Thread: War after war, whether is new one? HISTORY REPEATS

Originally Posted by ST

Advanced Tactical Bot?

Yes and it must be destroyed!

England with the out-of-date antinational form of the board, being
in a precritical condition, being nuclear empire, represents
the basic danger to the world from itself.
Danger is represented also by the foreign policy of England, loosening
the peace relations, developing and aggravating political conflicts.
Before disarmament of England, with a purpose of prevention of occurrence armed
conflicts provoked by England, it is necessary to consider England as a possible aggressor.
It is necessary to conduct defending policy as protection against English colonialism
and to redirect weapons from politically illiterate conductors of war
to their source. England should know that it will not avoid responsibility any more
for kindling of war and for colonization. Disarmament of England
and transfering all authority to democratic bodies would remove military
intensity in the world.

Well, at least he making small posts...What if someone makes more angry bot, which will make post about 1 Mb every 5 minutes...

Main principles of English democratic colonization which invaders of Iraq follow by, Hitler sounded 64 years ago.
" We shall declare, that we are compelled to occupy, operate and pacify, that it is done for the sake of the population; that we provide order, communications, feed. We should represent ourselves as liberators. Nobody should guess, that we prepare the final order, but it will not prevent us to take to necessary measures - to send from the country, to shoot - and these measures we shall accept. We shall operate as if we here only temporarily ".
After S.Husejn disarmed the country, and democratic colonialists occupied Iraq, Iraq insurgents use the remained means of conducting emancipating war - terror for emancipating the country.
Democratic colonization goes to a counterbalance to own development of the countries of Asia.
Using natural aspiration of people to an establishment of a free society,
and backwardness of system of the state and local management, before occupation, democratic colonialists aggravate contradictions arising on this way, collide a society together to irreconcilable opposition.

Dear Mr. or Ms. Oleg,
I would like to take this opportunity to request to withdraw from receiving your most fascinating and informing newsletter. Please take my address off your e-mail list.



PS. Shut the hell up!

I've got it!

I was puzzling over why this turnip might be so paranoid about England. I mean, I'm sure the English still think they are that significant and powerful, but I don't know anyone else who does.

But wait! No, Mr Oleg is not 150 years out-of date, I do believe he is in fact talking about the great Anglo-Saxon conspiracy so favoured of both Marxists and militant Muslims everywhere (not to mention the French), and the online translator he's drivelling through is corrupting it back into England/ English (or else, the Jihadi/ Marxist Leninist handbook he's copying it from has already translated it wrongly... that would be even funnier).

Similarities are not present, except for:

1. In opinion of London in Sudetes in 1938 human rights were broken,
and Czechoslovakia threatened the peace in the Europe.
In opinion of London in Iraq in 2003 human rights were broken,
and Iraq threatened safety in the world.
2. London lobbied occupation of Sudetes in 1938 and Iraq in 2003.
3. Military force in these operations is assigned to the most armed countries
during corresponding times.
4. Sudetes and Iraq had become the important strategic and raw resource.
5. London shifts the responsibility for occupation on the countries-allies.
Attitudes before the allied countries change.
The policy becomes internal matter.

As well as 64 years ago a priority policy of London is a struggle for
human rights in the East.

Does similarity comes to an end on this?

With strengthening a role of England in Asia and colonization of Iraq, the question about restoration the status of democratic Hong Kong and an aggravation of contradictions between London and Pekin rises. China a developing socialist country having complex times of perfection of a control system. England – country with aspiration of restoration of colonialism in the form of democratic and military-political in APR. The greatest danger is represented with idea of profascist disinformation by London and presence of nuclear weapon in London.

In the USA people supported ideas of Freedom during formation of a state system. With coming to international scene the government of the USA has changed idea of Freedom under influence of London to the doctrine of Democracy. Democracy has become the system of the modern control over the person in the hands of colonialists. In international relations it is a form of colonialism.
Civil emancipating war in Iraq becomes regional movement of people and the governments for Freedom from Democratic colonization.

чё?

Emancipating movement of provinces against England is connected with colonial
form of board in Mother country.
The English democracy which arisen in 13 century as the form of colonial board
served interests of barons and peers, in modern England - to the same noblemen.
Provinces are practically as dominions and protectorates. Struggle of English
provinces is conducted for free participation in government against
limited democracy.
Development of English democratic colonization threatens also to safety
of the world. The state with the out-of-date form of board where the lie can
become the reason of war should not have the nuclear weapon.

Asia has appeared not ready to oppose lie and hypocrisy,
therefore democracy in Asia is shown in the worst form,
as imposing of colonial standards, suppression of freedom,
destruction of culture and morals.
Anticolonial war in Iraq is directed to restoration
of statehood, free development of a society.

What form of partition of the world constant membership in Secutiry council of the United
nations has?
Constant membership should be replaced to elective.
How the Secutiry council of the United Nations can affect an aggressive policy of
monarchic authority of England possessing the nuclear weapon?
England as discredited country by colonial policy
and by occupation of Iraq should be excluded from Secutiry council of the United Nations and to become state without weapon.

After attack to London, the policy of democratic colonization
in Iraq should have weaken, but it has not occured.
As politician Tony Blair does not consider that bears the personal responsibility for occupation of Iraq because idea of colonialism is inspired by the queen Elizabeth II?

The English monarchy, actively aspiring to influence world politics, finds the participation through English democracy - creation of the deformed negative information (as a freedom of speech), imposings of permissiveness (as freedom of the rights). Acceptance by a democratized society of English democratic values - without English system of the totalitarian control - decomposes the state up to a feudal-bureaucratic colony. With growth of movement for freedom and the truth the English society is divided into supporters and opponents of democratic colonization. Desperate effective resistance and migration become means of struggle for emancipating the colonized countries.

Basis of the constitution of Iraq offered by the USA is a restriction of the rights and freedom. Occupational armies cannot be in the territory of Iraq without free will of people. All conversations about the constitution of Iraq have no sense because there is no free Iraq. Acceptance of the colonial constitution by the state occupied by USA is a prolongation of a colonial policy of USA concerning to Iraq.

Oh you're back! Did you get fresh batteries?

Wait...since he's so anti-England. Maybe he was gone 'cause he was hiding after the terror attack in London.

Layin low...

...

...the timing kinda fits...

To establish the democratic government in Iraq
english-speaking neo-Nazis occupied Iraq.
Iraq became neo-colony. Civil emancipating
war has begun.
To make the constitutional democratic order,
occupation of Iraq should become termless,
the constitution is accepted for this purpose.
The democratic government of Iraq serves
interests of neo-colonialists in deliveries of oil to
support democratic stability in the country.

Damn I think this person using a very simple translator for everything he types.

The basic question of the Iraq constitution is legalization and fastening of spheres of
influence, sources of enrichment in Iraq by neo-colonialists.
Local authorities, created by neo-colonialists, will receive nothing from such repartition,
their role will be maintenance of stability,
maintenance of tolerance to plunder of the country.
Political dissociation of Iraq, while there is the absence of national ideology,
is fixing in the constitution as democracy and refusal of freedom, and creates
the Iraq democratic colony.