Metal Reviews

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013 ... html?hp=f1

There's no way to spin it. The US was made a fool of by this administration. It's almost as if he is intentionally running it into the ground, because the alternative is these clowns are really this dumb. And that is a scary thought.
Obama is the 180' opposite of a leader; pure beta, he wanted all the perks of being in a position of immense power, but wants none none of the responsibility that comes with it.

I predict yet another vacation is on the immediate horizon.



If he had kept his lips from flapping, I would have given him credit for keeping us out of this and probably a far wider conflict(for the time being, at least; I always figured it would be the next pres getting us involved in another ME war), but all he has done is flush our credibilty down the toilet.

As it stands, why in the world would Assad give up his CW stockpile?
Obama will never get the votes in Congress, and without UN approval, it would be viewed (internationally, at least) as an illegal war.

On the other hand, this may be a backdoor move to at least continue arming the so-called rebels, our old friends and all-around sterling guys, al-Qaeada (and al-Nusra, FSA, Muslim Brotherhood and whoever else this rag-tag team consists of). Oh, wait...
Assad made it clear he would only give them up under the condition that we cease and desist from arming them and stop our sabre-rattling.
Based on that, and clearly lacking the stomach for another war, Barry O probably decided to cut his losses at least.

Russia, and obviously Assad, won this round big time.

This administration has been nothing but a circus act with clowns galore.

I wonder what Obama's grade was when he graduated from clown college

http://washingtonexaminer.com/companies ... le/2535595

about the Syrian rebels holding and using chemical weapons, i find it hard to believe. apparently it requires a high level of sophistication - besides the access to chemical weapons, i'm talking about means to deploy them effectively - which would be beyond thei reach of such a broad group, and there's the question of whether they'd be willing to do this to innocent people just to pin it on Assad's regime (i very much want to believe no one would stoop to such depths but who knows).

Obama's "red line" was beyond retarded.

the Qatari/Saudi/Sunni muslim interest also has to be considered.

the US is buying helicopters from Russia who is also the Assadr regime's key contractor is another thorny issue.

this looks like an even dirtier war than Iraq. please, please, please don't let this happen.

Using a gas attack when you're already winning the war? Assad is either a retard or innocent of the crime.

Meanwhile the US is supplying weapons to those brave liberation fighters so they can continue killing just about every minority group left in the country, then take their business elsewhere once Assad has been ousted and a Sharia regime installed. Good job, Obama!

http://news.yahoo.com/public-shift-isra ... 27994.html


Whatta shocker!

This is surely going to end well.

Marx and Engels call this the reserve army of labor

Article I posted earlier basically explained the thought behind the logic of this. Keep people fighting and destabilized, help the one who is losing and then right before they can gain too much ground, help the other.

The whole divide et impera thing, I know. The region being destabilised, by the way, doesn't mean as much for the American continent as it does for us Europeans, namely, whole hordes of destitute asylum seekers knocking on our doors by the tens of thousands per year. I guess you have to be a Nobel prize winner to see the merit in that.

I kinda just want to re-post the link that V just posted. Cheap labor, dude! Sweden wants it.

Are you talking about the Sweden where blonde young women have to dye their hair brown or black in order not to be sexually harassed by those 'cheap labourers'? Yeah, they'd be happy with that

But Sweden is accepting all Syrian refugees, no? Capitalism wants that cheap labor, dawg.

You continue to confuse capitalism with corporatism.

A strange phenomena, European peoples ethnomasochism.

About 13% of European citizens under the age of 24 are unemployed and not studying, so no. And there's plenty of cheap labourers in Europe itself - Poles, Romanians etc., so again, no.

with probably higher expectations in terms of wages than folks who were just displaced by a civil war into a relatively affluent European nation
And if you have another group come in that will work for even less then you can drive costs even lower.

1) No. Not when you have Germans already working for 4-5 euro per hour.

2) No, because they'll work for less until trade union jackasses tell them they shouldn't, which usually takes less than a week.

Moot point really, as most 'refugees' just come to Europe for its easily accessible social security system, not for a job. But we've been through this already. Just don't drag Hitler or the Crusades into it this time, alright.

Cheap labor = lower competive wages for all = less money to spend... At a time when unemployment / underemployment is at a record high (with no end in sight), importing "cheap" labor is outrageous.

Tack on the ever increasing cost of living, health care premiums, sending your kids to college, etc, and it's unconscionable.

And it's not just low skilledworkers, either.

From Mother Jones (hardly a bastion of conservative thinking):



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ch-workers