Title: Don't you just love it? Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:May 23, 2014 Author:mee Post Date:2014-05-23 10:31:11 by Itistoolate Keywords:None Views:1376 Comments:62
As we keep posting even worse stories about what is happening hour after hour, week after week, month after month, year after year, President after President, it just keeps getting worser and worser.
I so agree! I believe that we are closer to the tipping point though! I'm not really anxious to have a revolution. Best not to fire the first shot, but I do not want to leave this mess for my grandkids!
#13. To: Lorie Meacham, Lod, Fred Mertz, Americans (#9)
I'm not really anxious to have a revolution.
I am.
Sooner the better, hopefully before I leave this mess to someone else.
Here is breakdown on our first Revolution.
"Are You a Three Percenter?
By Kellene Bishop Photo c/o fusilier.wordpress.com
Photo c/o fusilier.wordpress.com
Here’s a very important set of facts about the Revolutionary War that every person who would call themselves an American should know.
During the Revolutionary War, only THREE percent of the people actually fought against Great Britain.
Only TEN percent of the citizens actively supported that three percent.
Approximately TWENTY percent considered themselves to be on the side of the Revolution, but they did not actively participate.
Towards the climatic end of the war, approximately THIRTY percent actually fought on the side of the British.
The rest of the citizens had no disposition either way. They didn’t care. They didn’t want anything to do with what they deemed to simply be a political issue.........
If we wait for a majority of Americans to raise their voices, we are lost.
Another one: is this "rebuilt" America isolationist or does it concern itself with geopolitical power vacuums in anyway?
Power vacuums in total...
The Monroe Doctrine was the first assertion by this emerging country, for European powers to stay out of the Americas. The second fact was the Civil War which ended in this country being one power, not two.
Isolationism then as now would not have been in our interest. There was a power vacuum in the Americas and we filled it. The Europeans stayed away. In the beginning it was enforced by the British because it kept Russia and other countries away from the Americas.
With isolationism, our Northwest States might well be Russian.
Sum total is this, isolationism is the best posture of all, except it does not work. It cannot work because THERE IS ALWAYS A BULLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WANTS TO BE BOSS.
Sum total is this, isolationism is the best posture of all, except it does not work.
How different is this "new America" you're proposing should your faction win CW2? Internationally things appear to be the same to me if you were king.
I'm of the persuasion that domestic economic policy and foreign policy are linked: James Monroe was a central banker. Under the influence of a colleague of Schact's no doubt you accept central banking as a structural kingpin of the empire. How do you plan to reform the current central bank? How would you prevent the abuse of currency valuation? If the "wars against vacuums" didn't go well, you'd have to institute inflation to print money to pay back investors, or decree that they simply wait indefinitely for an honest return.
The Monroe Doctrine was the first assertion by this emerging country, for European powers to stay out of the Americas.
Not quite true: existing colonies would be permitted. In fact, the Monroe Doctrine is considered isolationist because it decreed that America would not interfere in any European wars, nor would it perturb existing European colonization. It simply reserved future colonization in the western hemisphere for American expansion within those limits.
With isolationism, our Northwest States might well be Russian.
First, we bought Alaska from Russia. We did not seize it. Second, its possession by Russia was accounted for in the Monroe Doctrine in that no existing colonies were to be disturbed. Finally, Russia needed the money I suspect because of the Crimean war's effects on its own finances.
More importantly, Monroe had articulated a boundary on America's expansion, something ignored in the Spanish-American war with our possession of the Philippines, well beyond the western hemisphere. Imperialists brought us back to central banking and into WWI on the continent of Europe.
Military Drafts for the Civil War, which neither united us, nor clarified our outward vision, set the standard for WWI, WWII and Korea. Especially after the middle of those conflicts, the American grunts in those three wars were forced to fight, as you know. The Sedition Act of 1918 and the Espionage Act of 1917 were draconian measures hardly congruent with our constitution, but the battle against vacuums demanded their enforcement.
It's clear to me that the wars against vacuums we've been fighting coincide all too well with Zionist aims. How would you prevent that in the future? How would you prevent any of America's minorities from conspiring to wield bureaucratic power to achieve their ethnically defined goals once your empire had "righted itself?"
How would you keep the absolute power of the American empire from corrupting itself absolutely? Isn't this indeed what has happened once already?
I'm of the persuasion that domestic economic policy and foreign policy are linked: James Monroe was a central banker.
A correction is needed here re your thinking.
The Monroe Doctrine was written by John Quincy Adams, not Monroe, it was written at the behest of, and in self interest of Great Britain and the United States.
It was a mutual self interest for differing reasons. For Britain it was money/trade, for the US it was to stop foreign interests from invading small countries and enforcing their will on our neighbors.
Recall, we had just beaten Britain at the same game in the war of 1812??
The British realized it was now time to play a different game, stop using force and use mutual interests in a more civilized way.
Britain proposed this country shut out all European powers, including themselves, in return they would enforce the Doctrine on the high seas and we would field an army on land.
We filled a power vacuum in the Americas, in conjunction with Britain. France, Spain, Portugal and others were furious because they wanted enforced colonies in Latin and South America.
Britain suggested the Doctrine, Adams wrote it, Monroe being President had to put his name on it. The people from Texas to Cape Horn loved it. THEY ALL HAD A BIG BROTHER PROTECTOR.
Indeed, we have interfered in most of their private affairs, however, they are all still there.
We have been the policeman in the Americas since that time. For the good of the human race, power vacuums cannot exist, someone has to be in charge.
From what we now have world wide, there would be no difference, regardless of whom was in charge.
Man is inherently greedy and self serving, if not plain evil. The best the world can hope for is for the power holders to be as benevolent as possible.
Britain helped us in self interest, in WWII we returned the favor or they would now be a non country.
Look at the opposite side of the world. Again, study the battle of the Coral Sea.
Half way around the world, Coral Sea was the Japanese high water mark on their way to Australia. The Australians had already written off the northern half of Australia as being non defensible, let the Japanese have it. The Aussies fled south by the thousands.
The US won at Coral Sea, the Australians were saved, the tide turned against Japan. Just suppose we had stayed home?
Now look ahead, using history and geo/politics, tell me what you see in store for the Far East??????
So how do we keep America's ethnic minorities from trying to sneak into this new government of nice guys and using its power to assist in their own projects? How do you finance "police action against vacuums" without deflating the value of American savings? How do you ensure a succession of power between only nice guys?
How do you keep what's happened from happening all over again?
"WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Poland's former president and Nobel Peace laureate, Lech Walesa, said Friday he plans to urge President Barack Obama to take a more active world leadership role when he visits Poland in June.
Speaking to The Associated Press, Walesa said "the world is disorganized and the superpower is not taking the lead. I am displeased."
The former Solidarity leader said that when he meets Obama in Warsaw, he wants to tell him that the U.S. should inspire and encourage the world into positive action.
"The point is not in having the States fix problems for us or fight somewhere, no," Walesa said. "The States should organize us, encourage us and offer programs, while we, the world, should do the rest. This kind of leadership is needed."
"I will say: Either you want to be a superpower and guide us, or you should give the superpower to Poland and we will know what to do with it. Amen," said Walesa, who is known for sometimes abrasive comments.
Obama is traveling to Poland next month to mark 25 years since the country emerged from communism.
The two failed to meet on Obama's previous visit to Warsaw in 2011.
Walesa led Poland's peaceful transition to democracy in the 1980s. The June 4, 1989 elections gave Solidarity a share in the power and paved the way for the ouster of communists."
Poland's former president and Nobel Peace laureate, Lech Walesa, said Friday he plans to urge President Barack Obama to take a more active world leadership role when he visits Poland in June.
I hope this isn't a Polish joke.
Has Walesa been living in a cave for the past 6-years? He's going to urge our drug addled, foreign interloper to be more active on the world stage? Lech would be better off extending an olive branch to Putin than our puppet.