CHOULO19

Woah Can't believe Sanders actually won Michigan!

Could have really used Pedro's experience for this one. Instead it will be Oscar on the wing....sigh.

Yeah, I just tried it and even with an ad-blocker you still can't sign in. @Thendo for now, don't click on 'Sign In' in the banner, instead, click on the downward arrow in the top right corner (where your profile would be once signed in) and fill the username and password from there. It works fine. EDIT: For anyone else having the same issue, this is what I mean:

That's very admirable, but you have to ask yourself why that very same question is not being asked about Bahrain where the ruling US allied dictator ship has been brutally crushing the revolution for 5 years now with the help of the Saudi Army. Why is it not being asked about the Turkish dictatorship (a member of NATO) who are destroying entire Kurdish villages and killing civilians? These images are not from Syria. They are from Sur and Cizre in Turkey: And the examples are endless... So when the sympathy is 'selective' it becomes more than likely that your humanitarian feelings are being used by your government to achieve its political agendas. Btw, for me, the feeling of individuals anywhere in the world wanting to help those being oppressed anywhere is completely different from governments wanting to intervene. As an individual you have every right to fight any struggle you find worthy anywhere on earth. After all, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Sam Hutchinson reveals the mental torture he endured as injuries threatened career Brilliant if sad, interview with Sam. Would absolutely LOVE to see him in the PL next season.

Couldn't agree more on all of that, Brilliantly put, my friend. I would like to add though, that I think I have heard/read most of what Trump has said and I believe that he actually means what he's saying as much as Hillary saying that she opposes the TTP or cares for the rights of minorities. I can't help but feel that elections in the US are like a game show. "Super-Tuesday", "Super Delegates", "Winner-Takes-All States", caucuses, and dice throwing to determine winners! I mean it's just entertainment, I feel... Frankly, what I care most about from the US presidential race is foreign policy and the amount of damage that is going to be cause. Not because I don't care if the American people get the rights and representative democratic system they deserve, but because I feel the system won't change regardless of who takes office and even the changes in internal politics will be too minuscule. In that sense, I have no doubt that Hillary will be the most destructive of the bunch because of her relation with the weapons and oil corporations., hence my original statement that I will have my fingers crossed for anyone other than her, including Trump. Also, obviously TTP and TTIP are also very important (and incredibly scary) but I've lost any hope that they won't get passed regardless of who wins the elections because every single lobbying group in DC will be pushing for it. We need a revolution, man...

Clean sheets are a product of the work of the entire team. Amateurish keeper mistakes, however, only have to do with the keeper making them...

I don't realistically see us keeping a clean sheet, so I'm hoping for an extra-time 3-1 win. Penalties would be too nerve wrecking..

Why, though? Why is that even a question for governments that have absolutely nothing with the country of the uprising? The answer is very simple: provide medical and humanitarian aid and take in and help refugees. In the worst cases use diplomacy and the UN for non-violent interventions. That's it. If he is a dictator whom the people of his country want gone then they will find a way to do so. That's what history teaches us. Don't intervene militarily and increase the violence because that never ends. That's what history teaches us as well. The very fact that that is THE question comes from the belief that the US owns the world having inherited it from western European countries. Why else would a government feel that an uprising against a dictator literally thousands of miles away from you be of any concern to it and worse one needing a military intervention?! It's even more absurd that this is largely accepted as a necessary question when anyone who knows anything about previous interventions would know that these interventions are about economic and geopolitical gains and NEVER have anything to do with any moral obligations towards civilians. Simply put, you CANNOT pretend to care about Gaddafi killing 350 Libyan protesters when you support the Saudi government dictatorship over its own people and sending troops to crush the uprising of the people Bahrain against their own dictator and then sell them weapons to bomb and murder thousands of Yemeni civilians and schools and hospitals. And that's just one of endless examples. Regarding Syria, it's WAY too late now to talk about not intervening when everyone and their uncle has already played major roles there. Of course there are countless various reasons for the uprising, the biggest one of course is that the Baathist regime is a bloody dictatorship, but the uprising was doomed before it even started because the US and its regional allies were planing for intervention in Syria through manufacturing sectarian conflicts from at least 2006: https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html I genuinely believe that without Saudi-Qatari-Turkish-US intervention to gain political leverage and ensure that the next regime does their bidding (and shares their religious beliefs in the case of KSA) that Assad would have been overthrown within a few months because without the islamization of the revolution, minorities and forces from neighboring countries would not have rallied behind the only remaining secular force: The Assad regime. But now the best we can hope for is Russia and the US agreeing on some sort of settlement that would give all the 'involved' countries some political power in Syria so that they would allow for the creation on a semi-operational state in a part of Syria while everyone goes into a decade of 'war on terror' in the other part.

The moment he took that first touch I shouted 'GOAL'! Having watched him a lot with Vitesse I knew he does not miss from those positions. And he sure did not disappoint!

Both we and the ref really did our best so Stoke can get a point from this....

Yeah, obviously I mean foreign policies when she was secretary of state. 'Masterminding' the Libya catastrophe, cosigning on the global drone assassinations, helping to fund and arm neonazis in Ukraine and groups on the US' own terror list in Syria...etc. and that's just getting started though it suffices to just mention Libya for why she should be jail. So it makes for a change, if/when she gets elected, that the president of the USA is a war criminal even BEFORE taking office... When it comes to foreign policy in the US, parties matter little. As you rightly pointed out, every single US president since WW2, democrat or republican, is a war criminal. And that's not even an exaggeration: Take Obama, for example. There hasn't been as much attention to Libya as was for Iraq, but the results are arguably as devastating if on a smaller scale (Libya only has about 6 million citizens). As country and as a state, Libya is now in a much worse shape than Iraq. The state is just completely gone and there is no possible way for it to get better in the near future that the US is now talking about another war there this time to fight those they put in power with their first war! And in the whole region, apart from fueling the islamization and militarization of the uprisings in neighboring countries, the weapons thrown into Libya are now being use all over Africa by groups like Boko Haram and Al Shaba that have grown immensely due to the Libyan war and are now terrorizing half of Africa. And you mentioned the lies about Iraq, I was just reading this article last week and it points out that contrary to what was being reported in Western (as well as Arabic) media about tens of thousands (even reached hundreds of thousands by some 'estimates) being murdered by Gaddafi, Human Rights Watch now estimates that a total of about 350 protesters were killed. Obviously still an awful tragedy, but it exposes the shameless propaganda that was used to justify the war. So democrats lie and wage horrendous wars just as much as republicans do. That's because US wars are not done for any principle (you can argue that for the vast majority of wars in history) but for the benefit of corporations like weapons manufacturers, defensive contractors, oil companies...etc. On that basis, Hillary is by far the most likely to cause the most damage as president because her position as part of the establishment and her ties to those corporations and willingness to do their bidding by far surpasses any of the other running candidates (with Rubio probably in second place). So it's not that I by any means think that Trump would do good or not kill a whole lot of people, I just can't see him being as destructive on foreign policy as Hillary.

I know I'm 'foreign' to US politics, but I just can't understand how Trump is unanimously viewed as worse than Hillary. Even if you want to take his rhetoric at face value, he's still come out on the left of Hillary on several issues particularly foreign policy. I mean the woman is a war criminal even before she sets foot in office which makes for a change from the usual procedure. As someone who lives in the middle east, I'm wishing for ANYONE except Hillary Clinton, Trump included! As for Cruz, the obvious issue is that if he somehow does get elected and then even more unlikely actually does very well, would anyone really want to see that wax face of his on money everywhere?! Would probably complete devalue the dollar and send the world into a financial crisis....

The dip in form was always going to be inevitable and most likely in his second season here. Do people forget how young he is, especially for a keeper? In a sense, it's actually good that he is having this dip in a season where results don't matter as they usually would. He'll learn from this and get valuable experience on how to deal with low points.

Very encouraging stuff. I think another full season on loan there would do him a world of good.

Dear Guus, if you're going to give him playing time on his current form ahead of RLC, at the very least don't start him at the same time as Oscar! I just can't handle them both at the same time...

Late reply, I know, but he always plays left midfield in Allegri's system because that makes it very easy to switch to 3-5-2 when overloading central midfield with Evra moving forward as a left winger. It has roved to be an effective strategy difficult to defend against especially for teams parking the bus (which is practically everyone in the Serie A vs Juve) but against Bayern it was a huge mistake because they absolutely killed us on the wings. Should have gone with an actual winger instead of a second striker and Pogba at #10, imo.

Costa's movement and runs are world class, but he comes no where near Didier in terms of aerial ability, hold up play, link up play, dribbling...etc. Of course Drogba had awful periods here, but my initial point regarding the stat is that Drogba and Costa are very different players so you can't compare them in goals. How does he compare to Aguero or even Torres at Liverpool?

Yeah, that hamstring will be key to whether or not he can still improve. Unfortunately every time he seems to be reaching new levels he gets an injury set back. Yeah, no doubt.

Sorry if it was not clear in my post, but I was actually talking about current form Costa. For all we know he might still surpass prime Drogba (though frankly, unlikely).

It's not at all a fair comparison because what Drogba offered for the team, especially in his prime, is so much more than goals and assists. Costa has been in excellent form since Guus' return, but would anyone really take Diego over a prime Drogba? I certainly would not.

Of course Hillary cares nothing about minorities and black communities, her husband created mass incarceration ffs! Hillary only cares about her big money donors. But she's a traditional establishment politician, you can go door to door to every black voter in the US and show them that video and it won't affect her. Bernie VERY clearly has a black vote problem and it's not about those who voted for Hillary but more about those who didn't vote at all. That's where he failed more than anywhere else. He is supposed to be a candidate for the disenfranchised and those who feel voiceless; that is what the idea and rhetoric of Bernie Sanders is all about, but he has not run a campaign to match that. Call it pandering if you want, but if Bernie is saying he's running a 'movement campaign' for a political revolution then he needs to come down and actually penetrate communities and particularly black communities, not just universities. And he's done nothing of the sorts because he's insistent on running a traditional political campaign. And the reason Bernie hasn't called her out on that video is the same why he has pulled sooooo many punches since the start of his nomination. I read an article a month or so ago (which I can't seem to find now) about the most used phrase/sentence by each candidate in debates. You know what Bernie's was? "I agree with the Madame Secretary"! Wall street aside, he's been weak and did not attack Hillary on many of the major issues. Particularly on foreign policy where he could have murdered Hillary on Libya and Iraq but instead has tried to play on two ropes and ended up not saying much at all. He sounds sooo weak on foreign policy. And that's what the guy in the video (who most definitely is NOT a Clinton supporter, btw) was saying. That a progressive campaign, unlike traditional political campaigns, needs to be built on principles and to strongly hold progressive views on all the issues from Wall Street to civil rights, to surveillance to trade agreements to environmental concerns to foreign policies regarding Gitmo, the drone campaign, Palestine/Israel to human rights....etc. In short, from the start Bernie has been afraid of running a truly progressive campaign and calling out Hilary for her neoliberal politics and that has clearly hurt him with a lot of people on the actual left and particularly in black communities.

Fear not, fair maiden, for Lord Obi Mikel is on his way to the rescue!

Sounds boring...