I have never said in any of my posts that that the Pro-Israel lobby doesn't exist or is not powerful I just don't think it's a bad thing. I also haven't come close to throwing myself into everything on this board that mentions Israel. Not even close. I also clearly am more than a "army of two" in this country. There are lot of people in this country that are in full support of the war effort and who's policy is carrying the day after all. No army of two. I should have some basic knowledge huh...ok..maybe so..but you and others here could use some basic wisdom and stop looking for the jewish boogeyman on every occasion.
more black culture...
- Thread starter Jimmy Chitwood
- Start date
Obfuscation is your specialty in the political threads but I'm not interested in playing your game.
Screaming eagle wrote that Saudi Arabia is the "master" of Washington, D.C. I responded by noting that I've heard a lot of different conspiracy theories in my day but that this was the first one that claimed the Saudis run the world, adding that screaming eagle was "an army of one" in this belief. You wrote that you agreed with screaming eagle, thus making you and him "an army of two," adding that you still believe Iraq had WMDs, that "the Saudis have wanted us to finish off Saddam Hussein. . . for years" and that "[a]ll this stuff about Pro-Israel lobbies and oil interests are just fodder for those who Hate Israel."
If I have mis-statedwhat you wroteon this thread, tell me how I have done so.
Screaming eagle wrote that Saudi Arabia is the "master" of Washington, D.C. I responded by noting that I've heard a lot of different conspiracy theories in my day but that this was the first one that claimed the Saudis run the world, adding that screaming eagle was "an army of one" in this belief. You wrote that you agreed with screaming eagle, thus making you and him "an army of two," adding that you still believe Iraq had WMDs, that "the Saudis have wanted us to finish off Saddam Hussein. . . for years" and that "[a]ll this stuff about Pro-Israel lobbies and oil interests are just fodder for those who Hate Israel."
If I have mis-statedwhat you wroteon this thread, tell me how I have done so.
You said "but to pretend it doesn't exist(Israel Lobby) and that everything that has happened post 9-11 is because the Saudi's are calling the shots is so off the wall that it's pathetic". I have said on other posts on this very thread that Iraqi WMD's and years of Iraqi funding and support of Al Queda and other terrorist organizations were also reasons for the Iraqi war. Thats one area where you mis-stated my position. I have also never denied the existence of the Pro Israel lobby which you intimated in your post. I also talked about the lugitimate oil interests we have in a few posts above. I certainly do think you mis-stated my position and I have just pointed out the areas where you have. I also am not playing any "obfuscation games". I write what I believe and I have always been that way since I joined this site. You know that. Edited by: guest301
So on this thread you didn't write "the Saudis have wanted us to finish off Saddam Hussein. . . for years" and "[a]ll this stuff about Pro-Israel lobbies and oil interests are just fodder for those who Hate Israel"?
It's not just a matter of what I did say, it's also a matter of what I didn't say. I don't think it's accurate or even fair to use the words I said in one post and leave out the words and ideas I posted on the very same thread out of your critique of my viewpoint. I did say that the complaints about Pro-Israel lobbies were fodder for those who hate Israel.Is that the same as saying that I believe that pro-israel lobbies don't exist and/or are not powerful. I also did say that the Saudi's want us to finish off Saddam Hussein for years. That's a well known fact. I didn't say on this thread that it's the only reason we invaded Iraq. I pointed out various other reasons as well. I hope you can see that now or maybe we should discuss this by pm messages.
Screaming eagle's statement was that Saudi Arabia is the "master" of Washington, D.C. You jumped in by agreeing with screaming eagle, adding to his thesis that the Saudis have wanted the U.S. to finish off Saddam for years. You further stated, in this thread, that any talk about an Israel Lobby was merely fodder for people who hate Jews.
And no, it's not a matter "of what [you] didn't say." I'm only interested in what you clearly wrote.
Now, to give you just one example of how you obfuscate, you just wrote, "I did say that the complaints about Pro-Israel lobbies were fodder for those who hate Israel."
You substituted the word "complaints" for "stuff," which clearly changes your original meaning.
I'll stop here because anyone can read this thread and see what your position was. But understand that I havestrongly opposedthis war from the beginning. It has nothing to do with "hating Jews" or supporting Cindy Sheehan and I don't like it at all when someone says that. My opposition comes from a principled stance based on love of country. If you want to jump in on a thread and oppose me, that's fine, but do so with some basic knowledge of the underlying facts.Edited by: Don Wassall
And no, it's not a matter "of what [you] didn't say." I'm only interested in what you clearly wrote.
Now, to give you just one example of how you obfuscate, you just wrote, "I did say that the complaints about Pro-Israel lobbies were fodder for those who hate Israel."
You substituted the word "complaints" for "stuff," which clearly changes your original meaning.
I'll stop here because anyone can read this thread and see what your position was. But understand that I havestrongly opposedthis war from the beginning. It has nothing to do with "hating Jews" or supporting Cindy Sheehan and I don't like it at all when someone says that. My opposition comes from a principled stance based on love of country. If you want to jump in on a thread and oppose me, that's fine, but do so with some basic knowledge of the underlying facts.Edited by: Don Wassall
It's clear you don't want to admit any error or misjudgement here. I did say in my posts that I have respect for the "isolationist" reason for not going to war even though I don't agree with them. The whole "complaints" as opposed to "talk" thing is pure semantics, and I didn't knowingly substitute any word. So it doesn't matter to you that I pointed out various other reasons for our going to war with Iraq. Out of basic fairness it should matter to you as owner of this site.
I absolutely do respect the anti-globalist nationalistic position of staying out of wars where we don't have a national interest in being. I have read and remembered your past posts on the matter and know your postition is principled, but not everybody's is and those are the ones I was talking about.
You are right, anybody can see on this thread what my positions are and it has nothing to do with what my "original" position was as you unfairly pointed out. My postion has not changed and it has been a constant. You are wrong here whether you continue the discussion or not.
I absolutely do respect the anti-globalist nationalistic position of staying out of wars where we don't have a national interest in being. I have read and remembered your past posts on the matter and know your postition is principled, but not everybody's is and those are the ones I was talking about.
You are right, anybody can see on this thread what my positions are and it has nothing to do with what my "original" position was as you unfairly pointed out. My postion has not changed and it has been a constant. You are wrong here whether you continue the discussion or not.
Obfuscate all you want, but the reality is 1. you entered this thread agreeing with screaming eagle's contention that Saudi Arabia is the "master" of the United States; and 2. you wrote that anytalk about an Israel lobby was nothing but fodder for people who hate Jews. I don't care about all the other positions and commentaryin the otherposts you've made in this thread or in any of your other 735 posts, youwrote what I said you wrote. Now tell me again my "error"and "misjudgment" in quoting what you wrote.
Don, with all due respect and much is due. That's why you are in error for "not caring about my other posts in this thread".These threads are like discussions and debates you have with someone at a dinner table and everything you post on that thread has equal value or at the very least is relavant to your other posts. To say the only reason why I think we went to war with Iraq is because of Saudi Arabian interests and pressure is a clear mis-statement of my beliefs. I even said in that one and only post you are focusing on that we had security interests in going into Iraq. I do think that screamingeagle's contention that Saudi Arabia is a master of the United States is correct, but this country has plenty of other masters as well. The pc crowd, liberal news media, corporations, teacher's unions, feminist groups, the neo cons and the entertainment industry.
Edited by: guest301
Edited by: guest301
guest301 said:Our security, White Shogun. You surely know by now what the security reasons are, you are just not buying it. I am. WMD's(shipped to Syria and Bekaa Valley shortly before the war started),Iraqi involvement and funding of Al Qeada and other terrorist organizations against the Unites States for years and it was a belated consequence to their invasion of Kuwait and of their well known plans to do the same to Saudi Arabia. It's also going to make a nice staging ground to take out the Nuke sites in Iran probably sometime this year. All this stuff about Pro-Israel lobbies and oil interests are just fodder for those who Hate Israel, liberal organizations, isolationists(I sympathise on that one) and the wack job Cindy Sheehans of the world who embarrasses her late son everytime she opens her stupid mouth.
WMD's? Are you serious? How would Iraqi WMD's be a threat to us? How would they deliver them? Oh, I know with their powerful navy and secret submarine fleet.
Actually consistency is valued, not contradictory and ever changing opinions and shades of meaning, even within a single thread.
To say the only reason why I think we went to war with Iraq is because of Saudi Arabian interests and pressure is a clear mis-statement of my beliefs.
You specifically agreed with someone who believes that way. I was having a discussion with him and you entered it by agreeing with him that the Saudis are the pre-eminent power in the world, to the point of controlling the United States government. You wrote it, understand, I'm quoting what you wrote. Changing your mind later on in the thread doesn't change the fact that you wrote it. Maybe you need to think through what you actually believe before you start posting on a topic.
Words have meanings. You can't pick and choose which opinion within a thread is really yours and which don't mean what you actually wrote.
I do think that screamingeagle's contention that Saudi Arabia is a master of the United States is correct, but this country has plenty of other masters as well. The pc crowd, liberal news media, corporations, teacher's unions, feminist groups, the neo cons and the entertainment industry.
Sothis is what I was supposed to think when you wrote that you agree with screamingeagle. Do you know what the word "master" means in the context in which it was used? He didn't write of the Saudis as being "a" master, one of many. He wrote, "Our Saudi masters." I
I don't have to read all your posts and then combine all of them together and find shades of meaning and secret interpretations. You wrote what I said you wrote and if I did not misquote you, then I made no "error" or "misjudgment" and we can continue this ad infinitum until you point out where you were misquoted.
Edited by: Don Wassall
To say the only reason why I think we went to war with Iraq is because of Saudi Arabian interests and pressure is a clear mis-statement of my beliefs.
You specifically agreed with someone who believes that way. I was having a discussion with him and you entered it by agreeing with him that the Saudis are the pre-eminent power in the world, to the point of controlling the United States government. You wrote it, understand, I'm quoting what you wrote. Changing your mind later on in the thread doesn't change the fact that you wrote it. Maybe you need to think through what you actually believe before you start posting on a topic.
Words have meanings. You can't pick and choose which opinion within a thread is really yours and which don't mean what you actually wrote.
I do think that screamingeagle's contention that Saudi Arabia is a master of the United States is correct, but this country has plenty of other masters as well. The pc crowd, liberal news media, corporations, teacher's unions, feminist groups, the neo cons and the entertainment industry.
Sothis is what I was supposed to think when you wrote that you agree with screamingeagle. Do you know what the word "master" means in the context in which it was used? He didn't write of the Saudis as being "a" master, one of many. He wrote, "Our Saudi masters." I
I don't have to read all your posts and then combine all of them together and find shades of meaning and secret interpretations. You wrote what I said you wrote and if I did not misquote you, then I made no "error" or "misjudgment" and we can continue this ad infinitum until you point out where you were misquoted.
Edited by: Don Wassall
KG2422..I was waiting for someone else to pile on. You don't have to have a air force or navy for wmd's to be a threat to us. They would be a threat of course to our American troops stationed in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia before the war. Have you also ever heard about suitcase bombs or shipping biological or chemical weapons into our ports and terrorist cell groups using them against us. Are you saying that can't happen. You are right, it is treason if you place another country's interest before your own. It's just a matter if you think Israel is of no interest to us. I don't think so for economic,political, military and being a Christian, spiritual reasons.
One can have many "masters" Don. You have mis-understood my positions more than you have misqouted them and at this point it is probably too far into this debate for you to admit your error. I didn't change my mind anywhere in this thread, I just added on like everybody else does here. You clearly took me out of context and you just refuse to admit it and so why continue this ad infinitum, It's pointless. You did make in my opinion a illogical leap and your own personal viewpoint about the Iraqi war has harmed your objectivity on the matter. You also said that I wrote that 'talk about a Pro-israel lobby was nothing but fodder for those who hate jews"..I never said that...I said it was for those who hate Israel and a number of other things which I posted.There is a difference with some here about Jews in general and Israel in particular. So there is one area where you misqouted me. But misqoutes are not the problem, your conclusions are.
Do some research on PNAC and the many other papers written by neo-consand their oil industry buddies of their desireto launch military campaigns in the Middle East, wars that would only be supported by the American people if there was a "galvanizing event" such as a "new Pearl Harbor." The causes of the current problems in the world aren't hard to understand, especially in the age of the Internet; it's how to get America out of the mess it's in that's the problem.
Ok Don! I accept that.
I also will acknowledge the fact that the neo-cons have their own objective for the war and it doesn't always coincide with what is best for the country. Where I differ is the thinking that neo-cons are inherently evil and always wrong which seems to be inferred by various members of this site. I do think you are a patriot and so am I. We just get there at times from different perspectives. I have had enough on this back and forth and likely you have as well and so I will back off from posting again on this particular thread. Peace and in other words Shalom if you don't mind.
Maple Leaf
Mentor
Sorry to interupt but...
I don't know where this all got started ,however, one thing I can say for sure is the Iraq war is NOT about fighting terrorism. In fact, most people, be they left,right, or centre minded don't believe this. It may be the one thing the far right and far left have in common.
Terrorists operate in small clandestine groups, invading an entire country and destroying its infrastructure is not going to eradicate them. Anyway, the plausible pretext for invading Iraq was for those nonexistent WMDs. Since WMDs were never found, why are the US soldiers still there? Ask yourselves the questions.
WMDs? No.
Terrorists? No. They move and form country to country.
Saddam? No. Don't need to invade a country for one man.
Democracy? No. They always say that in every country. And as if they really care.
Oil? Yes. With explanation.
US dollar? Yes. Now your talking. Iran's going to sell oil in Euros. Who did you say was next on the hit list?
Oh yeah, and China's going to be buying oil in Euros from Iran.
The Saudis agree, for the moment, to sell oil in US dollars. What if they change their minds, will they make it on the list?Edited by: Maple Leaf
I don't know where this all got started ,however, one thing I can say for sure is the Iraq war is NOT about fighting terrorism. In fact, most people, be they left,right, or centre minded don't believe this. It may be the one thing the far right and far left have in common.
Terrorists operate in small clandestine groups, invading an entire country and destroying its infrastructure is not going to eradicate them. Anyway, the plausible pretext for invading Iraq was for those nonexistent WMDs. Since WMDs were never found, why are the US soldiers still there? Ask yourselves the questions.
WMDs? No.
Terrorists? No. They move and form country to country.
Saddam? No. Don't need to invade a country for one man.
Democracy? No. They always say that in every country. And as if they really care.
Oil? Yes. With explanation.
US dollar? Yes. Now your talking. Iran's going to sell oil in Euros. Who did you say was next on the hit list?
Oh yeah, and China's going to be buying oil in Euros from Iran.
The Saudis agree, for the moment, to sell oil in US dollars. What if they change their minds, will they make it on the list?Edited by: Maple Leaf
guest301 said:
You don't think it's a bad thing. Most Christian and Jewish Zionists would agree with you. Israel occupies the principal place in the hearts of Zionists. This dual loyalty stuff is a lie. If America should suddenly reverse course and treat Israel as oneof the nations comprising the axis of evil, what would be the reaction of Alan Dershowitz, Abe Foxman, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Hal lindsey? If we decided to invade Israel and do to her what we did to Iraq, they'd be weeping and gnashing their teeth, wailing and moaning in sack-cloth and ashes. Where would you stand Aragorn??
guest301 said:
Dirty bombs are no less or more of a threat regardless of Iraq's nuclear status. That sort of material would probably come from the former Soviet Union. Hussein actually helped control terrorism in Iraq because they were considered a threat to his regime. We have destabilised Iraq, not a good strategy for countering terrorism. How exactly is Israel an economic asset when they funnel 3 billion a year away from us? I don't see any benefits for the U.S. in the relationship politically. And militarily, the whole reason 9-11 happened was our relationship with Israel.
I should have known that "Bart" would bait me back in this thread. This is absolutely my last post on this thread. In answer to your question Bart, in the circumstance you described above..I would absolutley decide to stand for Israel if there was a American invasion of that country as you stated. Why? For one thing you didn't post any reason to invade Israel like we did Iraq. So why would I be for it. I would only stand for America if I thought Israel was wrong and wrong in such a mannner that warranted a invasion like a jewish 9-11(which is not likely)! Israel is certainly not a part of the "axis of evil" and is a victim of it just like the United States is.
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
re: Iraq. I voted for Bush in both elections. I was even a member of the Republican party. I was never quite sure if I believe that Saddam had WMD's, and even if he did, if we should go after him for them. I believed the war was about oil. I thought that we felt turning Iraq into a pro-Western democracy would give us access to cheap oil for another hundred years, allowing us to break out from under the hegemony of Saudi oil, until we either drilled for oil in Anwar or came up with other non-oil sources of fuel. War has always been fought for resources; oil is just another one, in this day and age. My favorite comment was if you don't think we should fight a way for oil, then stop complaining every time oil hits $2.00 a gallon. (You can tell how much has changed since I made that quote!)
Now, I've become more aware of how oil companies control the prices at the pumps, not necessarily OPEC. I know about oil bourses and how oil is bought and sold on the open market. This is one of the reasons we're going after Iran next.
I don't think we started a war to benefit Cheney and Haliburton, but I do believe they have profited immensely from it, to the tune of billions. I'm also not so certain there aren't large business interests that are now keeping us in Iraq. It is seen as a fertile, undeveloped terroritory for American corporations. Lots of money to be made in Iraq, now on government contracts, and later doing business with the Iraqis themselves. Something they were NOT able to do under the UN sactions against Saddam-led Iraq. Think about that.
Ad for the Saudi's, the government is our ally, per se, because they are threatened by radical fundamentalist Islamic states and Muslims, the same as we. Those types see Saudi alliance with us as despicable, and would love to see the House of Saud overthrown. So the Saudi goverment has become a master of playing both ends at once, donating money to Palestinians in support of Islam, and supporting the US against other terrorist groups (Al-Queda) at the same time.
I have no doubt that our alliance with Israel is one of the reasons the Islamic world hates us as much as they do. Along with Hollywood and women's rights, and democracy, and so on. But Islam isn't just an enemy of the USA, they're an enemy of the West and any country that is not Muslim. That seems to be lost in a lot of the discussions taking place everywhere. Islam is a world religion that makes no distinction between the secular and the spiritual. Governments should be run according to Islamic law, period. Until that happens, we always have to be aware that some Muslims, somewhere are going to want to overthrow and topple governments that are not Islamic.
re: One World Goverment. I do believe that there are certain powerful groups that want to see the world fall under one world government. It will make easier the sell of corporate goods across borders if every one is under the rule of one government, abiding by the same trade laws, regulations, and policies. Its about the money. However, right now, I think there are many in those groups who see the U.S. as THE de facto leader of this one world government. As the last remaining Super Power (for now,) I think a lot of what the current government (or those behind the scenes) are trying to accomplish is set up the United States as some kind of proxy head of a one world government, or at the very least, making way for the one world government that in the end they hope will answer to US business interests.
So, the United States is at war in Iraq, not for oil but for oil, not necessarily to run its oil wells but to continue to have access to cheap oil, and to prevent the EU from taking over the oil market. If this happens, the US economy is sunk.
We are allies with Israel because of the pro-Israeli lobby, and Christian fundamentalists who see the restoration of Israel as a nation as fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. There is no way the United States will permit Israel to fall to an attack, period.
The Saudis are walking a tight-rope right now, but seem fairly well secure to me, at least until the USA is finished as a super power. Then watch how quickly the convert oil sales to the Euro and turn overtly Muslim overnight.
As to whether this is good or bad: I cannot say. Unless and until the United States of America decides to produce its own oil; stop borrowing money from China and other governments; stops giving money to and propping up foreign governments; stops wasting money abroad on 'interventions,; stops illegal AND legal immigration; lowers its tax rates; finds a means of keeping corporations from going over seas; well then, until that happens, we sort of have to fight these wars in Iraq, Iran, and elsewhere. But I'd rather bring our guys home, get out of Iraq, stay away from Iran, drill for oil in Anwar, seal the border, stop welfare, reroute foreign aid dollars to R&D for alternative fuel, censure corporations who move off shore, and stop unfair trade practices.
But which of those scenarios do YOU think is more likely to happen?
Now, I've become more aware of how oil companies control the prices at the pumps, not necessarily OPEC. I know about oil bourses and how oil is bought and sold on the open market. This is one of the reasons we're going after Iran next.
I don't think we started a war to benefit Cheney and Haliburton, but I do believe they have profited immensely from it, to the tune of billions. I'm also not so certain there aren't large business interests that are now keeping us in Iraq. It is seen as a fertile, undeveloped terroritory for American corporations. Lots of money to be made in Iraq, now on government contracts, and later doing business with the Iraqis themselves. Something they were NOT able to do under the UN sactions against Saddam-led Iraq. Think about that.
Ad for the Saudi's, the government is our ally, per se, because they are threatened by radical fundamentalist Islamic states and Muslims, the same as we. Those types see Saudi alliance with us as despicable, and would love to see the House of Saud overthrown. So the Saudi goverment has become a master of playing both ends at once, donating money to Palestinians in support of Islam, and supporting the US against other terrorist groups (Al-Queda) at the same time.
I have no doubt that our alliance with Israel is one of the reasons the Islamic world hates us as much as they do. Along with Hollywood and women's rights, and democracy, and so on. But Islam isn't just an enemy of the USA, they're an enemy of the West and any country that is not Muslim. That seems to be lost in a lot of the discussions taking place everywhere. Islam is a world religion that makes no distinction between the secular and the spiritual. Governments should be run according to Islamic law, period. Until that happens, we always have to be aware that some Muslims, somewhere are going to want to overthrow and topple governments that are not Islamic.
re: One World Goverment. I do believe that there are certain powerful groups that want to see the world fall under one world government. It will make easier the sell of corporate goods across borders if every one is under the rule of one government, abiding by the same trade laws, regulations, and policies. Its about the money. However, right now, I think there are many in those groups who see the U.S. as THE de facto leader of this one world government. As the last remaining Super Power (for now,) I think a lot of what the current government (or those behind the scenes) are trying to accomplish is set up the United States as some kind of proxy head of a one world government, or at the very least, making way for the one world government that in the end they hope will answer to US business interests.
So, the United States is at war in Iraq, not for oil but for oil, not necessarily to run its oil wells but to continue to have access to cheap oil, and to prevent the EU from taking over the oil market. If this happens, the US economy is sunk.
We are allies with Israel because of the pro-Israeli lobby, and Christian fundamentalists who see the restoration of Israel as a nation as fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. There is no way the United States will permit Israel to fall to an attack, period.
The Saudis are walking a tight-rope right now, but seem fairly well secure to me, at least until the USA is finished as a super power. Then watch how quickly the convert oil sales to the Euro and turn overtly Muslim overnight.
As to whether this is good or bad: I cannot say. Unless and until the United States of America decides to produce its own oil; stop borrowing money from China and other governments; stops giving money to and propping up foreign governments; stops wasting money abroad on 'interventions,; stops illegal AND legal immigration; lowers its tax rates; finds a means of keeping corporations from going over seas; well then, until that happens, we sort of have to fight these wars in Iraq, Iran, and elsewhere. But I'd rather bring our guys home, get out of Iraq, stay away from Iran, drill for oil in Anwar, seal the border, stop welfare, reroute foreign aid dollars to R&D for alternative fuel, censure corporations who move off shore, and stop unfair trade practices.
But which of those scenarios do YOU think is more likely to happen?
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
Wow, that was one long a** post! It didn't look that big in the preview window!!
Good luck to all of you who venture to wade through it all.
Good luck to all of you who venture to wade through it all.
The rest of the world is trying to figure out ways to check and reverse U.S. power without being overly obvious or blatant about it. Russia and China are taking steps to form an alliance, an alliance that also includes India, Brazil, Venezuela, and various weak Arab and Third World countries.
This is perfectly natural. If it was the USSR with the overwhelming military and financial advantages that the U.S. has now, America and everyone else would be trying to find ways to check and eventually checkmate it without igniting WWIII. The world seems to work better when there are rival power blocs of roughly equal strength rather than a single hegemon seeking to dictate to everyone else.
If China and/or Japan decided to cash in its dollar-held debt, what would happen? Even establishment economists believe the Washington-controlled global financial system would go into severe depression if not crash entirely.
A combination of anti-U.S. economic and eventually military alliances will form, but the Democrat/Republican one-party system is its own worst enemy in many ways. The incomprehensible debt being piled up to fund short-term interests -- domestic debt and foreign-owned debt -- cannot continue to mount like it is forever. The open borders, the methodical elimination of the middle class through "free" trade and outsourcing, the failure to develop alternative energy sources, choosing instead to milk the world's oil supply dry, the rotting of America's infrastructure, the dumbing down of the population in the government schools. The list is long and ominous.
What frightens me most about the current power structure in Washington is that in so many ways it resembles the government of Israel in its m.o. It thumbs its nose at the rest of the world, reveling in its military strength without looking at the long-term consequences of its actions. Israel is a despised, isolated nation that exists only because of its umbilical cord to Washington. But who will bail out the U.S. when the rest of the world (other than Israel) turns decisively on us?
This is perfectly natural. If it was the USSR with the overwhelming military and financial advantages that the U.S. has now, America and everyone else would be trying to find ways to check and eventually checkmate it without igniting WWIII. The world seems to work better when there are rival power blocs of roughly equal strength rather than a single hegemon seeking to dictate to everyone else.
If China and/or Japan decided to cash in its dollar-held debt, what would happen? Even establishment economists believe the Washington-controlled global financial system would go into severe depression if not crash entirely.
A combination of anti-U.S. economic and eventually military alliances will form, but the Democrat/Republican one-party system is its own worst enemy in many ways. The incomprehensible debt being piled up to fund short-term interests -- domestic debt and foreign-owned debt -- cannot continue to mount like it is forever. The open borders, the methodical elimination of the middle class through "free" trade and outsourcing, the failure to develop alternative energy sources, choosing instead to milk the world's oil supply dry, the rotting of America's infrastructure, the dumbing down of the population in the government schools. The list is long and ominous.
What frightens me most about the current power structure in Washington is that in so many ways it resembles the government of Israel in its m.o. It thumbs its nose at the rest of the world, reveling in its military strength without looking at the long-term consequences of its actions. Israel is a despised, isolated nation that exists only because of its umbilical cord to Washington. But who will bail out the U.S. when the rest of the world (other than Israel) turns decisively on us?
guest301 said:
The truth of the matter is most Christian Zionists favor Israel over the U.S., thinking that little pile of rocks will be the center of God's Kingdom on Earth. Every time we suffer the consequences of a hurricane or natural disaster the prophets of doom tell us it was because we slighted Israel in some fashion.
According to the disciples of Billye Brim, Mike Evans and countless others, we need not actually invade Israel to incur the wrath of God. No, if we merely fail to supportit's every whim or withhold monies the anger of a vengeful Jehovah will be unleashed with a fury, chastising us for our great sin.
It was often stated byChristian Jewish sycophantsthatthe reasonBush Sr. lost his bid for re-election ...was ...for threatening to delay loan guarantees.
The quote which ticked off God and sealedBush daddy's fate:"There are 1,000 lobbyists up on the Hill today lobbying Congress for loan guarantees for Israel and I'm one lonely little guy down here asking Congress to delay its consideration of loan guarantees for 120 days."
PoorGeorge. if only he hadn't listened to Jiim Baker who reportedly said: "F-the Jews", he easily would have beaten Clinton.
