[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

AI is exhausting the power grid. Tech firms are seeking a miracle solution.

Rare Van Halen Leicestershire, Donnington Park August 18, 1984 Valerie Bertinelli Cameo

If you need a Good Opening for black, use this.

"Arrogant Hunter Biden has never been held accountable — until now"

How Republicans in Key Senate Races Are Flip-Flopping on Abortion

Idaho bar sparks fury for declaring June 'Heterosexual Awesomeness Month' and giving free beers and 15% discounts to straight men

Son of Buc-ee’s co-owner indicted for filming guests in the shower and having sex. He says the law makes it OK.

South Africa warns US could be liable for ICC prosecution for supporting Israel

Today I turned 50!

San Diego Police officer resigns after getting locked in the backseat with female detainee

Gazan Refugee Warns the World about Hamas

Iranian stabbed for sharing his faith, miraculously made it across the border without a passport!

Protest and Clashes outside Trump's Bronx Rally in Crotona Park

Netanyahu Issues Warning To US Leaders Over ICC Arrest Warrants: 'You're Next'

Will it ever end?

Did Pope Francis Just Call Jesus a Liar?

Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) Updated 4K version

There can never be peace on Earth for as long as Islamic Sharia exists

The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception.

Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders

The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena

How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten

Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam

Terrorists shut down Park Avenue.

Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala.

The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US

Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today

Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear?

France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront

Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England.

George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed.

Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus.

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

International News
See other International News Articles

Title: Marines looking at deploying aboard foreign ships
Source: USA Today
URL Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/ ... 1/marines-amphibious/28935549/
Published: Jun 22, 2015
Author: Jim Michaels
Post Date: 2015-06-22 17:33:03 by redleghunter
Keywords: None
Views: 3009
Comments: 22

Faced with a shortage of U.S. Navy ships, the Marine Corps is exploring a plan to deploy its forces aboard foreign vessels to ensure they can respond quickly to global crises around Europe and western Africa.

The initiative is a stopgap way to deploy Marines aboard ships overseas until more American vessels are available, said Brig. Gen. Norman Cooling, deputy commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces Europe and Africa.

The Marines will be able to respond quickly to evacuate embassies or protect U.S. property and citizens, a need highlighted by the 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador.

"There's no substitute for U.S. amphibious" vessels, Cooling said. "We're looking at other options" in the meantime, he added.

The Marines have been working with Spain, Italy, the United Kingdom and other close allies to determine the suitability of the foreign ships for U.S. personnel and aircraft.

The units would be designed for limited operations and not major amphibious assaults. A ground force of about 100 to 120 Marines would be deployed along with three or four Ospreys, which fly like airplanes but can take off and land like helicopters.

The U.S. Navy has 30 amphibious ships but says it needs 38 to fulfill war fighting requirements. It won't reach that level until 2028 because of budget constraints, according to the Navy.

Critics say the Navy has allowed its amphibious capabilities to decline.

"Allowing the continued atrophy of the Navy-Marine Corps team's amphibious capacity is simply not an option given the national security challenges facing the United States and its allies," said Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., a member of the Armed Services Committee, in an email statement.

Much of the Navy's current amphibious fleet is being used in the Pacific — where the U.S. military is attempting to respond to an expansionist China — and the Middle East, where it is responding to an endless series of crises.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: redleghunter (#0)

Next, the new American warplans will include hitch hiking to the war zones.

Don  posted on  2015-06-22   17:48:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: redleghunter (#0)

The better strategy is to reduce the number of overseas missions.

Stop being driven by events.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-06-22   17:54:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Vicomte13 (#2)

The better strategy is to reduce the number of overseas missions.

Stop being driven by events.

Yes that is a most valid strategy.

Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-06-22   18:07:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: redleghunter (#3)

Yes that is a most valid strategy.

And it has the singular virtue of not getting our own people killed, not killing other people, and saving a ton of money...at the price of being the big swingin' dick in every neighborhood.

Our ego has cost us a lot of legs and lives and cash. We should economize on those things now.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-06-22   18:17:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: redleghunter (#0)

I have an idea. Why not just hire Chinese Marines to do our fighting for us at a huge discount? They can use their own ships and we can save a bundle of money!

OR.......,we could just quit shipping Marines all over the freaking world to fight other people's battles?

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-06-22   18:57:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Vicomte13 (#4) (Edited)

And it has the singular virtue of not getting our own people killed, not killing other people, and saving a ton of money...at the price of being the big swingin' dick in every neighborhood.

Our ego has cost us a lot of legs and lives and cash. We should economize on those things now.

Less spending on big ships does not make admirals and congress happy. In this day and age we need ocean going versions of PT boats rather than carriers or cruisers, etcs. At least we mothballed the battleships. Since we don't fight smart - might as well stay home.

Pericles  posted on  2015-06-22   19:00:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Vicomte13 (#2)

" The better strategy is to reduce the number of overseas missions. "

Yes, stay home& mind our own business. That would be a lot cheaper for us in blood & treasure. And it would be beneficial by protecting our own borders!

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Stoner  posted on  2015-06-22   20:25:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: sneakypete, TooConservative, Vicomte13 (#5)

Pete good points. The European Union has more interests in the areas where we fight wars. They have all (even the UK) drawn down their armed forces to almost nil and have become reliant on American military power to uphold their interests.

Don't get me started on our Allies and their "contributions." I'll cut the Brits some slack given they have stuck it out the longest but are now so small they could not sustain multiple deployments.

Yet all these Euro nations continue to import the very fanatics who we fight in the ME. Beggars to their own demise.

Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-06-23   0:58:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: redleghunter (#8)

Yet all these Euro nations continue to import the very fanatics who we fight in the ME.

Since we do the same,we are in no position to criticize them for that.

And we ain't going to stop,either. The Dims need a new professional victim voter base.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-06-23   7:46:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Don. redleghunter, all (#1)

I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to remember that either reading or having been told that all US Military avionics are either made in or have internal parts made in only China.

BobCeleste  posted on  2015-06-23   8:26:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: redleghunter, Pericles, sneakypete, Vicomte13 (#8)

Pete good points. The European Union has more interests in the areas where we fight wars. They have all (even the UK) drawn down their armed forces to almost nil and have become reliant on American military power to uphold their interests.

Don't get me started on our Allies and their "contributions." I'll cut the Brits some slack given they have stuck it out the longest but are now so small they could not sustain multiple deployments.

Obviously, the NATO tail is wagging the American dog.

Look at Yugoslavia/Bosnia/Serbia/Kosovo. A EUro mess from start to end. Same thing with the destruction of Libya as a functioning country.

OTOH, we've drug NATO EU into our wars like Iraq and Af-Pak, much to their regret.

Getting rid of NATO would reduce the incentives for wasteful and counterproductive wars-of-option.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-06-23   8:36:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: TooConservative (#11)

Getting rid of NATO would reduce the incentives for wasteful and counterproductive wars-of-option.

Getting rid of NATO would be the death of the Europian empire. Without the US, Europe is naked and a hen house for Putin. Just saying...

Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-06-23   9:06:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: redleghunter (#12)

Without the US, Europe is naked and a hen house for Putin. Just saying...

I don't think the EU believes that.

Putin's profits go out the window if he takes western Europe. And that is even if we don't contest it in any way.

Even the Soviets at their height couldn't have taken western Europe. It would have caused the end of the Soviet Union much sooner than it occurred in the mid-Eighties.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-06-23   9:28:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: TooConservative (#11)

NATO's usefulness was in forming a united front to resist Josef Stalin's Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union fell apart in 1991. NATO's shelf life expired a quarter century ago. Save money and be done with it. Europe is the world's largest economy. Let them defend themselves.

Our economy is careening towards a Greek outcome. We do not have the money to maintain world dominion anymore. We are not rich enough to police the oceans. It is not our job. We appointed it to ourselves, and now it is bankrupting us. And we're every bit as addicted to our idea of being the "First Nation", "The Leader" as the Greeks are to their notions of high pensions with no functional tax system.

And in both cases, this delusion of the mind makes it impossible to fix anything, and means that the country must slide into bankruptcy.

It DOESN'T MATTER that China is aggressively expanding and that Russia is going to grab a piece of, or all of, the Ukraine. The UNITED STATES is neither powerful enough nor rich enough to stop any of that, and it is not, and never was, our job TO stop it.

It's the job of the people in Asia to contain China. That can be done simply and easily by nuclear proliferation. South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines can nuke up, and that's the end of threats to territorial integrity.

Likewise, Europe can nuke up over the Ukraine, if they really CARE.

As an American, I remember when the Filipinos threw us out. Why, then, am I spending a dime preventing China from seizing the Filipinos territorial waters? They had our protection, and we built fine bases there. They kicked us out. So why is it OUR problem, then, if China uses its military superiority to take away the ocean bottoms claimed by the Filipinos. Seems like they made a bad choice, for them, that it lets US off the hook of having to defend them, and I really do not give a goddamn that the Philippines loses its ocean bottoms to China. The Filipinos were dumb and made a bad decision, and now they lose. That's skin off their nose. From MY perspective, the fact that we're NOT there any more means that we don't have to get in a fight with China AT ALL. The Chinese push the Filipinos around just like we push Cuba or Haiti around. And IT IS NOT MY PROBLEM.

The Filipinos COULD have avoided this by not being fools and kicking us out. But they DID kick us out, which means that WE are saved a lot of trouble, if they're smart. I say: LET CHINA WIN over the Filipino claims. The Philippines is a little weak country. They had an ally. They threw us out. So now they get pushed around by China, and it IS NOT MY PROBLEM.

Nor is it my problem that the Chinese and Japanese hate each other. Japan is an economic competitor. They can build nuclear weapons and stop China in its tracks. IT IS NOT MY PROBLEM.

South Korea is advanced. They can build nuclear weapons too, and should.

So should Taiwan.

Long ago, Taiwan could have declared its independence, but instead the absurd little government there, which was so corrupt that they lost control of Mainland China, CLAIMED to be rulers of ALL China. It was always an absurd pretension. The Communists won. The KMT lost. China is ruled from Peking, not Taipei. During those long years, Taipei could have relinquished its ridiculous claim to not only be an integral part of China, but to be China's only legitimate government.

And WE could have been intelligent and not insisted upon an obvious stupidity: Taiwan is obviously NOT the ruler of China, and never will be in any universe that ever has, or ever will, existed. We played a high school game.

Instead of declaring independence and having done with it back when we opened to China, back when the Chinese couldn't do anything, we allowed the Taiwanese to nurse their pretensions.

And so NOW, TODAY, China is big and bad, and CHINA agrees: Taiwan IS an integral part of China. If Taiwan seceded TODAY, China would invade, and would win unless we went to war over it - and that might very well end in a nuclear exchange that destroys the planet.

So, the Taiwanese were impossibly arrogant, stubborn, overreaching and foolish. THEY made an argument for 40 years, and now they're trapped in the snare of that argument. China agrees: Taiwan is an integral part of China, and the Chinese are not going to let them go.

Once upon a time, the Taiwanese COULD HAVE set a course for themselves as an independent and free people. They CHOSE not to. WE should not hock OURSELVES to THEIR foolish choice. Taiwan is China, and I am not willing to expend money we don't have, and risk a nuclear war with China, to preserve the political liberty of some Chinese province, just as I am not willing to go to war with Russia over the Ukraine.

But...but...

But WHAT?

"The "bad guys" will win! If China is "bad guys", why do they have "Most Favored Nation" status for US trade purposes? If Russia is "Bad guys" why do we have normal relations with them.

It's comical, really. I hear all of the "national security" arguments made by men who like to sound smart.

It is not in the national security interest of the United States to go bankrupt trying to defend Chinese from Chinese, Russians from Russians, or murky Chinese sea bottoms from regional struggles. It is in our interest to NOT BE INVOLVED in ANY of that crap. It's not our affair. We don't have the money, or the power. And we weaken ourselves and destroy the prosperity of our own people and our own future pretending that we are more powerful and important than we really are.

It is time to accept a lesser status in the world. The British and French people, and Russians too, and Japanese, are all MUCH better off now that they've given up all pretense of Empire. We still like to listen to political science majors crow that we're the "Indispensible Nation". It feels good to stroke our own ego. It also feels good to get a blowjob from a whore.

But guess what - if you do the latter, the good feeling is accompanied by a heapin' helpin' o' herpes, and you pay for it. And if you do the former, you go bankrupt and LOSE ANYWAY, because we are NOT , in FACT, powerful enough to stop China from winning in the China seas, or Russia from winning in Russia, and we should stop thinking like teenagers and grow up and stop throwing away money to lose again and again and go bankrupt. We NEED THAT MONEY here.

IF we got our financial house in order, we'd have pretty good lives. We have the resources to live better than Scandinavians. But the fact is that Scandinavians live longer and healthier and happer than we do, because they take the modest excesses from their modest economies and invest directly in themselves. And that gives them very secure lives.

We, on the other hand, piss away our fortune trying to pretend that we're the "Indispensible Nation"...and getting humiliated on foreign battlefields from Chosen to Vietnam to Beirut to the Persian Gulf to Aden to Iraq...and we bluster and harm our economy in pointless sanctions and posturing over the China seas and Russia...and the locals ignore us and forge ahead, and win. They end up stronger, we end up weaker, looking stupid and ineffective, with bodies to bury sometimes, and injured soldiers to then disregard and turn into homeless criminals that prey on us, while we go bankrupt.

Americans are really crappy at war and foreign policy. Sadly, like the Taiwanese of old, we actually think we're great at it, and are impervious to reality.

So I guess we've gotta piss away what's left of our national treasure losing wars and struggles, until we collapse into a Greek ruin...but WITHOUT the pensions, because we pissed all that money away trying - and failing - to stop the Russians from ruling Russia, and the Chinese from ruling the China Seas, and the Muslims from ruling Muslimania.

God we're dolts. An arrogant, stubborn, blustering ones. Caricatures. Conservatives are always saying how we need to grow up and become realistic. Then they talk about slashing social programs. We all DO need to grow up and become realistic, but the REALLY means slashing the military, bringing it home, accepting the inevitable defeats on a bunch of battlefields of choice around the world, and once we've lost the Empire, like Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, and the USSR all did, using the freed-up resources to fix our accounts and get on with a Scandinavian-style system of internal social supports for one another.

That way we, too, can live longer lives, with less crime, and generally greater happiness, and stop being run ragged, worrying about losing our jobs, all so that we can hand money to an incompetent military and foreign policy establishment that has lost everything since 1946.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-06-23   9:34:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: TooConservative (#13)

Even the Soviets at their height couldn't have taken western Europe.

France and the UK both have nukes. Lots of them. Enough to destroy the United States or the USSR.

Neither the United States nor the USSR could have conquered France or the UK. The USSR could not conquer Europe. It could have conquered Germany, maybe.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-06-23   9:35:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Vicomte13 (#14)

Our economy is careening towards a Greek outcome.

Nobody's fault but our own. Just like Greece,we can lay the blame directly at the feet of our "buy a vote" politicians and the voters they buy. America is done unless we go back to a system where only land owners can vote. Democracy is nothing but slow-motion national suicide.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-06-23   9:44:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Vicomte13 (#14)

It's the job of the people in Asia to contain China. That can be done simply and easily by nuclear proliferation. South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines can nuke up, and that's the end of threats to territorial integrity.

Likewise, Europe can nuke up over the Ukraine, if they really CARE.

I agree with all that you wrote, these bits especially.

If the Norks and the mullahs of Iran can be trusted with nukes, I think the EU and Japan and South Korea (and Taiwan) can too.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-06-23   9:57:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: sneakypete (#16) (Edited)

America is done unless we go back to a system where only land owners can vote.

If that's the case, then we're done. We're never going to such a system. It's ridiculous and unacceptable. If the law is going to affect me, then I get to vote on it. Money and land are not going to be the doorway to votes.

So, I guess that means that, if you're right, the country is through. So it's through. Done. Over. Stick a fork in it.

Now let's talk about the NEW country we can put together on the ruins, because that country that you want - one in which only landowners get to vote - is dead and cannot be resurrected. And shouldn't be.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-06-23   10:21:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Vicomte13 (#18)

If that's the case, then we're done. We're never going to such a system.

True.

It's ridiculous and unacceptable.

No,it's traditional and reasonable. Since property owners are the only ones that "own stock" in America,we should be the only ones that have a voice in how OUR money is spent.

If the law is going to affect me, then I get to vote on it.

WTF are you to be so special? Want to vote,but property and pay property taxes. If not,you are no better than some illegal alien from Nigeria,so quit whining about it.

Money and land are not going to be the doorway to votes.

They were when this country was founded,and the Founding Fathers specifically set it up that way because they understood that democracy was nothing more than the slow-motion suicide of a nation.

Now let's talk about the NEW country we can put together on the ruins, ...

Works for me. I think we should crack down and only allow veterans who have served at least one full enlistment in the US military to obtain full citizenship and to be allowed to vote. Heinlein had the right idea.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-06-23   10:53:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: sneakypete (#19)

WTF are you to be so special?

You call your view "traditional". It's traditional in the sense of European nobility, but it's not American. The Americans started abolishing property rights for voting in the 1790s, right after the ratification of the Constitution, and it was gone in every single state before the Civil War.

As far as me being "special", the opposite is true. I'm a citizen, voting is a right of citizens. You want to change the rules back to the antiquated European aristocratic system of requiring property to vote. It was a system designed to establish oppression in Europe, which is why the Americans starting doing away with it as soon as the ink on the Constitution was dry and there were national offices to vote for.

You think it's reasonable to go back to aristocracy. That's nice. The Americans got rid of it first, and even the Europeans have done away with all of that - and they still have aristocrats.

The really precious thing is that you think your crazy uncle-in-the-attic view is normal and obvious, and that Americans like me, who follow the tradition of the whole country of eliminating special rights for landed aristocracy are doing special pleading.

So you sit on your little desert island, alone, raging that the system is dying around us because we won't go back the British landed system that PRECEDED the American Revolution.

And you're SO SURE of your cranky view that you speak to ME as though I'm some sort of radical for standing for one-person, one-vote, regardless of economic status, which is the mark-one mod-zero American stance and HAS BEEN since the Revolution.

It's funny.

And no, veterans don't deserve special rights either.

You say that "the Founders set it up that way", and you actually BELIEVE your nonsense.

No, they didn't. The BRITISH NOBILITY set it up that way, and as soon as we had a Constitution, the FOUNDERS started getting rid of the practice, just like they got rid of powdered wigs and calling people "M'lord". The first states to be admitted after Independence were Vermont and Kentucky. Vermont never property requirement to vote, and Kentucky got rid of theirs in 1792. State after state followed suit in the early 1800s, in the Founder's generation. The last state to go was North Carolina, before the Civil War.

You like old aristocratic norms. You should get along well with me, then, because I'm an honest-to-God hereditary nobleman of three separate Western European countries. I'm certainly always ready to agree that there is a difference between nobility and hoi polloi, that the real nobility are the natural leaders due to charisma, granted by the grace of God to lead other men in an era before there were any strong institutions, and when men tended towards savagery. Without true nobility, nothing but raw brute force would rule the day. That was the contest between Vikings and the settled West. The Vikings were raw force and courage. The West were law and order and noble rulers. The West won and even brought religion and civilization to the Vikings.

You'd reject the notion of civilization, because you love brute force. So in speaking to your type, I'd just note: the Vikings lost and we won, so our law ruled the roost...until the American Revolution.

In America, the people ruled the roost, and one of the first things that the people started to change was doing away with the old law that gave those of us with hereditary land control of the government. It was a GOOD innovation for America.

But here you are, wishing to drag yourself and your countrymen BACK under the rule of men like me. I'm happy to rule you. And one of the first rules that I will make is: no, we're really not going to go back because, you know what, we nobles were good in our day, but the mass of free people moving together with their own dreams in large, structured institutions moves forward progress in all areas of science and knowledge, and generally improved human conditions, then we ever did back when we ruled the roost, or ever COULD today if we ruled the roost again.

Many hands make light work, and the business of science takes lots and lots of hands. So does industry. Free hands and free minds produce better, and men fuss at fetters and chains. Every adult gets the vote. It's the best way.

Going back is not the way. We can learn from the wisdom of our ancestors, see what they did right and what they did wrong, but the modern world is much more complicated and advanced, and it could not possibly function well on the foundation of hereditary landholding and power by birthright.

Oh, and if you think it will stop with landholding, it won't. As your ancestors in Scotland, Ireland and England learned, the greater grandees will use their greater power to pass Enclosure Acts and drive you little ones out of your small freeholds. Then you'll be reduced to penury and have to emigrate to America...

...except there is no America to emigrate to anymore.

So it's best to accept the wisdom of your forefathers and understand that one man, one vote is a foundational element that keeps you free. You envision yourself the lord of the manor. Your people never were lords of the manor, and never will be. I am. Think about that WELL. Think about how much I piss you off. Understand that if we go BACK, that I will be ruling you. My family DID rule yours for a thousand years. I have their blood, their brains, and some of their assets, and the connections, the pedigree, the perch in society. Men like the Bushes will be greater still, but men like me and my children will always be the ruling class - by Grace of God - because we have charisma and intellectual capacity that comes from God, and not from learning. We are natural leaders - we are attractive - people FOLLOW us. Always have. The law has been harsh to you, but men like me always get breaks.

And precisely BECAUSE I have centuries of wisdom to lean on, I know that what you THINK you want will NOT be good for you and for men like you. So I insist, no, no, we're just going to all be equal now, because it's better that way.

Your CHOICE is to be my equal, or to be ruled like men like me. There is no universe in which men like you rule men like me other than places like Soviet Russia or Communist China, and that doesn't last.

You THINK that because of your political views, you're landed gentry. But you're not. You're a yeoman farmer, and they were all crowded off their land by the grandees. We bought ourselves a Revolution in France doing that. The Americans had the good sense to get rid of the nonsense. You should have the good sense to not want to go back to the ways that oppressed your ancestors.

But you don't. You don't have the wisdom, or sense, or sense of proportion, which is why you sneer at me and address me with contempt, even though I am you social, economic, intellectual superior. I bear it with humor, like a barking dog.

But realize what you're wishing for: get your wish, restore the land qualification, and your whole government becomes chock full of men like me - and I'm of the better sort, a kind and reflective one. You're going to be ruled by George Soros, and he's going to take your land just like my ancestors took your ancestors land in Europe and drove them over here.

THEY were smart enough to GET RID OF the land qualification, but you're uppity and think YOU'LL be noble because you've got a piece of land. What you'll get is landless, in time.

The Founders were smart. THEY abolished the land ownership rule. Take their advice and change your mind.

Or don't, and rage, and be ignored.

The dog barks. The caravan passes.

Yes, I'm special. And we're equal. And it should stay that way.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-06-23   11:27:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Vicomte13, *Humor* (#20) (Edited)

You call your view "traditional". It's traditional in the sense of European nobility, but it's not American.

Yes it is because in America anyone can gain a "nobleman's rights" by purchasing property.

And forget all the nonsense you heard about it being illegal for blacks to vote prior to 1964. The first slaveowner in the original 13 colonies was a black man,and as a property owner he had the right to vote.

The Americans started abolishing property rights for voting in the 1790s,...

Which is why Franklin said in response to the question "What kind of government do we have?","A Constitutional Republic,if you can keep it."

He knew the trash would try to take over so they could vote for access to the public treasury for themselves.

It was a system designed to establish oppression in Europe..

You are a devout Catholic and have the gall to complain about a "system designed to establish oppression"??????

I might as well be talking with Jesse Jackson about personal responsibility,or Obomber about equality for white people.

The really precious thing is that you think your crazy uncle-in-the-attic view is normal and obvious, and that Americans like me, who follow the tradition of the whole country of eliminating special rights for landed aristocracy are doing special pleading.

No,I think you are whining losers who want something for nothing. In your case,you probably want enough Catholics to be registered to vote to vote for us to come under the control of the Vatican.

Do NOT try to pass yourself off as some sort of champion for freedom. You are the polar opposite.

You'd reject the notion of civilization,

No,I reject the idea of a Big Massa Government,which you adore.

The West won and even brought religion and civilization to the Vikings.

Go peddle your horseshit where there are plenty of ignorant cult followers to believe you. The Vikings had their own religion and religious figures,and they had their own form of civilization. In FACT,there was more individual freedoms in the Viking countries than there were the Catholic countries of old Europe.

because you love brute force.

YOU are the one that worships brute force,or you wouldn't be arguing for more power for governments. Nobody applies brute force like governments. Including the Catholic Church,which is a government itself.

As your ancestors in Scotland, Ireland and England learned, the greater grandees will use their greater power to pass Enclosure Acts and drive you little ones out of your small freeholds.

In America they did this by allowing anybody to vote.

I'm happy to rule you.

Not for long,you wouldn't.

Every adult gets the vote. It's the best way.

No,it's the worse way. It's govenrment by the lowest common denominator. Which you know,but ignore because you think the idiots will vote for a Catholic State and you are delusional enough to think that would be a good thing.

So it's best to accept the wisdom of your forefathers and understand that one man, one vote is a foundational element that keeps you free.

No bigger lie has ever been told.

our people never were lords of the manor, and never will be. I am. Think about that WELL. Think about how much I piss you off. Understand that if we go BACK, that I will be ruling you.

What I understand is that you want every retard and 3rd world Catholic immigrant to vote because in your delusional mind you think THAT will put you back in power.

And precisely BECAUSE I have centuries of wisdom to lean on,...

ROFLMAO! Good one! Make me a miracle,Big Daddy!

Your CHOICE is to be my equal, or to be ruled like men like me.

A little full of yourself,ain't you?

Or are you just trying to get me to hit the humor ping list? I do have to admit that a devout Catholic Jesuit wannabe talking about freedom is hilarious,though.

You THINK that because of your political views, you're landed gentry.

You really are an idiot. I already own land.

You don't have the wisdom, or sense, or sense of proportion, which is why you sneer at me and address me with contempt, ...

No,I sneer at you because you are a clueless fool. I also feel sorry for you because I think you really are so delusional you actually believe the nonsense you spout.

restore the land qualification, and your whole government becomes chock full of men like me - and I'm of the better sort, a kind and reflective one.

Ok,that does it. You finally earned your humor ping list ping.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-06-23   12:27:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: sneakypete (#21)

Sneer away, sneaky.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-06-23   15:06:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com