Send Flowers to Russia, Ukraine and Worldwide with Cyber-Florist.com Fiance.com: Beautiful Russian brides
Home  |  About  |  Forum  |  User Blogs  |  Login  |  Register

	Create New Topic   My Posts   My forum buddies   Invite friends   Private messages Russian brides > Main Forum > Human Traficking Author Post jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/5/2012 8:48:59 AM   Ragingbull: More to the issue of this thread - why would Conservative women come down hard on you as a trafficker, for showing your interest in Ukrainian dating? #1. A lot of successful, intelligent and attractive (as far as marriage would be anyway) men, go to the FSU looking for wives. Its a fact. And American women hate it. I have heard American women say "I hate Ukrainian women because they take our best men." American women who obviously have a high regard for themselves as the best, wonder what allure women from a poor country could possibly have. #2. Ukraine and Moldova ARE two of the countries where impoverished women are most likely to be trafficked from. They seem to take deperate measures to relieve their poverty. MIX those two facts together, in a shaker. Strain the ice. And you get: #3 American men must be BUYING those poor Ukrainian women and taking advantage of their poverty. Why else would Ukrainian women go with them? Its very loosely knit logic and doesn't stand up to scrutiny. But a lot of activist older Conservative women are known really known for rational deductive reasoning. Its just not one of their strong points. jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/5/2012 8:52:34 AM   Second last sentence was supposed to be "But activist Conservative women are not really known for rational deductive reasoning." durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/5/2012 1:06:55 PM   @jetmba: "activist Conservative women are not really known for rational deductive reasoning" Sad, but apparently true... 10+ years ago I found a website for "Second Amendment Sisters," that got a famous Benjamin Franklin quotation BACKWARDS so as to completely mangle its meaning. @ragingbull: To address what seems to be your core question, I have not heard of any connection between the international marriage business, and human trafficking. In Ukraine, the trafficking industry seems to thrive on the fraudulent offers of overseas jobs, which were mentioned above. I recently read about a Russian city where gangsters were kidnapping teenage girls from the street, and giving them the alternatives of prostitution or death. But I can imagine how ignorant cows (see top part of my post) could get international marriage brokering and human trafficking mixed up in their sorry brains, as jetmba clearly explained. ragingbull Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/5/2012 4:53:57 PM   Thanks for the answers, guys. My conclusion is just the confirmation that there is no connection between these dating sites and human trafficking. I don't believe you can isolate conservative women as irrational. It is probably because you don't agree to the conservative point of view. I can think of at least a few instances where liberal women are irrational. Then again, I don't usually classify them as women, just liberals. Jetmba, if you look at the reasons why we attacked Iraq, I don't believe you will find that it was because of 9/11. It was largely because of WMD's. Also, Saddam was becoming a leader of the Arab world that beating the war drums. President Bush does not speak so loud about it because they weren't found, but I believe they did exist. First of all, the US gave it to Iraq during the Iraq and Iran War. What happened to those? Even if Saddam used it against his own people, they weren't all found. Saddam's sons in law defected and said there was a WMD program. Why would they say there was if there wasn't? Saddam enticed them to go back home with "amnesty", but he had them executed (the fathers of his grandchildren). Further, I don't believe they were lying with what was found with the intelligence. What happened to the WMD's? Saddam had time to get rid of them. He was playing yoyo with the inspectors, kicking them out and then inviting them over and over again. I believe another country took them. I saw at least one news report that the WMD's President Obama just warned Syria about came from Iraq. Yes, the rich never had it so good. The rich always have it good. What they possess, they possess. They will look at business ventures and if the taxes are high, they are less likely to participate. I believe that is what happened to American jobs, or the anticipation of such. Also, I never said you blamed the Patriot Act on Romney Supporters. I said you labeled us as its supporters when Obama also supported it. "I shake my head in disbelief at such people, just like I shake my head in disbelief at Romney supporters like yourself, who think the Patriot Act has EVER stopped a terrorist attack, and isn't instead used and abused according to classifed government interpretation strictly against American citizens who have nothing to do with terrorism." jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/7/2012 9:21:18 AM   Rangingbull: We go to war for war's sake alone. Don't be confused by the propaganda. They will tell us anything to justify it. Dwight D. Eisenhower (a great Republican) warned us that the greatest peril America faces (even in the midst of the Cold War) was the power of the miltary industial complex. It is now firmly entrenched and it has now taken over to the end that it must maintain itself at all costs. George Orwell in his famous book "1984", predicted that eventually state eventually the state would create perpetual war, and he may have been off by a few years, but except for that he was dead on. Perpetual war does man things. It gives the people something to rally around (If you don't support it, you are a traitor.) Makes us more cohesive and easier to control. It provides us with (supposed) "heroes" that we can wave the flag around and give parades for. It employs the lower classes in direct military roles and teaches discipline, where perhaps they were raised without sufficient discipline. It employs other classes as well who work for defense contractors and support companies. More new millionaires and billionaires are created by defense contracting than by other other economic avenue. Democrats love it because it provides $2 billion in "economic stimulus" daily. In many way the military is 100% socialistic, everyone works for the stste, the state owns everything, all needs are provided for by the state. Republicans love the military because they don't SEE it as one big government employment program. Republican exempt it from that definition. (And Democrats love that Republicans exempt it!) Randolph Bourne said way back in 1918 the "War is the health of the state." Only war keeps people together. And if there isn't good reason (and really there isn't currently) then you make a reason up. Major General (USMC) Smedley Butler - Who, when he passed on, was the most highly decorated Marine in US history wrote a great book call "War is a Racket." As true today as it was then. Its done only for economic reason. Don't wall for the bull that its ever done because of WMD, to bring freedom to anyone, or to bring democracy. Those are all bull crap hollow excuses. And it just isn't true. We have war - for our own economic interest. For nothing else. ragingbull Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/8/2012 9:28:54 PM   Look at the first and last sentence of your post, Jetmba. They conflict along with your post about drunk guy crawling around the ground under a street light. I understand your anti-war sentiments, but you will not further your views if you falsely ridicule their reasons. Granted, your reason is legitimate as the primary reason, but the other reasons stated are not without merit. I am not confused by the propaganda. Who, nowadays believe there were WMD's? Even now, as they find them in Syria, the politicians and the main stream media largely ignores them. The reason I and others state were legitimate, but do not tell the whole story because they exist elsewhere in the world. Iraq was where we had economic interest in. We went to war the second time in Iraq because we did not take down and replace the Saddam regime the first time. Yes, it was for the free flow of oil, which was for our economic interest. But, Saddam invaded Kuwait and claimed it for his own and was threatening other neighbors. Still, even then, I believe our economy would have largely been unaffected because even if Saddam owned Kuwaiti oil, he still would have to sell it, at least, eventually. What good is owning oil if you don't sell it? Afghanistan is another story. It was the training bases for Al Queda and the Taliban who protected them. We warned them to disband after 9/11 and they did not. Instead, they went into the air waves, declared their victory, and wanted the west to recognize them as a state. One of Osama bin Laden's reasons for the attack was that the west "stole" precious Middle East oil by paying too little for it. Yes, it's all about oil. The question is moot, but Romney and the GOP had the most ambitious plan to put into full use American natural resources to make the US a net energy producer. If we count oil shale, the US has the most oil in the world, six times as much as Saudi Arabia, enough to last more than 900 years. Again, the question is moot until such a plan is implemented, but if that happens, we can leave the Middle East to fight among themselves and it would not affect us economically whatsoever. Rick4girl Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/9/2012 12:53:42 AM   raging bull said: "I guess my real question on this thread is, if it does exist. What connection does it have to FSU dating?" the answer would be that unfortunately as there are women scammers, there are also men scammers only these guy's scams are worse than getting 300 bucks from you. these guys are willing to shell out the money to convince a girl to leave with him and into the abyss of the sex trade. If you seem too good to be true to them (through no fault of your own, you just want a good girl) then it throws up red flags with the girls who have experienced or heard of it happening. jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/9/2012 8:13:17 AM   ragingbull: War is sold to us like professional sports are. We have to think that there is a good reason for it. Incredible hype is built up around the Super Bowl. We hear all abou the lives of the players, the importance of the win to a coach, who has the best, running game and passing game. MILLIONS of dollars are spent promoting the Super Bowl so that we rally behind our team - but its all hype. The next day our worlds havent changed. War is the same way. The government spoon-feeds the press so that we will be hyped up. The fact that we are often now fighting aginst former allies, as Suddam Hussein was, or the Taliban was, is quickly white washed. We THINK we know what we are fighting for, but the reason we are given are just for hype. The fact is that we arre lied to more often than we are told the truth. Osama bin Laden was complaining about abuses and covert action that had been commited since the 1940's. We didn't HEAR about much of that. Few people today are aware that the Iranian take over of the US Embassy around 1981 or so, was actually predicated when the US toppled a democratically elected President and replaced him with the ruthless and dictatorial Shah in 1953 (give or take). We didn't hear about that - we heard about crazy maniacal Muslims. Do you really think that oil independence will cause us to get out of the Middle East? Thats a pipe dream. With the fall of the Soviet Union, Muslims became the new Commies. They became they hyped bad guys. We have to have hyped bad guys, to sell weapons. If the Middle East and/or Muslims suddenly lost their hyped most favored bad guy status - we would simple choose another. Was is for the health of the economy. Nothing else. But they have to sell it to us. And they DO. jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/9/2012 8:23:57 AM   "Rangingbull: We go to war for war's sake alone. Don't be confused by the propaganda. They will tell us anything to justify it." "We have war - for our own economic interest. For nothing else." Those were my first and last sentences. Its not a conflict, it was a refinement for reasons honed in the post. We have war just to have war. Its not to win democracy. Its not to save the oppressed. Its not to fight Islam. Its not to end poverty. Its not because there is evil in the world. Its not to stop communism. Its not to prevent suffering. Its not to end hunger. We have war JUST to have war - because people make a lot of money selling weapons, and and a result of the "stimulation of the economy". Stop looking for noble reasons. There are none. As a footnote, by the way. We LOST in Vietnam. Some 54,000 American lost their lives. Was it the end of the world? Did all hell break lose? Hardly. Today Vietnam is an ally. But a lot of people laughed all the way to the bank. jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/9/2012 5:34:53 PM   What I mean when I say we have war just for wars sake - is that we aren't really fighting bad guys. We make bad guys up so we have a reason to fight somebody. We are ALWAYS on the look-out for somebody to go against. Nt because the US is a force of good in the world (though we like to tell ourselves that) but that we need somebody to aim our war machine at. To stimulate OUR economy. In a way the Cold War was the most civilized time in recent American history. We were keeping our precious war machine up. But we were running in place. We weren't killing anybody (much anyway). We were simply stockpiling the weapons and when they became obsolete sometime we replaced them. As long as that threat of mututal assured destruction existed with our prinicpal enemy, the Soviet Union, it was DANGEROUS to actually shoot at people (again, much). So we kept the military industrial complex fat and happy by just buying things and building weapons. With the fall of the Soviet Union we suddnly realized that we DIDN'T have to worry about mutually assured destruction anymore. We could start blowing up people again to our hearts content. No more sissy wars for us. We just needed to figure out somebody to shoot at. And that somebody was MUSLIMS! It tomorrow all the people of the world dropped their weapons and hostility and decided to usher in a new era of cooperation and brotherhood - and they all linked hands around the globe to sing Kumbaya. We would be in trouble. I guess we would have to start shooting those who sang too loud and off key. America needs war. Its an economic thing. Its a dependency we need to break. And the government has a great PR department that can rival anything Madison Avenue has ever had to sell it to us. kiwinorth Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/9/2012 8:38:46 PM   sadly jed what you are saying, this is how we see the US and for most new zealanders is very real. when you sit on the outside looking in, its a lot easier to see this stuff you speak of. when NZ went nuclear free we became Americas worst nightmare and we have paid for it terrible financially. the little secret not so secret embargoes on us almost crippled this country,, in someways it helped in us not been to involved in ya dirty wars,,, for soldiers are soldiers and a lot dont care whom they play against, they are just happy to do so. anyhow now we have a free trade agreement with China,, very few here wanted this(and still dont) but really we had no choice. we wanted this trade with the US but we are against your idealism's that are not spoken of, so what we got is what we got. this actually show up badly for you guys in the last pacific fleet exercise, we were involved for the first time since that infamous day we became nuclear free. during these exercises we were not allowed to dock our frigates in Pearl Harbour, so we watched the Japanese ships sail passed into dock,,,(i try to forget and let be but) in a kiwis eyes you dont want to know what we thought,,, to have those people sail over who is still down there and we could not show a solidarity, hmmmmmmmmm just of late you guys have relayed to our government this will never happen again. its bit late for the people who care about these things, for we will remember. but anyway the real picture of US policy is quite different from a time when Franklin Roosevelt reprimanded or showed his distaste for Churchill's antics with the Russians in WW11 for much the same style of governing. i can go on but its actually pointless, just sad really. ragingbull, look for that rant and rave of Saddam on youtube on their state tv saying he will help and support Osama Binny Layden, it will be there somewhere,(i will never forget it the mongrel) thats what signed is demise by the US war machine. by the way, the massive build up of arms in the gulf, is that not for Syria Iran and such? ragingbull Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/10/2012 12:01:27 PM   Jetmba., I don't know what to tell you. First you told the joke about the drunk looking for his keys where the light is, but he lost the keys elsewhere. That is why we invaded Iraq. When I answer you, you said it was economic interest. I addressed that and then you say we go to war just for the sake of war. I think there is always a reason for something, and the first thing we should do is define the problem. We can go to war for many reasons. The economic reason is probably the biggest. Can we at least agree on that? If times were better and he did not have to run for re-election would, GHW Bush attacked Iraq the first time? Maybe, but I think not. The reason for the second Iraq war is not that simple. They had nothing to do with the Afghanistan War. I'll accept that, but it's debatable. The US said they were hiding Al Queda. There were none found, but they had several months to a year to leave after it was clear that the US will attack. My point is there is a reason. It may not be a good reason, but there is a reason. The economic one is at the root of it, if not all. Until we address this problem, we will have wars. I think our personal and national finance would have been fixed with the energy plan drawn by Romney and adopted by a few Republicans. We have the natural resources. Why not use them? We no longer have Romney. Someone still needs to implement that plan. Al Gore and environmentalists are in the way. In the midst of the fiscal cliff, President Obama gave billions to the developing countries to implement his green energy plan that bankrupted many US companies at taxpayer expense. Yes, he did that, through the United Nations. He knows exactly what its for. Why do we need to spend more taxpayer money for that? We need American jobs, then we can go out and help other countries. The cart is in front of the horse. durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/10/2012 12:31:29 PM   Durak's simplified version of American conservative beliefs: 1. Governments are inherently immoral, dangerous, destructive, dishonest, and corrupt. Governments must be treated with utmost suspicion and distrust. They must be starved of resources, and made as small and weak as possible. Anything government does, it will do wrong, wastefully, at ruinous cost. Tax dollars taken in and spent by government kill the economy. Any other person or organization can do things better than any government. All government is bad, but the US Federal government is the absolute worst. 2. When it comes to the awesome power to raise and maintain armies, make war, and slaughter thousands of people -- many of whom are innocent non-combatants -- government can do no wrong. Everything the government says about enemies and war must be taken as gospel truth, and anyone who questions this is disloyal. The government is amazingly competent at war. No matter how many hundreds of billions of dollars the war machine asks for, it must be given even more. Tax dollars taken in and spent by government on the war machine are good for the economy. No person, organization, or government on earth is as excellent and virtuous as the sacred US Federal government war machine. ragingbull Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/10/2012 12:59:36 PM   1. "Governments are inherently immoral, dangerous, destructive, dishonest, and corrupt. Governments must be treated with utmost suspicion and distrust." Exaggerating, but they can be. The point is do not do so with taxpayer money. "They must be starved of resources, and made as small and weak as possible." I agree for taxpayers sake. People worked for this money. "Anything government does, it will do wrong, wastefully, at ruinous cost." I agree. Government uses taxpayer dollars for every financial venture. That means, land, building, equipment, supplies, salaries, health care, retirement and so forth. "Tax dollars taken in and spent by government kill the economy. Any other person or organization can do things better than any government. All government is bad, but the US Federal government is the absolute worst." Again, exaggerated but I agree. There is no incentive to make a profit, therefore none to cut costs. If money is to be spent, it should be spent by those who earned it, not government. ragingbull Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/10/2012 1:29:50 PM   2. "When it comes to the awesome power to raise and maintain armies, make war, and slaughter thousands of people -- many of whom are innocent non-combatants -- government can do no wrong." I am ambivalent on this one. While there were thousands of noncombatants were killed, hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions are now free or at least somewhat. If you remember, after we told Saddam to stop the aggression on his people after the first war, it was still necessary to declare a no fly zone to perhaps implement it. "The government is amazingly competent at war. No matter how many hundreds of billions of dollars the war machine asks for, it must be given even more. Tax dollars taken in and spent by government on the war machine are good for the economy. No person, organization, or government on earth is as excellent and virtuous as the sacred US Federal government war machine." I disagree. If that was true, we would be involved in more wars. I think that tax dollars spent by the government war machine to improve the economy is both a liberal and a conservative belief. It is a mistake. I will disagree and have disagreed with any conservative who believes that. Obama believes that, I think. He believes we should spend ourselves into economic prosperity. If that is so, why not military spending? Granted, he has cut the military. Once he did that, I don't know why he now threatens Syria. The military build up is for deterrence. I was in the military. That is the reason they gave us in theory about our existence. It surely worked for Reagan and the fall of the Soviet Empire. jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/10/2012 3:01:32 PM   Durak: Those two paragraphs very adequately express the views of NeoCons. These people are not true conservatives. They only want to cut nonmilitary spending. When it comes to blowing up foreigners to them - bigger is better. A Liberty Republican (and conservative) like myself, would strike the last sentence of your first paragraph and your entire second paragraph. Rick4girl Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/10/2012 7:13:44 PM   now now guys. I am considered a conservative of the libertarian strain. I believe federal government should be small and only do the bare minimum required to protect the country, regulate interstate commerce and the other requirements established by the constitution. It should set the standards by which the states must operate to insure harmony within the union. The states should bear the most responsibility for day to day governance and governmental operations. Laws must insure that rights are not infringed and that people should be free to do what they want as long as it does not infringe upon the rights of others. what exists now is something even Lenin would be envious of. lonelyranger1701 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/11/2012 1:51:09 AM   War has helped this country’s economy in the past,,, but that is no longer true today. Year after year of wasting natural resources, fuel and precious metals, has ruined the world economy. $4.00 + gasoline stops our economy in it’s tracks! Many people don’t have enough money for the extras in life,,, all of that unnecessary spending. lonelyranger1701 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/11/2012 2:26:12 AM   http://news.yahoo.com/argentine-mom-rescues-hundreds-sex-slaves-221110530.html kaiserdag Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 12/11/2012 4:16:45 PM   Watch for those green card chasers, just to proof that our American system is better. Eastern Europeans want to go west and western Europeans to America. I live in Germany, great place but $8+ gal of regular! But they have 30 days’ vacation guarantee. western Europe is a magnet for human trafficking. Your Reply: Your name:   New Registration Password:   Forgot password?   refresh Code:   Russian brides > Main Forum > Human Traficking
	Pages: 1 2 3