Jump to content

Не риторические вопросы


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 11.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Դու հաղթեցի՛ր Հայաստանի Հանրապետության Հպարտ քաղաքացի: Ու այս հաղթանակը քո ձեռքից ոչ ոք չի կարող խլել: Շնորհավորում եմ՝ հաղթակա՛ն ժողովուրդ:   Nikol Pashinyan / Նիկոլ Փաշինյան

Призыв жить без дураков, трезвые взгляды на прошлое и настоящее  

Манвел Саргсян. Мнение.  

Posted Images

Вид у Перча, конечно, как у тушканчика, которого отрыгнул и без него сытый удав :D

Тебе что не спиться adabas?

Edited by Ararat3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Барбара Боксер (на снимке - справа).

Правда милашка? :D

Если ты про фото, то я бы помер, не то что безсонница. Ну и уродка.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Вот и отшумел очередной управляемый цирк под названием амерские выборы. Лохи которые 2 года назад в ожидание обещанных перемен с энтузиазмом отдавали свои голоса за Барака Алибабаевича, на этот раз с таким же энтузиазмом отдали иx за его идеологических противников.

При условие что экономика через 2 года так и останется в жопе, выборный маятник вновь махнет обратно и лохи снова - как и 4 года назад - будут голосовать на демократов. И так до бесконечности. Политической процесс по американски, называется.

Симптоматично что какая бы из 2-х проституток маскирующихся под политическую партию не приходила в Америке к власти, Израиль всегда оказывается в выиграше. Что само по себе показатель того насколько все прогнило коррупцией и до какой степени реальный политический процесс отсутствует как таковой.

П.С. Мне было любопытно сколько пройдет часов после окончания выборов прежде чем появится это письмо.

Saudi Arms Sale Prompts Questions From U.S. House Panel Leaders

The Obama administration’s decision to sell as much as $60 billion in weapons to Saudi Arabia has prompted concerns from the top Democrat and Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, according to a letter being circulated for lawmakers’ signatures.

California Democrat Howard Berman and Florida Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen are seeking support from other members of the U.S. House of Representatives for a letter outlining concerns and questions to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The letter stops short of opposing the sale, which would be the largest in U.S. history if all purchases are made. The package includes Boeing Co. F-15 fighter jets, attack helicopters and satellite-guided bombs. It also contains helicopters made by United Technologies Corp. and advanced radar from Raytheon Co.

The lawmakers raise “the potential repercussions for our friends and for our own forces in the region in the event of political change in Saudi Arabia,” according to the draft letter obtained by Bloomberg News yesterday. Ros-Lehtinen is expected to replace Berman as committee chairman in January, when Republicans take control of the House.

“We have serious concerns about the nature of Saudi involvement in the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, particularly since the Saudis have failed to take steps toward normalization of relations with Israel or to augment their financial support to the Palestinian Authority,” according to the letter.

Leverage on Iran

On Iran, Ros-Lehtinen and Berman ask what Saudi Arabia has done beyond expressing anxiety at Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. The lawmakers cite potential Saudi “leverage in the international oil market to diminish Iran’s oil revenue” and actions to stem financing for terrorism or reduce the spread of nuclear-weapons technology.

The administration notified Congress on Oct. 20 that it wants to sell the weapons to help the Saudi government confront threats from Iran and violent extremists.

Congress has until Nov. 20 to stop the sale before the Defense Department and companies proceed to more detailed talks on contracts, which probably would extend over a decade. Congress will review the proposal during its lame-duck session, which starts Nov. 15.

The Oct. 29 note from Berman and Ros-Lehtinen asks interested lawmakers to sign their letter by tomorrow.

Israel’s Edge

The letter questions how thoroughly the State Department and the Pentagon have considered the effect of the sale on U.S. policies in the region, including the goal of ensuring that Israel maintains a “qualitative military edge” over its neighbors.

The two lawmakers cite a report by the Government Accountability Office, which concluded that the Departments of State and Defense “did not consistently document how arms transfers to gulf countries advanced U.S. foreign policy and national security goals.”

Defense Department officials discussed the proposed sale with Israeli officials as the package was being developed, according to both sides. Jonathan Peled, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, has said that while his country isn’t “thrilled” by the proposal, it hasn’t requested such actions as congressional hearings or assurances.

The Saudi F-15 package doesn’t include arms that might pose the greatest concern, such as weapons that can be fired from long distances and could, under certain scenarios, threaten Israel, according to Colin Kahl, deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East. In September, the Israeli government agreed to buy Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter when it becomes available.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Вот и отшумел очередной управляемый цирк под названием амерские выборы. Лохи которые 2 года назад в ожидание обещанных перемен с энтузиазмом отдавали свои голоса за Барака Алибабаевича, на этот раз с таким же энтузиазмом отдали иx за его идеологических противников.

Я помню совсем недавний энтузиазм - Ваш на пару с Kars-ом. Позавчера (если не ошибаюсь), Вы были уверены, что вставили Алибабаечу по самые гланды :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Я помню совсем недавний энтузиазм - Ваш на пару с Kars-ом. Позавчера (если не ошибаюсь), Вы были уверены, что вставили Алибабаечу по самые гланды :)

Интересно, что поменялось:

- ощущение самого факта, что "вставили"?

- ощущение, что вставили именно "по самые гланды"?

- понимание, что "вставили" не вы, а совсем наоборот?

Link to post
Share on other sites
У меня энтузиазма не было. То что ощущал я, по немецки называется schadenfreude.

По крайней мере, Вы его выразили.

Возможно, я Вас неверно понял.

Sorry

Link to post
Share on other sites

В любом случае, до тех пор, пока нет ответа на эти вопросы:

Kars,

насколько я понимаю (хотя возможно я ошибаюсь), "первой рукой" тех денег, которыми оплачиваются постельные и прочие удовольствия сенаторов США (якобы по статье: "лоббирование"), являетесь вы - простые американские армяне, которые деньги эти зарабатывают и, уверен, при всех позитивах Америки - зарабатывают не легко.

Вам никогда не приходило в голову послать на хер этих попрашаек с аппетитом аллигаторов (я имею ввиду диаспоральных "товарищей" и их сексуальных партнеров в Гонгрессе)? Вам не обидно, что над вами, возможно, просто издеваются и смеются (до и после очередного оргазма)?

Или это давно стало "косвенным налогом", типа акциза на ваше право быть американцами?

трудно определиться: кто же кому регулярно "вставляет"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

От того что у вас в политике чобаны из крипто курдов, а у нас хорошо выбритые выпускники юрфаков в костюмах из Brooks Brothers - сути дела не меняет.

И там и здесь тошнотворный, коррумпированный бледовник.

Link to post
Share on other sites
От того что у вас в политике чобаны из крипто курдов, а у нас хорошо выбритые выпускники юрфаков в костюмах из Brooks Brothers - сути дела не меняет.

И там и здесь тошнотворный, коррумпированный бледовник.

Знаете, уважаемый, если платить, не понимая - зачем, всегда нарываешься на разочарование.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Знаете, уважаемый, если платить, не понимая - зачем, всегда нарываешься на разочарование.

Если платишь за что-то конкретное, но этого конкретного не получаешь и, тем не менее, продолжаешь платить [delete - самоцензура]

Мягко выражаясь, это хуже.

Edited by adabas
Link to post
Share on other sites
В любом случае, до тех пор, пока нет ответа на эти вопросы:

Нет, нет, adabas джан! Обязательно птвечу! Просто вопрос потавлен не совсем так как надо, поэтому четкого ответа наверное не получишь. Но всё же, отвечу.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Про та как "строго" караются акты государственной измены (начать войну под липовым предлогом) или военные преступления в контексте политического дискорса современной Америки.

Such a Parcel o’ Rogues in a Nation

October 21, 2010

Last Friday Condoleezza Rice visited the White House and reportedly had a long chat with President Barack Obama which included an extended discussion of foreign policy that "covered the waterfront." Afterwards, Rice commented approvingly that "there is still a foreign policy community that believes that foreign policy ought to be bipartisan." Rice, who is on a book promotion tour, described the problem exactly, though the word she should have used was "monolithic" rather than "bipartisan." The Obama Administration foreign policy is virtually indistinguishable from that of George W. Bush, whose heavy handed form of internationalism combined with regime change has brought calamity to the United States. Presumably Obama and Rice were able to congratulate each other on their ability to unite Republicans and Democrats in supporting a seamless vision of the world as it might be if only those poor heathen devils out there would learn to behave.

Andrew Bacevich has described the foreign policy consensus that has ruled the United States since the Second World War as a sacred trinity consisting of global military presence, a military capable of projecting power worldwide, and a willingness to intervene anywhere in the world for any reason secure in the belief that Washington is a force for good. These policies have been supported by both major parties and have now led to something approaching war without end as new adversaries are identified and confronted. The peace dividend from the fall of communism was temporary at best, with international terrorism the new threat that has to be combated globally at great cost in lives and treasure. The consensus foreign policy makes for a bleak future for those Americans who actually care about their country, meaning that there will be little difference if we continue with Obama or wind up with President Sarah Palin or Hillary Clinton in 2012.

Condoleezza Rice, serving as an inept National Security Adviser and then as an only marginally better Secretary of State, was part of the grand delusion. She once thrilled the American public and the fawning media by describing her vision of nuclear mushroom clouds over US cities courtesy of Saddam Hussein, who, at the time, had no ability to do harm to anyone but his own people. One might have expected public and congressional demands that Rice be called to account for the foreign policy shipwreck she participated in, but she has instead been rewarded and is currently both a tenured professor at Stanford University and a Fellow at the Hoover Institution. She is even being spoken of as a possible Republican presidential candidate somewhere down the road.

The benefit of having a monolithic foreign policy based on a consensus crafted by America’s elites is that it will all pretty much function like an exclusive club where members are allowed to disagree mildly over what wine to have with dinner but not argue about the entrée. As a result, there will be zero transparency to what takes place and absolutely no accountability in a system that is designed to avoid internal conflict and change. Those who expect the government to serve the people should be particularly appalled at the revolving door of self-serving statists who proliferate throughout the system, men and women who have never had a genuine job in their lives but who scurry off to their law firms, lobbying offices, think tanks, and universities before returning at a higher level to the government bringing ruin with them.

A system in which neither party is required to behave responsibly means that decisions will be made without regard for the consequences. Seven years ago a major war crime was committed when Iraq was attacked yet no one has been punished, nor has anyone even been seriously challenged on the steps taken that led up to war. The United States bombed and then invaded a country that posed no threat and that had no ability in any event to strike against Americans or American targets. In 1946, the judges at the Nuremberg Trials called the initiation of a war of aggression the ultimate war crime because it inevitably unleashed so many other evils. Ten leading Nazis were executed at Nuremberg and ninety-three Japanese officials at similar trials staged in Asia. In spite of the fact that a majority of Republicans now considers the Iraq war to have been a "mistake," a view certainly shared by most Democrats and the public, no American government official was even fired as a consequence.

If one were to ask who were the potential war criminals in the Bush Administration the list would certainly include Rice. She was the National Security Adviser at the time and it was her job to know how good the intelligence was and to advise the president accordingly. If she was not aware that a lot of the information she was seeing was questionable at best, she was not doing her job very well and should be held accountable for her incompetence, incompetence which in this case led to war.

Putting aside the key question whether George W. Bush, "The Great Decider," was aware that he was being sold a bill of goods, there were certainly others who should have known better but went along for the ride. George Tenet, the CIA Director notorious for his "slam-dunk" comment, a man who cooked the intelligence to make the war possible to curry favor with the White House, is now Professor in the Practice of Diplomacy at Georgetown University and has generously remunerated positions on the boards of Allen & Company merchant bank, QinetiQ, and L-1 Identity Solutions. He sold his memoir At the Center of the Storm, which has been described as a "self-justifying apologia," in 2007 for a reported advance of $4 million. His book, ironically, admits that the US invaded Iraq for no good reason.

Tenet, who never actually worked as a spy, having instead wormed his way up through the system as a congressional staffer, provided the intelligence analysis and godfathered the 2002 Iraq National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that hyped the case for Saddam being a threat. It has been argued that he truly believed the intelligence he was providing and, if that is true, he failed to pay attention to the considerable doubts within the CIA about some of the sources used to indict the Iraqis, most notably "Curveball." If Tenet was not aware of that and was not conveying the caveats to the White House he was failing to do what his job required, opting instead to get on board the Administration bus and go after Saddam.

And then there is Dick Cheney. Cheney, unique for a Vice President, made numerous visits to the CIA headquarters to oversee the generation of the Iraq NIE and to make sure that it said what the White House wanted it to say. Cheney and his colleague in crime Scooter Libby also served as a conduit for bogus information being generated by the Pentagon, bypassing the usual intelligence channels through the CIA and the National Security Adviser. In 2002, Cheney disclosed that he was worth somewhere between $19 and $86 million so it is safe to assume that he is currently in comfortable retirement, a millionaire many times over from his time at Halliburton, a major defense contractor. Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in 2007 but later had his prison sentence commuted by President Bush. He has achieved a soft landing since that time and is now a Senior Vice President at the Hudson Institute.

Paul Wolfowitz, the Bush Deputy Secretary of Defense, is seen by many as the "intellectual" driving force behind the invasion of Iraq. He is currently a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. A bid to reward him for his zeal by giving him a huge golden parachute as President of the World Bank at a salary of $391,000 tax free failed when, after 23 months in the position, he was ousted over promoting a subordinate with whom he was having an affair.

Wolfowitz’s chief deputy at the Pentagon, Doug Feith, was the architect of the invasion of Iraq. As Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, he ran the infamous Office of Special Plans (OSP). OSP collected and disseminated information that CIA and State Department Intelligence had found to be suspect. Not surprisingly, Feith’s reports supported the case that Iraq presented a threat to the United States. After the fighting had begun, when no weapons of mass destruction were found, it was learned that much of the phony information had been invented by people like Ahmad Chalabi, who manipulated his neocon friends and was also very chummy with the Iranians at the same time, providing them with classified information that had been passed to him by his US government contacts. Feith left the Defense Department to take up a visiting professorship at the school of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, which was subsequently not renewed. He is reported to be again practicing law and thinking deep thoughts about his hero Edmund Burke, who no doubt would be appalled to make Feith’s acquaintance. Feith is a senior fellow at the neoconservative Hudson Institute and the Director of the Center for National Security Strategies. His memoir War and Decision did not make the best seller list and is now available used on Amazon for one cent, plus shipping. If the marketplace is anything to go by Tenet has turned out to be more esteemed if not venerated with a used copy of his opus available for $2.75.

And so it goes with Condoleezza Rice off on her book signing. No one is found guilty for starting an unnecessary war that has killed 4,425 Americans and many thousands of Iraqis. No one is punished or even tarnished by his or her role. On the contrary, all are, in fact, richly rewarded for their presumed dedication to their country. One can well presume that the old saw about every good deed being rewarded has been turned on its head in the US government, with only those guilty of crimes against humanity being considered for promotion. Can there be any wonder why ambitious people who are ethically challenged flock to start wars and torture for Uncle Sam? They know they will never be held accountable for anything they do and will reap the financial rewards that they think they deserve. Until that culture is eradicated by something like a Nuremberg trial demonstrating that no one is above the law the United States will continue to be a place that the rest of the world quite rightly regards as preaching respect for rules and values while rewarding just the opposite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Нет, нет, adabas джан! Обязательно птвечу! Просто вопрос потавлен не совсем так как надо, поэтому четкого ответа наверное не получишь. Но всё же, отвечу.

Думаю, ты можешь поступить так: сперва ответить на эти вопросы в моей формулировке, затем переформулировать вопросы по-своему и ответить на переформулированные.

Edited by adabas
Link to post
Share on other sites
post-32257-1289002650.jpg

Вид у Перча, конечно, как у тушканчика, которого отрыгнул и без него сытый удав :D

Вот это ты уже зря, Adabas. Как никак, но этот человек посвятил всю свою жизнь защите армянских интересов.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Вот это ты уже зря, Adabas. Как никак, но этот человек посвятил всю свою жизнь защите армянских интересов.

А ты приглядись, разве не похож на тушканчика (и именно после указанного акта) :D ?

И почему ты считаешь, что человек, посвятивший жизнь защите армянских интересов, в принципе не может быть похож на тушканичка? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
А ты приглядись, разве не похож на тушканчика (и именно после указанного акта) :D ?

И почему ты считаешь, что человек, посвятивший жизнь защите армянских интересов, в принципе не может быть похож на тушканичка? ;)

Не спеши называть это демагогией, Kars.

Ариэль Шарон сделал не мало для своего народа. Знаешь как его называют в Израиле перед телекамерой? "Наш Арик". Скорее всего не перед камерой его называют "Бочкой С Жиром" или "Толстожопым Ариком", но уважают его от этого не меньше. Что это? Фамильярность? Цинизм? Я подозреваю, что это "профилактика кумира". В этом есть нечто весьма рациональное, не думаешь?

Edited by adabas
Link to post
Share on other sites
Думаю, ты можешь поступить так: сперва ответить на эти вопросы в моей формулировке, затем переформулировать вопросы по-своему и ответить на переформулированные.

Трудно ответить, потому что вопрос многогранный, практически в одном вопросе заключается несколько вопросов, вопрос наводящий, не говоря уже о том, что написано всё это в тоне саркастической иронии. Тебе везет, что имеешь дело с весьма необидчивым, хорошим собеседником - Kars-ом, у которого прекрасная натура и редкий характер.

Но ладно, перейдем к вопросу.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Трудно ответить, потому что вопрос многранный, практически в одном вопросе заключается несколько вопросов, вопрос наводящий, не говоря уже о том, что написано всё это в тоне саркастической иронии. Тебе везет, что имеешь дело с весьма необидчивым, хорошим собеседником - Kars-ом, у которого прекрасная натура и редкий характер.

Но ладно, перейдем к вопросу.

По-моему, тебе хорошо известно каким может быть мое общение с обидчивым собеседником с широко распространенным характером ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Конгрессмен Brad Sherman, eщё один (кошерный) друг армянского народа. Сфотаграфирован во время какого-то (кошерного) междусобойчика в Вашингтоне.

Я так понимаю что у армян Калифорнии случился массовый вынос мозга потому как их интересы в обоих законадательных палатах страны представляют евреи.

Таким образом евреи представляют свои местные трайбл интересы, интересы Израиля - а заодно и армянские интересы.

a12223e3f2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Конгрессмен Brad Sherman, eщё один (кошерный) друг армянского народа. Сфотаграфирован во время какого-то (кошерного) междусобойчика в Вашингтоне.

Я так понимаю что у армян Калифорнии случился массовый вынос мозга потому как их интересы в обоих законадательных палатах страны представляют евреи.

Таким образом евреи представляют свои местные трайбл интересы, интересы Израиля - а заодно и армянские интересы.

Сегодня как раз по "SHANT TV" Перчу Карапетяну в online очень вежливо и тактично задавали именно подобные вопросы. Он отвечал в духе: "котлеты - отдельно, мухи - отдельно". Может быть, его ответы были адаптированы для hайкаканской аудитории, может я был не в форме, но, в любом случае, честно говоря, мало что понял из отвеченного им.

Edited by adabas
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...