Dagmar Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 ali ne izgleda baš dobro. ne da bi izgledalo super sa clinton. mislim, pravićemo Obamu od blata to svakako. Jer, što se tiče USofA, možda su "liberalni imperijalisti" izgubili, ali ko god misli da su došle mede i zeke nije normalan. Nije izgledalo dobro ni sa jednim od njih dvoje. Mislim da su stvari već neko vreme na vrlo lošem putu.
rezwalker Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Trampa su mnogi okarakterisali kao nekakvog Đavola, a sa tim se apsolutno ne bih složio. Ako se podrobnije analizirala materijal u kome se pojavljuje Đavo kao arhetip u terimorfnom obliku, primetićete da je uvek in disguise, a to je Hilari Klinton. Tramp više odgovara figuri trikstera koja donosi novi sadržaj u kolektivnu svest - sa svim svojim zavodljivim karakterisitikama. Mnogi su šokirani ovim izborom... Jebem li ga... Za mene bi šok bio nešto sasvim drugo. Kroz medije se sve vreme provlačila činjenica da je većina Amerikanaca zgrožena sa izborom koji im se nametao. Šteta što nisu bili malo kreativniji i izabrali nekog trećeg kandidata, koji je postojao, jer to bi bio, po meni, pravi šok i presedan, a imali su tu opciju.
Prospero Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Peskov u NY, na šahovskom turniru of all things The Kremlin said on Thursday U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's foreign policy approach was "phenomenally close" to that of President Vladimir Putin, giving Russia hope that tattered U.S.-Russia relations could gradually be improved. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, speaking in New York, said he saw incredible similarities between the two men's foreign policy ideas, and this meant there was a solid basis to start a meaningful dialogue between Moscow and Washington. Peskov, in the United States for a chess tournament, said he was struck by how similar parts of Trump's victory speech were to a speech Putin gave in southern Russia last month. Both men said they would put their own country's national interests first, but that they would be ready to develop ties with other nations, depending on how ready other countries were to deepen relations themselves. "They (Putin and Trump) set out the same main foreign policy principles and that is incredible," Peskov said in comments broadcast by Russian state TV's Channel One on Thursday evening. "It is phenomenal how close they are to one another when it comes to their conceptual approach to foreign policy. And that is probably a good basis for our moderate optimism that they will at least be able to start a dialogue to start to clear out the Augean stables in our bilateral relations." With Moscow and Washington now at odds over Syria, Ukraine and NATO, Peskov cautioned that it would take a long time before relations could return to a high level, however, because of how far they had been allowed to deteriorate. "An atmosphere of mutual trust takes years to achieve," he said. "It's not possible to just declare that there is an atmosphere of mutual trust, especially after such serious damage was done in the last few years to our relations." Peskov told the TASS news agency separately that Putin was ready to be flexible when it came to mending ties which he wanted to improve, but that there was a limit to his flexibility and that he would need to see some U.S. reciprocity. Peskov spoke after one of Russia's most senior diplomats told the Interfax news agency earlier on Thursday that the Russian government had been in touch with members of Trump's political team during the U.S. election campaign and knew most of his entourage.
Tribun_Populi Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Oće sad da prime Rusiju u NATO? via CZ-M53 TT
rezwalker Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Oće sad da prime Rusiju u NATO? via CZ-M53 TT Može biti, može biti,,,, A možda mu odma' uruče, k'o Obami, Nobelovu nagradu...
Tribun_Populi Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Odmah posle Crne GoreOdmah +300 miliona! via CZ-M53 TT
MNE Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Miralem, Koliko samo nista ne kapiras. Postoji nesto izmedju "sirom otvorenih vrata" i "zidanja zida". Sto se ratova tice Trampova potencijalno meksa pozicija prema Putinu ne znaci obavezno manju upasnost od rata vec moze znaciti i vecu kao sto je objasnjeno ovde: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/11179774? Uostalom pricamo o neuracunljivom coveku koji vodi ratove na twitteru u 3 ujutro. I na kraju ne radi se tu ni samo o Rusiji vec o tome da li ce ovo dovesti do ekspanzije terorizma, potencijalnog zaostravanja odnosa sa Kinom ili Iranom itd. najveća opasnost(po ostale) i jeste ako se udruže kao 2 kompanjona (a priča je tako krenula) i onda krenu da maltretiraju koga god hoće, jer ako Rusija&USA budu nastupali zajedno čak ni Kina neće moći da im stane na put, moći će na planeti da rade bukvalno šta hoće, britanska imperija će biti ništa pri tome ono, sumnjam da će baš tako krenuti a pogotovo odmah ali nikad se ne zna
Weenie Pooh Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 A inace je u svojoj briljantnoj analizi rekao da je Franc Ferdinand bio "minor European royal" :D Prilično neverovatna glupost ali ko zna, možda je moguće studirati arheologiju i nemati pojma o istoriji 20. veka. Još kad bih znao zašto piše "Arch Duke" umesto "Archduke"....
Prospero Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Mutti :ziga: She said: “Germany and America are connected by values of democracy, freedom, and respect for the law and the dignity of man, independent of origin, skin colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political views.“I offer the next President of the United States close cooperation on the basis of these values.
Budja Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Poenta je da nije bitno da li će biti zida. Onaj najvažniji zid je već izgrađen, a to je da je pobedio čovek koji hoće zid. A poenta izbora u smislu narativa je, takodje, da je na zid kukala osoba koja je za zid glasala a i u debati protiv Trampa pomenula da je zid/ograda potrebna. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2016/aug/15/donald-trump/donald-trump-right-hillary-clinton-once-wanted-wal/ When asked for backup, Trump’s campaign pointed to a 2006 bill that Clinton voted for while a senator from New York. The bill -- the Secure Fence Act of 2006 -- authorized about 700 miles of fencing to be installed along the country’s southern border, along with other security measures. It was the beginning of an attempt to pass comprehensive immigration reform. The original bill specifically called for double-layer fencing across 700 miles of the border. Clinton, and 25 other Democratic senators, voted in favor of the bill. It passed the Senate 80-19 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush. So, it’s fair to say she once supported a barrier along a large portion of the border. Today, 702 miles of fencing separates the United States from Mexico, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. But just 36 miles are double-layered. That’s because a 2007 amendment in the federal budget bill let the U.S. Department of Homeland Security determine what was necessary. Wall vs. fence Trump campaign adviser Stephen Miller said of Clinton: "Her vote is self-explanatory." Practically speaking, what’s the difference between Trump’s wall and the fence proposed in 2006? Television news anchor Jorge Ramos asked Clinton this question Jan. 11, 2016 at the Iowa Black and Brown Forum, broadcast on the Fusion network, a Hispanic news channel. "What the difference between your idea and Donald Trump’s idea on building a wall with Mexico?," Ramos asked. "So we do need to have secure borders and what that will take is a combination of technology and physical barrier," Clinton said. "You want a wall then," Ramos interjected. "No, we’ve --" she said. "You said that." "Well, I voted for border security and some of it was a fence," Clinton said. "I don’t think we ever called it a wall. Maybe in some places it was a wall." Tj. glasali su i protiv ovakvog spin bullshit-a. Glasali su protiv Rubia koji je bio za legalizaciju ilegalnih imigranata before he was agianst it, itd...
hazard Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 kada se priča o tome da više meksikanaca napusti ameriku nego što uđe u nju to je jako nategnuto, ja ne bih ništa verovao tim podacima. druga stvar najveća imigracija sada Na osnovu cega to tvrdis? Jer ovi sto tvrde obrnuto daju i podatke a i ubedljive razloge koji ih objasnjavaju. Da li je stvarno u tom petogodisnjem periodu bio ,,neto minus" ka Meksiku nije toliko bitno koliko nesporna cinjenica da je imigracija iz Meksika zestoko opala. Ovo za Aziju, centralnu Ameriku i dr. je nebitno u kontekstu rasprave o Meksiku i zidu. I na kraju, Portorikanci nisu ,,migranti" nista vise nego Njujorcani koji se presele u Teksas, ljudi su americki drzavljani i uzivaju puna prava kao i svi ostali americki drzavljani, ukljucujuci i pravo da se unutar SAD presele gde god hoce.
Budja Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 Ja uopste nisam siguran da se isplati izgradnja zida. Vrhunac meksicke migracije ka SAD je po svemu sudeci prosao. Meksiko je bolje mesto za zivot nego pre, bar u proseku, jasno je da postoje ogromne nejednakosti. Prirodni prirastaj u Meksiku je takodje nizi nego pre, sto je vrlo bitno jer u ogromnoj vecini migriraju mladi. Zid vec postoji duz jednog dela granice, mozda ga malo nadograde, ali bas celom duzinom granice da ide, tesko. meksicka imigracija != imigracija iz Meksika Sad, tacne brojke ne znam, ali malo-malo, pa neki ilegalni imigranti podavljeni u kamionu, poubijani u poljani od raznih coyotea.
hazard Posted November 10, 2016 Posted November 10, 2016 meksicka imigracija != imigracija iz Meksika Sad, tacne brojke ne znam, ali malo-malo, pa neki ilegalni imigranti podavljeni u kamionu, poubijani u poljani od raznih coyotea. brojke, tacno koliko mogu biti, imas u izvestaju koji sam linkovao
Recommended Posts