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.

 

Do we need the German military in the Caribbean and Micronesia?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Currently, as World War I was paid off in 2010 by Germany, the deal with the treaty of Versaille was to allow Germany to reposes all of its land in the Caribbean and Micronesia held by a U.S. Trust.

The only way I am going to see Prussia and Germany fly its flags in the caribbean and micronesia is to just place the flags next to the U.S. flags there, and let nature take its course.

If Germany forces the U.S.'s flags down and replaced, this might start commotion, so the alternative is to just fly them together.

The deal was not both wars paid, because World War I was over different land then World War II, so must be treated seperately.

A little background information is the entire Pre-World War, WWI and WWII were all started over Prussia's land in the caribbean and micronesia that was tresspassed on because of unattention by Prussia at the time. The United States was the primary accuser of tresspassing Prussia's land during the 1800's.




posted on May, 26 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


I am sorry but the way you have worded your post it sounds like America always wanted the land and once it got the land it never had any intention on giving it back..

and if that is what happens I would really question the logic!

how are Americas allies ever going to trust America if America is not seen to keep her side of any treaty.. and why would Americas enemies ever sue for peace knowing a peace treaty with America is meaningless.

A lesson can be found in 2 words... Perfidious Albion
edit on 26/5/11 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by thoughtsfull
reply to post by firstonterror
 


I am sorry but the way you have worded your post it sounds like America always wanted the land and once it got the land it never had any intention on giving it back..

and if that is what happens I would really question the logic!

how are Americas allies ever going to trust America if America is not seen to keep her side of any treaty.. and why would Americas enemies ever sue for peace knowing a peace treaty with America is meaningless.

A lesson can be found in 2 words... Perfidious Albion
edit on 26/5/11 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)


Thanks for your response,

auctually, one reason is because Prussia is credited for establishing all american countries. A few examples for you considering the United States of America is...

1. The United States education system is Prussian.
2. The United States military method of chain of command is Prussian.
3. The United States fundaments of virtues and beliefs are Prussian. ie: Pride, Honor, Integrity.. ect.

so the problem arises with just the fact of just asking, does America even own its land in the first place?
of course not. It was developed by the Prussian Empire.

As far as the Americas are concerned, every country in the Americas wear Prussian Pickelhaube Uniforms, such as the Chliean, Columbian, Venezuelan.. ect, Honor Guard in respect of Prussia for starting this continent.

They just dont teach you this in school, but it is publically available to find out.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Perfidious Albion is what the French call the English, 'Albion' refers to the white cliffs of Dover, ever since 1066 the two Nations has not got on very well together, As late as 1939, French naval planing was what to do if the English fleet got in the way of French interests. The French have not really forgiven the English for the terrible deeds done in the Mediterranean.(1940)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by pikestaff
 


My comment was aimed along the lines of.. does America want to be labelled in the same way England (and now Britain) has in this regard (i.e seen as treacherous)

As far as I am aware the comment aimed at England dates from the 13th century and for various reasons that label has stuck and been used repeatedly by a lot of nations down the centuries... even the American Administration used it as recently as 2008.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


Interesting notion.. tho I generally get confused when people use the term Prussia.. do you mean Germany as a whole? the Holy Roman Empire? or just the lands of Prussia? since looking in from the outside the terms seem interchangeable but like England/Britain have different connotations to different people.

I understand Germany is seen by some as perhaps a better choice for USA to claim lineage from and closer connection to.. It certainly feels at times this is the way America leans especially at the moment.. (which is cool) but wouldn't it then that make it all the more important to return the lands and Islands America holds in trust?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by thoughtsfull
reply to post by firstonterror
 


Interesting notion.. tho I generally get confused when people use the term Prussia.. do you mean Germany as a whole? the Holy Roman Empire? or just the lands of Prussia? since looking in from the outside the terms seem interchangeable but like England/Britain have different connotations to different people.

I understand Germany is seen by some as perhaps a better choice for USA to claim lineage from and closer connection to.. It certainly feels at times this is the way America leans especially at the moment.. (which is cool) but wouldn't it then that make it all the more important to return the lands and Islands America holds in trust?


hi thoughtsfull,

Prussian Empire is my answer. When I say Prussia I mean Prussian Empire including all lands, people, races and nationalities.

The Prussian Empire is probably the only empire of the earth to include itself as an open door empire. Allthough Prussia does not have land, it still represents most if not every and all lands.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


So.. do you feel that the USA should take the opportunity via these Islands and Lands held in trust to reaffirm it's relationship/kinship with it's Prussian roots?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by thoughtsfull
reply to post by firstonterror
 


So.. do you feel that the USA should take the opportunity via these Islands and Lands held in trust to reaffirm it's relationship/kinship with it's Prussian roots?


no. the whole point was to advertise full payment of World War I received, and whether the German military should force all U.S. Trusts to cough up the land.

Problem is, that is all and every U.S. land they have in the caribbean and micronesia.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Yes. All blue land in the U.S. Trust is Prussian and may be collected by Germany now, even the mainland 48 states of USA.

Deals a deal ladies and gentleman, says treaty of versailles.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


thanks
I would be interested to see what kind of solution they come up with to resolve this issue.. I'm guessing which ever way the issue goes if it hits the MSM then it'll simply devolve into an argument about colonialism and Empire building.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


slightly off topic (bit slightly on topic as we are talking about the specifics of the treaty)

Have you read The Economic Consequence of Peace by the economist John Maynard-Keynes?
(Maynard-Keynes was involved in the Versailles Peace Conference that led to the Treaty of Versailles)


"Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist System was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth. Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become "profiteers,", who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.

Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose"

Source
www.gutenberg.org...



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


isnt it amazing that the official language is english



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


actually - during WWI , the japanese decladed war on the central powers , for the sole purpose of siezing germanies collonial assets in asia

they came into US trust in 1945 - as a condition of the japanese surrender



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


UTTER TWADDLE



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by firstonterror
 


I think you are a bit confused my friend. More than a bit. Let's start with the simple and work up: where in the treaty of versailles does it grant the mainland 48 states of the United States of America to "Prussia" once the debt imposed after WWI was paid off?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ateuprto
 


further to that reply - who is prussia ?

its not a trick question - the terms of the unconditional surrender , the articales of administration of the occupide zones , and lastly the formations of the FRG and DDR as seperate soverign states erased prussia and all previous authorities etc etc etc -

the 2 new states started with a virtually blank slate - all that was transfered to them were reparations obligations , the sovereingnty of land within thier new borders , coastal waters and maritime ecconomic exclusion zones etc

niether state inherited any claim to anything else from any previous state

if the teturn of former colonial teretory was not a condition of reparations terms - then there would be no obligation to hand them back at all



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Is there a link or anything you can provide? This thread makes no sense to me at all. What lands exactly are you reffering to?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


And to further the initial point even...further...BOOKS! check em out. I don't like to rag on anyone but the OP has previously admitted to being a diagnosed schizophrenic forgoing any treatment. Most if not all of this makes little to no sense what so ever.




top topics



 
2

log in

join