Discussion Forum for Readers and Supporters of European Action

So Russia is "still Asian" (according to Ben Waterhouse) because it goes to the assistance of fellow Russians whom they believe are being mistreated by the Georgians? A strange definition of 'Asian' in anybody's book.

You also say the core of the problem is "Russians...terror bombing hospitals and encouraging ethnic killing". We have learnt from bitter experience that in war-like situations atrocities are committed by some people on BOTH sides. Trying to make out that only the Russians (or the Germans) commit atrocities, and are therefore the guilty party, isn't believable anymore.

Although no allied servicemen were hung at Nuremburg we know that the first Allied troops to land on the beach heads of Normandy on D-Day had been ordered not to take any prisoners for the first week. They obliged -and as usual history was written by the victors.

As Mosley used to point out: the ONLY way to avoid atrocities is to avoid war.

I think the idea of Britain and Europe leaving NATO and joining a relaunched Warsaw Pact is an excellent idea. In a stroke it would show the Americans we are no longer prepared to be their tame poodle - and demonstrate to Russia that the rest of Europe is genuinely supportive of her interests.

As Condoleeza Rice said "It's not 1968 any more".

Georgia reentered a part of their own country occupied by foreign forces of the Putin FSB/KGB oligarchy who had spent months shelling parts of Georgia.

The reaction of the "nekulturniy" Russians came as no suprise, terror bombing hospitals, and encouraging ethnic killing of civilians by Russian armed out of control militias.

Georgia is European, Russia has proved that she is not yet European but still Asian in sensibility and actions

Edited by author 14-08-2008 22:21
Basically, it is all to do with oil and gas pipelines ... especially oil from the Caspian Sea area.
The Israelis have an interest in this. They want to bypass Russia and use Georgia as transit. Then on to Turkey and Israeli sea ports.
Georgia began this conflict with a military attack upon South Ossetia. They thought Russia would stand by and do nothing. They were wrong.
Russia is justifiably peeved with American encroachment in eastern Europe. Putin is simply protecting Russian interests in that part of the world.
I agree with FG on Russia being European. We should embrace Russia and reject any 'special relationship' with the United States.
In fact, we should call for the complete withdrawal of American military from European soil ... which would mean scrapping NATO.
How about a new Warsaw Pact of ALL of Europe with our Russian brothers? That and good relations with the Arab and Islamic world. America (and Israel) would be like spoilt brats put in their place.
Who the hell does this Condoleeza Rice think she is, flying around the world wagging her little finger? She is the one who needs isolation.

The Georgians enter a small country on its northern borders that wants to remain independent of Georgia and give its citizens a hard time (most of whom are Russians). Russia responds by coming to the small country's assistance and chasing the Georgians away. Pretty obvious who's in the right and who's in the wrong one would have thought.

But the United States and its media stooges in Europe present Russia as the aggressor and Georgia as the innocent little country. "It isn't 1968, you know" Condalesa Rice undiplomatically tells the Russians.

The U.S. must keep its big nose and oil greedy hands off this part of the world. It's absolutely nothing to do with the U.S. and everything to do with Europe.

Russia must take its rightful place in a new Union of Europe and made aware of the advantages of membership. We should start treating Putin and the Russian Government with friendship, courtesy and respect - not with hostility, suspicion and the cold shoulder.

Then Europe will be in a position to spell out to the Americans that their interference will not be tolerated here and we wish to put an end to the so-called 'special relationship' once and for all.

You do not convince me, Dale. You are one of those people who go on about 'usury' with a nudge, nudge, wink, wink, know what I mean kind of suggestion. Mention Cromwell to a certain type of reactionary and he let 'them' in.
You are not this and you are not that. Then what the hell are you?
You are wasting both your time and my time here, Dale. Stick to the British Fascist Forum where the 'silly little boys' have you worked out.

And yes I know we're off topic but I'm afraid I couldn't let an accusation like that go unanswered.

I deliberatley didn't say that because I consider it irrelevant, usurers have entered England at different times in history from different groups, the Lombards for example, the Huguenots. I am not an anti-Semite. Funny, I've just had that silly little boy from the Fascist Forum or whatever it is accuse me of that because i questioned his shrill, hysterical attitude to Muslims.

Quote: " I know Cromwell allowed the re-introduction of usury on a wide scale, thus abandoning this country to the forces of international finance and sounding the death knell for the guild system. I assign the practice of this to no one religious or ethnic group please note".

Why don't you just say he let the Jews back in? That is what you really mean behind all your euphemistic turns of phrase. Ah, but I forgot, you are not an anti-Semite, either.
We are now so off topic that we are in danger of losing ourselves here.

Cromwell represented the triumph of the Bourgeoisie to the detriment of the workers in their guilds and the monarch who protected them.

Thank you for the grammatical correction ,I shall be more vigilant in future. Well no, I do not consider myself a an old-fashioned reactionary. I know Cromwell allowed the re-introduction of usury on a wide scale, thus abandoning this country to the forces of international finance and sounding the death knell for the guild system. I assign the practice of this to no one religious or ethnic group please note.
I have no particular loyalty to the Protestant church, just Catholicism adapted for a more rampant form of capitalism.

What was he a traitor to, Dale? It was Charles I who was betraying his obligations to Parliament and the nation to keep the Protestant constitution. That, and the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings. That had to go for a start.
Cromwell was a Parliamentarian first. He was a great Englishman who was responsible for the creation of universities in many cities because he wanted to raise the common man to a higher level. Charles I thought differently.
For grammatical correctness, you meant to say "should have been hanged". 'Hung' is as in 'my coat is hung on the hook'.
I am beginning to think you are an old-fashioned reactionary.

I see, thank you.
I must say I disagree, Cromwell was a traitor who should have been hung.

I am stating my own personal opinions. You know, thinking for myself and not what someone else says I must think.
Union Movement did not have a policy on the Monarchy apart from OM's response to 'Are you loyal to the Crown?' in question 155 in 'Mosley, Right or Wrong'. He said the position of the Monarchy would not change.
This was published in September 1961 and, like a few things in this excellent book, it is not something set in stone. We are pragmatists, above all.

Was that official UM policy?

If something has become out-dated, relatively pointless and ineffectual, then it is no longer a matter of finding something to replace it. It is just a matter of getting rid of an irrelevance.
Then you are simply throwing away excess baggage so that the journey can proceeed smoother and more efficiently.
Constitutionally, it is Parliament that rules Britain. Parliament triumphed over the King in an English Civil War who was replaced by Cromwell, the Lord Protector of the Commonwealth.
Remove the monarchy and something more representative of the people will emerge. In the 21st Century we do not need all of this absurd pomp and circumstance. Keep it for the Last Night of the Proms where it can do no harm.

With what would you replace the monarchy?