On Apr 22, 11:29 pm, nada <dwalters...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Apr 22, 2:55 pm, Vngelis <meberr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 22, 8:35 pm, nada <dwalters...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > Want to discuss Chinese cops as part of the occupation of
> > > Haiti...doing the bidding the US? Your turn...you just love
defending
> > > capitalism and cops don't you?
>
> > > David
>
> > The class nature of a state isn't determined by what they do in the
> > UN.
> > Russia was in Austria until 1955 and defended private property there.
> > Stick to what you do best. Defending US imperialism in decline.
> > vngelis
>
> I actually agree with you on the issue of the cops. But it dosn't mean
> the Chinese gov't are not running dogs for US imperialism in this
> instance. I should feel somehow different when Haitians KILL these
> occupiers vs that of, say, the Brazilians or other puppets? do you
> even take a position to defend Haiti against occupation?
>
> You rather ridiculous puff-balls of Stalinist slander about 'defending
> US imperialism' only get nods from Maoists and their ilk. You need to
> discuss *politics* and not make up positions to make yourself look
> like you might be on the right side of the class line.
>
> Do you stand for the withdrawal of US impeiralism AND their lackeys
> from Haiti: Yes or No?
>
> David
>
> David
The question you now ask has nothing to do with what was being argued
previously.
I dont sup****t the presence of Chinese troops in US occupations
anywhere, bar Mitrovica.
There are no maoists on here so who are you referring to?
China has defended the USA on North Korean talks as well which I
consider to be reactionary as well.
vngelis
|
