Originally posted by The Vagabond
The possibility is considerable, however feel free to post conclusive evidence if you're going to assert it that strongly and self-righteously
dismiss other members as "babies".
America has in fact made convenient decisions for Britain at times, but it has also gone its own way at times.
The bonds between us in the relationship you propose can only be as strong as the personal convictions of whoever might be in power here at the time.
ATS is full of people new to understanding the difference between how we're told the world works and how it actually does.
Refering to anyone learning to 'digest new food (information)', as a 'baby', is older than the Bible and usually not taken as an insult.
Taught histories and actual histories, are very different animals. Most can and do accept this, untill you point out their own Nations 'Glories'
were just scripted 'roles' by world ruling families. That's naturally hard for most, 'proud of their country', to 'swallow'.
Putting on a 'smoke and mirror show', to convince folk you represent them, and so avoid revolution, isn't restricted to local politics, but a most
effective, ancient tool of Globalists.
While "The Coalition of the Willing" was locking up it's own citizens as terrorists, Australia was funnelling 100's of millions to Saddam through
wheat sales, a fact made public by an American Senator, yet not important news to Americans, who should 'turn against us' for knowingly doing so, IF
it wasn't all just part of 'the family plan'.
Britain, America and Australia are key members of a 'family' (well their 'true' rulers are), and like all siblings, will have spats, but also
'pretend to be fighting' inorder to get intell. from enemies of 'the family'.
To me, 'Americans' should be happy to know they aren't to blame for what 'America' is doing. As I don't blame 'Australians' for what
Bush was once asked why John Howard's popularity went up, on deciding to go to war, when his and Blair's fell. His answer was, "He married well."
He laughed, the reporters laughed and all seemed to miss the profound truth of it.
As to, "whoever might be in power... at the time", for a young, modern 'democracy', the U.S. has suffered too many assassinations and
'unfortunate' deaths amoung it's power elite, for others to believe the U.S. Government represents 'the will of the people'.
Anyway, how would I post "conclusive evidence" of the course of human history, when 'experts' are still arguing about most historic and political
A simple summation of what I'm getting at; Democracies are just a foil to protect the World's Ruling Royals from assassination by angry citizens.
When you keep people's attention focused on following 'changing' governments, they tend not to notice those boring things, that 'stay the
Many Americans can accept their Government was behind 9/11 to 'justify' a War on Terror, I simply suggest it's because their Government, like the
rest of the coalitions', doesn't answer to 'the people' but more 'important' people of the world?
Pride doesn't lead to a fall, the blindness it can cause to humble truths, does. I don't want to see America fall, we're family, but worse than
possibly falling with her, is inheriting her 'world's policeman role'.
I'm sorry my written realization, that this expansion on the topic is 'unpalatable' to most Americans, came across as 'self-righteous' instead of
humourously self-adomishing for daring to publicly raise it.
I don't use 'smileys' to indicate humour because I'd rather folk like you feel free to respond than be accused of, 'not being able to take a
joke', which is the real reason many people use them when they mean to insult.
I did and do not mean to insult. I am not the enemy, just a another pawn who lucked out on a vantage point and cares to warn fellow soldiers.