It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


A View of War and Violence

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 04:23 PM
War was best summarized as, "diplomacy, by other means." These words were spoken because there has never been a war of, for or by the people on foreign soil. There have been wars on foreign soil and there have been wars of, for and by the people, but never one and the same.

What is this significance but extremely telling of our current World Order and it's mechanisms of control? Why are we at war in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries? Is there a clear and definitive answer, or is it mostly conjecture even ten years later which is backed by the fact we are still there? What of the War on Drugs, on substandard Education, on being the first in space matters or technology? What do these accomplish for the average man? Nothing but pain and suffering is ever to be had from war, take it from a combat veteran.

I have struggled with why we are at war, and I have come to different conclusions with varying degrees of correctness and together they start to encompass the real reasons, but always fall short. I had to finally realize that, wars are never won. Wars are only the death throes of loss on both sides, the tango of failed diplomacy between nationstates.

It is our job as the people to elect and control a government who's main focus is our relations abroad. It is not their duty to shower nations with money, or suppress one nationstate and coddle another. It is not their right to take up arms in our name, with our brothers and sisters carrying out the declaration and enforcing it. I reiterate, "war is diplomacy, by other means." The very fact we ever go to war is an admission of defeat and failure on behalf of our elected offices. They are entrusted to deal with nations maturely and efficiently, and when two people can not do this and resort to violence, they are arrested and tried of crimes. When nations can not do this, they go to war.

How do we enact change?

It's not an easy task, that much is certain. The people have to care, and in a country of apathy and greed, unless it is self serving or self preservative, little action will be taken. That is the largest obstacle, American laziness and sheep-like nature. I think that no assertion this gloomy should be without a possible solution, though that would require a different world. If people vote with their money, and throw off the illegal debt slavery chains that bind them to their televisions, good things could happen to this country. If the corporations are funding the politicians, vote out those acting against our beliefs and structures. This type of movement is highly succeptible to hijacking in a very insidious nature that is being witnessed right now. The far left has co-opted and attempted to make the #OccupyWallStreet protests about corporatist evils and the benefits of socialism. We see here how easily the people are distracted and used as a weapon. There is one voice in the nation, and the people speak as that voice, but they are reading from a carefully crafted script.

In truth, there are computer models and projections that attempt to discern the best approach to stamping out the coming revolution by perverting it and causing it to lose steam. Only a revolution of truth will succed, but the type the Wall Street protests are turning into is nothing more that what we have seen in Egypt, Libya and other countries. It will enact regime change (something to note and caution others, Alex Jones and his peers are calling for just that, so think about it), and it will be swift, but the result will be nothing like the original goals.

This is where we come to a crossroads.

If the people are not capable of enacting change as a group, decicively, what is to be done? For years I have believe that if we can not effect change ourselves, we don't deserve it. In fact, we deserve tyranny because we are incapable of ruling ourselves effficiently and justly. The other option, is the nuclear option. However, even with this option there are heavy flaws.

I am a combat veteran, and I have seen martial law first hand. The people will submit. The people will not revolt openly, and those few that do will be quelled or silenced. I believe many here want to fall back on this option if "TSHTF", but even with the largest gun toting population, a very small minority might stand up. More to follow.


log in