War as a Fact of Life

Were you really scared of the Vietnamese coming to harm your family or your country? No, you may see it as a fight to defend a smaller country and that is fine but dont pretend its to protect "your" family or "your" country, there is no shame in saying you went to protect families you never met.

 

So your family were immigrants who came here and "stole jobs from real Americans"???



- - - Updated - - -

What's funny is ...all the American businesses (many headed by Republicans/conservatives) who now do business with Vietnam, making money off of that country and its labor and resources....

which was the whole reason for the Vietnam War in the first place.

 

Capitalism, communism, or Marxism really have nothing to do with it. They are, more, just monikers we use to identify the different groups. The types of atrocities all the civilizations that practice and don't practice these things do is more the result of the want of power, wealth, and control. Yes, they change their wrappers from one century to the next, but it's the same basic motives. Theft, avarice, extortion, murder, and sabotage. How was this different for Native Americans...or Mexicans...or Blacks...or Haitians...or Aborignes...or South Americans...or Vietnamese...or Cambodians...or Japanese? Seeing as though we,o ourselves, like to dodge the term genocide and have made it a point to express to international law that the US cannot be tried under international law for genocide, I doubt there is any real difference between one and the other. Not all of the examples were genocide, of course, but neither were all of the names you implied.

 

I claim that you are now talking out of your rear end. Perhaps you have a read comprehension deficit? "I enlisted before Vietnam, and was there at the beginning." I enlisted and was ordered to Vietnam I had no choice in the matter. Once there and in country under ambush attacks, you better believe I was scared. I wasn't worried about America being attacked, I was more concerned about survival. But you wouldn't know about things like that. You probably weren't even born then.

 

Both my grandparents came to America legally and worked when given the opportunity. Wasn't this the land of opportunity? Stealing jobs? I guess that every time you are hired you are stealing the job from the man you replaced.

 

Oh, the guilt one must bear, especially when ideologues attempt to blame the past on those of today, whose families were not even part of the problem and were even persecuted here. One can then make the premise that your family was involved in the persecution of minorities and responsible for all the wrongs you heap upon America.

 

Go for it. Explain how.

There are two generally stupid ideas that have been passed off as intellectual in some way. One is that the people of a particular time "didn't know any better" and that things like slavery or mass killings were, while normal, not seen as bad things. Which is utterly stupid. Religion, thousands of years old, clearly lays out clear examples of morality and virtues. The same same religion people like to use today as the archtype of morality addresses such virtues and awareness of abuse against others.

The second is that a society is somehow vindicated of fault if the generation that commits it passes away with time. We aren't talking about individuals. We are talking about the society...the nation. Groups of people and organizations complicit in these acts. Older generations of American's took the land they now call theirs. Because they managed to hold onto it until they died, it's now their's and one cannot bring up claims against them because the criminals died so Native Americans remain permanently dispossed and their descendants must strive to survive while the descendants of their abusers live in opulence and relative comfort. One of the great crimes of history if you ask me. Under international law, the US and all such nations and parties affiliated with the act should be held accountable.

It's justice when it pleases us, apparently.

 

Immediately after talking about Vietnam you say, "but that doesn't mean I won't fight to protect my family or my country.", you did not fight to protect your country or your family as you just admitted right now, "I wasn't worried about America being attacked, I was more concerned about survival." You contradict yourself.

 

Obviously you have no loyalty to this country or your family, dare say the impetus to protect either much less yourself or those to the right or Left of you in a fight. One has to question one's loyalty and to whom that loyalty lies as well as manliness.

 

The only things worth starting a war over are food and water. Even self defense is an iffy proposition when it comes to full-scale war, considering all of the "preemptive defense" and false flags things that people will engage in.

 

Who the hell are you to say?

And like I said before, your Jefferson quote is wrong, he never said that go ahead and tell me where and when he said it, because he never did.

 

This quotation is attributed to Jefferson's comment in an 1825 letter to William Short: "Some are whigs, liberals, democrats, call them what you please. Others are tories, serviles, aristocrats, &c. The latter fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society; the former consider the people as the safest depository of power in the last resort; they cherish them therefore, and wish to leave in them all the powers to the exercise of which they are competent." The content is the same but the wording as follows is more suited to today's world. "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”

 

So why dont you use his real quote now that I proved to you he never said that? Right, because his real quote defends liberals and Democrats, left wing, while attacking the aristocracy, the right wing. You would never put the true Jefferson quote, it should be against the rules to knowingly misquote someone in your signature as you are doing here. Change the quote or I will report

 

lol why dont you be a man and just use the real Jefferson quote? Why do you have to lie?

 

your childish notions of right and left are duly noted. meanwhile, in the real world, the liberal establishment wields the power of the state like a cudgel, continually attempting to increase governmental intrusion and to degrade the power of the individual. as this goes on, the more conservative elements of society strive to rein in the power of an unwieldy bureaucracy and to force a recalcitrant ruling elite to return to individuals the power to which they are rightly entitled. so now, who is this aristocracy?

but, of course none of this will make the slightest difference to such as you. you who are so willing to run to any authority at the first hint of imaginary impropriety.

 

Everyone knows liberals want wealthy equality, and conservatives attack wealth equality as being Communistic in nature, which it is, so how can we be both in favor of wealth equality AND an aristocracy? Its not possible, its an oxymoron. The right wing defends peoples "right" to be born with 40 billion dollars, THAT is an aristocracy. The left wing thinks that people born with 40 billion dollars should have to pay a large percentage of that to the poor they stole it from, that is the opposite of an aristocracy. How is taking from the rich and giving to the poor aristocratic in any sense of the imagination?

 

where do you people get this stuff? is it part of some playbook passed around from failures to malcontents and then back to failures again? this obsession y'all have with the wealth of others simply isn't healthy and there seems to be no cure for this disease.

to begin with, that wealth you're so concerned with is not stolen. if it is gained through unscrupulous or illegal means, then it is society's duty to punish the culprits and return their ill gotten gain to its rightful owners. otherwise, it's none of your damn business what they do with it. who are you to tell anyone what they may or may not do with the wealth they earn? a nobody. just another greedy loser, enviously grasping at what others have earned. what i do with my own personal property is my own business. i may chose to give it to charity. i may decide to start up a business, so that others may be employed and begin accumulating their own wealth. i may just sit on it and leave it to my children, assuring that they have the ability to live the sort of life i would like them to enjoy. the point is that it belongs to me, not to you or anyone else, and you have no right to it even after my death. you may grouse around and stew in your envy of those who are lucky enough to have inherited wealth, but their luck does not make them any less deserving of the full ownership of the gift of that inheritance.

now i think it's time you learned the real meaning of "aristocracy". it's not about wealth, but about power - unassailable power. it's about the kind of power enjoyed by the the ruling elite who suckle at the public teat their entire careers. the kind of power acquired by cajoling the ignorant electorate with deceit and doled out at their leisure to those who can afford it. you know the sort of power i'm talking about, your type has been handing it out for years to the political animals who promise you the pipe-dream of wealth equality, one of the most unnatural and impossible philosophies imaginable, and give you nothing for your troubles. the true american aristocracy consists of lifelong political bureaucrats, firmly ensconced in their comfortable little fiefdoms and renting out the power they have accumulated from an unwary citizenry. trading it for wealth and for the capacity to acquire still more power. those trust fund babies you rail against are far removed from the aristocracy you seem to think they are a part of. they may lease a bit of the power from time to time, but they are seldom, if ever, allowed to join in that rarefied club.

what you seem to think "everyone knows" is the fever dream of a peasant mentality. for centuries y'all have been investing the inherent power of the individual which you possess in the ponzi scheme of unscrupulous hucksters. they promise you a better life for little effort and even pay out a bit, but in the end they are the ones who reap the rewards and the suckers are left wondering why they didn't get their "something for nothing". they are the aristocrats of the modern world and you are among their dupes.

 

And we wonder why personal responsibility is so absent in much of today's people....

The partisanship you are showing is really sad to me.

 

the partisanship isn't really what saddens me. it's better to have strong convictions than to simply twist with whatever way the wind blows. what is sad are the childish caricatures of right and left, liberal and conservative, republican and democrat that those convictions are based on. what is sad is the lack of faith in themselves that it shows, that they require a scapegoat and the parental hand of the state in order to survive.

 

​