Betcha a great number would try to cheat even then!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacuum7
|
Betcha a great number would try to cheat even then!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacuum7
Talaniman: NO DOUBT ABOUT IT: I am sure many would still try to cheat!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacuum7
The one thing you cannot cheat is death, you may think you have bought extra time, but it is an illusion
seems cheating in Iowa is out too, no result, at least not yet, just an IT nightmare, the demonrats have been undone by thier own technology, which foreign nation will they blame this time?
Bet it was those pesky Lithuanians! Either that, or they were trying to use Hillary's old email server.
Nanny Bloomy takes a swig of a Big Gulp Coke, a drag from a cigarette, and smiles while caressing his 12 gauge shotgun. His diabolical plan is working to perfection
Mayor Pete is going to NH victorious and that would be big if it pans out. We'll know at 4PM alledgedly.
He declared victory yesterday . That would be a hoot if he won Iowa because Bolshevik Bernie is going to win NH and then Biden will show up on Super Tues . I want a contested convention the likes we haven't seen since 1980 when the swimmer undermined Carter .
Funny thing about dems and computers. They just don't seem to mix well.
Much like the Russian bots that invaded Facebook during the last presidential campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
wow the Dems act like the Ruskies invented using the other nation's media to influence politics in another nation . Our CIA has employed that since it's birth in 1947 . And that is the least of the means we have used . Solmetimes we use covert means .But often we are upfront in out efforts ;like we did in Russia when we openly supported Boris Yeltzin (a move that ultimately led to the rise of Putin) .https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/201.../yelt-j14.htmlQuote:
he United States is the world leader in interfering in other countries’ elections. Professor Dov Levin of Carnegie Mellon University has assembled a database documenting as many as 81 occasions between 1946 and 2000 when Washington interfered in elections in other countries. This number does not include military coups or regime-change efforts following the election of candidates the US opposed, as in Iran, Congo, Guatemala, Chile and many other nations.In fact, the number of countries whose elections have been affected by US meddling is much higher. There is scarcely a country, large or small, where the CIA, the State Department, the Pentagon or their various nongovernmental agencies, including the AFL-CIO, have not intervened in an attempt to obtain the election result desired by Washington. This includes nominal “allies” such as Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Britain, Australia and Japan.One fairly recent election stands out for the brazen and open manner in which the United States government, directed from the White House, intervened to put its candidate in office in a foreign land. The targeted country was none other than Russia.In 1996, the White House and President Bill Clinton personally mounted a massive campaign to secure the reelection of Boris Yeltsin, whose comprador regime had been installed in the first place to oversee the dissolution of the Soviet Union and restoration of capitalism. One of the ironies of the current contrived scandal over alleged Russian intervention in the 2016 election is the fact that the supposed victim, Hillary Clinton, is the wife of the president who oversaw the very real interference by Washington in the Russian election 20 years earlier.By the time Yeltsin announced in early 1996 that he would be running for a second term in the presidential election scheduled for that summer, he had become one of the most despised figures in Russia, having presided over the catastrophic consequences of the privatization of the Russian economy. The impact included a GDP decline of 50 percent, hyperinflation, rampant corruption, skyrocketing violent crime, the collapse of medical services, food and fuel shortages, nonpayment of wages and pensions, and a plunge in life expectancy. Added to this toxic mix was Yeltsin’s highly unpopular war with Chechnya.By late 1993, these policies had provoked such massive opposition that Yeltsin, by means of a dictatorial decree, dissolved the parliament. In response, opponents in Moscow took over government buildings. To put down the rebellion, Yeltsin, using critical intelligence provided by Washington, called out the military, shelled the parliament building and in the ensuing bombing and shooting killed an estimated 2,000 people. This was the supposed hero of democracy whom the United States backed in the 1996 election.The oligarchs and generals who supported Yeltsin urged him to cancel or postpone the election, fearing that Gennady Zyuganov, the right-wing nationalist leader of the Stalinist Communist Party, would win. Instead, US political operatives were sent to Russia to rescue Yeltsin from likely political defeat.Far from concealing this intervention, the American ruling elite boasted of its success after Yeltsin’s victory. Timemagazine made it the cover story of its July 15, 1996 edition.
So Russian influence is just returning the favour, an interesting quid pro quoQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Yes indeed. That was all part of the Russian conspiracy that was aiding the Trump campaign. No, wait. That has been debunked. Never mind.Quote:
Much like the Russian bots that invaded Facebook during the last presidential campaign.
The interference that never was, that dog don't hunt, nor does Ukraine interference, now what about republican interference, now that dog does huntQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Soaring rhetoric aside but the Russians and the US were at war, and still are and alls fair. Sure we have used the tactic all over the world to keep our foes at bay but now everybody knows the tricks and traps so you better get the edge back or lean a new language. It's still a war.
Tal, I think you are quite right.
The Russians are not "at war" with the US, they are rivals, just as China is a rival. All this talk of war is outdated. There are four camps in the world at the moment all vieing for economic supremacyQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
That's true and none of us plays nice. Like I said a war. Be glad we have other ways to fight that doesn't cause mass destruction of lives and property. We are just more civilized about it than we have ever been before.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Civilised, is that what you can it? millions displaced, areas devastated, whole countries barely livable. War in the past 150 years has suppassed what was done beforeQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Yes those proxy wars are still quite devestating.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:47 PM. |