• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Italy and Hungary oppose warfare supply to Ukraine

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
My opinion in the post you're quoting was more about America than it was about Europe. @Estro Felino suggested that Americans actually want to get Europe into war so the US can justify maintaining an active military presence (and it's quite likely that America's ruling class does want that).
I have never meant American citizens.
I meant those élites. The MIC and also banks and financial groups.
My view is that I don't believe most ordinary Americans actually want that, but they have been convinced and strongly persuaded that it's necessary for European security.
Ordinary Americans didn't want all those wars in the Middle East either...for sure.
My opinion about Europe is that they talk out of both sides of their mouth much of the time.
Because the US is not a monolith.
So... there are bad warlike people and people who care about Europe.
Half the time, they express contempt, scorn, and mockery of America, while the other half of the time, they say "We need America! Please save us from the boogieman!"
I have always pointed out that I was talking about the élites.
I have never seen America as a monolith.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
What changes?
The NATO was sent there.


Yes, as a result of an UN mandate. But not just NATO did partake and not all of NATO took part.
So it wasn't really a NATO thing as such. Rather NATO did the practical part, but didn't start it or declared the action as such. That was the UN.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Yes, as a result of an UN mandate. But not only NATO did partake and not all of NATO took part.
So it wasn't really a NATO thing as such. Rather NATO did the practical part, but didn't start it or declared the action as such. That was the UN.

My country is a NATO founding member.
But now the NATO makes me sick. It's a warlike organization promoting destruction and escalation of the conflicts.

Watch this.

 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
How are the civilian victims of Russia's war crimes the bad guys?
How are Zelenskyy and his forces the bad guys for trying to defend the lives, land, and liberty of the Ukrainian people?
If you support Putin and his unprovoked invasion, then you are the warmonger.

Like I said before, this victim blaming is the same logic that rape apologists use.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Europeans love the United States.
The problem is that the élites push for war, also by brainwashing the American people and convincing them that war is inevitable.

I guess I was fortunate enough to be born and raised at a time when such brainwashing and mental conditioning were considered wrong. I was exposed to many different and contradictory viewpoints that no actual "brainwashing" ever took hold with me.

oyjb24fzla5b1.jpg



The US presence in Europe was meant as defense against future wars started by non-Europeans. Or future attacks.

That means that the NATO should be the first to promote peace. And yet Iraq, Libya, Syria show otherwise.


I used to go out with American soldiers from a US air station in Sicily.

The US began a permanent presence in Europe following WW2. We were already put into a warmongering state of mind, fueled by Axis aggression and intensified by Red Scare propaganda and fears that the "evil empire" was coming to get us. After WW2, Patton famously declared that we "fought the wrong enemy."

Most of my criticisms of US foreign policy have revolved around the inconsistency, the incoherency, and the lack of any firm political or moral principles in what we do. This means that our leaders are either a bunch of incompetent dolts who don't know what they're doing, or they've been lying all along about US foreign policy aspirations and national security interests.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
So now I did. I am sorry that NATO didn't support Ukraine more before 2022. There, that is a different opinion than yours and it changes nothing at all as such.
That video demonstrates that the NATO is in on it,
The NATO does want Ukraine to use weapons since 2014. And to reject the diplomatic ways.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I guess I was fortunate enough to be born and raised at a time when such brainwashing and mental conditioning were considered wrong. I was exposed to many different and contradictory viewpoints that no actual "brainwashing" ever took hold with me.

View attachment 96660




The US began a permanent presence in Europe following WW2. We were already put into a warmongering state of mind, fueled by Axis aggression and intensified by Red Scare propaganda and fears that the "evil empire" was coming to get us. After WW2, Patton famously declared that we "fought the wrong enemy."

Most of my criticisms of US foreign policy have revolved around the inconsistency, the incoherency, and the lack of any firm political or moral principles in what we do. This means that our leaders are either a bunch of incompetent dolts who don't know what they're doing, or they've been lying all along about US foreign policy aspirations and national security interests.
I did speak with those guys from the Naval Air Station.
They were in Italy just to work as soldiers. They loved life.
They didn't want to be sent to Iraq to fight in a stupid war...for sure.

And the idea that some of them may have been sent to Iraq drives me nuts.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Appeasing tyrants and terrorists is ****-poor "diplomacy" that would set very dangerous precedents.

Italy would have violated article 11 even if she had fought on Russia's side.
The only ways allowed are sanctions and diplomacy.
And bargaining.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Italy would have violated article 11 even if she had fought on Russia's side.
The only ways allowed are sanctions and diplomacy.
And bargaining.

No, we don't know that and you have even admitted that yourself. Please stop doing this. You admit one thing and then you turn around and in effect do the contradictory thing.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
No, we don't know that and you have even admitted that yourself. Please stop doing this. You admit one thing and then you turn around and in effect do the contradictory thing.
You probably defend Stoltenberg because he's from the Scandinavian area.

The truth is that with that declaration, he is basically justifying Putin.
Because Putin must have felt threatened by the NATO aiding and abetting Ukraine's warlike aspirations, since 2014...
as he says with that nice accent.
So the NATO started it...in the eyes of Russians.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
You probably defend Stoltenberg because he's from the Scandinavian area.

The truth is that with that declaration, he is basically justifying Putin.
Because Putin must have felt threatened by the NATO aiding and abetting Ukraine's warlike aspirations.
So the NATO started it...in the eyes of Russians.

Yeah, this time you get a whatever.
 
Top