Originally posted by American-philosopher
reply to post by JakesterL
We the People" pose no threat whatsoever to out government and it will act in anyway necessary to ensure it's very survival. Whether we, or our
"representatives" approve or not
Is that the problem now? That we the people do not pose a threat to our current government and I am not meaning it in a violent way. I mean it ina
way of mass people standing up for what they want the whole of the american people.
And are you saying that we are entering a DUNE scenario where it is just a battle for resources a battle for the spice. And the ends justify the
means,anything to get the spice.
My previous post is of pure strategic consideration, which is why it will need to be done without the shackles of the morality of the people. I’m
saying that some time soon, there will be no more need to pretend we are holding the strings.
The Iraq war for example, WMDs was the premise we invaded for. The intelligence provided has been proven to be false. Then the mission changed. Our
guilt was quite predictable and who can say no to spreading our cherished democracy? Only one big problem with that, it wasn’t why we invaded. Once
we neglected to admit fault, then it became a moral obligation to stay. Hey Halliburton isn’t complaining. In that case, the will of the people
wasn’t denied, just hijacked. We were deceived and what of those who orchestrated it, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld? If there are no consequences, why
wouldn’t they? Why won’t they now? Give me an example of how the government can’t do whatever it pleases, regardless if it’s against the will
of the people.
What can you do in response, elect one of the two candidates already indoctrinated? The last independent president elected was George Washington. I
think the two parties have the system pretty well figured out by now. Pick any extreme view right or left and neither even comes close to an accurate
representation of the people. But come election time, that’s what will be offered. They already know, the more ridiculous agendas of either party
have no real chance of success. So the status quo will be maintained, business as usual.
The objective of the government is to increase it’s own power, not to serve the people. To that end you will see both parties in total agreement. If
a conflict arises between corporate sponsorship and public opinion, the public will lose each and every time. It doesn’t matter who is in office,
republican/democrat the outcome will be the same. They have the same masters and it’s not “we the people”.
American-Philosopher do you think my scenario is really all that strange?
In this link the language seems pretty strong in objection towards our tactics and citing civilian deaths. China, Russia and even North Korea want to
be champions of humanity as well: China and Russia call for an immediate cease fire in
I guess we will find out soon enough, but my money is on we don’t back down and in fact escalate our presence.
edit on 3/22/2011
by JakesterL because: (no reason given)