Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: U.S wars - recommended readings?

  1. #1

    Default U.S wars - recommended readings?

    Anyone have any recommended readings in regards to U.S wars?




    I’m particularly interested in:


    American Civil War
    American Indian Wars
    American Revolutionary War
    French and Indian War
    Invasion of Panama
    Iraq War
    Mexican-American War
    Occupation of the Dominican Republic
    Occupation of Haiti
    Occupation of Nicaragua
    Philippine-American War
    Quasi-War (France and the United States)
    Spanish-American War
    Vietnam War
    War of 1812

    I'll read a book on anything though.
    Light-bearers are immune to the judgment of man.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uncharted View Post
    Vietnam War
    Concerning the Vietnam war, arguably the Phoenix program is the most interesting.
    The book by Valentine has lots of information, I don't really recommend it, but haven't found anything better: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post6485037
    Because it's freely viewable, you can take a preview to see if you like it...

    Quote Originally Posted by Firestarter View Post
    The most named source for information on Phoenix is the book “The Phoenix Program (1990) by Douglas Valentine: https://ia800400.us.archive.org/11/i...0Valentine.pdf
    I cannot recommend this book, however. Valentine tries to explain how the CIA works as a whole, but in my opinion this goal was too ambitious...

    I actually found the appendix to the book more interesting than the book itself: http://hestories.info/the-phoenix-program.html?page=38
    The appendix details an example of a Psyops Comic Book “Gia dinh ong Ba va Chien Dich Phung Hoang” (Mr, Ba's Family and the Phoenix Operation).
    This had to teach the Vietnamese that the “good” Americans will help them to defeat the “evil” Vietcong.

    Quote Originally Posted by uncharted View Post
    Invasion of Panama
    (...)
    Occupation of Nicaragua
    The most interesting about the wars in Central and South America of the 1980s, is that the CIA and the Reagan/Bush White House were involved in cocaine trafficking: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...s-for-Oil-wars

    Following are some quotes on Panama, including 2 books (the occupation of Afghanistan was mostly about heroin...), the amount of possible quotes about Nicaragua is too damn long!
    Quote Originally Posted by Firestarter View Post
    I found another interesting book - John Coleman “Drug War Against America”: http://www.mediafire.com/file/1kr78c...7lr/646377.pdf
    (...)

    PANAMA – IMF
    The banking structure in Panama was set up by Nicolas Ardito Barletta. Barletta formerly ran the Marine and Midland Bank, which was taken over by the drug banker's Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank. While Panama banks control the cocaine trade, the opium/heroin trade is controlled from Hong Kong.
    In 1982 the Treasury Department stated that Banco National de Panama had become the main clearinghouse for drug dollars with a six-fold increase in cash flow from 1980 to 1988.
    Henry Kissinger and the US State Department promoted General Paredes as a "Panama nationalist, a staunch anti-Communist friend of America", in reality Parades had long-standing ties to Fidel Castro. Paredes took command of the National Guard and supported Kissinger's Andean Plan to turn Central America into another war area for the US military. Parades sabotaged Contadora's efforts to reach a peaceful solution to the problems in the region.
    The IMF blackmailed Panama by threatening that the preliminary agreement to restructure Panama's $320 million debt might be cancelled if they wouldn’t follow orders. General Noriega told the Panamanian people on national television on March 22, 1986, that the IMF is strangling Panama.
    Roberto Eisenmann accused Noriega of destroying Panama's economy, and even of being involved in the cocaine trade, when in fact Eisenmann worked closely with the Colombian cocaine barons.
    President George H.W. Bush had a meeting with the Panamanian "opposition forces," the Panamanian Democratic Opposition Civic Alliance, with ties to banks in Panama and Florida that launder drugs money. Its leader, Guillermo Endara, on television called for the assassination of Noriega. Naturally Ted Turner’s CNN supported the campaign to get rid of Noriega. Bush declared the drug-tainted Civic Alliance the "official government of Panama". They were "sworn in" on a US military base.
    Noriega was kidnapped by a 7000 strong military contingent and brought to Miami to stand trial as a major "drug dealer". On November 16, 1990, Noriega made the following statement in court:
    I am now at the mercy of a totally unfair, unjust system, which chooses my prosecutors, and now chooses my defense attorney”.
    In 2009, drugs are flowing more freely than ever from Panama; and drug money laundering banks operate in ever more freedom.

    Quote Originally Posted by Firestarter View Post
    I’ve found another interesting book about the CIA’s involvement in cocaine trafficking in which Nicaragua’s Contras (Fuerza Democratica Nigaraguense, FDN) were used and financed.
    It shows that the whole Iran-Contra affair was a cover-up of the ugly truth that the CIA was making the crack epidemic of the 1980s happen, and used the proceeds to finance the Contras in Nicaragua. Also some other Latin American countries were involved (notably the Panama of Dictator Manuel Noriega).

    Gary Webb “Dark alliance - The CIA, the CONTRAS, and the CRACK
    COCAINE EXPLOSION” (1998): http://www.mediafire.com/file/kdayng...5sv/953236.pdf
    (...)

    In June 1985, on a yacht in the Pacific port of Balboa, North and Manuel Noriega made a deal that Panama would help to support the Contras; particularly by making airbases located in Panama available for the drugs for arms pipeline.
    The Columbian drug trafficker, George Morales, testified that in March 1984 in Fort Lauderdale he talked with 3 Contras close to the CIA, Octaviano Cesar, Adolfo "Popo" Chamorro and Marcos Aguado, who asked him to support the Contras and told him they worked for the CIA. Cesar and Aguado (old friends of Meneses) promised Morales that they could help make his “legal problems disappear”.
    Aguado, the chief pilot for the ARDE Contra forces in Costa Rica, was identified in a 1987 congressional testimony as a CIA agent.
    Morales said planeloads of weapons were flown to a ranch in Costa Rica owned by CIA-operative John Hull; a training area for Contra soldiers. After the arms were dropped off, large green duffel bags stuffed with cocaine from the Contras were loaded aboard and flown back to the United States, usually to the public airport at Opa Locka, Florida. A pilot, Gary "Hippie" Betzner, testified that their flights were protected by the CIA.
    (...)

    MANUEL NORIEGA
    Manuel Noriega was the dictator of Panama that helped in the cocaine trafficking; he suddenly became an enemy of the USA and was sentenced to prison.
    In 1988, Noriega's pilots would fly up weapons for the Contras along with the drugs, leaving the guns behind in Costa Rica, and dumping the drugs in Louisiana and Texas.
    Last edited by Firestarter; 07-07-2017 at 03:16 AM.
    Do NOT ever read my posts.
    Google and Yahoo wouldn’t block them without a very good reason.

  4. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firestarter View Post
    Concerning the Vietnam war, arguably the Phoenix program is the most interesting.
    The book by Valentine has lots of information, I don't really recommend it, but haven't found anything better: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post6485037
    Because it's freely viewable, you can take a preview to see if you like it...




    The most interesting about the wars in Central and South America of the 1980s, is that the CIA and the Reagan/Bush White House were involved in cocaine trafficking: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...s-for-Oil-wars

    Following are some quotes on Panama, including 2 books (the occupation of Afghanistan was mostly about heroin...), the amount of possible quotes about Nicaragua is too damn long!
    @Firestarter,

    I've seen a few documentaries in regards to the CIA's involvement in cocaine trafficking (such as the highly recommended "American Drug War" by Kevin Booth. Ron Paul is featured in it.) and I'm eager to read books on that. Thank you very much.

    It seems that Ronald Reagan (along with the Bush "Skull & Bones" family) was an arch-enemy of humanity:


    Ronald Reagan, a so-called "Conservative Christian", at the Bohemian Grove during 1967 along with another terrible man (Richard Nixon) who elevated the Leviathan via the "War on Drugs". Probably going through the casting process for the biggest role of his career.

    That said, I am a youngling that wasn't around when Reagan was in office. I'm assuming that any allegations of CIA drug trafficking during his administration were dismissed as conspiracy theories that the masses ignored.
    Light-bearers are immune to the judgment of man.

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uncharted View Post
    I'm assuming that any allegations of CIA drug trafficking during his administration were dismissed as conspiracy theories that the masses ignored.
    There are a large amount of books about the drugs trafficking by the elite. A lot of them focus on the CIA.
    If I understand correctly, the Dutch and British Royal family have been making (lots of) money for centuries by controlling the dope business, and are still involved.

    There is “hard” evidence that Oliver North was involved in cocaine trafficking using the Contras, for which I recommend the book by Gary Webb. Webb was found with 2 bullets in his head when he was working on a new book; can you imagine that this was ruled a suicide?
    CIA asset Barry Seal dropped off drugs in the Arkansas of Governor Bill Clinton. Barry Seal was executed after he reportedly said that he had evidence that the “boys” of George Bush Sr. were involved in the drugs game.


    Quote Originally Posted by uncharted View Post
    Ronald Reagan, a so-called "Conservative Christian", at the Bohemian Grove during 1967 along with another terrible man (Richard Nixon) who elevated the Leviathan via the "War on Drugs". Probably going through the casting process for the biggest role of his career.
    A mere week ago when I heard "Leviathan" I thought about an album of Mastodon. Now I know that it's one of the 4 Crown Princes of Hell as defined by Anton LaVey in his Satanic Bible. I have not seen a specific connection between Ronald Reagan to Satanism (let alone Leviathan...).

    Who would’ve given this thread such a “terrible” rating?!?
    Last edited by Firestarter; 07-09-2017 at 06:44 AM. Reason: Barry "Seal"
    Do NOT ever read my posts.
    Google and Yahoo wouldn’t block them without a very good reason.

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firestarter View Post
    There are a large amount of books about the drugs trafficking by the elite. A lot of them focus on the CIA.
    If I understand correctly, the Dutch and British Royal family have been making (lots of) money for centuries by controlling the dope business, and are still involved.

    There is “hard” evidence that Oliver North was involved in cocaine trafficking using the Contras, for which I recommend the book by Gary Webb. Webb was found with 2 bullets in his head when he was working on a new book; can you imagine that this was ruled a suicide?
    CIA asset Barry Adler dropped off drugs in the Arkansas of Governor Bill Clinton. Adler was executed after he reportedly said that he had evidence that the “boys” of George Bush Sr. were involved in the drugs game.



    A mere week ago when I heard "Leviathan" I thought about an album of Mastodon. Now I know that it's one of the 4 Crown Princes of Hell as defined by Anton LaVey in his Satanic Bible. I have not seen a specific connection between Ronald Reagan to Satanism (let alone Leviathan...).

    Who would’ve given this thread such a “terrible” rating?!?
    @Firestarter,

    Ever watch presentations on the War on Drugs from former LAPD detective Michael Ruppert? Here's a video of him calling out former CIA director John Deutch - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UT5MY3C86bk

    I look very forward to reading about Gary Webb and Barry Adler. Thanks again.

    "Leviathan". I was actually referring to how Thomas Hobbes eloquently used that term when describing a tyrannical state . Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon both increased the size of government ("Leviathan state") as a result of the CIA "war on drugs". On the other hand, Ron Paul opposes the "war on drugs" ("A war on liberty" he describes said policy) and is also calling for the abolishment of the CIA:

    https://www.moneyandmarkets.com/podc...ul-end-the-cia
    http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arch...-down-the-cia/
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk5T8Fx705k
    Light-bearers are immune to the judgment of man.

  7. #6

    Default

    The Story of the Mexican War by Robert S. Henry
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    The Story of the Mexican War by Robert S. Henry
    I saw some used hardcovers on line for around 9 FRN's with shipping some time back and picked one up for my Brother in Law.

  9. #8

    Default

    I forgot to mention that I often use 2 places were lots of books can be found.

    When I search for a book, I often start at the following Dutch site, most books are in English, and there is also a huge amount of videos: http://www.vrijewereld.org/pdf-bibliotheek/

    I do warn that Vrijewereld.org specialises in “conspiracy theories”, which means that there is also a lot of garbage in between the good books.
    Antony Sutton has written a number of books that in my opinion are all worth the time. Vrijewereld.org features (links to) a few (or all?) of his books.

    Project Gutenberg is another book repository with an almost endless amount of books.
    One of the few Dutch writers worth reading is Frederik van Eeden – Little Johannes (this is a novel): http://www.gutenberg.org/files/40656/40656-h/40656-h.htm
    I don’t know if Project Gutenberg also features good history books however.
    Do NOT ever read my posts.
    Google and Yahoo wouldn’t block them without a very good reason.

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uncharted View Post
    Anyone have any recommended readings in regards to U.S wars?




    I’m particularly interested in:


    American Civil War
    American Indian Wars
    American Revolutionary War
    French and Indian War
    Invasion of Panama
    Iraq War
    Mexican-American War
    Occupation of the Dominican Republic
    Occupation of Haiti
    Occupation of Nicaragua
    Philippine-American War
    Quasi-War (France and the United States)
    Spanish-American War
    Vietnam War
    War of 1812

    I'll read a book on anything though.
    Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

    by Dee Brown
    There is no spoon.

  11. #10

    Default

    @uncharted

    Reassessing the Presidency: The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom
    , John Denson (free at the LvMI)

    It focuses largely on foreign policy.
    "The program of liberalism, ...if condensed into a single word, would have to read: property..."

    -Ludwig von Mises

    "Patriotism, not nationalism, should inspire the citizen. The ethnic nationalist who wants a linguistically and culturally uniform nation is akin to the racist who is intolerant toward those who look (and behave) differently. The patriot is a "diversitarian"; he is pleased, indeed proud of the variety within the borders of his country; he looks for loyalty from all citizens. And he looks up and down, not left and right."

    -Erik Maria Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

    "The monarch is a responsible person. The fact that a monarch is responsible "to God alone," rather than to an assembly or a popular majority, is rather shocking to an agnostic mind; but while God cannot be fooled, the masses can. While it is perhaps true that "one cannot fool all the people all the time," it seems one can fool millions for centuries."

    -Ibid.

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uncharted View Post
    @Firestarter,


    It seems that Ronald Reagan (along with the Bush "Skull & Bones" family) was an arch-enemy of humanity:


    Ronald Reagan, a so-called "Conservative Christian", at the Bohemian Grove during 1967 along with another terrible man (Richard Nixon) who elevated the .
    Ronald Reagan had the political courage to end inflation which no one else did in the previous 10 years. The combination of a regulatory freeze, stable dollar, and tax cuts set up 20 years of prosperity and return of US business. He got the US involved in very few foreign interventions. When he was elected, the Iranians immediately started negotiating with Carter to send the hostages because they knew Reagan was getting things done no matter what. He stood up to the Air Traffic Controllers and fired them which put the Russians on notice that they weren't dealing with a pussy like Jimmy Carter. Reagan's military intervention with US troops was minimal. As governor of California, he beat back the hippies and domestic terrorists who were taking over colleges.

    Ronald Reagan was one of the great leaders in world history. He was not the enemy of humanity.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 07-17-2017 at 02:37 PM.

  13. #12

    Default

    The Civil War by Shelby Foote is the best series on the subject there is.
    “Maybe I forgot to mention something to you: I don’t believe in queens. You think freedom is something you can give and take on a whim. But to your people, freedom is as essential as air. And without it, there is no life. There is only darkness.” -Zaheer

    "A man chooses. A slave obeys."-Andrew Ryan

    "There are three things the parasite hates: free markets, free will, and free men."-Andrew Ryan

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Ronald Reagan had the political courage to end inflation which no one else did in the previous 10 years. The combination of a regulatory freeze, stable dollar, and tax cuts set up 20 years of prosperity and return of US business. He got the US involved in very few foreign interventions. When he was elected, the Iranians immediately started negotiating with Carter to send the hostages because they knew Reagan was getting things done no matter what. He stood up to the Air Traffic Controllers and fired them which put the Russians on notice that they weren't dealing with a pussy like Jimmy Carter. Reagan's military intervention with US troops was minimal. As governor of California, he beat back the hippies and domestic terrorists who were taking over colleges.

    Ronald Reagan was one of the great leaders in world history. He was not the enemy of humanity.
    I wouldn't go that far. He slowed the decline in some respects, but did nothing to solve the structural problems of Leviathan.

    But, yes, he was also not Darth Vader.

    On another note, @uncharted, you might also look into Thomas Dilorenzo's Unmasking Lincoln.
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 07-17-2017 at 03:45 PM.
    "The program of liberalism, ...if condensed into a single word, would have to read: property..."

    -Ludwig von Mises

    "Patriotism, not nationalism, should inspire the citizen. The ethnic nationalist who wants a linguistically and culturally uniform nation is akin to the racist who is intolerant toward those who look (and behave) differently. The patriot is a "diversitarian"; he is pleased, indeed proud of the variety within the borders of his country; he looks for loyalty from all citizens. And he looks up and down, not left and right."

    -Erik Maria Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

    "The monarch is a responsible person. The fact that a monarch is responsible "to God alone," rather than to an assembly or a popular majority, is rather shocking to an agnostic mind; but while God cannot be fooled, the masses can. While it is perhaps true that "one cannot fool all the people all the time," it seems one can fool millions for centuries."

    -Ibid.

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Ronald Reagan had the political courage to end inflation which no one else did in the previous 10 years. The combination of a regulatory freeze, stable dollar, and tax cuts set up 20 years of prosperity and return of US business. He got the US involved in very few foreign interventions. When he was elected, the Iranians immediately started negotiating with Carter to send the hostages because they knew Reagan was getting things done no matter what. He stood up to the Air Traffic Controllers and fired them which put the Russians on notice that they weren't dealing with a pussy like Jimmy Carter. Reagan's military intervention with US troops was minimal. As governor of California, he beat back the hippies and domestic terrorists who were taking over colleges.

    Ronald Reagan was one of the great leaders in world history. He was not the enemy of humanity.
    Uh.....NO.

    V. Conclusion: Reagan: Rhetoric and Reality

    Ronald Reagan was swept into office by the conservative movement, whose leader and spokesman he had become. He made a raft of campaign promises to that movement, each and every one of which he has broken egregiously. He raised income taxes rather than lowered them, he brought us $200 billion deficits rather than balancing the budget, he entrenched fiat money rather than bringing back the gold standard, his budget is the highest absolutely and as percentage of GNP in American history, he has deregulated nothing, he has not abolished the Departments of Education and Energy, etc. The conservative movement has long been animated by three broad concerns: (a) Freeing the economy and Getting Big Government Off Our Back; (b) using government to enforce Judaeo-Christian morality (so-called "social" issues), and (c) engaging in nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Simply listing these concerns reveals that (b) and (c), the theocratic and the war-mongering, contradict the libertarian (a), to put it very mildly. The conservative movement is so constituted that in a tussle between these three, (b) and (c) always win out in their hearts and minds over the free market.

    The quintessence of Ronald Reagan is that he is a master in supplying the conservative movement with the rhetoric they want to hear. In all politicians there is a gulf between rhetoric and reality, but in Ronald Reagan that gulf has become a veritable and mighty ocean. There seems to be no contact whatever between Ronnie the rhetorician and Ronnie the maker of policy. In that situation it is hard to know which one is "the real" Reagan. The conservatives, feeling betrayed but lacking any guts for a break with the Administration, persist in asserting (publicly, at any rate) that the rhetorical Reagan is the real one, and that if only his evil pragmatist advisers would "let him," this real Reagan would finally emerge. Hence, the famous right-wing slogan, "Let Reagan Be Reagan." But the problem with that slogan is the "let." What do you mean, "let"? Who picked these evil advisers, and who persists in maintaining them in power? None other than Reagan himself. So in what sense is this visible person not the "real" Reagan?

    There are only two solutions to his dilemma, neither one a happy situation for conservatives. Either Reagan is a total cretin, a puppet who gets wheeled out for ceremonial speeches, and who really believes that he is putting conservative policies into effect. Or Reagan is a cynical master politician, keeping the conservatives happy by dishing out their rhetoric and his phony 3×5 card anecdotes, while keeping corporate centrists happy by pursuing the New Deal-Fair Deal-Great Society-Nixon-Ford policies that we have all come to know so well. Either way: Reagan the imbecile or Reagan the cynical manipulator, the situation is hopeless for conservatives, who yet persist in willfully not perceiving this stark reality.

    Of the three conservative concerns mentioned above, Reagan has clearly and flatly sold out the free market, and also pretty much for the theocratic social issues. Unfortunately, the anti-Soviet part of the rhetoric is something that Reagan seems to believe in more firmly than the rest of the stuff, so that he has more difficulty abandoning his conservative mass base on this issue than on the others. "Unfortunately," because the more Reagan betrays conservatism on the war front (and on theocracy), the better. The drift toward war, and the ascendancy of the war-hawk troika, are ominous signposts for the future. The only silver lining in the cloud is that, despite the whipped-up hysteria, the Reagan Administration hasn't really done anything to crack down directly on the Russians. (He couldn't retaliate by banning Aeroflot in U.S., since Carter had already locked that into place when the Russians marched into Afghanistan.) His not doing anything concrete has, of course, sent conservatives up the wall, for this is by far their most emotional and most deeply felt of the three broad issues. It is a helluva note when we have to rely, for saving us from nuclear annihilation, on the likes of the Rockefellers, the Trilateralists, the Shultzes, the Kissingers, and all the rest. But that is unfortunately the way things are.

    Hopefully, as rhetoric and reality clash and as we weave back and forth in the direction of the Final World War, Ronnie will be booted out in 1984, and we will all be able to leave the question of who or what is the "real" Reagan to shrinks and historians. Ronald Reagan will, then at long last, become supremely irrelevant for our time.

    Murray N. Rothbard (1926–1995), the founder of modern libertarianism and the dean of the Austrian School of economics, was the author of The Ethics of Liberty and For a New Liberty and many other books and articles. He was also academic vice president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute and the Center for Libertarian Studies, and the editor – with Lew Rockwell – of The Rothbard-Rockwell Report.

    Murray Rothbard Archives

    The Best of Murray N. Rothbard

    Murray N. Rothbard (1926–1995) was dean of the Austrian School, founder of modern libertarianism, and academic vice president of the Mises Institute. He was also editor – with Lew Rockwell – of The Rothbard-Rockwell Report, and appointed Lew as his literary executor. See his books.
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/...gan-warmonger/
    There is no spoon.

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Yeah. He got nothing right in that article. Reagan not only didn't get booted out, he won 49 states. Reagan did lower income taxes on balance. Reagan lived in the real world. He dealt successfully with a Democratic legislature. And Reagan wasn't relegated to irrelevancy. He was the best modern President. Not perfect. Not libertarian. Indisputably the best. For all of Rothbard's talk of inflation, last time I checked, Reagan was the person who willingly took the political hit to end high inflation. Reagan opened up communication with the Russians. Jimmy Carter's administration basically cutoff all diplomacy. Reagan's administration started the negotiations for a nuclear arms reduction that was put into place right after he left office that is still in place today. Rothbard demonizes pointless $#@! and often doesn't give credit when it is due. Rothbard is a dishonest debater on not just this issue but numerous issues.

    Reagan didn't live in Murray Rothbard's clown world where LBJ is a better choice than Barry Goldwater (which is so idiotic that citing anything Rothbard says about politics is ridiculous), where Che Guevara is just swell, Adam Smith was a fraud and Milton Friedman was a demon statist sent by the "establishment" to wreck libertarian.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 07-17-2017 at 08:55 PM.

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Yeah. He got nothing right in that article. Reagan not only didn't get booted out, he won 49 states. Reagan did lower income taxes on balance. Reagan lived in the real world. He dealt successfully with a Democratic legislature. And Reagan wasn't relegated to irrelevancy. He was the best modern President. Not perfect. Not libertarian. Indisputably the best. For all of Rothbard's talk of inflation, last time I checked, Reagan was the person who willingly took the political hit to end high inflation. Reagan opened up communication with the Russians. Jimmy Carter's administration basically cutoff all diplomacy. Reagan's administration started the negotiations for a nuclear arms reduction that was put into place right after he left office that is still in place today. Rothbard demonizes pointless $#@! and often doesn't give credit when it is due. Rothbard is a dishonest debater on not just this issue but numerous issues.

    Reagan didn't live in Murray Rothbard's clown world where LBJ is a better choice than Barry Goldwater (which is so idiotic that citing anything Rothbard says about politics is ridiculous), where Che Guevara is just swell, Adam Smith was a fraud and Milton Friedman was a demon statist sent by the "establishment" to wreck libertarian.
    Riiiiight.....

    Yet these are the same folks who have spent every presidential election cycle until now lecturing their audiences against succumbing to the trap of “purism,” the trap of holding out for the “perfect” (most conservative) candidate—even while they endorsed one candidate after the other—think George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney—who was anything but conservative.

    To see that these “conservative” commentators are behaving more than a bit hypocritically now, let’s play a little game. In the following list of multiple choice questions, let’s see if we can’t figure out the correct answer.

    1. Who said: A “uniform standard [of gun-control] across the country” is necessary, for “this level of [gun] violence must be stopped?”

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Hillary Clinton

    c. Bernie Sanders

    d. Ronald Reagan

    2. Who said: There’s “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons,” for guns are “a ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will?”

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Hillary Clinton

    c. Bernie Sanders

    d. Ronald Reagan

    3. Who supported the “Therapeutic Abortion Act?”

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Hillary Clinton

    c. Bernie Sanders

    d. Ronald Reagan

    4. Which American president deployed hundreds of Marines to the Middle East, got them murdered, and then “cut and run” in spite of having promised to “stay the course?”

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Bill Clinton

    c. Jimmy Carter

    d. Ronald Reagan

    5. Who said: “I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though some time back they may have entered illegally?”

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Hillary Clinton

    c. Bernie Sanders

    d. Ronald Reagan

    6. Who raised taxes 11 times while president; increased the debt to unprecedented levels; preserved every government program and department; grew the federal government by creating a new agency; and created a progressive system of taxation to continue funding Social Security?

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Bill Clinton

    c. Jimmy Carter

    d. Ronald Reagan

    7. Who decried tax “loopholes” for millionaires while complaining that they don’t pay their “fair share” in taxes?

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Bill Clinton

    c. Jimmy Carter

    d. Ronald Reagan

    e. all of the above

    8. Which president nominated to the Supreme Court two justices who maintained—and ruled—that it was unconstitutional to both deny women access to abortion services and deny homosexuals the right to marry?

    a. Barack Obama

    b. Bill Clinton

    c. Jimmy Carter

    d. Ronald Reagan

    If your answer to each of the foregoing questions was “Ronald Reagan,” the most “conservative” president in all of modern American history, to hear the anti-Trumpsters tell it, then you can go to the front of the class!

    And while Reagan was governor of California, he didn’t just support the Therapeutic Abortion Act.

    He made it law.

    Consequently, the number of abortions in California increased exponentially.

    Governor Reagan can also be credited with having burdened Californians with the largest tax increase in the history of their state, and he passed into law the Mulford Act, which made it illegal for legal gun owners to carry their guns anywhere in public.

    Moreover, Reagan, in spite of having once rejected Medicare as “socialist,” went on as President to support it (and Medicaid). When, in 1980, Carter challenged his earlier denunciations of Medicare, Reagan replied that he never opposed “the principle of providing care” for the elderly.” The only reason that he opposed Medicare is because, at the time, Reagan said, there had been an alternative piece of legislation that would have done the work of Medicare—but do it better.

    It seems, though, that there was no alternative piece of legislation. But even if there had been, Reagan in effect had admitted that his earlier argument against Medicare, his argument from socialism, had been rhetoric, that it wasn’t the socialist character of Medicare that he opposed, but the fact that it wasn’t his brand of socialism.

    At any rate, when Reagan was president, he signed the “Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act,” a law—a federal law, mind you—that compels hospitals to provide emergency care to anyone, irrespectively of whether they can afford to pay for the care or even whether they’re citizens.

    And Medicaid was expanded multiple times during Reagan’s two terms.

    In fact, long before there was Obamacare or Romneycare, there was Reagancare!

    While governor of California, Reagan called for a mandatory health insurance plan for his state’s residents.

    Though Reagan did all of this as a Republican, we shouldn’t forget that until he was 51 years old, Reagan was a Democrat. The more Conservative-Than-Thou anti-Trumpsters who never miss a moment to remind us that Trump donated to Democrat politicians through much of his adult life may want to recall that Reagan was a Democrat.

    So, if Reagan is the gold standard of “conservatism,” then how exactly does Trump fail to measure up?
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/...conservatives/
    There is no spoon.

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Reagan wasn't great on guns. Neither was Ayn Rand. http://sellingthesecondamendment.com...views-on-guns/ I don't agree with either of them. So what? It is important to look at the entire body of work.

    Most libertarians are for some form of amnesty. Reagan flattened the tax more than literally any President. He took the top tax rate from 70% to 28%. I have no idea what this guy is talking about. Reagan did raise taxes numerous times- after a massive cut and still a net reduction. I don't support tax loopholes either. I agree with that Reagan quote. Mises had a quote about this back when to rates were 90% that people take as gospel. A flat no deduction tax is the best answer. Eliminating federal departments and nominating good judges is hard with a Democratic legislature. Reagan found that out with Robert Bork. Reagan handled Lebanon correctly. I guess Rockwell is publishing neocons now. Reagan was pro-choice as Governor- just like I am pro-choice and most libertarians are pro-choice.

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Reagan wasn't great on guns. Neither was Ayn Rand. http://sellingthesecondamendment.com...views-on-guns/ I don't agree with either of them. So what? It is important to look at the entire body of work.

    Most libertarians are for some form of amnesty. Reagan flattened the tax more than literally any President. He took the top tax rate from 70% to 28%. I have no idea what this guy is talking about. Reagan did raise taxes numerous times- after a massive cut and still a net reduction. I don't support tax loopholes either. I agree with that Reagan quote. Mises had a quote about this back when to rates were 90% that people take as gospel. A flat no deduction tax is the best answer. Eliminating federal departments and nominating good judges is hard with a Democratic legislature. Reagan found that out with Robert Bork. Reagan handled Lebanon correctly. I guess Rockwell is publishing neocons now. Reagan was pro-choice as Governor- just like I am pro-choice and most libertarians are pro-choice.
    Here's a pretty good article on post WWII finances and presidents.

    https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/da...or-the-economy

    Personally, I believe the best pres of the era was Kennedy, a rich playboy who woke up. We all know what happened to him. My fam loved Reagan when he was the CA gov but were very disappointed in him as president. Of course, it looks like he may have had the same experience as Kennedy- just lived through it.

    Those are older articles from Rockwell, BTW.
    There is no spoon.

  20. #19

    Default

    The stromgest argument against Reagan is simple:



    And this cannot be blamed on the Democrats, since they never once had a supermajority.

    He could have vetoed every single spending bill. He chose not to.
    "The program of liberalism, ...if condensed into a single word, would have to read: property..."

    -Ludwig von Mises

    "Patriotism, not nationalism, should inspire the citizen. The ethnic nationalist who wants a linguistically and culturally uniform nation is akin to the racist who is intolerant toward those who look (and behave) differently. The patriot is a "diversitarian"; he is pleased, indeed proud of the variety within the borders of his country; he looks for loyalty from all citizens. And he looks up and down, not left and right."

    -Erik Maria Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

    "The monarch is a responsible person. The fact that a monarch is responsible "to God alone," rather than to an assembly or a popular majority, is rather shocking to an agnostic mind; but while God cannot be fooled, the masses can. While it is perhaps true that "one cannot fool all the people all the time," it seems one can fool millions for centuries."

    -Ibid.

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    The stromgest argument against Reagan is simple:

    And this cannot be blamed on the Democrats, since they never once had a supermajority.

    He could have vetoed every single spending bill. He chose not to.
    Reagan didn't make cutting spending his number one priority. It was a big priority though. He vetoed numerous budgets. The Democrats shut government down three times under Reagan and had eight times where the government had a funding gap because they couldn't agree on a bill.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govern...l_funding_gaps

    Also Repubs voted with Dems to override Reagan's veto at least once. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/09/22/back.time/

    Also of note, Reagan had the most vetoes of any President from Kennedy to Trump. https://www.senate.gov/reference/Leg...vetoCounts.htm
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 07-18-2017 at 11:11 AM.

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Reagan didn't make cutting spending his number one priority. It was a big priority though. He vetoed numerous budgets. The Democrats shut government down three times under Reagan and had eight times where the government had a funding gap because they couldn't agree on a bill.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govern...l_funding_gaps

    Also Repubs voted with Dems to override Reagan's veto at least once. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/09/22/back.time/
    Nonetheless, it was within his power to do much more. He chose not to.

    My personal take on Reagan has always been that he genuinely wanted libertarian-ish reform, but was weak willed (perhaps senile).

    So, I don't view him as malevolent, but nor does his conduct deserve much praise.

    Let me put it this way: if Rand got elected and only did what Reagan did, I'd tear the stickers off my bumper and burn them.
    "The program of liberalism, ...if condensed into a single word, would have to read: property..."

    -Ludwig von Mises

    "Patriotism, not nationalism, should inspire the citizen. The ethnic nationalist who wants a linguistically and culturally uniform nation is akin to the racist who is intolerant toward those who look (and behave) differently. The patriot is a "diversitarian"; he is pleased, indeed proud of the variety within the borders of his country; he looks for loyalty from all citizens. And he looks up and down, not left and right."

    -Erik Maria Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

    "The monarch is a responsible person. The fact that a monarch is responsible "to God alone," rather than to an assembly or a popular majority, is rather shocking to an agnostic mind; but while God cannot be fooled, the masses can. While it is perhaps true that "one cannot fool all the people all the time," it seems one can fool millions for centuries."

    -Ibid.

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Nonetheless, it was within his power to do much more. He chose not to.

    My personal take on Reagan has always been that he genuinely wanted libertarian-ish reform, but was weak willed (perhaps senile).

    So, I don't view him as malevolent, but nor does his conduct deserve much praise.

    Let me put it this way: if Rand got elected and only did what Reagan did, I'd tear the stickers off my bumper and burn them.
    I always judge based on the alternatives not my ideal. If something can never be implemented politically and is not workable practice there is no point in holding that as a standard.

    I am not comparing Reagan to Rand. Despite what imbeciles say, Rand is a radical libertarian. Rand would be much more libertarian as President than Reagan but he isn't going to be President. Rand is an extreme outlier just to be in the Senate. I compare Reagan to the people who preceded him (Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ). Reagan was the best President since Coolidge and there hasn't been someone better since.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    I always judge based on the alternatives not my ideal. If something can never be implemented politically and is not workable practice there is no point in holding that as a standard.

    I am not comparing Reagan to Rand. Despite what imbeciles say, Rand is a radical libertarian. Rand would be much more libertarian as President than Reagan but he isn't going to be President. Rand is an extreme outlier just to be in the Senate. I compare Reagan to the people who preceded him (Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ). Reagan was the best President since Coolidge and there hasn't been someone better since.
    Fair enough, but that's a far cry from Reagan being one of the "great leaders in world history."
    "The program of liberalism, ...if condensed into a single word, would have to read: property..."

    -Ludwig von Mises

    "Patriotism, not nationalism, should inspire the citizen. The ethnic nationalist who wants a linguistically and culturally uniform nation is akin to the racist who is intolerant toward those who look (and behave) differently. The patriot is a "diversitarian"; he is pleased, indeed proud of the variety within the borders of his country; he looks for loyalty from all citizens. And he looks up and down, not left and right."

    -Erik Maria Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

    "The monarch is a responsible person. The fact that a monarch is responsible "to God alone," rather than to an assembly or a popular majority, is rather shocking to an agnostic mind; but while God cannot be fooled, the masses can. While it is perhaps true that "one cannot fool all the people all the time," it seems one can fool millions for centuries."

    -Ibid.






Similar Threads

  1. Readings from the book of Barack
    By axiomata in forum Books & Literature
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2012, 05:09 PM
  2. Readings on Spontaneous Order
    By znichols in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-29-2012, 08:29 PM
  3. Glen Beck wars, Palin wars, Anarchy wars
    By klamath in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-27-2009, 05:54 PM
  4. Good readings?
    By jbrace in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-11-2008, 08:21 PM
  5. any good recommended readings?
    By fourameuphoria in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-04-2007, 12:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •