I’ve published several posts on the topic, with the most popular one titled, Prepare for Impact – This is the Beginning of the End for U.S. Empire. Here’s an excerpt:Krieger zeroes in on über-hawks Tom Cotton and Nikki Haley. He sees Cotton as the major foreign policy influence on the president, more influential the the generals, and Haley as likely to replace Tillerson if he leaves the administration, which seems increasingly likely.This is not the sort of thing you see in a confident, brave, and civilized nation, it’s the sort of stuff you’d expect to see toward the end. It’s the stuff of craven war-mongers, of dishonest cowards, of a totally deranged and very dangerous media. The signs are everywhere; imperial decline is set to accelerate rapidly in the coming years…
Tom Cotton is as dangerous a war hawk as exists in America today.…
Tom Cotton might actually be the most dangerous person in the entire U.S. Senate (which is saying a lot), so the fact he’s become so cozy with Trump on foreign policy is extremely dangerous....
I’m glad Nikki Haley came up, as she’s a certified grade-A maniac and bloodthirsty neocon. While she’s dangerous enough at the U.N., there’s talk that she could ultimately replace Tillerson as Secretary of State. Any combination of Cotton and Haley moving into increased prominence within the Trump circle of influence effectively guarantees more disastrous war in the Middle East....I wouldn't limit that to the Middle East.
The post doesn't mention it, but Donald Trump initially offered the job of Secretary of State to Haley but she turned it down for the UN. Haley, Samantha Power, and Madeleine Albright are cut from the same mold.
Liberty Blitzkrieg
Empire Destroying Wars Are Coming to America Under Trump – Part 1
Michael Krieger
24 comments:
John Bolton was caught sneaking into the WH on Tuesday. Sec. of State?
NPR and the rest of the deep state apparatus fawns over Haley adoringly. They've repeatedly produced radio segments highlighting her ability to promote neo-conservative warmongering at odds with Trump admin policy as if that were an accomplishment. For liberals they view it as "progress" to "open" markets by bringing war to the world and bombing those who will not submit to their policy of openness.
Hard core libertarians writing here.... the link is to the Ron Paul people...
All gold and bitcoin ads over there....
@Matt: Irrelevant. But go ahead and dismiss it because you don't like the source.
As to Ron Paul, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
The Libertarian cohort generally gets the foreign policy issues correct, versus the neocon cohort on the right, while the so-called left in the US is liberal internationalist/interventionist, based on the US being the "indispensable nation."
Progressives are pretty much in the same boat as the liberal interventionists.
Bernie Sanders on foreign policy:
"Foreign policy is about whether we continue to champion the values of freedom, democracy, and justice, values which have been a beacon of hope for people throughout the world, or whether we support undemocratic, repressive regimes, which torture, jail, and deny basic rights to their citizens," Sanders said.
That is is exactly what the liberal interventionists and neocons say.
America needs to look to its own house first.
In the first place, the US is not a democracy; it is a republic. Moreover, it is an oligarchy run by a ruling class that is privileged an operates under a double standard. And to the degree it is subject to nepotism and dynastic wealth, it resembles an aristocracy.
Secondly, incarceration stats show how the underclass is being repressed through the selective application of law.
Thirdly, the US acts like a bully in international affairs, violating international law with impunity based on its power.
I could go on.
Americans really need to get their shit together and STFU until they do.
I am not talking only about the ruling class. Where are the mass demonstrations like there were in the Sixties and Seventies? Oh, wait. Look what happened to Occupy Wall Street. Now dissent is a terrorist offense. The US has become a police state.
This is why there is no draft - it leads to civil unrest and can end wars (Vietnam). Which is why there are no body counts / body bags in the media (unless we are the "victims", in which case it is used to perpetuate the "cause"), and yet another reason for keeping a large percentage of the population near-destitute (joining the all-volunteer military due to lack of other options, which - it should be noted - continually lowers its standard for acceptance).
The Libertarian cohort generally gets the foreign policy issues correct, versus the neocon cohort on the right, while the so-called left in the US is liberal internationalist/interventionist, based on the US being the "indispensable nation."
Vote Democrat for more SENSITIVE IMPERIALISM
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/10/war-culture-gun-culture-theyre-related/
In the first place, the US is not a democracy; it is a republic.
Tom, you are being super picky here :) A republic is a representative democracy. So, really a distinction without a difference.
A republic is a representative democracy. So, really a distinction without a difference.
lastgreek, I am surprised that you of all people would be taken in by the rhetoric that masks the reality.
In a genuine democracy, citizens vote directly on issues, as in ancient Athens. Of course this was not a democracy in the modern sense, since slaves pretty much comprised the working class in those days. Slaves were not citizens of the polis. The citizens had time for direct democracy, where they debated the issues in the forum (agora) and voted on laws.
Republican government characterized pre-empire Rome. The US government is modeled on Rome's republicRome's republic rather than Athenian democracy, although most people tend to confuse them either through ignorance or for persuasive effect. They were very different.
Lincoln's government "of the people, by the people and for the people" describes "participatory" aka "direct" democracy. This was initially proposed at the time of the founding but the Founding Fathers nixed it after considering the issues because they wanted to avoid the "rule of the rabble."
Actual political liberalism is either direct democracy or some form of anarchism based on consensus rather than hierarchy. Political conservatism is republicanism or some other form of oligarchy or monarchy. Rousseau versus Hobbes in terms of the modern debate. Republicanism often parades itself as a from of liberalism but it is conservative through and through, although some forms of conservatism are more liberal than others. Burke was quite liberal for a conservative of his time, for instance.
First Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court and one of the US founding fathers. John Jay. is reported to have said, in effect, Those who own the should govern it.
See
Law & Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice
Volume 5 | Issue 3 Article 2 1987
"The People Who Own the Country Ought to Govern It": The Supreme Court, hegemony, and Its Consequences
Anthony Walsh
These sites attempt to con people into thinking that we're always on the verge of Armageddon so they will be more apt to buy gold....
This is a pretty good article on direct democracy.
Direct Democracy
The US is a constitutional republic with representative democracy.
Curiously, I have seen people argue that Hillary Clinton really won the 2016 presidential election because she carried the most votes and democracy is based on the majority.
Sorry, but the US is not structured that way. HRC did not win the election. She lost even though she won a plurality of the votes cast.
No one had a majority since no one won more than fifty per cent of the votes cast. HRC only won 48.2%, I believe.
In addition there are good arguments that the US is not really even a representative democracy owing to voter suppression, gerrymandering, etc.
"Dollar crash!" = "its WW3!" = "buy gold!"
To make a case for rejecting a whole based on a part one has to show that the part is an integral aspect of the whole with respect to the particulars of the case.
Someone can be right on the political but wrong on the economic in that they are not that integrally interdependent in terms of the structure of the whole.
It's an issue to be aware of but not decisive.
Yeah, it does my head in, all that end of the world doom and gloom and buy gold. And all that collapse of the dollar and survivalist stuff.
I liked the Four Horseman documentary which was put together by left wing economists but I was disappointed at the end when they recommended the gold standard. So even left wingers can fall for the gold bug. The spin off of the Four Horseman is the Renegade Economist which is quite good.
It's a bit disingenuous to blame this on Trump, he isn't driving the bus.
Tom, that's like saying you should look at a broken clock because it is right twice a day...
The whole place there is a gold and bitcoin sales operatin... its biased...
Kaivey that "Four Hoseman is a metaphor from the Armageddon section of the Greek scriptures which brings in the whole apocalypse scenario....
It's charged rhetoric...
The whole place there is a gold and bitcoin sales operatin... its biased...
You know, I get questions about the ads that appear here at MNE, asking WTF I am doing associating with a place like this. People think that MNE chooses the ads rather than Google.
I am not saying that Krueger doesn't choose his ads. He probably does. He has probably figured out the kind of person that goes there and what they will click on to put money in his pocket.
"The People Who Own the Country Ought to Govern It" JJ would be happy today.
Post a Comment