Having a large military is not a problem. Deciding that swatting some tin-pot dictator's dick is important or smart politically is astounding. If there were Republicans in the executive branch these same douches would be telling us to stay out of it. I'm certainly not seeing where we have any business involving ourselves beyond eating popcorn and watching what happens.
It's hard when humans in general are so god damned stupid,
Right there is the inherent problem with democracy. Letting the average voter impose their will on you over most aspects of your life. They are easily propagandized by the ruling elite; even if not, why should the majority rule over you on things that don't violate their individual rights? For example, if the majority think gayness is wrong, why should they have the power to tell the minority they can't buttfuck in private?
Democracy is "soft authoritarianism", aka mob rule. On any issue, the minority can be forced, against their will, to do something the "majority" want. Any bad law can be justified as being "the will of the majority".
And it's no coincidence that the 20th century, which saw the rise of mass democracies, is also the century of huge wars, because said democracies had the power to tax the average citizen, most of whom didn't want war, to fund said wars.
As surely as it was inevitable we would all discover that the earth is round and that the sun does not revolve around it, we will all understand that authority is just an idea, whos power disappears as soon as we ignore it.
I had a realization that the "anti-war left" is a myth. The left is not generally anti-war. Not in this country, not in general. Leftism has its roots in Marx and his ideas of violent revolution. Many of their heroes were violent, such as Che Guevara.
The myth arose with the Vietnam war; I suspect that faction appeared not so much because they were anti-war as pro-communism, and wanted to see the communists win by getting the US out. Despite the fact that that war was started or extended by presidents from both parties.
Today the "left" is nothing but a bunch of useful idiots who cling to the notion that "their team" (the Democrats, are morally correct and the "other team", are wrong. That's why they support Obama despite the fact that he has demonstrated to be no better than Bush on civil liberties and war, things the Dems are supposedly better than the Reps on.
This human tendency to stick to "your team" allows both Reps and Dems to do things the opposite party is vilified for, over and over again.
As surely as it was inevitable we would all discover that the earth is round and that the sun does not revolve around it, we will all understand that authority is just an idea, whose power disappears as soon as we ignore it.
Agreed 100%. This is why in its own little way this thread will make for a better future. These types of discussions are happening in numerous other places. These ideas will spread.
My impression is that just 5 years ago the majority of the American public was way more gullible than they are today. 5 years ago I didn't see people speaking out against gov't propaganda the way they are in this thread.
"It is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book." (p. xiv)
"How America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)
"Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being.
"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
<CUE OVERHYPED WAR ON TERROR>
Megalomanic ******** want to wield power and when they do, they want to expand it with any means they have, such as by imperialism justified by "humanitarian" reasons, "democracy", or "terror".
Last edited by JasonC SBB; 09-06-2013 at 11:28 AM.
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor" (51)"
9/11, anyone? Never let a crisis go to waste.
General Wesley Clark in a 2007 interview admitted that he was told, right after 9/11, that the US was gonna invade several countries, Iran, Libya, and Syria included, even though they had nothing to do with the attacks:
Syria has been in the crosshairs of the Neocons for over a decade now.
You've painted yourself into a corner with your past statements. Essentially, you can have no evidence to back up either a pro-war or anti-war stance.
By your own admission, you should stop posting in this section.
No not really. I've been to war. I've been shot at and shot at others. I've lost friends to war. War sucks. I'm not basing my stance on anything syria specific.
But for the most part you are right. Although I don't post often in the political threads, when I do it's usually a biased position based on no cited facts. I also usually post sarcastically or ironically. I never said I was perfect.
I'd love for anyone to post a news agency that is unbiased and uses their own verified sources.
Relevant: There was a large outcry on Reddit when RT.com was banned from the news section for TOS violations. People posted some of the dumbest **** I've ever heard like "RT has no bias unlike CNN/MSNBC."