Comments on: Twenty Years Since the Wall’s Fall – by Jamie Glazov http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/ Sat, 26 May 2012 17:58:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: ScotchIndian http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/comment-page-1/#comment-4763 ScotchIndian Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:50:59 +0000 http://frontpagemag.com/?p=35850#comment-4763 I'm really baffled by what you have said. I really don't see how anything I said was racist. Criticizing Obama is not racist. And, Obama's father was a communist. That is a fact. If there is a legitimate criticism about my comment above, it that I probably should not try to ascribe a motive to Obama's lack of action.<br><br>As far as Bush & Iraq are concerned -- I did not support Bush II 's invasion of Iraq. However, the Senate gave Bush II very broad grounds for going to war with Iraq -- including almost all of the Democrats. Do yourself a favor and look up the resolution on the internet, and check on the votes.<br><br>Even though Saddam was a horrible person, I do not feel that justified our invasion. One of my good friends who is liberal strongly supported the invasion on the grounds of a) defiance of the UN; b) past use of WMD (gas used on the Kurds), and c) general trampling of human rights and use of torture (real torture) by Saddam Hussein. I disagreed on the basis that we (US) just can't right every wrong in the world. <br><br>What was deplorable about Iraq was the way that the same Democrats who voted to OK the invasion turned so quickly on him. I'm really baffled by what you have said. I really don't see how anything I said was racist. Criticizing Obama is not racist. And, Obama's father was a communist. That is a fact. If there is a legitimate criticism about my comment above, it that I probably should not try to ascribe a motive to Obama's lack of action.

As far as Bush & Iraq are concerned — I did not support Bush II 's invasion of Iraq. However, the Senate gave Bush II very broad grounds for going to war with Iraq — including almost all of the Democrats. Do yourself a favor and look up the resolution on the internet, and check on the votes.

Even though Saddam was a horrible person, I do not feel that justified our invasion. One of my good friends who is liberal strongly supported the invasion on the grounds of a) defiance of the UN; b) past use of WMD (gas used on the Kurds), and c) general trampling of human rights and use of torture (real torture) by Saddam Hussein. I disagreed on the basis that we (US) just can't right every wrong in the world.

What was deplorable about Iraq was the way that the same Democrats who voted to OK the invasion turned so quickly on him.

]]> By: guxt65 http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/comment-page-1/#comment-4752 guxt65 Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:44:50 +0000 http://frontpagemag.com/?p=35850#comment-4752 It seems that you are just looking for an opportunity to criticize Obama. I find your comment about Obama's father so racist and untrue. What Bush did in Irak is so horrible than we have to look at the past to find the good things that USA has done in the world. It seems that you are just looking for an opportunity to criticize Obama. I find your comment about Obama's father so racist and untrue. What Bush did in Irak is so horrible than we have to look at the past to find the good things that USA has done in the world.

]]> By: USMCSniper http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/comment-page-1/#comment-4571 USMCSniper Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:07:07 +0000 http://frontpagemag.com/?p=35850#comment-4571 Reagan is the hero not Gorbachev, a deposed Communist from the former Soviet Union given asylum in the USA. Reagan is the hero not Gorbachev, a deposed Communist from the former Soviet Union given asylum in the USA.

]]> By: USMCSniper http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/comment-page-1/#comment-4570 USMCSniper Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:05:03 +0000 http://frontpagemag.com/?p=35850#comment-4570 The Berlin Wall came down twenty years ago today. So this might be a good time to take a look at Ronald Reagan’s “Tear down this wall” speech from June of 1987.<br><br>A note of explanation for Barack Obama: Mr. President, sir, if you happen to watch <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjWDrTXMgF8&feature=player_embedded#" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjWDrTXMgF8&feat...</a> , this video is a dandy instruction guide. Please watch it a few times and follow Reagan’s example next time you have to deal with a ruthless dictator. The Berlin Wall came down twenty years ago today. So this might be a good time to take a look at Ronald Reagan’s “Tear down this wall” speech from June of 1987.

A note of explanation for Barack Obama: Mr. President, sir, if you happen to watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjWDrTXMgF8&feat… , this video is a dandy instruction guide. Please watch it a few times and follow Reagan’s example next time you have to deal with a ruthless dictator.

]]> By: ScotchIndian http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/comment-page-1/#comment-4544 ScotchIndian Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:52:40 +0000 http://frontpagemag.com/?p=35850#comment-4544 AlAlAll this is interesting. However, what is more interesting is to see the pictures of Merkel and Gorby hugging at the wall, while the Germans are shouting "Gorby, Gorby". <br><br>Obama missed a big opportunity by not going himself, or not sending Bush I. But then, Obama is not interested in promoting the good the US has done in the world combatting people like Obama's father. AlAlAll this is interesting. However, what is more interesting is to see the pictures of Merkel and Gorby hugging at the wall, while the Germans are shouting “Gorby, Gorby”.

Obama missed a big opportunity by not going himself, or not sending Bush I. But then, Obama is not interested in promoting the good the US has done in the world combatting people like Obama's father.

]]> By: Daniel Moore http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/comment-page-1/#comment-4527 Daniel Moore Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:55:46 +0000 http://frontpagemag.com/?p=35850#comment-4527 leib, notwithstanding the continuing publication of his books, don't you think there is an absolutely fascinating wall of silence around Golitsyn? i once thought it could be explained by the trajectory from the battle over Nosenko's authenticity to the fall of Angleton/triumph of the anti-war triumphalism, post-Nixon Church Commission stew - effectively the victory of anti-anti-Communism... but now i don't know. how could a book like New Lies For Old, whose predictions we have watched materialize over the course of 3 very real decades, be relegated to mere conspiracy theory? i realize conspiracy theory is actually a realm in which some intelligence effort is invested, but nevertheless the silence seems bizarre. it would be nice if people like us could just tell the people who haven't read it: hey! People! you know how you read a book about, say, the Tudor family period, and you think, hey, now i know something about the Tudor family and its times, that was interesting! read New Lies For Old, and you will - without a doubt - get the feeling that you're *living through the Tudor family period.* i've never read any other book like it; it puts all punditry to absolute shame. and yet - even people you'd expect to be sympathetic to it aren't or won't admit that they are. a wilderness of mirrors indeed... leib, notwithstanding the continuing publication of his books, don't you think there is an absolutely fascinating wall of silence around Golitsyn? i once thought it could be explained by the trajectory from the battle over Nosenko's authenticity to the fall of Angleton/triumph of the anti-war triumphalism, post-Nixon Church Commission stew – effectively the victory of anti-anti-Communism… but now i don't know. how could a book like New Lies For Old, whose predictions we have watched materialize over the course of 3 very real decades, be relegated to mere conspiracy theory? i realize conspiracy theory is actually a realm in which some intelligence effort is invested, but nevertheless the silence seems bizarre. it would be nice if people like us could just tell the people who haven't read it: hey! People! you know how you read a book about, say, the Tudor family period, and you think, hey, now i know something about the Tudor family and its times, that was interesting! read New Lies For Old, and you will – without a doubt – get the feeling that you're *living through the Tudor family period.* i've never read any other book like it; it puts all punditry to absolute shame. and yet – even people you'd expect to be sympathetic to it aren't or won't admit that they are. a wilderness of mirrors indeed…

]]> By: leib http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/10/twenty-years-since-the-wall%e2%80%99s-fall-by-jamie-glazov/comment-page-1/#comment-4515 leib Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:23:04 +0000 http://frontpagemag.com/?p=35850#comment-4515 Readers should note that the Soviet defector Golitsyn in his first book, New Lies for Old, predicted the take down of the wall and the liberalization in the USSR. Common European home was Soviet language and the readjustment KGB run Russia has made could over the long term allows for Russia to eventually dominate an EU run Europe if American forces are ever withdrawn from Germany. Note also the bilateral treaties made with several European countries and the Soviet Union at the end of Gorbachev's reign and re-signed by Yeltsin. These treaties have articles that require consultations with Moscow in a crisis and include articles calling for increased cultural and political ties. The Common Security policy now in place in the EU makes potential Moscow manipulation of this diplomatic instrument much easier than a series of treaties with countries not linked through the EU. So the interviewee's concerns about the EU go beyond the issue of socialism.See Golitsyn's second book the Perestroika Deception for more information about Gorbachev and Yeltsin. Readers will discover there the reasons why Putin's ascendancy was a logical outcome of the events begun in 1989. Last, note that the events begun in 1989 served as a strategic retreat for Moscow that allowed it to enter Western economic institutions (G-7 becomes G-8 etc) and led to the US vastly reducing its restrictions on the export of dual use technology allowing Moscow access to Western military technology. Under Yeltsin and now Putin Russia has developed new offensive long range nuclear missiles while the US has frozen its nuclear development to the point that the infrastructure and base of scientific talent in this area is in danger of eroding. The advent of Obama to the Presidency with his approach to international affairs only increases this danger and enhances Russian prospects for gradually dominating the European continent. With China as its ally (another Golitsyn prediction) failure of the US to enhance its military posture in the Pacific offers a further danger to freedom and peace in both the pacific and Atlantic theaters. Readers should note that the Soviet defector Golitsyn in his first book, New Lies for Old, predicted the take down of the wall and the liberalization in the USSR. Common European home was Soviet language and the readjustment KGB run Russia has made could over the long term allows for Russia to eventually dominate an EU run Europe if American forces are ever withdrawn from Germany. Note also the bilateral treaties made with several European countries and the Soviet Union at the end of Gorbachev's reign and re-signed by Yeltsin. These treaties have articles that require consultations with Moscow in a crisis and include articles calling for increased cultural and political ties. The Common Security policy now in place in the EU makes potential Moscow manipulation of this diplomatic instrument much easier than a series of treaties with countries not linked through the EU. So the interviewee's concerns about the EU go beyond the issue of socialism.See Golitsyn's second book the Perestroika Deception for more information about Gorbachev and Yeltsin. Readers will discover there the reasons why Putin's ascendancy was a logical outcome of the events begun in 1989. Last, note that the events begun in 1989 served as a strategic retreat for Moscow that allowed it to enter Western economic institutions (G-7 becomes G-8 etc) and led to the US vastly reducing its restrictions on the export of dual use technology allowing Moscow access to Western military technology. Under Yeltsin and now Putin Russia has developed new offensive long range nuclear missiles while the US has frozen its nuclear development to the point that the infrastructure and base of scientific talent in this area is in danger of eroding. The advent of Obama to the Presidency with his approach to international affairs only increases this danger and enhances Russian prospects for gradually dominating the European continent. With China as its ally (another Golitsyn prediction) failure of the US to enhance its military posture in the Pacific offers a further danger to freedom and peace in both the pacific and Atlantic theaters.

]]>