Boom! Chancellor Merkels speaker today announced that Germany will negotiate with Assad and that there is no solution for Syria without his regime. Merkel also said she will send representatives. There goes Trumps strategy down the toilet https://www.welt.de/politik/deutsch...aendert-ploetzlich-ihre-Syrien-Strategie.html The reason behind this is, that the german government sees the recent strikes as utter failure and want normalisation of relations.
wow they are stepping up to the pitcher's mound gutting move i like that and unplugging from the matrix
got to view this perspective Germany has a lot too loose if Russian bear gets hungry and wants to take a bite out if it again like it did at the end of ww#2 with the east of it
It seems you're still confused on why America, UK and France did that mission. It was a complete success. You say it was for regime change and to get involved in a civil war, not us. We say it's to target and destroy illegal chemical weapons.
Neocon strategy, not just trump, although he has moved towards the neocons that he campaigned against in large part. Trump also notices that the only decent press he gets is when he war mongers and breaks international law. For this is what the establishment gov't in DC wants. They thrive on it, apparently. But good news for those who think the US has been criminal in the middle east, and a threat to world peace by what Merkel said. Bout time someone spoke with some intelligence. The intelligent want normalization in relations, and lessening of tensions which are uncalled for and neocon agenda driven cognitive dissonance.
I see no freedom of speech in Germany or abilities to read minds, so Germany has no choice but to allow freedom of thought since it has no control over that.
The only confusion here comes from those who don't need no stinkin' evidence. For only a confused mind would not demand such evidence before attacking someone. Not like the opposition to assad have not used gas. There is no strategic reason for assad to use it, and all of the reason not to. So did assad benefit from using gas? Or did someone else see a possible benefit by using gas and blaming it on assad? And everyone of these gas attacks blamed on assad have come at somewhat important and even critical moments in the civil war using outside forces. And each time, they never served assad. Duh. ha ha
No, you want proof from Putin or Assad first of their guilt, making you gullible and dead starved of oxygen if you held your breath waiting for them to come forward.
If anyone's stuck in the past, it's the nay sayers stuck in 2003 thinking UK has Tony Blair and America has George W. Bush.
Yes, the costs of ww1 imposed upon germany provided a great environment for what was to happen later on inside of germany. Books have been written on this subject. But can the actions of an aggressive anti russian West, create a similar enviroment within russia if this economic warfare against russia continues? Along with the perceived threat of NATO against russia, given we are trying to surround them as much as possible, with missiles aimed at them, as we lied and said it was against iran? I think a good case can be made for this, and it being a cause for a future effect. Not that the care, mind you. For PNAC demands this.
All the bla bla for nothing. What our government achieved is that the western union broke. Its that easy. Alot of countries stay silent about this. But what we see now is, that other european nations like Italy, Spain, Portugal, Denmark follow German lead regarding that issue. USA, UK and France are isolated in their position. Without western unity it cant be uphold. It also is a win for stability and reason. Im proud that our country broke this rubbish.
You referring to the failed attack on the double agent and his daughter? May be or may not be, given the world we live in. The evidence and forensics would give us a good idea of who did it, or who did not do it. Have you seen this already? As of this morning, but I have not checked in the last couple of hours, there wasn't any evidence, evidencing that russia, putin, did it. All we have are mere accusations, but no evidence. If I were on a jury in court, we could not convict, in quite the contrary. If you were in a jury, they would have to let you go. Not worthy of being a jurist.
Remember when the Western media was alarmed at Russia and Turkey for going into Syria but, going in on the wrong side. What that regime calls a war on terror, is just an a war on The Arab Spring social media sensation. We're fighting no one in Syria's civil war, we're only fighting chemical weapons.
That's true, but Russia have been let go from any investigation for being a suspect and given the possibility of Russia, again, using the law to protect dictators in a process using rights to process that stalls and buys time, until years go by, allowing in the meantime during the appeal, to continue doing that; Britain isn't a stupid country, we have our own British intelligence services, we know what they're up to, but we let them go because they're walking with impunity otherwise.
You saying because it is russia there is no serious investigation into the poisoning? The way that Mays, and the UK handled this from the get-go reeked of it being a ruse. And now it seems if there is a serious investigation it would never prove russia did it, and therefore, why bother? For it would negate the fast official story from the UK. The UK does not want to be caught lying, do they? So who does not having a serious investigation serve? The UK and Mays. For the press will just repeat the too fast judgment, that russia did it, and that will be left dangling out there, as all propaganda is treated. Some of us just want the truth is all. For the truth is the most essential info we can have. Yet if such info shows a nation's intel to be nefarious and dangerous to peace liars, we might stop trusting anything they tell us. And if we do that, how can intel and gov't , via MSM, manufacture consent for something that the wrong thing to do? Intel would lose its power, as well as a gov't to lie to their people, in order to do things in their names which is criminal. And we cannot have that!!
