10

The World According To Herbie

Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 2 months ago to History
76 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

A Little History
The world was changed by a lie put forth by a President. Not so surprising since most of them have been quite adept at the ability to lie convincingly to Americans, throughout history. The Gulf of Tonkin was a lie by LBJ, possibly one of the most lying of all Presidentsand this lie led to the Vietnam way going full scale.But It was all started by the assassinate President, JFKafter he had on very bad advice, Ngo Diem, the Catholic Prime Minister assassinated which was supposed to heal the Buddhist resentment of the Catholic takeove rafter1954.Then, Johnson and McNamara ran the war from the White House instead of the battlefield and didn't seem to care how many civilians were killed and wounded and driven into the arms of the Vietcongand thus the table was set for what became abortion on demand and the 50 to 60 million babies killed so that women could have sex without responsibility and with George Soro's mulri billions funding the growth of the radical left takeover of the Democratic Party.Meanwhile, Republicans not understanding the culture of America, was changing into a hatred of free market capitalism and hatred of the American ideal .

At that time it was still possible for Reagan to rebuild our military because there were still enough Democrats to vote pro-USA but somehow, that got lost through the Clinton years and then Bush made things a bigger mess because he had no understanding of the scope of Muslim terrorism throughout the world and mistook Saddam's secular Sunni dictatorship for the hegemonic growth of Shia Iran tat felt destined to conquer the world for Islam.Then came Obama. His 8 year mission was to terminate the USA as a world power and he succeeded beyond his dreams leaving Trump with a depleted military, and what just passed was a lifting of the squestration by a level of continuing leftist type spending that guaranteed the USA as a 3rd world country. Make America great again? We'll see.


All Comments

  • Posted by Dobrien 6 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Good evening Maritimus,
    I would be very interested in reading your story. if ....... it is not to much trouble and not so personal that you don't want to rehash it.
    Warm regards,
    DOB
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "China is doing a pretty good job of buying Hawaii as it is"
    That is exactly my point. In the modern world investing in a country is more profitable invading it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "you find that hiding and striking is very effective and if it can be sustained it can make it too expensive for the regular army "
    Plus the regular army's objective may be to make the occupied people do specific things, while the occupied people's objective is just anything to disrupt the aggressor and make them leave. That gives the occupied country an advantage.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Remember, it was Sun Tzu, the Chinese general who wrote "The Art of War," who said that one who is always prepared, wins without fighting. Martial display and war games send a clear message about a nation's ability to be a dangerous enemy.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    They need lots of sabers to rattle. Building a well armed military is cheaper than actually going to war. They may well win their battles bloodless and cheap.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm sure that there's a plan at the Pentagon for every contingency. In detail worked out to the nth degree with both win and lose. If Trump's election and nomination has taught me anything it is that there's not a politician around who can be trusted. Whose motives are not truly what they say they are, who won't turn on you the moment that they see it would be to their advantage. We saw it play out before our very eyes when pols who I thought stood for something and had integrity if even that they had the wrong ideas faltered and became just filled with hatred, lack of morality and venom toward anyone who was different. All the animus against Trump is nothing much more than bigotry. The hatred of those who hate because someone else is different, which is the very definition of prejudice.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Perhaps. Letme say that I believe in an armed citizenry. But, I also do not want to delude myself or others into thinking that arms alone can change anything. If coupled with a just cause, now, we're talkin'.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    China is doing a pretty good job of buying Hawaii as it is, so no need to invade. Taiwan is the more likely target for China to physically invade. They did make an attempt to invade Vietnam, when that country invaded Cambodia to stop Pol Pot's massacre of his own people. That was a case of a Russian proxy, Vietnam, being challenged by China defending its proxy, Cambodia. That invasion did not turn out well for China, that was embarrassed by its troops being shown as incompetent to wage war against even a smaller enemy that was fighting on two fronts.

    China has backed away from another confrontation with India, even though they were victorious in their earlier border tussle. Despite building up an impressive war machine,, China appears to be using it as an elaborate jobs program.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Better than meekly marching off to unchallenged destruction. I am armed. Not as highly as I'd like to be, but my various disabilities only allow me a limited type of firearm.My point is that an armed citizenry can make a statement and cost the government dearly, but in the long run, can't win, unless the generals see the citizens as a better option. It happened under the Czar, but never again once the "people" were in charge.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It will be a matter of guerilla warfare against standard army. Check out every rebel insurrection, and you find that hiding and striking is very effective and if it can be sustained it can make it too expensive for the regular army to continue throwing million dollar shells at the enemy.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "Small arms are no defense against real weapons of war."
    I know, and I'm not imaging relying only on small arms. I know small arms are insufficient, but I think you may underestimate the power of an armed population against a force that wants to invade and control a country.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "We might decide to better organize a segment of this ad hoc militia (10% would create a 10 million man army), disbanding the standing ground forces like the Army and Marines, transitioning more of them to trainers to take advantage of their combat experience to better train the militia."
    In my fantasy, there would be some system of coordination and training. It would be something like what the Founders were thinking of with a "well-regulated militia". It would just aim for being less of an institution, less of a portion of the economy funded by taxes, as big as it needs to be, but no bigger.

    My hope is the incentive to take over a country is decreasing. The spoils aren't land or gold anymore. Now it's Google, Amazon, and Apple. It's hard to take over and steal them.

    We talk about China invading Hawaii, but what about it invading South Korea or Japan? We talk about Russia invading Alaska, but what about it invading Finland? My thought is they don't because NATO and the UN won't allow it. In theory means groups of countries with pacts to defend each other, but in practice it means the US providing most of the security. It's a thankless job. I don't fully understand the history of how it came to be and why it's not a subject for debate. We're supposedly very divided, but everyone agrees we will spend a trillion dollars a year on war-related programs.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Everyone in my family with the exception of my father and me were born in the "old country." In the case of my father, of his 8 brothers and sisters, 4 were born in Poland, and he was the 1st to be born in the USA. So, we were very close to new immigrants. It was like we had one foot in America and one foot in Europe.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Maritimus 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Somehow, the optimist in me is not yet ready to give up. Can I somehow help your Gulliver?
    Stay well.
    Maritimus
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Maritimus 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello, Herb,
    Many of the immigrant stories are fascinating and show that luck always plaid a part.
    All the best.
    Sincerely,
    Maritimus
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Maritimus 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello, LibertyBelle,
    I just sent you the story about my immigration as a private message.
    Beef up you patience before you embark on reading it.
    All the best.
    Sincerely,
    Maritimus
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    My grandmother's cousin Benjamin escaped from the gulag. His story is also a long one. I was gratified to see him get to America, become a citizen, and get married starting from the time I was a teen up until I got engaged myself.We were also fortunate in that he was a sweet and, intelligent, man.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Maritimus 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello, LibertyBelle,
    I do not feel comfortable writing it here. I will send you the story privately. It is a long story, I need to warn you.
    All the best to you.
    Sincerely,
    Maritimus
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The idea would be to have the veterans train a militia to operate the more powerful weapons. Tanks are not always successful against a well trained infantry using mines and antitank weapons. When people say "militia" they often depict an unorganized mob, but a real militia has discipline and training. Anyway, I share your view that CG is engaging in fantasy.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    In my view, the primary reason for the existence of government at all is the protection of its citizens. We can take care of ourselves in all other circumstances, thank you very much.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Small arms are no defense against real weapons of war. One tank could easily obliterate a hundred small arms regiments.Not to mention some of the newer contraptions.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think I'm turning bitter. In the last few years many of my heroes have turned out to have feet of clay. In reviewing my posts of the last few years I have noted a definite downward trend, topped off by the horrible treatment of Donald Trump by people of whom I once respected.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 7 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No need to apologize. I like detailed explanations far more than "bumper sticker" vague statements. Here's where we disagree: the militia you envision already exists, as the 100 million American gun owners with 300 million guns and over 10 trillion rounds of ammunition. However, unlike the Swiss (the model I feel you're using as an example), these private owners do not have government standard equipment, coordination, or training. Facing an invading force, leaders and guerilla tactics would develop over time, but it's a clumsy way to rely on for defense. We might decide to better organize a segment of this ad hoc militia (10% would create a 10 million man army), disbanding the standing ground forces like the Army and Marines, transitioning more of them to trainers to take advantage of their combat experience to better train the militia.

    I do see the birth of an unpiloted air combat force that, combined with ground based antiaircraft and antimissile batteries could be a dependable element of a militia-manned defense. In theory, the unpiloted interceptors could be minimally guided by ground radar and GPS to their targets, with the actual intercept done autonomously.

    A standing naval force, to protect our coasts and ocean commercial activities, is a necessity. Large vessels like aircraft carriers could be mothballed. A submarine fleet of some composition will have to be part of that force.

    That would be my approach, probably in tiresome detail in achieving the goals you desire. In reality, I just don't see any scenario where we could go in that direction without inviting existing power brokers to demolish our connections with allies and the broader global commercial market, and possible even invasion. Russian President Putin has frequently "joked" about retaking Alaska, and China is longing to have Hawaii in its grip.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo