MOTHER of all CARAVANS - Poor & Uneducated WHITES ... mass to invade U.S.A.

Oneuli said:
Perhaps not immediately. Trump has successfully stirred up an orgy of xenophobia among the more cowardly part of the American population. So, in the short term, it's more of a holding action -- how good a job can we do in preventing the nation from being led in the wrong direction. That will minimize the damage we have to undo when the nation comes to its senses and we start heading in the right direction.
Click to expand...
Not ever....certainly not in my lifetime...or yours....
 
Oneulii is obviously not bright enough to understand the military she and her family like to bash are the reason she can type freely the bullshit she does. Sad really.
 
TOP said:
Not ever....certainly not in my lifetime...or yours....
Click to expand...

No. There you're wrong. The demographics will force our hand. We'll probably need a bigger chunk of the xenophobic dummies to die off, first, but we'll get there.
 
Sailor said:
Oneulii is obviously not bright enough to understand the military she and her family like to bash are the reason she can type freely the bullshit she does. Sad really.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Every nation in history has had a military. Not every nation has had a population free to speak its mind. In fact, many of the nations with the strongest militaries also had the least freedom. It's the hard work of civil libertarians that are the reason I can type common sense in a forum like this, even common sense of the type that makes the toadies of the military blubber.
 
Oneuli said:
No. There you're wrong. The demographics will force our hand. We'll probably need a bigger chunk of the xenophobic dummies to die off, first, but we'll get there.
Click to expand...
Not in our lifetimes...sorry...
 
Oneuli said:
Nonsense. Every nation in history has had a military. Not every nation has had a population free to speak its mind. In fact, many of the nations with the strongest militaries also had the least freedom. It's the hard work of civil libertarians that are the reason I can type common sense in a forum like this, even common sense of the type that makes the toadies of the military blubber.
Click to expand...

You are delusional. I hope to christ you cannot have children.
 
Oneuli said:
No. There you're wrong. The demographics will force our hand. We'll probably need a bigger chunk of the xenophobic dummies to die off, first, but we'll get there.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that even in the more rural areas of America, that young people your age (and the ages of my kids) are far more likely to be accepting of diversity than my generation. Despite our current crop of xenophobic parents and grandparents to drum the fear of other into them, I don't think that trend is going to reverse.
 
Oneuli said:
No. It shows how much I understand about those interests. Sadly, there are lots of wingnuts (generally ones who sucked long and deeply at the teat of our military-industrial complex, and bristle at the idea that their leeching of our tax dollars wasn't well-deserved) who think these constant interventions make us safer. No matter how many times the interventions backfire, they'll never learn.



My parents are anti-militaristic, too. But, what you need to keep in mind is that none of us have ever been wards of the military-welfare state, so the world looks a lot clearer from our perspective.



I know why control of the Middle East's fossil fuels is so important to the business interests of those who own our politicians. But that's not as important to "us."



I find it particularly funny that those who are most insistent that they're the ones who understand the facts about places like Iraq are pretty much inevitably the always-wrong imbeciles who thought that invasion would be a cakewalk, where we'd be greeted as liberators, and that it would set off a chain of positive improvements in the region's geopolitics. Their multi-trillion-dollar error didn't teach them a thing, because they're ineducable.
Click to expand...

It shows how much I understand about those interests. Sadly, there are lots of wingnuts (generally ones who sucked long and deeply at the teat of our military-industrial complex, and bristle at the idea that their leeching of our tax dollars wasn't well-deserved) who think these constant interventions make us safer. No matter how many times the interventions backfire, they'll never learn.
Click to expand...

If I'm not mistaken you are of Korean heritage. You do realize that if the US hadn't intervened in Korea in the 50's your family would be living under the thumb of that despot Kim and likely you wouldn't be here on earth. So in your family's case I guess American intervention wasn't so bad after all!

Iraq

You were too young to know some of the reasons we invaded. But I will give you a few.

1. Saddam had the worlds intelligence agencies convinced that he possessed WMD's in fact that is one of the reasons Iran didn't attack him after the Iraq/Iran cease fire.

2. Saddam indirectly supported world terrorism by giving large rewards to the families of dead terrorists.

3. Saddam brutalized his own people even gassing the Kurds for opposing him. He threw political enemies into wood chippers as a tool of execution.

The invasion and war were cake walks in the overall scheme of things and we were treated as hero's at first. It was only after the occupation dragged on that the Iraqi's started resenting our presence.

I know why control of the Middle East's fossil fuels is so important to the business interests of those who own our politicians. But that's not as important to "us."
Click to expand...


Wrong! the ME is important for the vital shipping lanes that support the world economy. Yes little one we are dependent on the world having stable economies. Also oil is the life blood of industrial nations.

So from a historical and economic sense you are completely wrong on all points.


It is hard to have a clear perspective when you wear blinders that only allow you to see things one way.
 
Oneuli said:
My plan would probably boost the need for spending on social support for the young, since the size of the population of children would grow. But the point is those kids would then grow up to be adults, and assuming we didn't skimp on the support they needed to become healthy and productive, they'd then pay back that support many times over in the course of their productive careers.



No, and no. I don't know anyone who is anti-military spending. The question is simply one of levels. Should we spend three or four times as much as the next-closest country? I'd say no. And pretty much every other country in the history of the world has likewise said no. Hell, even the US said no through most of our history. For example, even at the height of the Reagan era's military over-spend, we didn't spend anywhere close to three or four times as much as the next-closest country. Yet, these days, we're supposed to pretend that anyone who advocates for a merely Reaganesque multiple of the next-closest country's spending must be anti-military spending. That's silly.

Also, this isn't about helping our allies. Again, no country before us in history thought you had to spend three or four times as much as the second-highest-spending country in the world in order to help the allies. This current spending level isn't about doing our part to work with other NATO nations to defend our common interests against foreign aggression. It's about having enough excess that we can kick over multiple regimes at once, on a whim, with little or no significant help from allies. That's an absurd level of spending, and ultimately a self-destructive one, in that it lures us into conflicts that are actually counter-productive to our security interests (such as the idiotic Iraq conquest that destabilized the Middle East and undercut America's political capital and credibility around the world).



As you probably know, back in the 1950s, the US wasn't spending anywhere close to three or four times as much on its military as the next-closest country. It was more like 40% more than the next-closest country, rather than 200-300% more.

https://nintil.com/2016/05/31/the-soviet-union-military-spending/

We can continue to support key allies, with the assistance of other allies, as we did in the past, with vastly less than we currently spend.
Click to expand...

Totally utopian devoid of all reality just like this song.

 
Grumpy said:
If I'm not mistaken you are of Korean heritage. You do realize that if the US hadn't intervened in Korea in the 50's your family would be living under the thumb of that despot Kim and likely you wouldn't be here on earth. So in your family's case I guess American intervention wasn't so bad after all!

Iraq

You were too young to know some of the reasons we invaded. But I will give you a few.

1. Saddam had the worlds intelligence agencies convinced that he possessed WMD's in fact that is one of the reasons Iran didn't attack him after the Iraq/Iran cease fire.

2. Saddam indirectly supported world terrorism by giving large rewards to the families of dead terrorists.

3. Saddam brutalized his own people even gassing the Kurds for opposing him. He threw political enemies into wood chippers as a tool of execution.

The invasion and war were cake walks in the overall scheme of things and we were treated as hero's at first. It was only after the occupation dragged on that the Iraqi's started resenting our presence.




Wrong! the ME is important for the vital shipping lanes that support the world economy. Yes little one we are dependent on the world having stable economies. Also oil is the life blood of industrial nations.

So from a historical and economic sense you are completely wrong on all points.


It is hard to have a clear perspective when you wear blinders that only allow you to see things one way.
Click to expand...

Brainwashed horseshit. Your stumblebum perspective on the Iraq fiasco would be comical- if I didn't know that you actually believe your crap yourself.
 
TOP said:
Not in our lifetimes...sorry...
Click to expand...

I'm likely to live another 60 years, at least. 60 years ago, we had legal segregation, almost no women politics, gays were closeted, and Donald Trump was the unruly preteen kid of an infamous white-supremacist slum lord. 60 years is a very long time in the world of politics.
 
Oneuli said:
I'm likely to live another 60 years, at least. 60 years ago, we had legal segregation, almost no women politics, gays were closeted, and Donald Trump was the unruly preteen kid of an infamous white-supremacist slum lord. 60 years is a very long time in the world of politics.
Click to expand...
I hope you do live until you're 90... but you won't see the doors swinging wide for illegal outsiders...unless* the US finds a way to resolve our own poverty and homeless problems. Wouldn't that be lovely, though....
 
Sailor said:
You are still confused on this I see. No need to respond. Like a typical liberal you want shit cheap, you do not want to pay the fair price for it.
Click to expand...

^ I would say that about every American employer who uses illegal labor because they don't want to pay fair wages for it.
 
TOP said:
I hope you do live until you're 90... but you won't see the doors swinging wide for illegal outsiders...unless* the US finds a way to resolve our own poverty and homeless problems. Wouldn't that be lovely, though....
Click to expand...

Having over a thousand overseas military bases has bled the country . Is it twenty-two trillion dollars of debt now ? Twenty-three ?
 
RB 60 said:
It's because young people today are lazy. I worked picking strawberries along with working for a lawn care business in school.
Our local farms and orchards have no problem getting Americans to work for them. You constantly hide behind the lie that we
Americans won't work those jobs. Tell us, do you live here in the rural areas and farmlands, or are you projecting your ignorance
from the 34th. floor of your shoebox apartment? We rural folks aren't lazy so we don't need those asylum seekers to do our work,
you only want them for Dem votes.
Click to expand...

Yet farmers elsewhere are still willing to hire illegals for poor wages and horrible working conditions because they aren't willing to pay what Americans will work for.
 
moon said:
Having over a thousand overseas military bases has bled the country . Is it twenty-two trillion dollars of debt now ? Twenty-three ?
Click to expand...
OK...so no doors swinging wide Ever for illegal outsiders....
Not until we take care of our own...
But, Military bases aren't the problem....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top