"George W Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney are putting immense pressure on the Iraqi government to pass a controversial oil law before they leave office."

Nothing evil here: America is wanting to sustain her energy and fuel sustainence, and has been the primal support of the oil industry till very recently. Oil is like water today. The oil should not be seen as the property of a few Islamist families established by Briton 120 years ago. The war in Iraq was not about oil but terrorism - which is a distortion and deflection of the real evil. Get it right?

ArentYouIamJoseph, don't expect to be treated seriously if you continue to ignore the arguments put by your detractors and, instead, simply restate what you have already stated countless times before.

IamJosephIsHe wrote, "Guess how all the states surrounding Russia became communist - be assured it was not voluntarilly."

I don't really see how this answers my arguments.

As a result of secret agreements reached between Stalin, on the one hand, and Churchill and Roosevelt, on the other, Stalin was allowed to set up sympathetic police state puppet regimes in Eastern Europe in return for the Western Allies, being allowed to re-establish stable capitalist rule in the West.

Consequently Stalin used communist parties in the West to enforce that agreement. This included, as I wrote above, them in 1944 ordering partisans who had practically liberated Greece from the occupying Germans and Italians, to lay down their weapons before the British and their new-found allies amongst Greeks who had collaborated with the Germans ("The Kapetanios - Partisans and Civil War in Greece, 1943-1949", Dominique Eudes, 1972 (english edition) (1970, french edition)).

The conflict between Yugoslovia's Tito and Stalin, ironically originated because Stalin similarly instructed Tito to hand Yugoslavia across to the British and Tito defied those instructions. Later conflicts between Communist China and the Soviet Union originated, because the Soviet Union was prepared to do deals with the West at the expense of their Chinese Communist supposed allies.

The Communist Vietnamese were similarly sold out by both their supposed Chinese and Russian communist 'allies' in 1954 as I explained above.

This, and any other examples demonstrate conclusively that the Communist powers, far from incessantly trying to spread communism, in fact acted to prevent its spread, once their own perceived needs for national security were met.

The U.S. rulers, including Kissinger, as I have shown earlier, were not stupid and understood that perfectly well.

So, any argument that, by destroying democratically elected governments and suppressing popular political movements in Chile, Guatemala, Iran, Vietnam, Indonesia, etc, they believed that they were resisting totalitarian communism, is a lie.

"As a result of secret agreements reached between Stalin, on the one hand, and Churchill and Roosevelt, on the other, Stalin was allowed to set up sympathetic police state puppet regimes in Eastern Europe in return for the Western Allies, being allowed to re-establish stable capitalist rule in the West."

This is partly true and not contested. USA allowed Poland to be annexed by Russia, as well as half of Berlin. While this was regretable, it was also a decision based on compromise to resolve what would have been another great war. Russia demanded her share of the spoils. But this has nothing to do with the situation in Afghanistan, and the subsequent cold war - because Russia's encroachment required a response. This is also what America did - she continued the struggle against communism.

What happened after the cold war victory and the collapse of Russian communism, and the terrorism which replaced it - are not subsequential factors. Nor can radical Islamist doctrines be justified as a response to USA or the supply of weaponry against the cold war. These two factors are not related. The radical Islamists have their own, unrelated agenda. We see terrorism in India and in the recently evacuated area of Gaza with Hamas - which should have displayed the reverse of what is seen there.

The world witnessed what the Taliban did in Afghanistan - women were encased in black from head to toe, music was forbidden and Buddha relics were destroyed - which was based on radical doctrines of a religion, culminating in 9/11 and the housing of Al Qaida. You aught to visit a Hamas website if in doubt. America should be hailed for confronting another cold war very real and apparent today.

"Consequently Stalin used communist parties in the West to enforce that agreement. "

Stalinism is also unrelated to USA, and was initiated internally in Russia some 20 years before W.W.11. A large sector of the Russian people were either killed off or sent to gulags; numerous countries were pillaged and usurped into what became the soviet union. This was a result of a mafioso regime which hid behind the doctrines of Communism, barred its peoples from all outside news, fed them with attrocious falsehoods, and enforced a rule by a singualr dictator. Sounds familiar?.

It is analogoues to what radical Islamist Regimes do - they hide behind a religion, while Stalin hid behind an ideology. Nothing to do with America of all places - she confronted Stallinist communism, and is today confronting what all others should - but many have blank resumes in this confrontation, and invent deflectionary placebos instead. We've all heard of the notorious claims America perpertrated 9/11 - this shows the extend of the desperate deflections occuring today.

This situation will become a world war soon - when more Islamist Regimes acquire Nuclear WMD. The middle-east is only the front line - and here there is the aspiration this entire region is exclusive to Islam. Heard the slogan: FIRST THE SATURDAY PEOPLE - THEN THE SUNDAY PEOPLE - this refers to the west and the east?

Dagget,

I laughed my ass off when I read this gem of yours.

You said >> “ArentYouIamJoseph, don't expect to be treated seriously if you continue to ignore the arguments put by your detractors and, instead, simply restate what you have already stated countless times before.”

I have rebutted almost all of the ridiculous things you have suggested recently and yet you ignore the obvious logic and plow on with your conspiracy theories. So I’ll give it one more go.

I asked “Are you sincerely attempting to suggest that the USSR was not intimately involved in the spreading of international communism?"

And Dagget said

“Yes, I am suggesting that and I am suggesting that the U.S. rulers knew perfectly well that to be the case.”

Oh My God.

Your evidence for this consists of “How else do you explain the fact that the USSR leaned on the Vietnamese Communist Party at the Geneva Peace conference in order to force them to agree to give up most of what they won, at terrible cost, on the battleground”

Sorry What. Did you just suggest that the Soviet Union could not possibly have been involved in actively spreading communism because they at one time put pressure on the Vietnamese communists to accept a less than equitable settlement of their war of Independence? I’m not even going to bother responding to that, it is SO inane and so obviously flawed as an argument.

Here are some quotes for you.

Addressing Western ambassadors at a reception at the Polish embassy in Moscow, Khrushchev used his famous "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. WE will bury you" expression, shocking everyone present. He was referring to the historically determined victory of communism over capitalism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War

On November 13, 1968, during a speech at the Fifth Congress of the Polish United Workers' Party, Brezhnev outlined the Brezhnev Doctrine, in which he claimed the right to violate the sovereignty of any country attempting to replace Marxism-Leninism with capitalism.

TBC

cont,

During the speech, Brezhnev stated "when forces that are hostile to socialism try to turn the development of some socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not only a problem of the country concerned, but A COMMON PROBLEM AND CONCERN OF ALL SOCIALIST COUNTRIES." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War

During November 1958, Khrushchev made an unsuccessful attempt to turn all of Berlin into an independent, demilitarized "free city", giving the United States, Great Britain, and France a six-month ultimatum to withdraw their troops from the sectors they still occupied in West Berlin, or he would transfer control of Western access rights to the East Germans. Khrushchev earlier explained to Mao, using a startling anatomical metaphor, that "Berlin is the testicles of the West. Every time I want to make the West scream, I squeeze on Berlin". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War

From 1957 through 1961, Khrushchev openly and repeatedly threatened the West with nuclear annihilation. He claimed that Soviet missile capabilities were far superior to those of the United States, capable of wiping out any American or European city.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War

Yet again you seem to not have any factual understanding of the circumstances you are talking about.

You say >> “In 1944 Greek Communists who had practically liberated their country from the Germans were ordered by Stalin to put down their weapons and were, as a result, massacred by the British and their former German collaborationist Greek allies.

There is SO MUCH wrong with this one sentence I don’t know where to start. For starters the Greek partisans never came close to liberating their country. Secondly, you are ignoring the efforts of the other non-marxist partisans and the heroic efforts of the greek army in their losing battle with the Germans in 1941. Thirdly, fighting between Marxist and non-Marxist partisans over who would lead the resistance began in 1943. Finally and most importantly the decision was made at Yalta that Greece would be in the British sphere of influence, which effectively meant non-communist. At that time Stalin was anxious that the percentages agreement laid down at Yalta be followed, as he had a great deal to gain.