Conflicts in the Middle East & Northern Africa

[Bill77]

I will be honest, I don't like the US much. It's the double standards more than anything else. Could you imagine their response and meddling if the Macedonian authority used waterboarding on these captured terrorist shiptars responsible for the merciless killings of Macedonians.... We would probably have someone like Miko jumping in with bullshit like “this is not about right or wrong, this is about what is possible.”

I know communism had its issues. But since the collapse of the USSR and the Cold War, USA have gone rampant more than ever. No other can tame this beast any longer.

[Vangelovski]

What's your beef with the Chinese...?

Lets start with Tibet - a good old fashioned example of imperialism that you should absolutely loathe!

[Vangelovski]

I will be honest, I don't like the US much. It's the double standards more than anything else. Could you imagine their response and meddling if the Macedonian authority used waterboarding on these captured terrorist shiptars responsible for the merciless killings of Macedonians.... We would probably have someone like Miko jumping in with bullshit like “this is not about right or wrong, this is about what is possible.”

I know communism had its issues. But since the collapse of the USSR and the Cold War, USA have gone rampant more than ever. No other can tame this beast any longer.

Other governments have and still do much worse. Why not criticise them? What the US does, does not excuse what others do - they are responsible for their own crimes.

[EgejskaMakedonia]

I think people need to be more honest with themselves, because they're not fooling anyone. If you hate America, and by extension many also throw in 'the west' of which Australia is an integral part, then just say so. Don't pretend that you have a rational basis for doing so, because if you did, you would despise many other countries even more. Also, don't pretend that you prefer the alternatives, because if you genuinely did believe they were better, many of you would have sought refuge there or just remained in Macedonia.

Again, this isn't a debate about capitalism v communism or the east v west, it comes down to morality and justice. You don't have to hate America to be able to pose serious questions about their foreign policy/interests. I'd sure hope that those in America are asking the same questions about their government's involvement within foreign nations. Maybe these people should go live in Russia as well because they 'hate' America so much.

There is absolutely no basis to justify some of the actions the US have taken over the last century or so. You're making it sound as if we are obliged to agree with the US government, and if you don't like it, we should go live in an 'alternative' society. If anything that is a sheep mentality, which goes against everything you've said about Macedonia thus far. People are here to criticise and hold a government accountable for their actions.

Before you start your rant, remember that is was YOU that brought this 'west' v 'east' aspect into the debate. It has nothing to do with the notion of imperialism, so I'm not even sure what your point is. When did anyone ever mention that the 'alternatives' are remotely better than living in a western country? This is simply about opposing the political and economic influence that the US exerts over the globe, which in some cases is highly immoral and unjust. Sounds like McCarthyism (which is probably another definition you'll try and alter), whereby a number of us here are being accused of being 'socialists,' hating the US and against all western society. Before you know it we'll be communist spies and witches as well.

[Vangelovski]

Again, this isn't a debate about capitalism v communism or the east v west, it comes down to morality and justice. You don't have to hate America to be able to pose serious questions about their foreign policy/interests. I'd sure hope that those in America are asking the same questions about their government's involvement within foreign nations. Maybe these people should go live in Russia as well because they 'hate' America so much.

There is nothing wrong with questioning government policies, American and otherwise. No one suggested that. Its another straw man. Many posters have made this a west vs the rest debate because they keep apologising for dictators and communists while criticising the evil west.

There is absolutely no basis to justify some of the actions the US have taken over the last century or so. You're making it sound as if we are obliged to agree with the US government, and if you don't like it, we should go live in an 'alternative' society. If anything that is a sheep mentality, which goes against everything you've said about Macedonia thus far. People are here to criticise and hold a government accountable for their actions.

Again, I agree that some actions by the US are unjustifiable, just like many actions from other countries which you apologise for are unjustifiable. You have been one of the ones that have lamented the evils of the west and in particular the US, while apologising for those of dictatorial and authoritarian states. Once you even tried to tell me that communism was/is not evil and is a just political/economic/social system that does not violate fundamental human rights.

Before you start your rant, remember that is was YOU that brought this 'west' v 'east' aspect into the debate.

Again, many posters have criticised the west and apologised for the east. My particular point was that they are hypocrites and unprincipled in their sometimes genuine other times ludicrous criticism of the US and western states, but blind to worse activities by their favourite dictator.

It has nothing to do with the notion of imperialism, so I'm not even sure what your point is.

Of course not, you still haven't worked out what imperialism is.

When did anyone ever mention that the 'alternatives' are remotely better than living in a western country? This is simply about opposing the political and economic influence that the US exerts over the globe, which in some cases is highly immoral and unjust. Sounds like McCarthyism (which is probably another definition you'll try and alter), whereby a number of us here are being accused of being 'socialists,' hating the US and against all western society. Before you know it we'll be communist spies and witches as well.

Some posters were arguing that Venezuela, under Chavez, was a fantastic place making huge strides in its social and economic development - the implication being that it was a better place to live.

I don't think you even know what you are opposing or why. So what if the US exerts influence around the world? So have/do many other countries. I don't see you taking a principled stand against them. You can dance around the issue all you like, but its obvious that you have an unprincipled bias against the US. If you really were concerned with morality and justice, you have much bigger targets. But you're ignoring some of the elephants in the room. Why is that?

[EgejskaMakedonia]

Again, I agree that some actions by the US are unjustifiable, just like many actions from other countries which you apologise for are unjustifiable. You have been one of the ones that have lamented the evils of the west and in particular the US, while apologising for those of dictatorial and authoritarian states. Once you even tried to tell me that communism was/is not evil and is a just political/economic/social system that does not violate fundamental human rights.

I haven't apologised on behalf of any states in this debate. As I said earlier, Russia and China (on the opposite side of the spectrum) have also engaged in the exploitation of foreign nations. I don't doubt that, nor have I denied it. However, the US is the prime suspect when it comes to this. Furthermore, the initial discussion took place as a consequence of the death of Chavez. He opposed American imperialism, which is why a number of posters, including myself, have focused on the US. As an ideology, communism isn't evil. What your point is, I don't know, but I can now see why you are trying to push this debate away from the US and onto the likes of China.

Again, many posters have criticised the west and apologised for the east. My particular point was that they are hypocrites and unprincipled in their sometimes genuine other times ludicrous criticism of the US and western states, but blind to worse activities by their favourite dictator.

I think it's one of those matters where the majority are guilty, yet individuals attempt to diminish their own guilt by pointing out others. The most dominant countries are guilty in one way or another when it comes to exercising their power over more primitive nations, simply because they can. You cannot classify countries like Macedonia as imperialists in the modern world, because they have absolutely no authority beyond their own borders. That's why only a select group of nations can be classified as such.

Of course not, you still haven't worked out what imperialism is.

Check a dictionary.

Some posters were arguing that Venezuela, under Chavez, was a fantastic place making huge strides in its social and economic development - the implication being that it was a better place to live.

No I don't think anyone described Venezuela as a paradise. People simply made the point that Chavez, for the most part, did a good job of sticking it up to the big man (i.e America).

I don't think you even know what you are opposing or why.

I know exactly where I stand.

So what if the US exerts influence around the world? So have/do many other countries. I don't see you taking a principled stand against them. You can dance around the issue all you like, but its obvious that you have an unprincipled bias against the US. If you really were concerned with morality and justice, you have much bigger targets. But you're ignoring some of the elephants in the room. Why is that?

I'm against countries sticking their noses where they don't belong. Just because other countries engage in immoral activities for their own interests it does not exempt the US to start abusing their position of power. The US is the biggest elephant in the room. Why are you ignoring them?

[Gocka]

Tom,
Why do you keep reverting back to the definition of imperialism when not once did I say nor infer that the USA is traditionally imperialist? I don’t know if you confused my comments with someone else’s but if you look back at our entire exchange I did not even once claim the USA to be purely imperialistic. I was the second poster on this thread and my comments had nothing to do with imperialism, nor did Komita’s who started the thread.

Let’s clear up a few issues so we know where we both stand.

Komitas post was about how Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the EU, and the USA and the west were sponsoring Muslim extremist terrorists against a secular government and how that would have very bad consequences for the Christians of Syria and why the Christians in Syria have no choice but to support Assad.

Do you agree that the opposition in Syria is supported by SA, Qatar, EU, USA?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/01/friends-of-syria-conference-gulf-countries-fund-opposition_n_1394737.html

Then do you agree that the opposition in Syria is led by a Muslim extremist core which employs terror tactics on the Syrian population?

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/07/25/al-qaeda-infiltrating-syrian-opposition-with-us-support/

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2012/12/us-backed-syrian-opposition-demands.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-backed-syrian-opposition-demands-support-for-al-qaeda/5315439

http://rt.com/usa/us-opposition-group-al-nusra-853/

I think it’s hard to deny these two claims since as you can see above they are out in the open, the West has openly supported the opposition and the opposition has openly expressed its extremist ideology both verbally and physically. So then would you not agree that the West is openly and knowingly supporting Muslim extremism and terrorism in Syria?

Would you agree that the US and its allies did the same in Libya, Egypt, and Macedonia, openly supported groups that they themselves openly classified as terrorist organizations? I can get you sources on that too if you like?

All of the above was related to Komitas first post. Then my post came second and all I did was agree with Komita that the opposition in Syria at its core is run by a terrorist organization. I also commented on how the west is supporting the opposition and how they have done so in other Middle Eastern countries and that their actions make you ask what their agenda is and only speculated that the agendas is to throw the region into disarray.

Then you commented third and were the first one to bring the word imperialist into play, by stating “But in 2009, the US (being the evil imperialists that they are) allowed the Iraqi Government to auction off contracts for their oil fields. Out of the 18 largest contracts” and again “If the US is an imperialist state that only seeks to exploit the resources of its supposed 'client' states, then why did it allow the independent auctioning of Iraqi oil contracts”.

Before you made your comment the subject was about Syria and the Syrian opposition, and western support for them. No one mentioned imperialism except you, and it was you who were the first to “go off on a tangent” and bring imperialism and Iraq and a bunch of other issues up that were not being discussed. You also insulted Komita by saying he doesn’t even know the time of day, and he did nothing to provoke an insult from you. Even his comment was completely valid and not “out there” at all. So that’s 2 marks against you in your first post alone. Going off topic and insulting.

Then the forth comment was from Egejska Makedonia about Egypt, and Libya, and how the dictators in those countries were ousted (with western support) to help Muslim extremist to come to power (with support from the west) and how they are worse of then where they started and that Syria is heading down the same path. This was also completely valid comment which is supported factually as I showed above. So to date everyone has stayed on topic except you.

Then you chime in again (5th comment) with “EM, you're one of these "progressive" mythologisers - care to comment on the Iraqi oil example above?” So again you lead with an insult, and you again force the conversation off topic by invoking Iraq and oil (neither of which was related to the topic at hand). That’s another 2 marks against you, total of 4.

Comment 6 was again by Egejska, you forced him into answering you on the Iraq topic which you brought up to begin with, so he answered. He commented on how long the US was there and that they invaded a sovereign nation and pillaged and challenged you on why Iraq needed US permission to auction of its oil to begin with. Pillaged is debatable but because of your persistence you forced his hand on that comment because you originally used the term and he was compelled to use it in proving his point.

You commented next #7, you asked what was pillaged, who benefited and why countries like Russia and China got oil contracts, and called them Egejska’s “ideological buddies”, again getting personal for no reason when the other person didn’t initiate it or return the favor. The next is another misstep by you. “Of course they have that right - but you were claiming that the US is an imperialist state, which implies that it controls Iraq and that Iraq would not be able to do anything without US permission. You're contradicting yourself again.” As I have demonstrated you were the one who used the word imperialist to date and no one else. So how could Egejska contradict himself on imperialism when he never mentioned it, you did. He never claimed the US was imperialist so again completely baseless by you. That’s one more mark to a total of 5.

Later I replied to your Iraq example and talked about what was the agenda for Iraq and how the US benefited from invading Iraq and you criticized me for going off on a tangent and why I talked about Iraq and debt when you started that topic and forced others to reply to it.

I could go on and on and if you force me to I will. You threw the whole thread into disarray, you brought up imperialism, Iraq, pillaging, etc, and then forced others to defend points they never made to begin with. You start all these little wars and don’t stop until everyone agrees with you, (tyrannical).

Not once did I claim the USA was traditionally imperialist, but you claim that I did, then force me to defend myself against something I didn’t say. Then when the debater makes points you can’t answer you nitpick on the propriety of single adjective.

You have got to be the worst moderator I have ever seen in my life. You have done this countless times and its very tiresome, stop ruining threads and causing chaos and infighting. I’m beginning to wonder what your purpose is, are you just so arrogant that you will not stop until everyone says it exactly like you want it said? Do you just like to cause arguments and annoy the hell out of people until they give up? You clearly have your prejudices, which makes you a terrible moderator, because you are in no way moderate. Or are you just one of those people who loves the sound of his own voice? What is your goal Tom? I’d really like to know.

I purpose that we stop arguing with Tom and simply ignore him like a little child. We need to stop talking about only what Tom wants to talk about and talk about what the thread was actually about for a change.

[Risto the Great]

I can't even remember what this thread was about now.
That makes me a perfect moderator lol.

[Vangelovski]

I haven't apologised on behalf of any states in this debate. As I said earlier, Russia and China (on the opposite side of the spectrum) have also engaged in the exploitation of foreign nations. I don't doubt that, nor have I denied it. However, the US is the prime suspect when it comes to this. Furthermore, the initial discussion took place as a consequence of the death of Chavez. He opposed American imperialism, which is why a number of posters, including myself, have focused on the US.?

This is the first time you've stated that Russia and China engage in exploitation of foreign nations. Why is the US the prime suspect?

As an ideology, communism isn't evil.

It is evil because it denies fundamental human rights and individual freedom. For example, it denies freedom of religion, which is also a direct attack against individual conscience and an individual's right to follow his conscience. We can go through this point by point if you like.

What your point is, I don't know, but I can now see why you are trying to push this debate away from the US and onto the likes of China.

I'm not "pushing" the debate away from the US to China, I'm making the point that you're being unprincipled in your "moral" and "just" opposition to only the US.

I think it's one of those matters where the majority are guilty, yet individuals attempt to diminish their own guilt by pointing out others. The most dominant countries are guilty in one way or another when it comes to exercising their power over more primitive nations, simply because they can. You cannot classify countries like Macedonia as imperialists in the modern world, because they have absolutely no authority beyond their own borders. That's why only a select group of nations can be classified as such..

You still have no idea what imperialism actually is.

Check a dictionary.

Are you still in high school? What don't you understand about dictionaries? Dictionaries can not define complex political concepts such as imperialism because they limit themselves to a few words, a sentence at most. The dictionary definition that you provided is ridiculous because a) its wrong and b) it would include Macedonia and every other country in the world. Why are you still ignoring a commonly accepted definition of imperialism by an internationally respected scholar in the field?

No I don't think anyone described Venezuela as a paradise. People simply made the point that Chavez, for the most part, did a good job of sticking it up to the big man (i.e America)..

No one said paradise - that's another straw man. Chavez, did nothing to "stick it to the big man". As RtG pointed out and as a quick google search would confirm, Chavez sold 40 per cent of its entire oil exports to the US. If Chavez wanted to do more than beat his chest so his followers could get off on him, he would have found alternative markets and caused a disruption in supply for the US. He did nothing of the sort.

I know exactly where I stand).

Where's that? I'm still waiting for you to tell me what you think the US interests are in the Balkans. We can make it easier for you and just stick to Macedonia, if you like?

I'm against countries sticking their noses where they don't belong. Just because other countries engage in immoral activities for their own interests it does not exempt the US to start abusing their position of power. The US is the biggest elephant in the room. Why are you ignoring them?

I'm against states meddling in the affairs of other states as well, but its not always as straightforward as that. For example, Rwanda would have been a good time for foreign states to actually intervene and prevent the massacre of between 500,000 and 1,000,000 people.

You're right, other states' immoral activities do not justify or excuse the US. Neither does it work the other way around, so why support Chavez?

Why do you think the US is the biggest elephant in the room? Just because it is the worlds most powerful state, does not mean its actions are worse than others. You still have not been able to actually demonstrate why you think the US is the biggest problem, let alone satisfy the defition of imperialism.

I don't ignore the US - if you read my posts carefully since I've been on this forum, you'll see that I criticise their actions when warranted.

[Vangelovski]

Tom,
Why do you keep reverting back to the definition of imperialism when not once did I say nor infer that the USA is traditionally imperialist? I don’t know if you confused my comments with someone else’s but if you look back at our entire exchange I did not even once claim the USA to be purely imperialistic. I was the second poster on this thread and my comments had nothing to do with imperialism, nor did Komita’s who started the thread.

Let’s clear up a few issues so we know where we both stand.

Komitas post was about how Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the EU, and the USA and the west were sponsoring Muslim extremist terrorists against a secular government and how that would have very bad consequences for the Christians of Syria and why the Christians in Syria have no choice but to support Assad.

Do you agree that the opposition in Syria is supported by SA, Qatar, EU, USA?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1394737.html

Then do you agree that the opposition in Syria is led by a Muslim extremist core which employs terror tactics on the Syrian population?

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/07/25/a...th-us-support/

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/20...n-demands.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-back...-qaeda/5315439
http://rt.com/usa/us-opposition-group-al-nusra-853/

I think it’s hard to deny these two claims since as you can see above they are out in the open, the West has openly supported the opposition and the opposition has openly expressed its extremist ideology both verbally and physically. So then would you not agree that the West is openly and knowingly supporting Muslim extremism and terrorism in Syria?

Would you agree that the US and its allies did the same in Libya, Egypt, and Macedonia, openly supported groups that they themselves openly classified as terrorist organizations? I can get you sources on that too if you like?

All of the above was related to Komitas first post. Then my post came second and all I did was agree with Komita that the opposition in Syria at its core is run by a terrorist organization. I also commented on how the west is supporting the opposition and how they have done so in other Middle Eastern countries and that their actions make you ask what their agenda is and only speculated that the agendas is to throw the region into disarray.

Then you commented third and were the first one to bring the word imperialist into play, by stating “But in 2009, the US (being the evil imperialists that they are) allowed the Iraqi Government to auction off contracts for their oil fields. Out of the 18 largest contracts” and again “If the US is an imperialist state that only seeks to exploit the resources of its supposed 'client' states, then why did it allow the independent auctioning of Iraqi oil contracts”.

Before you made your comment the subject was about Syria and the Syrian opposition, and western support for them. No one mentioned imperialism except you, and it was you who were the first to “go off on a tangent” and bring imperialism and Iraq and a bunch of other issues up that were not being discussed. You also insulted Komita by saying he doesn’t even know the time of day, and he did nothing to provoke an insult from you. Even his comment was completely valid and not “out there” at all. So that’s 2 marks against you in your first post alone. Going off topic and insulting.

Then the forth comment was from Egejska Makedonia about Egypt, and Libya, and how the dictators in those countries were ousted (with western support) to help Muslim extremist to come to power (with support from the west) and how they are worse of then where they started and that Syria is heading down the same path. This was also completely valid comment which is supported factually as I showed above. So to date everyone has stayed on topic except you.

Then you chime in again (5th comment) with “EM, you're one of these "progressive" mythologisers - care to comment on the Iraqi oil example above?” So again you lead with an insult, and you again force the conversation off topic by invoking Iraq and oil (neither of which was related to the topic at hand). That’s another 2 marks against you, total of 4.

Comment 6 was again by Egejska, you forced him into answering you on the Iraq topic which you brought up to begin with, so he answered. He commented on how long the US was there and that they invaded a sovereign nation and pillaged and challenged you on why Iraq needed US permission to auction of its oil to begin with. Pillaged is debatable but because of your persistence you forced his hand on that comment because you originally used the term and he was compelled to use it in proving his point.

You commented next #7, you asked what was pillaged, who benefited and why countries like Russia and China got oil contracts, and called them Egejska’s “ideological buddies”, again getting personal for no reason when the other person didn’t initiate it or return the favor. The next is another misstep by you. “Of course they have that right - but you were claiming that the US is an imperialist state, which implies that it controls Iraq and that Iraq would not be able to do anything without US permission. You're contradicting yourself again.” As I have demonstrated you were the one who used the word imperialist to date and no one else. So how could Egejska contradict himself on imperialism when he never mentioned it, you did. He never claimed the US was imperialist so again completely baseless by you. That’s one more mark to a total of 5.

Later I replied to your Iraq example and talked about what was the agenda for Iraq and how the US benefited from invading Iraq and you criticized me for going off on a tangent and why I talked about Iraq and debt when you started that topic and forced others to reply to it.

I could go on and on and if you force me to I will. You threw the whole thread into disarray, you brought up imperialism, Iraq, pillaging, etc, and then forced others to defend points they never made to begin with. You start all these little wars and don’t stop until everyone agrees with you, (tyrannical).

Not once did I claim the USA was traditionally imperialist, but you claim that I did, then force me to defend myself against something I didn’t say. Then when the debater makes points you can’t answer you nitpick on the propriety of single adjective.

You have got to be the worst moderator I have ever seen in my life. You have done this countless times and its very tiresome, stop ruining threads and causing chaos and infighting. I’m beginning to wonder what your purpose is, are you just so arrogant that you will not stop until everyone says it exactly like you want it said? Do you just like to cause arguments and annoy the hell out of people until they give up? You clearly have your prejudices, which makes you a terrible moderator, because you are in no way moderate. Or are you just one of those people who loves the sound of his own voice? What is your goal Tom? I’d really like to know.

I purpose that we stop arguing with Tom and simply ignore him like a little child. We need to stop talking about only what Tom wants to talk about and talk about what the thread was actually about for a change.

Gocka, you're the very difinition of 'going off into a tangent'. But I won't reply to your latest round of stupidity. If you don't want to engage in a debate with me then don't. Its that simple. I'll leave it to you. But if you continue, then you won't have anything to cry about as you have been so far.

[Gocka]

Gocka, you're the very difinition of 'going off into a tangent'. But I won't reply to your latest round of stupidity. If you don't want to engage in a debate with me then don't. Its that simple. I'll leave it to you. But if you continue, then you won't have anything to cry about as you have been so far.

Yup going post by post and showing you how you were the one who went off topic to start, showing you how rude and illogical you were, showing you how hypocritical you were, that equates to a round of stupidity, and what does that equate you to? You are a shallow little man. God help the people who have to deal with you on a daily basis, I pity them.

[Gocka]

I can't even remember what this thread was about now.
That makes me a perfect moderator lol.

It was about Tom and his ego, duhh, like every other topic.
Key signs to look for, the thread is ridiculously long for no reason, there are 15 pages of comments between 2 people, and none of the original posters bothered to come back.
DING DING DING Toms ego.

[Vangelovski]

Yup going post by post and showing you how you were the one who went off topic to start, showing you how rude and illogical you were, showing you how hypocritical you were, that equates to a round of stupidity, and what does that equate you to? You are a shallow little man. God help the people who have to deal with you on a daily basis, I pity them.

Gocka, I gave you the chance to disengage - you have clearly chosen not to, so you have no excuse for you whining and crying.

You have shown nothing other than your uninformed, unsubstantiated and deranged OPINION. Nothing more.

You claimed that the US was an imperialist state, completely ignored what imperialism is even after it was explained to you using a definition from an internationally respected scholar in the field, came up with some new concept known only to yourself (quasi - or fake - imperialism), then completely lost the plot by trying to claim that the real "plunder" is of the American people themselves, which contradicts what imperialism actually is (the exploitation or domination of FOREIGN states or peoples) and finally claimed that this is some supposed form of "new imperialism".

What an incoherent, tangled, jumble of nonsense. Bending and twisting and ranting on and on and on in order to make yourself feel like you actually know what you're talking about.

In amongst all of that, you tried to claim that I am some sort of tyrant (obviously you have no idea what that even means, considering your use of the word), attempting to stifle debate. As I already told you, if I wanted to stifle debate (if you can really call your dribble debate) I could easily just delete you from the forum. And yet you're still here. You're still dribbling on and on and on about topics that you clearly have absolutely no understanding of, but for which you think the more you write the more it will seem to others that you must know something.

If this in itself was not a painful waste of space, you preceded it by torturing us with your idiotic scheme of assassination. Of course, you would never carry it out yourself, you just want someone blindly following your perverse version of nationalism (or patriotism - you couldn't quite make up your mind, but I suspect that you actually think the two are one and the same as you used them interchangeably) to do your dirty (read stupidly idiotic) work for you.

You have made this forum a dumber place by posting on it. Everyone reading your posts is now dumber for it.

[Gocka]

Gocka, I gave you the chance to disengage - you have clearly chosen not to, so you have no excuse for you whining and crying.

You have shown nothing other than your uninformed, unsubstantiated and deranged OPINION. Nothing more.

You claimed that the US was an imperialist state, completely ignored what imperialism is even after it was explained to you using a definition from an internationally respected scholar in the field, came up with some new concept known only to yourself (quasi - or fake - imperialism), then completely lost the plot by trying to claim that the real "plunder" is of the American people themselves, which contradicts what imperialism actually is (the exploitation or domination of FOREIGN states or peoples) and finally claimed that this is some supposed form of "new imperialism".

What an incoherent, tangled, jumble of nonsense. Bending and twisting and ranting on and on and on in order to make yourself feel like you actually know what you're talking about.

In amongst all of that, you tried to claim that I am some sort of tyrant (obviously you have no idea what that even means, considering your use of the word), attempting to stifle debate. As I already told you, if I wanted to stifle debate (if you can really call your dribble debate) I could easily just delete you from the forum. And yet you're still here. You're still dribbling on and on and on about topics that you clearly have absolutely no understanding of, but for which you think the more you write the more it will seem to others that you must know something.

If this in itself was not a painful waste of space, you preceded it by torturing us with your idiotic scheme of assassination. Of course, you would never carry it out yourself, you just want someone blindly following your perverse version of nationalism (or patriotism - you couldn't quite make up your mind, but I suspect that you actually think the two are one and the same as you used them interchangeably) to do your dirty (read stupidly idiotic) work for you.

You have made this forum a dumber place by posting on it. Everyone reading your posts is now dumber for it.

You have got to be the most unlikeable person I’ve ever encountered in my life. It is because of people like you that Macedonians have no unity, and the Diaspora and The Republic are at a distance. It is because of arrogant brats like you that progress cannot be made. You are not a fraction as intelligent as you think you are and you have made this forum dumber more than any other man could. Your constant insults, hypocritical statements, your unwillingness to listen, your obsession with the sound of your own voice. It’s a shocking, I am literally shocked that in the face of your own quotes disproving your claims you still continue as if nothing ever happened. YOU brought up imperialism, I never claimed them to be imperialist, no one else did, get that through your deranged mind. You are a screw or two away from being a mental patient. Read your own comments you nut case. I pity you, I honestly do, you are going to die as a lonely angry old man, I am very sorry that god made you this way.
What will it take for you to admit that you are wrong? Or has that never happened in your life? I think the forum should get together and chip in for a psychologist, because you have some serious issues that you need worked out. No wonder the forum has almost no members. I’ve engaged with you twice and I want to bang me head against a wall.

[Vangelovski]

You have got to be the most unlikeable person I’ve ever encountered in my life. It is because of people like you that Macedonians have no unity, and the Diaspora and The Republic are at a distance. .

likability has nothing to do with unity. Its because poeple think likability should be the bedrock of unity that there is no unity. Unity is based on shared prinicples.

YOU brought up imperialism, I never claimed them to be imperialist, no one else did, get that through your deranged mind. You are a screw or two away from being a mental patient. Read your own comments you nut case. I pity you, I honestly do, you are going to die as a lonely angry old man, I am very sorry that god made you this way.
What will it take for you to admit that you are wrong? Or has that never happened in your life? I think the forum should get together and chip in for a psychologist, because you have some serious issues that you need worked out. No wonder the forum has almost no members. I’ve engaged with you twice and I want to bang me head against a wall.

Did I bring up imperialism. Here is the second post from this thread:

The west is turning to whole middle east into a terrorist state, one by one they are overthrowing secular dictators to install radical islamist dictators My theory is that they want to get that whole region as depressed as possible so they can either control it.

YOU brought up imperialism. You don't seem to understand - or you do and you're just trying to cover yourself now - that a word does not need to be used for the concept to be understood.

I think you are the mentally challenged individual who seems to be having wet dreams about been a Gemigija calling on your blind sheep followers (totalling zero) to go out and rage against the system and execute mob justice, assassinations and whatever other childish dreams you have.

P.S. Why are you still crying and whining? I gave you the opportunity to disengage from this conversation but you chose not to.