PDA

View Full Version : One People One World One Government




Mach
03-16-2015, 01:23 PM
A Green Light for the American Empire

By Ron Paul.......


https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/03/ron-paul/one-people-one-world-one-government/


It should surprise no one that a policy endorsing the use of force to tell others how to live will only lead to more killing and greater economic suffering for those who engage in this effort, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. Twenty five years have passed since this green light was given for the current war and there’s no sign that it will soon end. So far it has only emboldened American political leaders to robustly pursue foreign interventionism with little thought to the tremendous price that is continuously paid.


The announcement by President George HW Bush on September 11, 1990 about the new world order was well received. Prior to that time it was only the “conspiracy theorists” who constantly talked about and speculated about the New World Order. Neoconservative ideas had been around for a long time. They were endorsed by many presidents and in particular Woodrow Wilson with his goal of spreading American goodness and making the ”world safe for democracy” – none of which can be achieved by promoting war. In the 1990s the modern day neoconservatives, led by William Kristol and Robert Kagan, enjoyed their growing influence on America’s foreign policy. Specifically, in 1997 they established the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) for the specific purpose of promoting an aggressive foreign policy of interventionism designed to promote the American Empire. This policy of intervention was to be presented with “moral clarity.” “Clarity” it was, but “moral” is another question. Their goal was to provide a vision and resolve, “to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interest.”

It was not a surprise that admittedly the number one goal for the New World order was to significantly increase military spending and to be prepared to challenge any regime hostile to America’s interests. They argued that America had to accept its unique role as the sole superpower for extending international order as long as it served America’s interests. Although neoconservatives are thought to have greater influence within the Republican Party, their views have been implemented by the leadership of both Republicans and Democrats. First on PNAC’s agenda was to continue the policy designed to undermine Saddam Hussein with the goal of eventually invading Iraq – once they had an event that would galvanize public support for it. Many individuals signed letters as well as the statement of principles and most were identified as Republicans. Interestingly enough, the fourth person on the list of signatories for the statement of principles was Jeb Bush, just as he was planning his second run for governor of Florida. The neoconservatives have been firmly placed in a position of influence in directing America’s foreign policy. Though we hear some debate between the two political parties over when and whom to strike, our position of world policeman is accepted by both. Though the rhetoric is different between the two parties, power always remains in the hands of those who believe in promoting the empire.

Zippyjuan
03-16-2015, 01:45 PM
What Bush's "New World Order" was in reference to: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/47760/joseph-s-nye-jr/what-new-world-order


The 1991 Persian Gulf War was, according to President Bush, about "more than one small country; it is a big idea; a new world order," with "new ways of working with other nations . . . peaceful settlement of disputes, solidarity against aggression, reduced and controlled arsenals and just treatment of all peoples." Not long after the war, however, the flow of White House words about a new world order slowed to a trickle.

Mach
03-16-2015, 01:52 PM
Zip, damn, you really are nothing but a crappy sales agent, huh......




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

"freer from the threat of terror" hurump!

AuH20
03-16-2015, 01:56 PM
I think they really have fun with this stuff.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQhbEh8AeSA

Zippyjuan
03-16-2015, 02:10 PM
Zip, damn, you really are nothing but a crappy sales agent, huh......




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

"freer from the threat of terror" hurump!

Thanks. Countries working together for peace and rights. "Where the principles of justice and fair play protect the weak against the strong". And yes, it includes the quote I added. Some of the speeches were in responce to the collapse of the former Soviet Union.

Mach
03-16-2015, 02:14 PM
I've heard those exact kind of points trying to be fit in places with that Kennedy speech about "secret societies."

Oh that was just this this and that that's all....


So, Ron Paul's got it all wrong, huh?

Zippyjuan
03-16-2015, 02:25 PM
Bush Sr was far less of a warmonger than his son was. He was more interested in promoting peace and cooperation. He wanted only minimal war in Iraq- the goal of driving them out of Kuwait. His son felt he did not go far enough and wanted to "finish the job right". Defense spending was actually decreased while he was president and those cuts flowed over into the Clinton administration- making his numbers look better as well (and some of that actually goes back to under Reagan- when HW was vice president though it should be noted that Congress, not Presidents, write all spending bills).

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/news/2011/07/06/10041/a-historical-perspective-on-defense-budgets/

Between 1987 and 1998 the defense budget fell for 11 straight years as Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton—two Republicans and a Democrat—brought spending down to more sustainable levels as the Cold War wound down.

Second, despite claims to the contrary, previous spending reductions have not compromised U.S. national security or created a hollow military:

The spending cuts usually attributed to President Clinton and, on occasion, George H.W. Bush, were actually begun during the Reagan administration’s second term, when the United States was still engaged in the Cold War. This smaller military drove the Taliban out of Afghanistan in a matter of weeks and successfully ousted Saddam Hussein from Iraq. It might have fared better in both conflicts had the George W. Bush administration not insisted on an inadequately light footprint in the early years of those wars.

http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2011/07/img/historical_defense_budget_charts.html

(figures in chart adjusted for inflation)

Mach
03-16-2015, 03:07 PM
Him and his son, my ass, the (Reagan) neocons in the background wanted more and his son was way more dingy than his dad, so....

You disagree with Ron Paul.

ZENemy
03-16-2015, 03:11 PM
Bush Sr was far less of a warmonger than his son was but still a warmonger. He was more interested in promoting peace and cooperation. He wanted only minimal war in Iraq-, but still, WAR the goal of driving them out of Kuwait, even though he doesnt live there, has nothing to do with that country or has any say in it whatsoever. His son felt he did not go far enough and wanted to "finish the job right", and by finishing the job I mean the murder of over 1,000,000 Iraq's Defense spending was actually decreased while he was president and those cuts flowed over into the Clinton administration- making his numbers look better as well (and some of that actually goes back to under Reagan- when HW was vice president though it should be noted that Congress, not Presidents, write all spending bills).




Much better.

jllundqu
03-16-2015, 03:16 PM
Ein Volk?
Eim Reich?
Ein Furher?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
03-16-2015, 03:31 PM
George Bush Sr. talked about Hussein as "Hitler revisited." George Bush Sr. was nothing but a lying piece of shit. He and his wife pretended to distance themselves from Atwater, but they ate it up. Loved the tactics. Lying piece of shit.

osan
03-16-2015, 03:35 PM
Ein Volk?
Eim Reich?
Ein Furher?

Einem großen dampfenden Haufen Scheiße.

jllundqu
03-16-2015, 05:14 PM
Einem großen dampfenden Haufen Scheiße.

According to Google translator that means, "To a big steaming heap of shit." lol

Zippyjuan
03-16-2015, 05:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDDsqJMFGrY

osan
03-17-2015, 07:35 AM
According to Google translator that means, "To a big steaming heap of shit." lol

Not quite. Should translate to "One great steaming pile of shit." Here, "einem" is referring to the pile of shit, the noun in German being feminine... at least as I recall, which may very well be wrong. Noun gender in German is a retarded mess. Unlike Spanish and Frog, there is no way to tell in German. Brute rote is the only way.

Anti Federalist
03-17-2015, 10:44 AM
Ein Volk?
Eim Reich?
Ein Furher?

<<< Sings "Horst Wessel Song".

Or maybe "The Internationale" is more accurate.

Weston White
03-17-2015, 12:10 PM
What Bush's "New World Order" was in reference to: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/47760/joseph-s-nye-jr/what-new-world-order

Also from Bush Sr., (Codename: Magog):


This is America: the Knights of Columbus, the Grange, Hadassah, the Disabled American Veterans, the Order of Ahepa, the Business and Professional Women of America, the union hall, the Bible study group, LULAC, "Holy Name"—a brilliant diversity spread like stars, like a thousand points of light in a broad and peaceful sky.
-- Speech at the 1988 Republican National Convention (18 August 1988)


I have spoken of a thousand points of light, of all the community organizations that are spread like stars throughout the Nation, doing good. We will work hand in hand, encouraging, sometimes leading, sometimes being led, rewarding. We will work on this in the White House, in the Cabinet agencies. I will go to the people and the programs that are the brighter points of light, and I will ask every member of my government to become involved. The old ideas are new again because they are not old, they are timeless: duty, sacrifice, commitment, and a patriotism that finds its expression in taking part and pitching in.
-- Inaugural Address (Friday, January 20, 1989)

Anti Federalist
03-17-2015, 02:22 PM
Oh yeah, Bush Sr. is a peach.

Played both sides against the middle in the Iran - Iraq War that killed millions.

Ran a drug and gun smuggling operation out of the White House basement and hung Reagan out to dry when caught. This operation was the primary reason for the crack/crime epidemic of the late 80's early 90s.

Was director of CIA for a little less than a year, doing damage control for the most part, and deflecting fallout from the Church hearings.

Followed through on the Kissinger Nixon China accords.