It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dictator Bush. Is It Really Possible?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   
I hope that this is the proper forum for this thread. If not I apologize in advance.

I've never been one to buy into Bush's ability, or even desire to become "Dictator" of the US. I'm not a big fan of his, I think his decision making is attrocious. I think watching him try to think on his feet is an embarrassment. His public speaking skills are, well, to put it delicately - "lacking". While an unwavering stance is often the signature of a great leader, it can also just be a refusal to admit when you're wrong.

That being said, there are some compelling developments which have me scratching my head.

The wire tapping issue, where The US government no longer needs court orders to listen in on private telephone conversations.

The newly institued ability of the government to open private US Mail.

The Governments efforts to get search engine records.

The ability of the government to seize email records.

These are things that we know about. What don't we know about?

So here is my question. Is it feasible that Bush actually could become a "Dictator"?
If a BIG "terrorist catastrophe" happens right before election time, is it possible that marshall law would be instituted, and Bush is able to forego the election process and remain in office indefinitely? That he would put into effect a Patriot Act on steroids which in essence gives him ultimate power? Dictator status in the US. Seriously is it possible?

Now here's another question. And this is a really scary one. Let's say Bush and Company pull something like that off. Would the rest of the world allow it? Bush has pretty much gotten the rest of the world to hate the US, and that when there's a Senate, and a House for checks and balances. Imagine what mistaken Foreign Policies Bush would commit if he had the authority to just pen stroke anything he wants? "So it is written, so it is done." - kind of thing. Would the world just get together and put an end to this train wreck?

I'd love to hear some thoughts on this, as it provides quite a bit of fodder for some paranoia.




posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Well, the president, from what I understand, has already laid out the possibility of declaring martial law.

I think that if a big terrorist attack did occur within the next year, then,yeah, it's possible that the election could be forstalled for a while. The real question would be for how long.

As far as the world intervening in such an instance. I doubt it. The world didn't intervene when Hitler basically declared himself leader of Germany. It didn't intervene when castro took Cuba.. It didn't intervene when Lenin was over Russia... Why wuld it all of a sudden intervene against the most powerful military state the world has ever seen?

[edit on 9-1-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 9-1-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   
where have you been OP? Freeze dried? He's been laying the groundwork for it ever since 9/11 if not for himself then for what follows



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Hey SoT - While I can't really argue with the facts that the world never stepped in before in the scenarios you'd presented, the world is a much different place now. I'm worried that BECAUSE the US is such a strong military machine that the world might step in. The world can ill afford to have a madman, or idiot - call him what you may - controlling such a devastating power without any reigns or limitations.




where have you been OP? Freeze dried? He's been laying the groundwork for it ever since 9/11 if not for himself then for what follows


The fact that he's been laying groundwork since 9/11 can be effectively argued, however the question this thread asks is "IS IT POSSIBLE" for him to actually pull it off?



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by lombozo
I hope that this is the proper forum for this thread. If not I apologize in advance.

I've never been one to buy into Bush's ability, or even desire to become "Dictator" of the US. I'm not a big fan of his, I think his decision making is attrocious. I think watching him try to think on his feet is an embarrassment. His public speaking skills are, well, to put it delicately - "lacking". While an unwavering stance is often the signature of a great leader, it can also just be a refusal to admit when you're wrong.

That being said, there are some compelling developments which have me scratching my head.

The wire tapping issue, where The US government no longer needs court orders to listen in on private telephone conversations.

The newly institued ability of the government to open private US Mail.

The Governments efforts to get search engine records.

The ability of the government to seize email records.

These are things that we know about. What don't we know about?

So here is my question. Is it feasible that Bush actually could become a "Dictator"?
If a BIG "terrorist catastrophe" happens right before election time, is it possible that marshall law would be instituted, and Bush is able to forego the election process and remain in office indefinitely?


No.

It would be illegal. THere is no provision for the suspension of presidential elections. Bush cannot legally become dictator. He can try to force the issue. Anyone that tries to make themself Dictator of America will be shot.


That he would put into effect a Patriot Act on steroids which in essence gives him ultimate power?

If he stood up and said "i am now dictator', it would be illegal. He would not have 'patriot acts on steroids' put into effect. There would be no law. We already had a patriot act on steroids, it was the Alien and Sedition Acts.



Let's say Bush and Company pull something like that off. Would the rest of the world allow it?

The United States would not allow it. If enough of the US military had sided with Bush, then other countries, like Britain, France, Germany, etc, would aid the legitimate patriots in the US.


Would the world just get together and put an end to this train wreck?

No.
The world is weak. It prefers strong arm dictators anyway. If someone installed himself as dictator of the US, and prevented any realistic or substantial resistance internally to himself, then other countries would perhaps do lots of things, but one thing they wouldn't do is attack the US. At best they would aid the defeated legitimate government and its supporters.

No nation is crazy enough to openly attack the US when it has a democratic government, with a militaristic dictator, people would be even less likely. Heck, the US would probably be MORE secure, at least from external threats, than it is now. Of course, it'd be completely insecure internally, since, well, there'd be a dictator in charge.


I'm worried that BECAUSE the US is such a strong military machine that the world might step in. The world can ill afford to have a madman, or idiot - call him what you may - controlling such a devastating power without any reigns or limitations.

The world would allow itself to be held nuclear hostage against an Imperial America. It would quickly kowtow to it. Perhaps some countries would stand up to it on some issues, but overall, the majority of the world would get in line with it.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by lombozo
I'm worried that BECAUSE the US is such a strong military machine that the world might step in. The world can ill afford to have a madman, or idiot - call him what you may - controlling such a devastating power without any reigns or limitations.




There's a big difference between a madman and an idiot. I don't think Bush qualifies as either..However, he'd probably be closer categorized as a madman than an idiot..

Anyway, the world may would choose to cut off relations or such, but I doubt we'd see any military action presented against us. Look at it this way, if you know someone is tinkering on the edge of sanity, are you going to knudge him forward? Some might,but I certainly wouldn't advise it.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
A person is only as strong as the people around him and under him.

As we saw from the 2006 election, Bush's team lost control of congress.

And despite all the paranoia, there is no way he would have enough backing of generals, corporate American, and the foreign countries the US relies on to pull it off.

Could he try? Yes. But he wouldn't unless he was insane. But even if he tried, it would fail.

The NWO concept relies on one thing I personally do not believe from experience with people of power... it relies on unity and complete control at the top. And I just don't see that. Not even within smaller groups like the Masons or Political Parties.

The great thing about corruption and power is that it will always dismantle people who try to consolidate them.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:10 PM
link   


It would be illegal. THere is no provision for the suspension of presidential elections. Bush cannot legally become dictator. He can try to force the issue. Anyone that tries to make themself Dictator of America will be shot.


Agreed.
Nygdan, is right. Dictator of America will be shot. Lincon was accused of trying to become a Dictator due to some of his actions during the Civil War. Look what happened to him.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   
I agree he would be shot, But is that really gonna stop him?



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
But I seriously hope he does.
I would love to see Bush get shot.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:26 PM
link   
My thoughts on this would be that even if it did happen would his military might follow suit and take his orders. I doubt it very much and could imagine a sort of revolt from his mighty military machine they are US citizens after all.

There are always darker powers in control somewhere and im sure someone somewhere is keeping an eye on dubya



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
The only way it can work is it there is a crisis, and there is a legitimate question of who is in charge.

The 2000 Election would've been an oppurtunity for that. If large high level agencies and forces within the government were divided on who is the legitimate president is, then you could have a situation where the military would hvae to make a choice and step in. This is usually what happens in other countries.

Thats why the 2000 election was such a potentially dangerous time. Far more dangerous than any time since.

For bush, perhaps if the 2008 elections were up in the air, and both sides were seen as frauds, then people might support bush staying in power past his term's expiration date. But I doubt that. People would support one or the other candidate.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   
What indication does anyone have that he wants to remain "in charge" (a relative term in a representative republic like ours)? A rise to dictatorial rule in the U.S. would result in the subjugation of 300 million people, with nary a bit of infrastructure to do it. TSA start up woes ring a bell? If we can barely manage to hire some "rent a cops" to herd a small group like U.S. air travelers (yes, that a small group compared to 300 million), how can an effective force be arrived upon by 2009? Logistics, the will of the people, and what I see as a complete and utter lack of desire to function as sole means of governance answers the question.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by untouchable
But I seriously hope he does.
I would love to see Bush get shot.


well...
Thats how you end up on the FBI watch list



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   
I can guarantee you that there are already watching me. They probably have a team of people that watch this site just to see if anybody is catching on to the crimes that they are committing. In my opinion it could be possible that some of the site moderators and so-called "experts"could be working with them based on some of the extremely bias and unresearched posts I have read in the past. But I guess that's what you get for being honest!
I thought we were supposed to have freedom of speech. It is a sad sad day for humanity when voicing your opinion about a criminal gets you on the FBI's watch list. I just said I want to watch, like you don't.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Anyone that tries to make themself Dictator of America will be shot.


Quoted for emphasis. This is exactly what would happen.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by untouchable
But I seriously hope he does.
I would love to see Bush get shot.


So,you'd like to see a scapegoat get shot,eh? Hmmm...interesting.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Hey untouchable -
You'd really like to see the President get shot?
Dude/Dudette - WTF are you saying? And even moreso, what are you thinking?
That's just so uncool.
President Bush is our Commander in Chief. I might disagree with some, if not all of his decisions, but I don't wish to see an assasin take him out. Impeach? Yep no problem. But a violent crime against him. NO! I would die to protect him, even if I think he is wrong in his historical decisions.
Look at the big picture. He may seem like a "clown" but I do believe that his best intentions are for the citizens of the US. What's my biggest complaint thus far. He wants to listen to my phone conversations? Go ahead - he'll be bored out of his mind with my communications. He wants to open my mail? Go ahead. Maybe he'll see I need a raise after he opens my bills.
Want to check my search engine inqueries? Go ahead. The worst I have on record is an occassional - well how do you say it..............hmmmmmmmm.........."Hot item"........
Sorry . I ave nothing to hide....



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Sorry lombozo....

But this sick bastard is your commander-in-chief not mine. I live in Canada.

I think it's kind of funny that you're so willing to give up your freedoms as an American and support your Commander-in-Chief for doing sowhen this guy is supposed to be protecting your freedoms.Bush has committed the most of the same crimes against humanity as Saddam Hussein, yet this sick ^$&* is allowed to walk around in demonized Saddam as a criminal when he has done exact same thingsto his own people by way of tapping their phones and telling them what they can and cannot do by rewriting their constitution, In fact it was his father that sold Saddam Hussein, (a sick ruthless dictator) weapons of mass destruction and then his son coincidentally goes into the country to cut this guy's throat and ends up hanging him. Tell me again why this guy doesn't deserve to be shot like the dogs he is??



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 05:07 PM
link   
That's the beauty of corporate fascism. With an invisible oligarchy - who needs fascism?

Since we're talking about a democracy that is truly an oligarchy - and historically has always been an oligarchy - only aristocrats were able to vote in Greece, let's re-examine actions of the supposed representatives of the people.

Some would argue now that we have a fascist form of government controlled by the monetary interest of big business like Chevron and Shell.

Those who are acting on behalf of their own best interests with disregard for the rule of law; waging illegal wars and dismantling the bill of rights and constitution for the benefit of their supremacy in the social order.

Say it's an old fashioned democracy with diebold controlled votes by those who know best, no longer dependent geographically on any nation to increase their wealth and power. Unless it's for the use of a massive military industrial machine.

Assume that they're patriots and have America's best interests at heart, haven't transformed the economy into one of a developing nation's as an exporter of raw resource.

Assume they weren't responsible for 911, didn't instigate the atrocity as a means to instituting their total surveillance awareness network, rid themselves of the pesky bill of rights and invade the oil rich country of Iraq - just when Hussein was considering a cartel with the oil rich despot Chavez.

Aren't waiting for living standards to drop so low that 5 cents an hour is a competitive wage once again, hoping against hope to dismantle the last of a social safety net that diverts funds from private coffers and raises expectations for decent living standards around the world.

Nevermind that the pre-emptive strike was strategized by bean counters, made Hellasburntya rich, America poor (better to justify dismantling social safety nets with) and Iraq a training ground for terrorists and mercenaries.

After all, Iraqi's, like South Americans, lack the Western cultural skills that provide for a good sound oligarchy of immeasurable propaganda and secret assassination.

All those mass graves were such an obvious giveaway.

The Tigris Euphrates provides excellent irrigation for Monsanto's terminator seed, (a feat of necromancy admired in hell), and of course the rich oil reserves will insure the long-term survival of our very own industrial captains.

So let's pretend they're on our side and it's not already a fascist oligarchy so entrenched that no matter who gets voted for they have the people's interests at heart.

Besides the inexorable inertia of their upper-hand is so discouraging, that I think I'll just join in with the happy delusion that Western interests are being protected and promoted by happy meals and Walmart.

[edit on 9-1-2007 by clearwater]




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join