a failed state at the hands of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, like it did in the 1990s.  Surely you agree that a Western military presence, with the promise for Aghanistan to remain sovereign, is preferable to another Taliban government.  Iraqis too would probably prefer a US presence instead of an ISIL one.  As for Pakistan, the US gives millions of dollars worth of aid to Pakistan every year.  That does not look like the US is extorting any country at all, which is what empires do.
    1
  47. ***** Come on you don't really believe that.
    1
  48. van wray First of all, the attack on Paris was bad, but let's not sensationalize and exaggerate.  The world is still turning.  What happened in Paris won't happen here.  Europe's getting the brunt and US is only taking on a few. 
    1
  49. van wray Not that simple.  If all countries just ignored the refugee problem, that would be worse.  And since our allies are making an effort, US must be a faithful ally. 
    1
  50. van wray No it's not.  Europe is having problems because they are so close to the action.  It's like the Mexican Drug War here, but far larger and worse.
    1