PDA

View Full Version : Chuck Baldwin: My Thoughts On The Movie "American Sniper."




William Tell
01-28-2015, 09:02 AM
Chuck Baldwin: My Thoughts On The Movie "American Sniper."

As with millions of other Americans, I went to see the hugely popular Clint Eastwood-directed movie, "American Sniper." Here are some of my thoughts:

No one, at least not me, doubts the patriotism, courage, and sacrifice of our nation's military personnel--especially our combat forces. I certainly do not share Michael Moore's opinion that Chris Kyle (and our snipers in general) was a coward. Snipers have been effective in helping to wage America's wars since our War for Independence. In lawful combat, snipers are as needful as any other specialized fighting man.

My issue is not with Chris Kyle, or with any other American fighting man. My issue is with the justness of the war Chris Kyle was ordered to fight. Yes, I realize that we have an all-volunteer army; but let's be honest enough to admit that the vast majority of our young people joining the U.S. military sincerely believe that they are doing their patriotic duty by volunteering to conduct war against America's "enemies." They learn nothing else from family, school, movies and television, and church. The singular message they hear is that everything the U.S. military does is right and righteous and that every military engagement we fight is just and justified. I'm sure Chris Kyle was no different.

However, at the risk of sounding unpatriotic, after watching the real-life military exploits of Chris Kyle on the Big Screen, I left the theater extremely angry.

In the first place, Saddam Hussein and the country of Iraq had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11. G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney unabashedly lied to the American people about the necessity of America invading Iraq. We invaded Iraq under false pretenses; we occupied Iraq under false pretenses; and we took (and lost) thousands of lives under false pretenses.

Secondly, as I watched the depiction of U.S. Marines going house-to-house and kicking down doors, manhandling old men, women, and children, it occurred to me that these exact same tactics are now being employed by American police agencies against the people of the United States. Our so-called SWAT teams are nothing more than occupying military units. The strategies, philosophies, and tactics are exactly the same as soldiers in a war zone.

Thirdly, everyone, ask yourself these questions, what if instead of the place being Fallujah, Iraq, the place was Kansas City, Missouri? Instead of the invasion force being the U.S. military, it was military troops from Communist China or Russia? What if the occupying snipers were killing American women and children instead of Iraqi women and children? Would we still consider them "heroes?" And would we act any differently from the Iraqi people who were trying to defend their homes and communities against an occupying foreign power?

When I left the theater, I was not angry with Chris Kyle, who was apparently the best at what he did, I was angry with the politicians in Washington, D.C., who sent Chris Kyle into an unjust and undeclared war to wage war against people who posed NO imminent threat to the United States.

I am also angry with an American culture that seems to lack the discernment to recognize the difference between just and unjust war. I am further angered by ubiquitous U.S. propaganda against the Muslim people in general (especially by my Christian brethren).

It seems that hardly anyone recognizes that the power-elite are engaged in global conspiracy to pit the Muslim nations of the Middle East against the West and vice-versa. Our own CIA has been manipulating the internal affairs of the Middle Eastern states for decades. The CIA put Saddam Hussein in power. Where do you think those brand new hundred-dollar bills (in the amount of millions of dollars) stored between the walls of Hussein's house, wrapped in Bank of America wrappers, came from?

The CIA put Osama bin Laden in power. The CIA put ISIS in power. And dare we talk about the illegal drug-running operations that have been conducted by the CIA in both Middle Eastern and Far Eastern nations for at least a half-century?

I am angry with a federal government that cares absolutely nothing about our brave U.S. military personnel. They send them to fight unjust wars only then to treat them like second-class citizens in our VA hospitals. If DC truly cared about our military personnel, they would never ask them to risk life and limb except for those times that are truly necessary for the safety and security of the United States.

America has NO RIGHT to proclaim itself to be the world's policeman. It has NO RIGHT to send U.S. fighting men to vindicate the policies and prejudices of the United Nations. The President of the U.S. has NO RIGHT to invade and occupy foreign countries without a Declaration of War by Congress.

I am angry because in the name of fighting the War on Terror around the world, the American people are quickly losing the liberties guaranteed in our Constitution's Bill of Rights. And out of a misguided spirit of patriotism, the majority of the American people seem fine with it.

I am angry because our brave military troops are being asked to give their arms and legs and families and lives for the selfish, parochial, political, and economic interests of the ruling elite--and are also asked to take the lives of thousands of innocents in the process.

If you ask me, Chris Kyle was the victim of a sadistic and out-of-control federal leviathan that respects nothing. Not the rule of law. Not liberty--at home or abroad. Not family--our own military families or the families of other nations. Not constitutional government. Not national borders--our own or anyone else's. And certainly not the sacredness of life.

Yes, I left the movie "American Sniper" angry.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=932724926738432&id=226997970644468

William Tell
01-28-2015, 09:09 AM
Lots of idiots have commented there, calling him a liberal. Its pathetic.

Todd
01-28-2015, 09:19 AM
Lots of idiots have commented there, calling him a liberal. Its pathetic.

Have no clue what a liberal is then. baseless ad hominem.

William Tell
01-28-2015, 09:24 AM
Have no clue what a liberal is then. baseless ad hominem.

Correct, they clearly think a liberal is anyone who disagrees with Sean Hannity on any issue. They think that there are only 2 ideology packages. Unfortunately, many liberals think the same way. That anyone who disagrees with Obama and Al Sharpton is a Bush supporter, or racist or whatever.

RJB
01-28-2015, 09:25 AM
One of the commenters posted this picture.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/10246557_10203597552288003_2728670628683754659_n.j pg?oh=d9c355c9e0b08a38ccde8c1291e2c562&oe=55539FAE&__gda__=1433123275_6a81c535a5bcd24ac6c137cb549c3d9 1

Ronin Truth
01-28-2015, 09:26 AM
Fish or cut bait, Chuck. WWJD?

donnay
01-28-2015, 09:39 AM
Pastor Baldwin is spot-on! Most people who do not know what they are talking about spew the word 'Liberal' like they know what they are talking about. Has to be the public education!

cajuncocoa
01-28-2015, 10:07 AM
Get ready, because Chris Kyle's widow is going to be invited to speak at the 2016 GOP Convention...I can feel it. And the eventual nominee is going to have to embrace her, because there won't be a dry eye in the room when she finishes her speech.

Christian Liberty
01-28-2015, 10:14 AM
Get ready, because Chris Kyle's widow is going to be invited to speak at the 2016 GOP Convention...I can feel it. And the eventual nominee is going to have to embrace her, because there won't be a dry eye in the room when she finishes her speech.

I'm prepared. I have to wonder how Ron Paul would react in that situation (we know Rand will pander, as he pretty much must with this one.)

William Tell
01-28-2015, 10:18 AM
I'm prepared. I have to wonder how Ron Paul would react in that situation (we know Rand will pander, as he pretty much must with this one.)

Ron Paul wouldn't have a problem with some soldier's widow. I don't have any issue with her, but I am not a fan of Kyle. I don't see why people like dragging families into this.

RJB
01-28-2015, 11:12 AM
Ron Paul wouldn't have a problem with some soldier's widow. I don't have any issue with her, but I am not a fan of Kyle. I don't see why people like dragging families into this.

Yeah a weeping widow is a weeping widow, IMO. Ingrained chivalry, I guess.

Christian Liberty
01-28-2015, 11:19 AM
Ron Paul wouldn't have a problem with some soldier's widow. I don't have any issue with her, but I am not a fan of Kyle. I don't see why people like dragging families into this.

I wasn't so much thinking he'd have a problem with her as the implications for militarism.

pcosmar
01-28-2015, 11:19 AM
I like Chuck,, but I have to disagree with him here.

The blatant propaganda and glorification of war (especially a war were should not be involved in) does not anger me as much as it disgusts and saddens me.


And he opened his mouth in blasphemies against God, to blaspheme His name and His tabernacle, that is, those who dwell in heaven. It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him.

Perhaps he forgets who will be the ground troops of the Beast. :(

cajuncocoa
01-28-2015, 01:35 PM
I wasn't so much thinking he'd have a problem with her as the implications for militarism.
And that's the point of bringing her there (if they do, and I'm almost certain they will). They know the GOP base will eat it up, wave their flags, and cry buckets. And don't you DARE say one word of criticism, or else you're a cold-hearted snake beating up on a poor, defenseless widow who only wants to share the story of her brave husband who fought for your freedom, you ungrateful pinko.

RJB
01-28-2015, 01:50 PM
And that's the point of bringing her there (if they do, and I'm almost certain they will). They know the GOP base will eat it up, wave their flags, and cry buckets. And don't you DARE say one word of criticism, or else you're a cold-hearted snake beating up on a poor, defenseless widow who only wants to share the story of her brave husband who fought for your freedom, you ungrateful pinko.

And then the GOP base will demand more young men go overseas so we can have more crying widows and orphans.

It sucks. I get more cynical with each passing year.

Tywysog Cymru
01-28-2015, 01:59 PM
Get ready, because Chris Kyle's widow is going to be invited to speak at the 2016 GOP Convention...I can feel it. And the eventual nominee is going to have to embrace her, because there won't be a dry eye in the room when she finishes her speech.

I can only imagine the speech.

"Let's honor my husband's legacy by never giving up in the fight against terror!"

(thunderous applause)

AuH20
01-28-2015, 05:20 PM
Fighting for the New World Order is pretty damn un-American if you ask me. But then what do I know? :)

PaulConventionWV
01-28-2015, 05:38 PM
Great article. I wouldn't go so far as to call Chris Kyle a "victim", though. I think he knew what he was getting into and did it because he had an excuse. Why do you think he told that story about shooting people from atop the dome in New Orleans? I don't have a problem with saying he was brainwashed and that society is partially responsible for him thinking he had to fight for America, but to call him a "victim"? I don't think so.

GunnyFreedom
01-28-2015, 05:47 PM
Lots of idiots have commented there, calling him a liberal. Its pathetic.

Wow, yeah, don't read the comments unless you want an aneurysm.

TomKat
01-28-2015, 05:59 PM
Pastor Baldwin is spot-on! Most people who do not know what they are talking about spew the word 'Liberal' like they know what they are talking about. Has to be the public education!

Or from Faux news and "conservative talk radio" namely that horrible host Hannity (Mr. you don't agree with me and your ideas suck because you are a "liberal"). My dad constantly yells and screams about "liberals". It drives him nuts when I say that I am a "liberal". I follow up with classical liberal and talk about what the term is supposed to mean. He hasn't stopped yet but I have faith. He went from "no way in hell am I voting for that crazy Ron Paul guy" in '08 to not only voting for Ron in '12 but spreading the word which is hard for him to do comfortably through his job because he works for a major "conservative type of political group" and they mainly push neocons

AuH20
01-28-2015, 06:13 PM
This should help them think...

http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/pXB.jpg

Pericles
01-28-2015, 10:53 PM
Just about everything Baldwin writes increases my respect for him.

Sola_Fide
01-28-2015, 11:40 PM
He was way too easy on Chris Kyle himself. In my job I do a lot of business with the military, and of there is anything that always irks me about the attitudes of soldiers when they talk about these issues with me, it is their unflinching nationalism and cold heart for killing the infidels.

ThePaleoLibertarian
01-29-2015, 12:39 AM
Or from Faux news and "conservative talk radio" namely that horrible host Hannity (Mr. you don't agree with me and your ideas suck because you are a "liberal"). My dad constantly yells and screams about "liberals". It drives him nuts when I say that I am a "liberal". I follow up with classical liberal and talk about what the term is supposed to mean. He hasn't stopped yet but I have faith. He went from "no way in hell am I voting for that crazy Ron Paul guy" in '08 to not only voting for Ron in '12 but spreading the word which is hard for him to do comfortably through his job because he works for a major "conservative type of political group" and they mainly push neocons
I don't understand why anyone would identify as a "classical liberal" in the 21st century. As a self-identified reactionary, I certainly understand appreciating old ideas, and wanting to hearken back to an older political order. That being said, I don't get the "classical liberal" label. Why not just call yourself a libertarian? Classical economics are dated and wrong compared to modern free market schools of thought, like the Austrians, Chicago and of course the Neoclassicalists. I don't see any reason to identify that way, other than to confuse people. The liberal label belongs to the left now, it has for ages now.

Anyway, Chuck Baldwin is great. I was a registered Constitution party member for a while, in my first voting-age election in 2008 but it's a pretty facile thing to be in California. I was probably the only one for miles and miles.

puppetmaster
01-29-2015, 01:40 AM
And that's the point of bringing her there (if they do, and I'm almost certain they will). They know the GOP base will eat it up, wave their flags, and cry buckets. And don't you DARE say one word of criticism, or else you're a cold-hearted snake beating up on a poor, defenseless widow who only wants to share the story of her brave husband who fought for your freedom, you ungrateful pinko. America will be in a different place by the time elections hit.

AngryCanadian
01-29-2015, 01:46 AM
Lots of idiots have commented there, calling him a liberal. Its pathetic.

Idiots that dont have any arguments so they use insults to prove a point.

Mani
01-29-2015, 02:11 AM
He was way too easy on Chris Kyle himself. In my job I do a lot of business with the military, and of there is anything that always irks me about the attitudes of soldiers when they talk about these issues with me, it is their unflinching nationalism and cold heart for killing the infidels.




I absolutely loved what he wrote but I agree he was too soft on Chris.

Dude was on their soil, in their land, raiding their homes, murdering their women and children....And he called them "savages"???

anaconda
01-29-2015, 03:06 AM
Have no clue what a liberal is then. baseless ad hominem.

LOL. This type of thing always reminds me of Dick Morris calling Ron Paul a "left-wing radical."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAVM_IZolkA

cajuncocoa
01-29-2015, 08:03 AM
America will be in a different place by the time elections hit.
How so?

Christian Liberty
01-29-2015, 10:28 AM
He was way too easy on Chris Kyle himself. In my job I do a lot of business with the military, and of there is anything that always irks me about the attitudes of soldiers when they talk about these issues with me, it is their unflinching nationalism and cold heart for killing the infidels.

I agree that he was too easy on him. Its probably a strategic error to all go the Laurence Vance route though, right though he is.

Tywysog Cymru
01-29-2015, 10:32 AM
Chuck Baldwin 2016!

(If Rand Paul doesn't win).

Christian Liberty
01-29-2015, 10:34 AM
I agree that he was too easy on him. Its probably a strategic error to all go the Laurence Vance route though, right though he is.

I mean, I'm guessing you don't call them murderers when you are doing business with them. Hence, Chuck isn't going to do so when he's trying to win their votes. When I'm in a position that doesn't require me to win someone's respect, I'll share all the truth;)

Ronin Truth
01-29-2015, 10:42 AM
Getting votes creates a whole lot of whores.

cajuncocoa
01-29-2015, 11:23 AM
Getting votes creates a whole lot of whores.
That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

Christian Liberty
01-29-2015, 11:31 AM
That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

You know I'm definitely more on the "principled" side of the debate. But I'm telling you, even as someone who doesn't really care about strategic considerations as such, its hard to tell people the truth about the military, and doubly so when they have relatives who are in, or are looking to go in themselves. Strategically speaking, I think its possible to completely condemn the wars without compromise without calling soldiers who fight in foreign wars murderers. And if you don't try to do so, I'm not sure they will listen to you at all.

That said, I'm not really much about winning. Winning won't work unless you change minds. The question is where you start when trying to change minds.

William Tell
01-29-2015, 11:41 AM
That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

I don't think it has to be either or. When running for office you want votes, but I think educating is good too. I kind of doubt Ron Paul educated everyone in his Congressional district before he won the first time. Ultimately the goal should be an educated populace.

Sola_Fide
01-29-2015, 11:58 AM
That's why getting votes isn't the path to liberty. You have to change their minds FIRST.

Agree. Voting might only be beneficial if it helps to open people's minds. But even then, it is potentially wrong because it contributes to the machine of murder and theft.

Christian Liberty
01-29-2015, 12:29 PM
Agree. Voting might only be beneficial if it helps to open people's minds. But even then, it is potentially wrong because it contributes to the machine of murder and theft.

Only if with your vote you are actually contributing to the murder and theft.

cajuncocoa
01-29-2015, 12:30 PM
I don't think it has to be either or. When running for office you want votes, but I think educating is good too. I kind of doubt Ron Paul educated everyone in his Congressional district before he won the first time. Ultimately the goal should be an educated populace.Consider: why didn't RON Paul win the GOP nomination? Indoctrination of the GOP base by FOXNews, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, et al, had those people convinced that RON Paul's stance on many issues (primarily foreign policy) was completely out of step with what was needed in today's world.

Those folks have come no further than they were 4 years ago (look at the box office numbers for "American Sniper"). Listen to how RAND has to choose his words so as to sometimes alienate his Father's base, and STILL they call him an isolationist. Do you really believe he will be free to ACT as Ron would after he's elected (IF he's elected?) The same forces will be critical of him if he does...Limbaugh, Hannity, et al will throw him under the bus. He won't want that. He will want to be re-elected. That's part of the game of politics.

William Tell
01-29-2015, 12:59 PM
Consider: why didn't RON Paul win the GOP nomination? Indoctrination of the GOP base by FOXNews, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, et al, had those people convinced that RON Paul's stance on many issues (primarily foreign policy) was completely out of step with what was needed in today's world.

Those folks have come no further than they were 4 years ago (look at the box office numbers for "American Sniper"). Listen to how RAND has to choose his words so as to sometimes alienate his Father's base, and STILL they call him an isolationist. Do you really believe he will be free to ACT as Ron would after he's elected (IF he's elected?) The same forces will be critical of him if he does...Limbaugh, Hannity, et al will throw him under the bus. He won't want that. He will want to be re-elected. That's part of the game of politics.

Not to nitpick, but Ron won many GOP nominations. Rand being president is at the bottom of my list of fears. He's managed to have an almost perfect record in the Senate, why do you think he would be different as President?

Yes, people need to be educated. But I reject the notion that it has to be your way, Collins way, or the highway. People like Thomas Massie and others win elections without a fully informed populace. However, most of the them do not subscribe to Collins notions either. They understand that they can help educate in their tenure in office.

Yes, the populace is indoctrinated. Yes, they need to be woken up. But the job of waking up America does not rest entirely on Rand's shoulders, nor Ron's.

Tywysog Cymru
01-29-2015, 02:19 PM
On the issue of educating people, it's amazing how little people know. I was having a conversation with someone the other day who thought that Al Qaeda was in control of the Iraqi government when we invaded. He then went on to bash Ron Paul's foreign policy. He talked about how Iraq attacked us on 9/11. I then explained why he had no clue what he was talking about. He gave up on that argument. Then he talked about ISIS and how they were beheading people and how anyone could possibly not support fighting them. I then explained to him that people are being killed all over the world, and asked him if he wanted to invade China as well. He responded "I'd support that" (I'm paraphrasing). He also proudly supported Lindsey Graham (and was against Tim Scott because he's black). Of course, he also wanted me to "prove" that I'm not an Obama supporter. It was depressing.

GunnyFreedom
01-29-2015, 02:54 PM
Easiest way to educate people is from the bully pulpit. Only two bully pulpits continue to exist in America: 1) the mainstream press, and 2) elected office.