Bio not provided
The only GOP that dally with Fascism are the Establishment Repub's like Boehner. Fortunately, Boehner and his Big Govt buddies are a dying breed thanks to the new GOP invigorated by Tea Party, limited govt, max individual liberties guys like me.
But the GOP is run by 'establishment Republicans'. That is why you got Romney as your candidate last time and why Ron Paul was pushed aside by the party. Note that GOP darlings Mike Huckabee, Rick Perry, Scott Walker, and Rick Santorum were publicly supporting the ethanol fuel standard. Jeb Bush supported a program to import ethanol made from sugar from Brazil. The GOP supports sugar subsidies and all kinds of other subsidies for the agriculture industry.
Yeah, if you listen to guys like Boehner. But almost all the new guys despise the Boehner-Clinton-Obama Axis of Evil.
I take it you never caught Scott Walker's pledge of support for the Renewable Fuel Standard, which requires biofuels to be mixed into gasoline of fuel standards, in the latest GOP gathering in Iowa. He sounded just like Obama or Hillary.
Well, well, well, Vangely Baby, we just may have the basis of a beautiful friendship. I despise the welfare state, Obamacare, Dept of Ed., Dept of Energy, FCC takeover of the internet, etc.
The problem is that you are a supporter of the war state, which makes you as anti-liberty as the Liberals that you claim to oppose. Your embrace of war collectivism is not a position that a Classical Liberal would take. And the last time I looked the GOP was unwilling to eliminate the Department of Education, Department of Energy, FCC, etc.
I believe the Tax Code should simplified to be 90% the size it is today.
Why not just repeal the federal personal income tax and corporate taxes? Since the Constitution places a limit to the power of the federal government you can get rid of 95% of its activities. The other 5% do not require much in the way of spending.
I believe in the Right to Bear Arms (though don't own any) for the prime reason that it places a check on govt monopoly of violence.
There is no debate on that here.
I find it particularly offensive when Congressman talk of Freedom of the Press as if it applies only to journalist instead of the "printing press" and all of its modern day incarnations.
What freedom? Your media is not independent and is certainly not free. The NSA spies and tracks journalists just as it spies and tracks the activities of all Americans.
I am 59 y/o and I am not quite sure when I first began despising Communism, but I am pretty sure it was at my prenatal stage. My dear mother swears that each time I kicked in the womb she could hear me murmur "F_ck the Commies". My convictions have only deeper since.
But that is the problem my friend. You fail to see the small difference between the left and the right and do not even imagine that they are two wings of the same bird of prey; the totalitarian state.
What pisses me off, about you and your bosom buddy Bill5, is how sheepishly you've both bought into the Naom Chomsky/Howard Zinn zeitgeist of blindly blaming America and Western Civilization for all manner of ills in the world, yet turn a blind eye to the real evil doers (Commies, Socialists, Muhammadans, Liberation Theologists, Atheists, Moral Relativists, Keynesians, Eugenists, (Alfred) Kinsey, and Squarepants SpongeBob, for some reason I really hate that Squarepants guy (just kidding, mostly).
The problem is that you love war so you think that all people who oppose the Merchants of Death are the same. You justify moral crimes just because they are committed by your side and pretend to be a Christian while supporting actions that all true Christians would oppose.
Aye, lads, other than that wee bit of a character flaw, you're both right fine freedom loving Americans.
I know that Bill favours freedom and that you oppose it. Bill seems to take a strong stance on property rights and liberty. You say that you do but go on and support the warfare state that robs Americans of their freedom. There is a contradiction there, which is why you are so confused. As for me, I am not an American. I just observe the hypocrisy and am saddened by the way that you and your fellow citizens have abandoned the principles that once made your country so great.
11 hours, 32 minutes ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
Facicm was NOT popular on the Rigjt.
That is true if you mean the Old Right. But note that the principles that the Old Right stood for have been rejected by modern GOP sheeple like you.
And if you listen to the GOP candidates you see the same embrace of fascism that you find in the Obama and Clinton crowd.
I wish just once you Libs would take full ownership of your policies.
I am a liberal in the sense that Cobden, Bright, Jefferson, and Mises were Liberals but not in the sense that you mean. Like Bill, I embrace libertarian principles and consider even David Stockton to be a statist. The fact that you confuse my arguments with those by American Liberals who are just as supportive of the welfare/warfare state as you are shows just how little you understand about the political and philosophical ideas that made your country so great a very long time ago.
17 hours, 40 minutes ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
Your credibility would suffer less if you stopped with the personal attacks and debated the points based on principle. From what I can see Bill is morally superior to you because he does not make excuses for murder just because it is done by following orders. My disagreement with him is not on principle but a technicality. I just do not see the situation as dire as he does after the collapse that people like you have been making possible. Bill is clearly worried that the big-government policies supported by the GOP and Democratic Party leaders is finally going to end in the biggest crash of all time at a time when politicians and central bankers have far less ammunition to kick the can down the road. He expects lots of violence as the left and right fight for power and the nation deteriorates because the warfare/welfare state can no longer continue along its path.
While I disagree he is a lot closer to the situation than I am. I don't spend much time in the US and do not see the same problems that Americans do. I also think that the best hope for your country is to have people like Bill interact with the Remnant actively, not for him to abandon it to people like you and the people on the left who are pretty much the same as you are.
In your country it is easy to pretend to be brave and to go along with the herd. It takes far more courage to be like Bill and point out to both sides that you deserve each other and are the reason why your country is headed for a major collapse.
17 hours, 46 minutes ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
a) The Allies sought total defeat of Japan for good reason; so that all future aggression by Japan or any other nation would end horribly for the aggressor nation. Fighting to a draw would not surffice. Our losses would have been meaningless
Japan had lost. The US was controlled of the South China Sea and the Pacific. The Japanese air force and navy had been defeated. Japan would surrender as long as it could keep the Emperor. Truman said no. After he dropped the bomb Japan surrendered and got to keep the emperor.
Almost all of the military leaders in the US had opposed the use of the bomb because they could not see the point of killing innocent civilians once there was an offer of surrender on the table. I have no idea why you refuse to read your own history or learn from it.
b) Keeping the Emperor after total defeat was completely different. More importantly, we did NOT keep the Emperor as a God system in place. The Emperor stayed but was no longer god like. This was a profound condition of total surrender that most Westerners simply cannot comprehend.
I suggest reading history rather than propaganda.
c) Keeping the Emperor as a God system on place would be like keeping Hilter and the Nazis in power in Germany.
I do no think that the Japanese thought that the Emperor was God but it is clear that yours is a religious view, which is why you seem so eager to accept killing innocent people who happen to have a different belief than you.
d) Even after the second bomb, Japanese generals tried to seize control of the palace so as to keep on fighting. They almost succeeded. This belies the notion that the Japanese military no will to fight BEFORE the bombs were dropped let alone after.
As I pointed out, Japan offered to surrender and Truman rejected the offer. After he dropped the bomb he accepted a very similar deal.
YOUR MORAL EQUIVALENCY STILL FAILS.
Not at all. Killing innocent civilians is immoral. Someone who pretends to be a Christian should know that.
d) Furthermore, for moral equivalency fails to consider the obvious and critical fact that Japan was the aggressor. Not just against the US, but against Korea, Outer Mongolia, China, Indochina, Burma, Tailand, the Philippines, Australia, etc.
Don't you remember that you just invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and bombed Libya? That your country has military bases in more than 100 nations around the world and that it has been supporting dictators who oppress their own people? Stop pretending that those actions are somehow on a higher moral plane than what other degenerate warmongers do.
The are all critical distinctions which you ignore.
No. I simply point out that no matter how you dress it up the killing of innocent civilians is immoral.
Oh, since you bought up killing babies, consider that on Saipan, when American victory was certain, the Emperor ORDERED his civilian population to commit mass suicide (Gogle Banzai Cliff). This was done to protect their propaganda that the Americans were beasts who would do to Japanese civilians the same that the Japanese did in Nanking. The Japanese needed to protect this lie so that every civilian in the rest of Japan would fight to the death.
Notice that the emperor did not send his troops to kill the civilians; that they were free to do what they wished. And he was correct about one thing. The Americans were just as beastly as all other aggressors because in the middle of battle the tendency to err is to shoot first and think later. Since you like to use Google try looking up "american troops rape in japan". Notice that while you get hits on WW II rapes it does not stop there. Your troops were still raping Japanese women in the 1990s, 2000s and are still committing rape now.
17 hours, 56 minutes ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@WilliamJRood @VangelVesovski @TommyD6of11 @J68R @bill5 @marcopolo2150 @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
The British lost men and capital trying to control the colonies and were made weaker by their attempts to do so. The French failed in Indochina and in Africa. Russia is a massive country and to think that Hitler could control its large population with a small number of men who could not handle the climate and other conditions is pure foolishness.
Note that your own country has lost Iraq and Afghanistan. All you managed to do is to turn over Iraq to the Shiites and control a few tiny areas of Afghanistan by spending hundreds of billions in bribe money. A tiny fraction of that money could have hardened the electrical transmission systems to protect them from coronal ejection strikes or EMP attacks that could wipe out 80% of your population within a year.
2 days, 3 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@WilliamJRood @VangelVesovski @DevilsPrinciple @Boreal Owl
Of course, the government -- our government -- makes final decisions on US government policies and actions.
No. A few individuals in the executive decide and the rest follow. Your collectivist nature is showing up my friend. You might try to lean towards individual responsibility instead.
"We" do not directly affect that. However, "we" can indeed be complicit when "we" make judgements in our comments on websites such as this. "We" do influence the opinions of others, and if enough people begin to realize that, then perhaps government policy will eventually be affected.
Nobody cares about our opinions. The politicians will follow the money until there is massive unrest. You will need a bit more time for that to happen.
@TommyD6of11 @VangelVesovski @bill5 @marcopolo2150 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
You're right. It's all America's fault.
I am not a collectivist so I do not think that you can blame America. The blame goes to the political and military leaders whose actions created the 'unintended consequences' that others had to deal with.
Those innocent Japs running wild raping, enslaving and killing Koreans, Outter Mongolians, and Chinese in the mid-1930's were only doing so in desperate anticipation of an American oil embargo in 1941.
No. They did what they did because they were bad men. The same as all those GIs who raped their way across France, Italy, and Germany.
You must be an Ivy League graduate. It takes massive brain power to twist one's mind into believing such faulty logic.
The Ivy League historians spin the tales that you believe my friend. They do not expect you to bother reading the revisionists or the original documents.
As for HItler's rise to power, he was soundly rejected by the Germans in two elections until the German banks collapsed - nothing to due with sanctions years earlier.
His biggest and most violent supporters, his power base, was those people who starved due to the illegal blockade. Why is it that you keep ignoring that fact, my friend? Do you excuse the harm done because the crimes were committed by 'our side?'
As far as Hitler following American (and British) Eugenics, your spot on accurate about that. But blame the American Progressives, not traditional Americans. Blame Margaret Sanger, the Patron Saint of the Democratic Party, who was a rabid racist Eugenist who dreamed of eliminated Blacks from the human gene pool. Sanger and the Nazis had close ties. Sanger published Nazi articles in her "Birth Control Review".
The fact that fascism was popular among progressives on the left and the right is no secret. Hitler's speeches were broadcast in Texas and other states in German and he and Mussolini had many admirers in the American political and intellectual classes.
38.8% (6,332,000) of US servicemen and servicewomen were volunteers.
Context matters. As Richard Russell pointed out, many people volunteered because they feared getting drafted to fight in the Pacific. And as Bryan Caplan points out, in the tree months after Pearl, just 2.4% of the more than 17 million men of fighting age volunteered. And even if we ignore the context the fact that six out of ten were forced to fight tells us what we need to know about the popularity of the war.
My father, Uncle Joe, Uncle Ed and Uncle Clifford all volunteered. Uncle Bill was younger but volunteered during the Korean War. My mother and her sisters volunteered (they didn't need the money) to work summers as Rosie the Riveters in aircraft factories. My grandfather volunteered in WWI.
There was no Korean War because no war was declared. It was a police action. The fact that your family loves war must make you proud. My family hated war and only fought because their country was invaded. It was not happy to lose so many members but repealing the invaders was something that the individuals who fought believed in. What invaders did your family members fight? I do not recall reading about Germany or Korea sending troops to invade the US.
I was too young for Vietnam and too old for Gulf War I. I did serve 10 years as a firefighter/EMT (8 volunteer, 2 paid).
Why would you want to fight in Vietnam or the Gulf? Both were invasions of a foreign country that was not a threat to the United States. Are your kids volunteering to fight in Nigeria or Pakistan?
My brother, John, is a Liberal and would never fight to defend his country. He does however believe in killing unborn babies.
And the rest of your family believes in killing babies that have been born as well as unborn babies. That still seems to place him in the higher moral position.
@marcopolo2150 @VangelVesovski @bill5 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat @TommyD6of11
A mercenary is a killer for hire, with no allegiance to anything but a payday.
That may not be true. A mercenary can choose which side he works for depending on his moral position. A soldier cannot do that and must follow all orders regardless of the situation that he finds himself in.
A soldier is acting as his country demands he/she acts to carry out the view of their government. Their allegiance is to their country.
A country does not demand anything. The people who rule do.
When you're in combat with an "enemy" which in fact are the indigenous people of the country and not in any uniform, the morality of your actions become a grey area when one is ordered to fire upon "the enemy." Generally, since Vietnam, "the enemy" can be men women, children, but always armed. You do not fire on the unarmed or those who pose no threat even if ordered to.
There is nothing ambiguous about being a part of an occupying force in a country that your government chose to invade. There was nothing moral about Vietnam and there is nothing moral about Iraq. In both cases your leaders chose to fight in a foreign country and had your military kill plenty of innocent civilians.
Since 9-11, the govt. has defined the "enemy" as a behavior....terrorist. Even in the Ukraine, the Donbass as Kiev puts it, are "terrorists." That classification then gives them the "right" to kill anyone, anytime. Is that moral?
Let me get this straight. Someone is a terrorist becasue Obama or the Neo-Nazis in Kiev say that they are terrorists? Why don't you learn to think on your own?
The whole idea of defining an enemy as really a behavior is what government propaganda does to a population when it's repeated often.
Yes it does. It is the only way to distract people.
From the comfort of your home, you can have those thoughts of what is moral, but when you're in country, in combat your taught to act and react and people die as a result.
Actually, it is much easier. When you are far from home and occupying another country you know that you are the invader and that you do not have the moral high ground.
But your allegiance is to your country; a mercenary has only allegiance to the paymaster, and can leave anytime they decide it's not worth the money. A soldier can't. So no, my point of view is that they are not mercenaries.
As I said, this is BS. A mercenary can choose his jobs if he wishes and does not have to accept an assignment that is not considered moral. A soldier who has signed up for a tour of duty cannot choose where he is sent. And when you take money to fight you are a mercenary no matter how it is spun.
2 days, 6 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@bill5 @VangelVesovski @TommyD6of11 @J68R @marcopolo2150 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
The US population hasn't got a chance in any confrontation with the US military. Standing around to get slaughtered is just not smart. Why would I put myself in harms way if I know that?
I read a similar argument made by an American in the late 1930s. He too saw problems coming down the road and decided to ride things out in a quiet tropical island called Guam. Where are you going?
Speaking out is fine up to a point, but only if it is intended to wake people up to the very real possibility that the economy will tank, the US will lose Reserved Currency status and the Dollar will (further) sink like a stone as a store of value. That would produce chaos and I believe massive violence that the Fed Gov is preparing to counter. I can read the clues.
If you have hard assets parked in safe areas of the globe and keep your head down you should be fine. Let the idiots who elected your government fight it out with that government and stay out of the way. There should be plenty of fairly quiet places where you have self reliant people who are well armed where you can hang out. Just make sure that there is a good road to Canada and that you have the means to use it if you have to.
I don't agree that the US is full of cowards. It's full of people that can't face reality and keep hoping that some miracle will reverse the country's downward trajectory. They write letters to their "representatives", vote in rigged elections hoping for a savior. Plain stupid if you ask me. That includes my close relatives. They are willing to sit in the hot water as the flame is turned up - I'm not.
In my book, not being able to face reality is a form of cowardice.
3 days, 4 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
I would submit that the hyper inflation unleashed by the Wiemer Republic did more to destroy the German upper/middle class than food shortages(which effected the poor people). Without the support of the former upper/middle classes, Hitler would not have come to power.
You might be interested in this great paper.
But note that the blockade and hyperinflation both had the same root causes; the abandonment of the Classical Gold Standard to fight World War I and the way that the war ended.
@bill5 @WilliamJRood @VangelVesovski @DevilsPrinciple @Boreal Owl
You're right in theory, but in practice, I doubt the Fed Gov give a rats butt about our opinions.
The part about democracy being about the rule of the people is a big lie told to keep the general population in line. What fascinates me is that many people who are pulling the strings know what they are doing and don't buy the lies that they tell. But they accept the lies told by people in other areas of the government and accept the bigger narrative. Note that this is not something that is done because people are stupid but because of incentives. While your own moral integrity will prevent you from believing the lies you are telling as part of your job the economic incentives prevent you from questioning the lies that other 'experts' tell as part of their job.
When the economy tanks and millions of people are pushed to the wall, then gov't force meets its match in urban rioting.
That might be true I am sure that some in the media will spin a narrative that blames everyone but the government. All that it would take is to have some black ops people shoot a few of the local police here and there and you will have the talking haircuts starting to praise the noble public servants who risk their lives to keep order. By the time some new politicians take over it will be discovered that they are no better than the ones that they replaced. So unless you believe that we will get an anarchist system the problem of big government will still remain.
A convenient war is also in the cards to distract the intelligence challenged by presenting them with a manufactured enemy they can be taught to hate.
That seems like a good strategy because it tends to be very effective.
I know you'll keep voting for change right up to the point that the violence starts. Keep dreaming.
@bill5 @TommyD6of11 @J68R @VangelVesovski @marcopolo2150 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
I bought my own ticket out of the US almost 10 years ago. Couldn't stand the warmongering culture with all the tributes and special privileges awarded the murderers in the military and the absolutely profane Fed Gov.
What is wrong with sticking around and speaking out? Most of your fellow citizens are cowards who go along because they do not want to take unpopular positions. Are you any better when you just pack up and leave? And isn't it more fun to stir things up a little and keep sticking to principle?
@TommyD6of11 @bill5 @VangelVesovski @marcopolo2150 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
That's right, Bill5, the American soldiers who ended the Nazi terror and liberated the death camps were just a bunch of people with a broken moral compass.
The Nazis were beaten by Hitler's idiotic war on the Eastern Front, not the Americans. The US had a small force. Even when you include the fight against Japan, the US only lost around 0.4% of its population. Russia lost around 14% of its population, mostly fighting against Germany.
Likewise for our soldiers who ended the racist, reign of terror of Imperial Japan (see Rape of Nanking).
Unfortunately, those soldiers also wound up raping their way across Europe.
Now, tell me how your moral compass would have guided you. And, please don't bother telling me sanctions would have stopped either Japan or Hitler.
Perhaps not putting Hitler in power in the first place would have saved a lot of trouble. And don't you know that it was sanctions that led to the attack on Pearl?
PS - Einstein's quote wasn't directed at the military. It was directed at mindless followers ... such a Libs like you who spout such ridiculous Lib talking points.
Einstein was a socialist my friend. You really should do some fact checking before you write.
3 days, 5 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@TommyD6of11 @VangelVesovski @J68R @bill5 @marcopolo2150 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
"Yeah, but what if Hitler had defeated Stalin in 1941?"
He would have a few thousand troops that would have been left to try to control all of Russia and would still have had to deal with all of the problems that come from occupying a big country. Note that Hitler had a hard time in a tiny place like Yugoslavia where Tito's partizans managed to kill more than 150,000 Germans, Italians, and Croatian collaborators. On the Eastern front the Russians killed 4 million Germans and captured another 3.3 million.
Japan only agreed to surrender after the 2nd bomb was dropped.
This is not true. Japan agreed to surrender before any bombs were dropped but only if the US kept the institution of the Emperor. Truman refused but after he dropped the bombs agreed to the same terms. As many have pointed out, few in the US military agreed with Truman, including most of his closest advisors.
As for moral equivalency between the US and Imperial Japan, I suggest you read up on:
o Rape of Nanking
I have friends whose parents lived through the Nanking slaughter so I am quite familiar with the first hand stories. But they survived because only around 2% of the victims were children and many of the Japanese officers and soldiers tried to avoid killing children. That was not the case in Japan where the bomb targeted everyone in the area. Truman knew that the bomb would mostly kill civilians but did not care because he wanted to see if it worked and how effective it was as a weapon. Which is why he should have hanged alongside the German war criminals.
First, that is not true. There was a food blockade in 1919. The restrictions on food imports were not lifted until July 1919.
"This was what Lord Devlin frankly calls "the starvation policy" directed against the civilians of the Central Powers (particularly Germany), the plan that aimed, as Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty in 1914 and one of the framers of the scheme, admitted, to "starve the whole population — men, women, and children, old and young, wounded and sound — into submission."
The British policy was in contravention of international law on two major points. First, in regard to the character of the blockade, it violated the Declaration of Paris of 1856, which Britain itself had signed, and which, among other things, permitted "close" but not "distant" blockades. A belligerent was allowed to station ships near the three-mile limit to stop traffic with an enemy's ports; it was not allowed simply to declare areas of the high seas comprising the approaches to the enemy's coast to be off-limits."
But you are missing my point; the illegal food blockade by Britain during the war caused starvation. Most of the worst effected were Hitler's strongest supporters because he appealed to their sense of injustice.
A history lesson might be in order my friend. Sanctions were responsible for Hitler coming to power and for what Japan did at Pearl. Note that the British mined harbours and prevented food shipments to Germany during WW I. The people who were starving were Hitler's greatest supporters and made up the worst of the militants. A similar blockade was used in WW II to prevent food getting to Germany. With the lower supply the Germans came up with a brutal solution. They simply eliminated a percentage of the population that was considered undesirable as they followed eugenic programs inspired by American and British progressives. The attack on Pearl was in response to the American attempt to stop Japan from importing oil. Sanctions are just another form of war.
And while you are on your high horse let me point out that a very small percentage of eligible men volunteered after Pearl. If we look at the actual numbers we see that in the three months after the attack fewer than 150,000 men had volunteered. Since there were approximately 17 million men that were of combat age that comes out to around 2.5%. I think that the story of the American man wishing to go out and defend his country is mostly a myth.
3 days, 9 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@TommyD6of11 @VangelVesovski @marcopolo2150 @bill5 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
All of them believe in their mission and consider it both a privilege and honor to serve.
Believe in invading a country that did not attack the United States as part of a war that was based on a lie? Sorry my friend but few people are that stupid. Most soldiers know that there is no point to the occupations in Afghanistan or Iraq and certainly have no support for actions in Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Libya, etc. They just do what they are told because they fear that they will lose their freedom, pay, and benefits if they speak out.
I consider that moral cowardice but feel free to think that they feel honoured to be stationed in immoral foreign wars that have destroyed so many lives just so that the Merchants of Death can show better profits.
@TommyD6of11 @J68R @bill5 @VangelVesovski @marcopolo2150 @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat
"Secondly, without America, both Russia and England would have lost the war."
The Western Front was very quiet for most of 1940 and 1941 and Germany was not trying to invade Britain. The fight was actually in the East between Stalin and Hitler. Both tyrants were seeking to expand their power and were using their soldiers as pawns to gain an advantage. Had the Americans let them keep killing off their military divisions there would be little threat to the West.
Are we really in a position to judge?
No. But I want to ask what you mean when you say 'we'. Most people tend to confuse the actions of their governments with actions of come collective that they call 'the people' or the 'nation.' While we all slip in our use of language many of these people truly believe that there is some entity called 'the people' that actually has a say in what happens. I think that delusion is a part of the reason why we have so many problems.
3 days, 10 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@marcopolo2150 @bill5 @VangelVesovski @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat @TommyD6of11
"Having been drafted to serve in Vietnam, I hold no grudge against these "professional" grunts."
They take money to do a job and do not seem to be concerned about morality. While that does not mean that we should 'hold a grudge' I do think that it opens up your military men and women to charges of moral cowardice and makes them no different than a typical mercenary.
In conversation I only say "Sorry man, but you're "fu@ked; good luck."
In life we tend to get what we deserve more often than not.
3 days, 17 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
President Bush didn't know that there were different sects of Islam in Iraq until well after the invasion. He may well not have known that there are different sects of Islam. You can be sure that Cheney et al wouldn't have cared if they had known.
I don't think that they cared or if the facts mattered. In politics the goal is the expansion of power and influence above all and Bush and Cheney were no different than their Democratic Party counterparts. Do you really think that Bill Clinton did not know that the Albanians were lying about bodies being thrown down mine shafts or that the first Bush did not know that the baby incubator story told by the Kuwaiti Ambassador's daughter was an outright lie? In politics facts should never get in the way of political goals.
6 days, 13 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
a) American Exceptionalism is the unique concept that our individual rights are inalienable given to us by God (or Mother Earth if you prefer) and not given by the government or a king. As such, our rights can not be taken away by the government.
I disagree. Your courts have already decided that governments can take most of your rights away. Note that your government can fine you or put you in jail because your shower head pressure is too high. Also note that both Bush and Obama Bush suspended the right of habeas corpus to individuals that were "determined by the United States" to be an "enemy combatant" in their War on Terror. That means that your government can put you away without charging you because it suspects that you are helping terrorists even if it has no evidence.
And the last time I looked the concept of American exceptionalism was a theory that held that the United States was different and superior to other nations.
b) American Exceptionalism carries with it the requirement for self reliance and breeds a strong sense of individualism which engenders a greatness of spirit.
That is not working out very well. One in seven American families are on food stamps. The largest number of high earners tend to work for the parasite class that populates the public service sector. You have become a nation of whiners and dependents and elect politicians who pander to that sentiment.
@bill5 @VangelVesovski @WilliamJRood @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat @TommyD6of11
Those that continue to vote in one set of criminals to replace the previous set of criminals are just as guilty of war crimes as the people that benefit from the slaughter and those that actually do the killing and destruction.
You can thank a century of progressive education for that. Most people have no clue about how to use their ability to reason to come up with sound positions or how to base their arguments on sound propositions and defensible logic. They are drowning in a sea of data but don't have the theory needed to save themselves, which is why they are such easy prey for the court historians and public intellectuals that cast the shadows on the walls of their prisons and why they cannot even conceive of stepping out into the light.
The grunts in the military make the entire fiasco possible, for without them this constant shifting theater of war wouldn't be feasible.
I think that Bob Dylan may have found someone else to blame for all the stupid war, the women who cheer on their sons as they go out to fight in useless and stupid wars.
@marcopolo2150 @WilliamJRood @daybreakin2121 @HannaKhayyat @TommyD6of11
Without getting into too much detail, basically, Britain effectively blockaded the North Sea and Germany was starving.
This was a criminal act that violated international law. In a way it was not all that different from what the US did in Iraq when it bombed its water treatment plants and electricity generation plants and then used sanctions to prevent their repair.
As you and William have pointed out, the war was carried out on behalf of bankers who could not afford to have a settlement that would lead to a default on loans made to troubled governments so that they could perpetuate a stupid conflict that killed off some of their best and brightest individuals. What is worse, is the war collectivism that followed the American entry. It gave the Americans such fools as FDR and Hoover, both of whom were fond of central planning and making decisions on behalf of their fellow citizens. That gave a cover of respectability to war collectivism and a planned economy and has been the catalyst that is responsible for many of the problems that we face today not just in North America and Europe but around the world.
@daybreakin2121 @HannaKhayyat @TommyD6of11
Even more complicated is the Yemen situation where the rebels are Zaydi Shia, who are in many ways closer to Sunnis than the Shiites in Iran.
6 days, 18 hours ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@WilliamJRood @VangelVesovski @DevilsPrinciple @HannaKhayyat @TommyD6of11
I disagree that withdrawal should be delayed because if there is no way to win it is better to cut your losses as early as possible. What gets to me is that your leaders never bothered to articulate what victory would look like. If it meant getting rid of Saddam then there was no reason to stay. If it meant giving the Shiites power over the secular Ba'ath party and letting the Kurds control more of their own fate that was accomplished so there was no reason to stay. It could not mean stability because there was no way to make the Iraqi government more stable by getting rid of Saddam and unleashing the fundamentalist and sectarian forces that he had been keeping under control.
George Stephanopoulus also shows just how right Plato was when he stated that the small ruling elite would use public intellectuals to control the population by telling it lies that it would believe. The neoconservatives are well aware of that and also understand that the best way to keep the public disoriented and supportive of their crazy plans is to use thymos to generate a strong emotional response in support of some supposed injustice that may not be real or simply a false flag operation. The irony is that is the same strategy that the people who resist the neocons use as they point to real injustice that involves occupation, the killing of innocent civilians, and the propping up of dictators that oppress foreign populations. While it may work to make the false prophets rich for a while and help make the Merchants of Death who benefit from the warfare state a lot wealthier in the end that is a losers' game and the American public will wind up footing most of the bill. That is as it should be because the public has allowed itself to be used by the apologists employed by the War Party.
@DevilsPrinciple @Boreal Owl Why did Saddam have to go? He was a secular leader who kept the extremists from gaining a foothold. Yes, Iraqis were suffering but that was mostly because the US bombed electricity generation stations and water treatment plants and used sanctions to prevent them from being repaired. Women were well treated in Saddam's Iraq but are less well treated in the post-Saddam Iraq.
1 week ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
@DevilsPrinciple @WilliamJRood @HannaKhayyat @TommyD6of11 Out of proportion? Those fools lied the country into two useless occupations that reduced stability and strengthened al Qaeda and other extremist groups. Almost all of their predictions turned out to be wrong yet they still have their jobs and still get to advocate for more foreign interventions.
Sorry my friend but they are not slaves. They use Adelson and whoever else wants to pay for access to power. The real slaves are the voters that are fooled by rhetoric and get what they deserve.
1 week, 4 days ago on The GOP Sabotage And Scuttle Crew Can Lead To Only One Thing—–More Body Bags And Amputees
The War Party is good at pushing just the right buttons to advocate for war, which, ironically, are the same buttons that make people advocate for going home once the war begins. Every private university should have a course that explains the role of thymos in Plato's Republic so that the neconservative strategy can be explained much simpler to what are otherwise reasonable people.
1 week, 4 days ago on All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
What is wrong with standing on principle? Anyone should be free to use his property in the way he wishes and should not be coerced into having to participate in an involuntary transaction of any type. Whatever happened to defending freedom of association?
And isn't it ironic that the gay rights movement is now on the side of the very progressives who used the courts and police to prosecute its members? If it was wrong to prosecute gays in the 1950s it is wrong to prosecute those that choose not to cater to gay weddings today?
1 week, 4 days ago on Amateur Constitutional Redundancy——Or How The Indiana Lawmakers Shot Themselves In The Foot
If Rand Paul had the courage to stand up to the warfare crowd he could win the primary because he is the only candidate who seems to favour peace. The trouble is that he does not want to be clear about where he stands and his dithering will cost him votes among the libertarians and independents that supported his father so strongly.
1 month, 3 weeks ago on Jeb Bush’s Debut Speech: More War Party Prattle
The trouble is not the cost of capital but the depreciation schedules that are used to report costs that are much lower than they should be. If a well produces 60% of all the oil that it will produce over its lifetime in two years it makes sense to write off 60% of the costs over those two years. The trouble is that the accountants use models that lower the depreciation costs and hide the lousy economics of shale production. While that works for a while there is a point after which the cost of drilling enough wells to offset the depletion is too high to hide the problem. The price collapse has been a boon for shale company executives because they can now use the collapse to blame the failure of their companies. If they play their cards right after the sector collapses and accounts are settled some of them may be able to try the same scam yet again when prices of oil rise once again.
3 months, 4 weeks ago on Crash-O-Matic Finance: The ‘Shale Miracle’ Was An Epic Cheap Money Stunt
@modestproposal1 @scott_matagrano @DA_Stockman
But the cost is not $50. It is $100 or higher for the average well in the average shale formation. If the cost were $50 the primary producers of shale oil would have been able to generate positive cash flows even as they increased their drilling activity because of the huge depletion rates that ensure that most of the return comes over the first two years. That has not happened.
From what I see this is Nortel all over again. The shale players are carrying highly priced assets on their balance sheets that have no or negative value. Once reality intervenes we are looking at a typical collapse yet again.
@Adam Price Perhaps, but only because of possible technical reasons. The fundamentals for the US economy are not good and as far as I can see the USD is just a note that is issued by a technically insolvent Federal Reserve System. With around $60 billion of capital backing up $4 trillion of liabilities I do not see how the Fed survives the next crisis without requiring a bailout. The problem for dollar bulls is that when that happens you are looking at a 70% devaluation, not an increase, no matter what happens to the USD in relation to other currencies. Playing a game where we speculate about the relative strength of fiat currencies is useless unless we are a huge institution that has access to lots of free cash and has assurances of bailouts by the taxpayers. For the rest of us mere mortals it makes a lot more sense to avoid the nonsense and to keep acquiring physical gold and silver as long as the powers that be help keep the prices low.
3 months, 4 weeks ago on Mind The Global Dollar Short——Its A $9 Trillion Time Bomb
I am sorry but this is total nonsense. Three quarters of the Bakken wells are uneconomic even at $85 oil. The only reason why there is an appearance of economy has to do with accounting games that permit companies to use Estimated Ultimate Recovery rates based on guesses rather than likely Ultimate Recovery rates that are based on the production curves. I have been trying to find any primary shale producer that has been cash flow positive or has not been reporting funding gaps for the past few years. I have yet to find one.
Note that this is not an income reporting issue because the companies can come up with any number they want by playing around with the depreciation schedules. Where we see the problems appear are on the balance sheets and cash flow statements. We also need to note that the company CEOs have been relatively honest about the fact that they have funding gaps years after they got into the shale business. As before, the issue is not really disclosure as much as it the abandonment of reason on the part of analysts and the investing public.
3 months, 4 weeks ago on Three-Fourths Of Bakken Wells Are Uneconomic At $55/Barrel
@Ronald Thomas West
Sorry but the neocons work for both the left and the right wings of the totalitarian bird of prey. I think that your error, my friend, is assuming that there is an important difference between the GOP and Democratic Party.
7 months ago on Behind Washington’s Demonization Of Putin: Graft For Hunter Biden, Shaft For Collaboration On Iran & Syria
Shale gas? If the Ukraine is as good a target as the US shale will destroy a huge amount of investment capital. The simple fact is that regardless of the hype the EURs outside of a few core areas are way too tiny to make shale economic.
I am sorry but all of the evidence suggests that Mitt is just as bad on economics, foreign policy, and constitutional integrity as Obama. The idea that somehow the GOP is better at containing the growth of government and protecting individual liberty on the fiscal front than the Democrats is a myth that is not supported by any empirical evidence. If anything Mitt is even more rabid about attacking Iran and getting into foreign conflicts than Obama. He is waving the red cape at Russia when there is absolutely no reason to engage with the Russian kleptocracy and pushing China into retaliating against the USD and the US capital markets. At a time when some in the CP are listening to the advocates of Hayek and Mises the GOP is squarely in the Keynesian camp and insisting that a bigger government run by Republicans is the solution to our current problems.
2 years, 5 months ago on Three Futures