DescentBB

please give examples of illegal Russian military intervention in other countries.
It sounds like you mean Afghanistan and Poland. So that military intervention was triggered by the U.S., whether you believe it or not. It looks like you rely only on the data the U.S. media, but not historical facts.
I have already given enough facts in this subject, which you refuse to believe and you think this is an anti-American propaganda. I often see in the Western media is the same. Many Western journalists and so-called "experts" are tripping over themselves to distort the facts and words of Russian partners, or by any means justify clumsy and deceitful policy of the United States.
U.S. considers itself a model of democracy, but in fact, blatant hypocrisy and mendacity politic elite long ago discredited the United States in eyes of the international community.

sigma wrote:Barack Obama is a hostage policy of the U.S. Congress.

I don't understand this, sigma. If, as you say, the U.S. Congress is in control, and the U.S. wants military action in Syria...

...then why are the majority of the U.S. Congress undecided or voting against military action?

Funny thing Sigma, I remember a 1000 russian tanks rolling into Budapest simple because the Hungarians want to break away from "The Motherland". I guess that was another CIA plot eh?

Foil wrote:

sigma wrote:Barack Obama is a hostage policy of the U.S. Congress.

I don't understand this, sigma. If, as you say, the U.S. Congress is in control, and the U.S. wants military action in Syria...

...then why are the majority of the U.S. Congress undecided or voting against military action?

On mine, the U.S. President is under Congress control. To me sadly to see that the politic elite of the USA not has courage to recognize the his policy is destructive only because of arrogance in relation to opinion of other countries.

woodchip wrote:Funny thing Sigma, I remember a 1000 russian tanks rolling into Budapest simple because the Hungarians want to break away from "The Motherland". I guess that was another CIA plot eh?

Remember the post-war Greece. And the strange solidarity of European countries that have banned unexpectedly flying aircraft with Edward Snowden on board over the territory of the European Union.

sigma wrote:

Foil wrote:

sigma wrote:Barack Obama is a hostage policy of the U.S. Congress.

I don't understand this, sigma. If, as you say, the U.S. Congress is in control, and the U.S. wants military action in Syria...

...then why are the majority of the U.S. Congress undecided or voting against military action?

On mine, the U.S. President is under Congress control. To me sadly to see that the politic elite of the USA not has courage to recognize the his policy is destructive only because of arrogance in relation to opinion of other countries.

That's a contradiction, sigma.

The President is asking for military action, but Congress (and the majority of the U.S. people) are against it. So how can you say that Congress does not have courage to counter the President?

It seems that given the active opposition of the international community and the Americans fighting spirit of the Congress, now Congress is trying to make the guilty Barack Obama in lies and political blunders of congressmen.

Though I still don't understand, what right the Congress has and the U.S. President to make the decision on military "punishment" politically the objectionable USA of modes and leaders of other countries, disregarding opinion of member countries of the UN

I agree to a certain extent. I think that now that Congress has approved limited action in Syria, we should inquire of the UN's opinion now. If only to judge it's response.

Just because a committee approve the action does not mean it will happen. It still has to go before full house and senate. It's not looking good for the President.

I wonder why the American authorities refuse to solve the Syrian problem in alternative ways. For example, to provide U.S. citizenship to all the Syrian opposition and bring them to the United States on its aircraft carriers. In my opinion, and the Syrian opposition will be happy, and the government of Syria, and Russia, along with the international community. In addition, for the United States this option is even cheaper than to bomb Syria missiles. But why is the U.S. thinks that it is necessary to add fuel to the fire of the conflict in the Middle East. It is at least strange...

I'm sure most Syrians like their country and it's location. It IS the cradle of civilization and has a long history. Besides, if we repatriated them here, they'd have to contend with the usual treatment we give all immigrants to the U.S., and not just the illegals either, which is usually bad treatment. Americans can be so xenophobic.

There's also the tiny little detail that several of the opposition factions are Al-Qaeda affiliated and would love to kill us...

sigma wrote:I wonder why the American authorities refuse to solve the Syrian problem in alternative ways. For example, to provide U.S. citizenship to all the Syrian opposition and bring them to the United States on its aircraft carriers. In my opinion, and the Syrian opposition will be happy, and the government of Syria, and Russia, along with the international community. In addition, for the United States this option is even cheaper than to bomb Syria missiles. But why is the U.S. thinks that it is necessary to add fuel to the fire of the conflict in the Middle East. It is at least strange...

I wonder if Russia and Iran stopped providing Syria with weapons, military support and infiltrating the country with terrorists would the Syrian government not have been able and motivated to work out internal conflicts peacefully instead of with brutality?

sigma wrote:wherever there appear CIA agents, there begins chaos, civil war and the mountains of corpses of civilians, which is politicians in Washington called the "side effect" of "peaceful" military operations.

Yep. I don't see things turning out very well. Things haven't worked out as planned in the past and they probably won't now. I think the CIA has a permanent case of delusional thinking called: "If you don't succeed the first time, try, try again".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 96873.html

this viewpoint may lie behind Russian concerns:
http://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/09/ ... been-told/