[Aptrgangr]

Originally Posted by Theobald

I was pretty sure that someone would come with a huge post and argue with me.

What a boring world we would live in when all people would agree with each other.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Did I say the opposite ? You are just trolling with such comments.

You did not state otherwise. I inherit much sarcasm – that's why I easily make friends with English. Stating a simple fact is anything but trolling but destruction of illusions.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Of course. Iran's nuclear power is primarily meant as a Muslim counterweight to Israeli nuclear power, not directed against Europe. Contrarily to what many people think Iranian leadership is not a bunch of shiist fanatics. Most of them, including Ahmadinejad himself, are smart politicians and Iran has a clear geopolitical strategy.

Iran's geopolitical strategy is not based on creating a counterpart to Israel alone. It is directed in creating the so-called Shia Crescent too, in reaction to the more and more violent Sunni Islam.

Originally Posted by Theobald

But Algeria's nuclear power would be meant as a threat against France (and Morocco). There is a strong anti-French feeling in Algeria. For instance it is well-known that Algerian islamists are lobbying in the international islamist network for actions against France to be taken. These same islamists who were about to overcome Algerian governement some years ago. And could do it in the next years. If anti-French fanatics come to be in possession of nuclear weapons, with the possibility to wipe all Southern French cities off the map, what do you think they will do ? Play poker ?
"One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory."
Which parts of this statement don't you understand ?

The question is which part did you not understand? Islam is not a card in your poker deck, it is an independent operating force. Arabs are Arabs and behave like Arabs – show them you are willing to punish them hard for threatening you, show a point-blank sabre, give them no chance for backstabbing, and they are friendly and cooperative.
It is interesting you repeatedly talk about „Islamists“. This term was invented by multiculturalist dreamers that want to show Islam is the religion of peace and „Islamists“ are just a violent minority – having nothing to do with peaceful Islam.

Originally Posted by Theobald

On the other hand, please, show me one comment of Ahmadinejad or any important current Iranian leader (some mullah of Bandah-e-Busher or Gonbad-e-Kavus is not considered as an important Iranian leader) saying that they want to invade or nuke Europe. I am interested.

Originally Posted by Theobald

There is no such speech. Shiites have enough to do with defending themselves against the growing Sunni menace.
I do not take hot air for serious anyway.

Originally Posted by Theobald

I do not care about the Kabyles or the Kurds. I do not want to find a solution for their problems. I want to ensure French and European security. This is my problem and this is linked to Algeria and Turkey.

You sounded like you would support any sorts of anti-Turkish etc. movements...
The main problem is neither to be found in Algier, Ankara nor in Tel Aviv, our main problem is directly located in Paris, Berlin, Brussels etc.pp. Always looking for foreign reasons for our mess is paranoid. Let's clean up out mess at home.
Winning the hearts and minds of our own people, that's th only way for our survival.

Originally Posted by Theobald

I said "once we got rid of Islam at home". Do you seriously think there will not be a revanchist feeling in Algeria or in Turkey and that they are going to keep quiet at home ?

There already is a revanchist feeling.

Originally Posted by Theobald

And so what ? Do you believe nationalists are going to take power in Europe peacefully ? I would like it to happen. But it will not happen like that, at least it is not likely.

A Coup'd Etat would be fine indeed. At least it is annoying nationalists again and again make peaceful successes impossible by jumping into the Middle Eastern cesspit.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Yeah of course. And Turks should have their own Muslim state inside Germany as well. We could call it Deutschlandistan. Or do you prefer New-Turkey ? But of course we would observe it closely! LOL!

Germanistan would do it. http://tinypic.com/23w5us4.jpg
I am sure the Kalifate Franca would observe the Sultanate Germanistan closely. In 2020 50% of all people living here aged 40 and younger will beof foreign descent – and i am purposefully not quoting a Jewish source saying this will be alrady in 2010 the case. I doubt France is better off.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Islam does not belong in Europe, that's about it.

Albania nd Bosnia do not cause harm to us. A well equipped frontier patrol can solve any problem originating from there.

Originally Posted by Theobald

How so ? Do you know what is Realpolitik at least ?

Realpolitik is neither based on phantasy nor on illusions, but on pragmatism. That's at least my view.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Of course, in various minor aspects. But had I taken it into account my post would have been twice bigger. I said this in order to simplify things.

I would not consider Israel's delivering of military rechnology of high value to China as just a minor aspect. Same goes for US deliveries to Arab countries.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Of course I am. If we want to secure our borders we have to see further than the Mediterranean. No Maginot line would be able to stop nuclear weapons. And even with open borders, if there was no problem in the Muslim world there would have been no immigration.

Like I said above, th epresence of strenght is enough. Middle East and Africa always had problems, it's ot up to us jumping in this cesspit – let them solve their own problems or watch them perish.

Originally Posted by Theobald

In my idealistic view of Europe I would rather see England as the natural area of influence of Ireland and Scotland. (just joking of course, don't take it seriously...)

Celtic lands to the Celts and Germanic lands to the Germanics.

Originally Posted by Theobald

The way it was done. I support decolonization as a matter of principle. But we could have done it without losing our influence in our ex-colonies.

Sou you are saying today's Frnce has no influence in it's former colonies? It again and again urges other European states to support their neo-colonialist adventures.

Originally Posted by Theobald

That was not the point here. I was dealing with geopolitical situation and anti-European American foreign policy since 1945.

When there is a state in Europe that got rid off America's influence then it is France.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Anyway I loathe the French Republic, its principles and its influence as much as I loathe America, its principles and its influence. Principles which are not far from each other actually.

...when you say so.
At least my worst enemy is the Federal Republic of Germany.

Originally Posted by Theobald

"Negrification" in France proper before 1945 ? Please, give me some evidences. "Mein Kampf" will not be considered as a serious reference of course.

No Hail to the Führer today? http://forum.stirpes.net/32882-post6.html
It is not a secret negroes were given full civil rights in revolutionary France – including th eright to marry indigenous French women. France started much earlier with intermixing than other modern Europen states.

Originally Posted by Theobald

If we want to "be strong enough to encounter future dangers" we shall be a world superpower. And since future dangers are most likely to come from North Africa, Turkey and the Middle East we must deal with these areas before they represent a threat again.

It is interesting you, out of all Middle Eastern states, consider Iran as no threat then.
How to deal with those areas? Arabs are their own worst nightmare, as soon as teh borders are closed and the „Open Sesame“ policy has been cancelled they are no longer such a threat to us.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Of course, I made it clear many times I think.

So shooting yourself abullet in your head in order to cure a migraine? The US Middle Eastern adventure served us grate benefits. It enforces segregation here, and segregation i.e. the failed integration is the festering spike in liberal democracy's butt.
Supporting someone just because he is an enemy of the USA leads to nowhere. Just look at the pityful pro-Saddam Hussein remembrance, it only showed public nationalists are a bunch of looneys, no good way to attract more people.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Of course they would not agree with my opinion! LOL! Just like immigrants here do not agree with our opinions... What a point...

I expressed myself in a roundabout way it seems. Isreal would express her disagreement with your point of view with a nuclear atatck on Europe. She would not hesitate to do that in order to protect her existence – ever thought about that?

Originally Posted by Theobald

Anyway it is funny to see how you are defending Israel's right to exist like you were defending your very own right to exist...

I am looking behind the scenes. Do you think European problems are solved as soon as Isreal seizes to exist? Do you hink Turks and Arabs happily pack their bags and return home then? There is no indication for that.
Realpolitik and conspiracy theories are mutual exclusive.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Of course. Please, show me where I have said the opposite.

Well, often enough you target to USA and Israel as root of all our problems.
The source of France's serious problems is to be found nowhere else than in France.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Many people also say that there will not be a German nationalism anymore and that Hitlerian times are over.
How is nationalism a foreign ideology anywhere anyway ? It can be used and applied in any Nation.

Nationalism is foreign to Arabia since Islam does not inherit any form of secularism. „Give the emperor what is the emperor's and give God wat is God's“ says the Bible – Quran says everything is God's. Baathism is dead, he only remaining regime in Syria needs the tropps to prevent a Coup d'Etat. The ummah, the Muslim union is Arabia's future, not nationalism that was invented and founded in the Western world.

Originally Posted by Theobald

I criticize the USA's imperialist policy because it is anti-European, not because it is imperialist. I only care about French and European interests.

Again: Erope is Europe's greatest menace, not USA. It is in France's as wel as European interest to have a friendly
regime in the USA, Europids settling elsewhere does not make them alien to us.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Yes, by Europe I mean "European Nations acting together", not an united European Empire.

Difficult enough...

Originally Posted by Theobald

Oh yeah those fuckin' backstabbing French !

Indeed

Originally Posted by Theobald

But tell me, Aptrgangr, where was Germanic powers' support when we - together with the Brits and the Russians - liberated Greece from the Ottoman Empire in 1830 ?

There were many volunteers – patchwork Germany was no force at all.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Can you also explain how was the German Empire fighting against the Ottoman Empire in 1914-1918, huh ?

The alliance between The Deutsches Reich and the Ottoman Empire was a logical step after the Entente Cordial and teh Tripple Alliance was founded and France and GB had divided almost the whole world into their colonial empires.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Or how Nazi Germany with its Bosnian and Albanian SS divisions fought against Islam during World War II ?
We can blame each other without end. It is just pointless.

Muslim units were notoriously known for lack of discipline, insubordination, killing German officers and raping and looting. They were disbanded very quickly. Liberal media uses actrocities committed by Muslims in Serbia for their propaganda against Germany, in fact these troops were killing Serbs without German order.

Originally Posted by Theobald

It is true. But it is also true that under the motto "Divide and conquer" the Anglo-Saxons have always tried to create or to increase animosities between the French and the Germans, France and Germany being the two pillars of Western Europe. They knew very well what a Franco-German alliance, or rather an united continental Europe with Russia, would have meant, and they still know it. We can still see it through Anglo-Saxon foreign policies.

I say it even more plain and simple: the whole Western policy is not only crap but has devastating consequences for us.

Originally Posted by Theobald

Please keep it civil. We are not arguing over our lives. It is just about different views of European foreign policy. You can disagree with me, but please do it respectfully.

No reason for whining, I will name calls for the destruction of a state always as idiocy – nothing personal.

Originally Posted by Theobald

An alliance is possible between Nations fighting against the same enemies. Were the USA and USSR fighting for the same cause ? Again you are the one being idealistic here. I just want to achieve my goals. By any necessary means

The problem is you do not achieve anything, because you never can convince your own peopel having the better solutions. Just prit some flyers, stating: The destructio of Israel is the solution for the mess. Some skinheads will happily agree, but noone elese...

Originally Posted by Theobald

Then you did not get my point.
From a geopolitical point of view, what do I want ? Europe's security and greatness. I guess you want the same thing. We just have a different view on how to achieve our goal.

For me it is clear you have teh wrong basic approach.