ติดการพนัน ภาษาอังกฤษ_เล่นพนันบอลเป็นอาชีพ_casino online

65 posts / 0 new
Last post
montgomery

antiwar.com?

Not because they're all that antiwar but because it provides an education on how Americans can pretend to be antiwar. They're really all prowar at times but it mostly depends on whether it's their party that's promoting the current war.??

And then Justin Raimondo is a real hoot, wandering back and forth on supporting Trump and his stance toward Russia. I highly recommend reading Jason Ditz's writing at that site. But above all else, that site's main objective is in promoting libertarianism, which is always good for a chuckle or two!

NDPP

Actually, you'll find The Guardian, the Washington Post and New York Times are still big favourites here as well and this is reflected in opinions expressed.?

Back to the thread, TRNN is a decent source of alternative information and a propos?of the above here's a pertinent example: A 2 part interview with Yves Engler on his new book on the NDP and the essential facadism of the Canadian left.

TRNN: Is Canada's 'Left' Marching to the Beat of America's Imperial Drum?

https://t.co/wEBDhySFh4

"Canadian author Yves Engler discusses the New Democratic leadership's support for war, militarism and Israel...(Pt 1 of 2)

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Why did an eight year old thread suddenly become "sticky"?

ed'd to add:? and now it's not.? Huh.

In the interest of the thread:? personally I'll read almost any news site, but I'm typically just looking for facts, not editorializing.? Just tell me that something happened, not "what this means for Trump" or how "this proves that so-and-so is up to something" or whatever.

montgomery

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Why did an eight year old thread suddenly become "sticky"?

ed'd to add:? and now it's not.? Huh.

In the interest of the thread:? personally I'll read almost any news site, but I'm typically just looking for facts, not editorializing.? Just tell me that something happened, not "what this means for Trump" or how "this proves that so-and-so is up to something" or whatever.

I did it, in the interest of stimulating some conversations.

montgomery

NDPP wrote:

?

TRNN: Is Canada's 'Left' Marching to the Beat of America's Imperial Drum?

?

Quote:

Yes, of course it is! That which is seen now as the acceptable mainstream in politics is support of Nato, support of US led wars, and condemnation of Russia/Putin. The NDP would be making a mistake to vary far off of that mainstream in politics. Better to attempt to change people's impressions slowly. Do we have the leadership that is condusive to change toward an antiwar agenda? I think so but they're keeping their cards close to their chests. Political Hari-Kare seldom pays.

voice of the damned

montgomery wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Why did an eight year old thread suddenly become "sticky"?

ed'd to add:? and now it's not.? Huh.

In the interest of the thread:? personally I'll read almost any news site, but I'm typically just looking for facts, not editorializing.? Just tell me that something happened, not "what this means for Trump" or how "this proves that so-and-so is up to something" or whatever.

I did it, in the interest of stimulating some conversations.

So, you revived an old?thread about favorite websites,?to tell us about one that you dislike? Oooo-kay.

In any case, I agree with your overall analysis of Raimondo, though from my recollection of reading him, he was always pretty consistently antiwar, regardless of which party was in power. The main issue I'd have with him is his REASONS for opposing the wars, which seemed to lean toward the Charles Lindberghish end of the spectrum. But I'm willing to acknowledge that I might be extrpolating overmuch from the fact that he's a right-wing?libertarian.

Which wars is Raimondo now supporting?

NDPP

You mean besides his own on cancer? Why not see for yourself?

https://www.antiwar.com

?

montgomery

voice of the damned wrote:

[

So, you revived an old?thread about favorite websites,?to tell us about one that you dislike? Oooo-kay.

No, that's not right. I didn't say I didn't like it but I did criticize it for some of it's content. Maybe I should have elaborated more on that. Antiwar.com is libertarian first and antiwar second. Ask Thomas Knapp who is the moderator there. And being that, they divide the antiwar cause in the US and continually bash on the left. You'll see that pretty quickly if you read their articles posted there every weekday.

As for Raimondo, he's flipped 180 on Trum at least 3 or 4 times now and is currently a Trump supporter. I'm not afraid to say that somebody who supports Trump is being fooled by a psychopath and is likely a couple of bricks short of a load.

Quote:
In any case, I agree with your overall analysis of Raimondo, though from my recollection of reading him, he was always pretty consistently antiwar, regardless of which party was in power. The main issue I'd have with him is his REASONS for opposing the wars, which seemed to lean toward the Charles Lindberghish end of the spectrum. But I'm willing to acknowledge that I might be extrpolating overmuch from the fact that he's a right-wing?libertarian.

Raimondo is libertarian first and that clouds his judgment on being antiwar. Probably the most egregious example is how he's hooked into Trump's pretending to remove US troops from Syria. In truth, the US is far from giving up Syria to Russian control, and neither is the ME's apartheid regime. Syria and Iran are still on the PNAC hitlist and Raimondo has lost sight of that. In a nutshell, IMO no American is truly antiwar first, they're pro-US first.

Quote:
Which wars is Raimondo now supporting?

See my explanation above. It's a nuanced answer to the question. But I'm happy to continue the discussion here. Also, read the regulars who comment on Raimondo's articles. Recently, for every 10 comments there will likely be 7 or 8 solid antiwar people bashing on Raimondo for his buying into the Trump regime's sideshow. Raimondo believes that Trump is truly antiwar and that's mostly because the Dem party have temporarily taken over being the 'war' party in that country. There is no longer a 'left' in the US that we Canadians can depend upon to be antiwar. And if anybody thinks the right in the US is antiwar then I've got a bridge..................

montgomery

NDPP wrote:

You mean besides his own on cancer? Why not see for yourself?

https://www.antiwar.com

?

What about Raimondo's Cancer? Did you think I wasn't totally aware of his fight with Cancer?

voice of the damned

In a nutshell, IMO no American is truly antiwar first, they're pro-US first.

I think we should hold back on the statements about what 100% of the people in any given jurisdiction believe. And, no, this isn't because I'm Uncle Sam's toady on babble, but because?it opens?the floodgates to "No Albertan is truly anti-pipeline" or "No Quebecker is truly in favour of removing the crucifix" etc, and?the forum?ends up?sounding like?the shouting matches?at some Grey Cup parties I've attended.

I will also point out that if you ARE looking for genuine antiwar sentiment in the US, antiwar.com probably isn't the best place anyway, since whatever name they may give their websites,?the neo-isolationist viewpoint isn't actually anti-war, but indeed, America First. Moon Of?Alabama is another?website that seems to occupy that same ideological universe, and?from what I can tell, their analysis seems to be that Trump?is basically a?good guy who has?haplessly fallen into the clutches of scheming?neo-cons.

Anyway, thanks for the update on antiwar.com. I haven't followed them much since the?Iraq War in the early 2000s, so it's good to hear what they're up to.????

NDPP

Keep an open mind, read widely including Antiwar.com and MoA?then?decide for yourself?is best.

?

montgomery

voice of the damned wrote:

In a nutshell, IMO no American is truly antiwar first, they're pro-US first.

I think we should hold back on the statements about what 100% of the people in any given jurisdiction believe. And, no, this isn't because I'm Uncle Sam's toady on babble, but because?it opens?the floodgates to "No Albertan is truly anti-pipeline" or "No Quebecker is truly in favour of removing the crucifix" etc, and?the forum?ends up?sounding like?the shouting matches?at some Grey Cup parties I've attended.

I will also point out that if you ARE looking for genuine antiwar sentiment in the US, antiwar.com probably isn't the best place anyway, since whatever name they may give their websites,?the neo-isolationist viewpoint isn't actually anti-war, but indeed, America First. Moon Of?Alabama is another?website that seems to occupy that same ideological universe, and?from what I can tell, their analysis seems to be that Trump?is basically a?good guy who has?haplessly fallen into the clutches of scheming?neo-cons.

Anyway, thanks for the update on antiwar.com. I haven't followed them much since the?Iraq War in the early 2000s, so it's good to hear what they're up to.????

Thanks for your comments! If antiwar.com isn't the best site for antiwar sentiments then what is?

I think you've just said that your answer is the same as mine. There are none!

Maybe there used to be some. Commondreams.org was quite brave and outspoken at one time and so was Motherjones.

But now the left in the US has become their war party, while the right pretend to be the antiwar side. I don't buy into it one bit. Yes, you're right that I shouldn't paint all the Americans with the same brush. It's never helpful. Yet I would still like to challenge any of them to answer the question, "do you support the troops?"

Could you get a 'qualified' yes? Are you aware of any?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I have been watching Telesur for news that is not Euro or North American focused.? All news outlets have a built in bias just like all historical accounts of events. The trick is to be able to read for the facts from a number of sources of varying ideologies and come to one's own view of what the common facts being reported actually mean. Reading the subtext is a critical skill in dealing with the media.

montgomery

NDPP wrote:

Keep an open mind, read widely including Antiwar.com and MoA?then?decide for yourself?is best.

?

Keep an open mind but don't allow your thoughts to be open to hate or pro-war propaganda. Indeed, is there a site in the US now that deserves our time to consider.?

The left has become their war party. The right will quickly join them when they don't have Trump to defend anymore. And in between they have some weird concoction they refer to as the Libertarian party??

Where do we go for safe philosophical refuge these days? Not China, they're headed in the opposite direction! Russia's examples? Why? Why not?

Personally, I'm finding a lot of what is said on RT.com to be quite satisfying. If only because they are one of the most outspoken in their opposition to the US. Even though they foolishly applaud the Trump regime. But that's only because it suits their needs of somehow getting the US to stop the Cold war tactics.

Pages