Obamney vs Rombama

 Zykanthos (@chodebalm)7 years, 11 months ago

War, economic collapse, and personal devastation await Americans no matter who they vote for – and what we should do instead.

A vote for Obama will bring war with Syria, Iran, and eventually Russia and China. The economy will continue to suffer in order to bolster the interests of off-shore corporate-financier interests, while the collective prospects of Americans continue to whither and blow away. A vote for Romney, however, will also bring war with Syria, Iran, and eventually Russia and China. The economy will also continue to suffer in order to bolster the interests of off-shore corporate-financier interests, while the collective prospects of Americans continue to whither and blow away. Why?

Because the White House is but a public relations front for the corporate-financier interests of Wall Street and London. A change of residence at the White House is no different than say, British Petroleum replacing its spokesman to superficially placate public opinion when in reality the exact same board of directors, overall agenda, and objectives remain firmly in place. Public perception then is managed by, not the primary motivation of, corporate-financier interests.

It is the absolute folly to believe that multi-billion dollar corporate-financier interests would subject their collective fate to the whims of the ignorant, uninformed, and essentially powerless voting masses every four years. Instead, what plays out every four years is theater designed to give the general public the illusion that they have some means of addressing their grievances without actually ever changing the prevailing balance of power in any meaningful way.

The foreign policy of both Obama and Romney is written by the exact same corporate-financier funded think-tanks that have written the script for America’s destiny for the last several decades.

Bush = Obama = Romney

As was previously reported, while the corporate media focuses on non-issues, and political pundits accentuate petty political rivalries between the “left” and the “right,” a look deeper into presidential cabinets and the authors of domestic and foreign policy reveals just how accurate the equation of “Bush = Obama = Romney” is.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CNOf9N0EEC8/UDjP9rfhuWI/AAAAAAAADE0/rNhklLe0oCE/s640/BushEqualsObamaEqualsRomney.jpg

Image: Professional spokesmen, representative not of the American people but of Fortune 500 multinational corporations and banks. Since the time of JP Morgan 100 years ago, the corporate-financier elite saw themselves as being above government, and national sovereignty as merely a regulatory obstacle they could lobby, bribe, and manipulate out of existence. In the past 100 years, the monied elite have gone from manipulating the presidency to now reducing the office to a public relations functionary of their collective interests.
….

George Bush’s cabinet consisted of representatives from FedEx, Boeing, the Council on Foreign Relations, big-oil’s Belfer Center at Harvard, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Circuit City, Verizon, Cerberus Capital Management, Goldman Sachs, and the RAND Corporation, among many others.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TB3DETZGXSI/UDjV-J8jTmI/AAAAAAAADGU/tNGcvgUVysI/s640/HenryJacksonSponsorsPeople_1.jpg

Image: The Henry Jackson Society is just one of many Neo-Conservative think-tanks, featuring many of the same people and of course, the same corporate sponsors. Each think-tank puts on a different public face and focuses on different areas of specialty despite harboring the same “experts” and corporate sponsors.
….

His foreign policy was overtly dictated by “Neo-Conservatives” including Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Paul Wolfowitz, James Woolsey, Richard Armitage, Zalmay Khalilzad, Elliot Abrams, Frank Gaffney, Eliot Cohen, John Bolton, Robert Kagan, Francis Fukuyama, William Kristol, and Max Boot – all of whom hold memberships within a myriad of Fortune 500-funded think-tanks that to this day still direct US foreign policy – even under a “liberal” president. These include the Brookings Institution, the International Crisis Group, the Foreign Policy Initiative, the Henry Jackson Society, the Council on Foreign Relations, and many more.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5zutwetiWUw/UDjWmPrenRI/AAAAAAAADGg/wap3SisBUns/s640/BrookingsSponsors_2.jpg

Image: A visual representation of some of the Brookings Institution’s corporate sponsors. Brookings is by no means an exception, but rather represents the incestuous relationship between US foreign and domestic policy making and the Fortune 500 found in every major “think-tank.” Elected US representatives charged with legislative duties, merely rubber stamp the papers and policies drawn up in these think-tanks.
….

Obama’s cabinet likewise features representatives from JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, the Council on Foreign Relations, Fortune 500 representatives Covington and Burling, Citi Group, Freedie Mac, and defense contractor Honeywell. Like Bush’s cabinet, foreign policy is not penned by Obama sitting behind his desk in the Oval Office, but rather by the very same think-tanks that directed Bush’s presidency including the Council on Foreign Relations, RAND Corporation, the Brookings Institution, the International Crisis Group, and the Chatham House. There are also a myriad of smaller groups consisting of many of the same members and corporate sponsors, but who specialize in certain areas of interest.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-F2Goo8RpR3k/UDjXH5jiGpI/AAAAAAAADGo/ue_VOhM0qXg/s640/ObamaNotAMarxist_1.jpg

Image: Obama, not a Marxist. A visual representation of current US President Barack Obama’s cabinet’s corporate-financier ties past and present. As can be plainly seen, many of the same corporate-financier interests represented in Obama’s administration were also represented in Bush’s administration.
….

And with Mitt Romney, “running for president” against Obama in 2012, we see already his foreign policy advisers, Michael Chertoff, Eliot Cohen, Paula Dobrainsky, Eric Edelman, and Robert Kagan, represent the exact same people and corporate-funded think-tanks devising strategy under both President Bush and President Obama.

While Presidents Bush and Obama attempted to portray the West’s global military expansion as a series of spontaneous crises, in reality, since at least as early as 1991, the nations of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and many others that previously fell under the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence, were slated either for political destabilization and overthrow, or overt military intervention. While the public was fed various narratives explaining why Bush conducted two wars within the greater global “War on Terror,” and why Obama eagerly expanded these wars while starting new ones in Libya and now Syria, in reality we are seeing “continuity of agenda,” dictated by corporate-financier elite, rubber stamped by our elected representatives, and peddled to us by our “leaders,” who in reality are nothing more than spokesmen for the collective interests of the Fortune 500.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-klZaIvi1WxM/UDjeKQU7w5I/AAAAAAAADII/KPuqQWIAyoM/s640/ICGsponsors_1.jpg

Image: The International Crisis Group’s corporate sponsors reveal a pattern of mega-multinationals intertwined with not only creating and directing US, and even European foreign policy, but in carrying it out. ICG trustee Kofi Annan is in Syria now carrying out a ploy to buy time for NATO-backed terrorists so they can be rearmed, reorganized, and redeployed against the Syrian government for another Western-backed attempt at regime change – all done under the guise of promoting “peace.”
….

No matter who you vote for in 2012 – until we change the balance of power currently tipped in favor of the Fortune 500, fed daily by our money, time, energy, and attention, nothing will change but the rhetoric with which this singular agenda is sold to the public. Romney would continue exactly where Obama left off, just as Obama continued exactly where Bush left off. And even during the presidencies of Bill Clinton and Bush Sr., it was the same agenda meted out by the same corporate-financier interests that have been driving American, and increasingly Western destiny, since US Marine General Smedley Butler wrote “War is a Racket” in 1935.

What Should We Do About It?

1. Boycott the Presidential Election: The first immediate course of action when faced with a fraudulent system is to entirely disassociate ourselves from it, lest we grant it unwarranted legitimacy. Boycotting the farcical US elections would not impede the corporate-financier “selection” process and the theatrical absurdity that accompanies it, but dismal voter turnout would highlight the illegitimacy of the system. This in many ways has already happened, with voter turnout in 2008 a mere 63%, meaning that only 32% of America’s eligible voters actually voted for Obama, with even fewer voting for runner-up John McCain.

Ensuring that this mandate is even lower in 2012 – regardless of which PR man gets selected, and then highlighting the illegitimacy of both the elections and the system itself is the first step toward finding a tenable solution. People must divest from dead-ends. Presidential elections are just one such dead-end.

Focusing on local elections and governance first, not only emphasizes the primacy of local self-determination, but affords us a grassroots-up approach to transforming our communities, and collectively our nation back into something truly representative of the people.

2. Boycott and Replace the Corporate Oligarchy: The corporate-financier interests that dominate Western civilization did not spring up overnight. It is through generations of patronage that we the people have granted these corporate-financier interests the unwarranted influence they now enjoy. And today, each day, we collectively turn in our paychecks to the global “company store,” providing the summation of our toil as fuel for this oligarchy’s perpetuation.

By boycotting the goods, services, and institutions of this oligarchy, we steal the fire out from under the proverbial cauldron – the very source of the current paradigm’s power. While it is impractical to commit overnight to a full-spectrum boycott, we can begin immediately by entirely boycotting corporations like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, Kraft, Unilever and others by simply supporting local businesses and our local farmers market. This “voting with one’s wallet” is a form of democracy that unlike elections, will undoubtedly shift the balance of power toward a system more representative of the people’s interests.

By creating self-reliant communities independent of the machinations of corporate-financier interests, we provide ourselves with the greatest form of insurance against instability and uncertainty – an insurance policy placed solely in our own hands.

3. Get Educated, Get Organized: Leveraging technology is a necessary step in eliminating dependency on other corporate-financier interests – such as big oil, big defense, big-agri, big-pharma, and the telecom monopolies. To leverage technology, people at a grassroots level must get organized, educate themselves, and collaborate to create local business models and solutions to systematically replace large multinational holdings.

A recent interview by geopolitical analyst Eric Draitser with Seth Rutledge, featured on Stop Imperialism, explored the possibilities of developing local broadband networks. Community spaces dedicated to technological education, collaboration, and resource pooling are also an emerging phenomenon. Called “maker spaces” or sometimes “hacker spaces,” these grassroots initiatives serve as incubators for innovative, local small businesses.

Technology will eventually provide solutions to problems generally “solved” by government subsidies. Medicare, for instance, is a government subsidy to address the expenses and subsequent inaccessibility of medical care. Medical care, in turn, is expensive because the means to provide it are scarce. The supply of doctors, hospitals, treatments, biomedical technology, and many other aspects of modern health infrastructure are vastly outnumbered by demand.

Until technology can better balance this equation, people must organize to either defend as temporary stopgap measures, national programs that provide care to those who can’t afford it, or create local alternatives. To cut programs people depend on for the sake of saving an economy plundered by special interests, to specifically preserve these same special interests is unconscionable.

An organized political front that demands the preservation/reformation of these programs as well as investment in the development of permanent technological solutions, needs not pass the hat around to the working or even productive entrepreneurial classes of society, but rather level taxes on parasitic financial speculation and market manipulation – thus solving two problems in a single stroke. Geopolitical analyst and historian Dr. Webster Tarpley has already enumerated such an approach in his 5 point plan for international economic recovery (.pdf) by specifically calling for resistance to austerity and a 1% Wall Street tax.

Conclusion

Undoubtedly people realize something is wrong, and that something needs to be done. To ensure that the corporate-financier elite remain in perpetual power, a myriad of false solutions have been contrived or created out of co-opted movements, to indefinitely steer people away from influencing the current balance of power and achieving true self-determination.

By recognizing this and seizing the reins of our own destiny, we can and must change the current balance of power. In the process of doing so, we must recognize and resist attempts to derail and distract us by way of the incessant political minutia now on full display during the 2012 US Presidential Election. For every problem faced by society, there is a permanent, technological solution. For hunger there was agriculture, for lack of shelter, there was architecture, and no matter how daunting today’s problems may seem, there lies similar solutions.

We must realize that by endeavoring to solve these problems, we jeopardize monopolies as insidious as they are monolithic, constructed to exploit such problems. If we fail to recognize and undermine these interests through pragmatic activism, we will be resigned to whatever fate these special interests determine for us, no matter how cleverly they sell us this fate as one of our own choosing.

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/2012-us-elections-obamney-vs-rombama/32488

October 29, 2012 at 7:37 pm
yoinkie (1,498)C (@yoinkie) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@chodebalm, The potential for war with Syria and Iran(and of course, Russia and China will join in if that happens) doesnt have much to do with who will be the next president. Our hand is almost being forced with what is going on over there. China is money hungry and wants to keep its basic slave like working conditions, as well as protect its borders. Russia will back up their cold war comrades, the Syrians. Its one hell of a situation. The control is not in our hands, we can only stay out so long and let Isreal get fucked up like they are. Sooner or later, eeryone needs to sit the fuck down and figure out a solution to the crisis that wont result in a world war. I have faith that we will, but I have a suspicious feeling that China is up to no good. They benefit the most from a potential war.

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@yoinkie, You bring up some great points. This worries me. With all that is going on in the world right now, it all seems to be coming to a head.

[Hidden]
TheSkaFish (962)M (@theskafish) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

I wish more people would understand this idea. It’s like, when election day rolls around, people just forget the last 12 years even happened, and will continue to vote Democrat or Republican in spite of the fact that under both parties, things were essentially the same, the (very expensive) war dragged on, outsourcing and automation continued, the price of gas, food, and other things continued to skyrocket while salaries either fell or just didn’t keep up, alternate energy continued to lag behind that of other industrialized nations, income inequality continued to worsen, more and more people went to jail, the shit list goes on, and yet people still think that voting 3rd party is throwing your vote away. They may not win, but I don’t see the point in voting for someone who wants to hurt me.

[Hidden]
yoinkie (1,498)C (@yoinkie) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@chodebalm, its all really really, really bad. The players are setting up just like the past world wars. There are so many countries involved, directly or indirectly, and ANY of their actions will set this shit off. Turkey, Tehran, Qatar, Syria, Isreal, Iran, hell even China and Russia(who are believed to be funding and supplying Syrian gov.) can set off a chain reaction which will only end in World War. The only solution is a peaceful resolve in Syria, and a truce between the govt forces and the rebels. It seems kind of hard with the douchebag piece of shit Amajiniad(im not even going to bother to spell that fuckfaces name right), who keeps trying to rile people up. He wants war, badly, which is easy to see.

Either way, the next 5 years of this world will forever be remembered in history. It will either be remembered as the third world war, which ended civilization and the world as we know it, or it will be remembered as when the world finally got its shit together, put revenge and hatred behind it and solved its problems before all out war happened. US still has more allies, but Iran, Syria, Russia, and China all have great and powerful militaries, and the potential war would not be just fought overseas, but it would come to our door steps. Can not let this happen.

[Hidden]
yoinkie (1,498)C (@yoinkie) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

Oh, and if you ever turn on the news and hear that Isreal has just bombed facilities in Iran…Start saving supplies and buiding your bunkers, because that would be the start of it all, no looking back from that point on. Russian and Chinese Militaries are already lined up on their borders ready for retaliation if that happens. I’m not religious, but if you guys are, pray to your lord Israel doesnt fuck everything up by doing that.

[Hidden]
Anonymous (2,833) (@) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

so you guys are going to vote green, right?

[Hidden]
TheSkaFish (962)M (@theskafish) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@ijesuschrist, absolutely. I think they have more of a chance than the Free Energy Party, so I guess I’ll give them my vote. It’s not really a compromise either since I do mostly believe in the Green Party’s ideals, and certainly much more than Obamney. I’d rather not vote at all than vote for the corporate PR men.

@yoinkie, I don’t doubt it. But at the same time, didn’t Israel bomb Iran’s facilities before, and it didn’t turn into a worldwide shitstorm?

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@ijesuschrist, I’m gonna write in Bill Murray for president.

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@yoinkie, Regarding Israel….correct me if I’m wrong, because I am not extremely knowledgeable about this matter, but aren’t we (the U.S) pretty much the ones responsible for establishing Israel where it is? And for backing them up ever since WWII?

[Hidden]
Johnny Morris (8) (@johnnymorris128) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@chodebalm, You need to vote. Voting is essential in deciding which path we need to move closer to. Other than that, I agree with everything that has been said. Corporations have had their hand in the governments pocket since the railroads. It is difficult to say what is right and what is wrong, but it is easy for us to understand what we need to do next. What we cannot have is a revolt within the country, because what you have said about refusing to vote or support companies, well, that just isn’t going to happen. I’m not saying I don’t believe it will happen, but this country is too big, and the time for something like that has already past. We have to accept the shit we’ve been stuck with. It doesn’t seem fair, but it’s reality. So, we have a decision to make after all. Either we have patience in the President, or we resort to getting “tough” on these countries in turmoil.

If you want to go near the hornets’ nest, you’re going to get stung.

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@johnnymorris128, What’s your prediction on who wins presidency?

[Hidden]
Aiden (63) (@aidenblair) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@chodebalm,
Many of these issues have weighed heavily on me for some time now, but I feel at a loss for how to confront them. It seems every time I try to convey my views to anyone else (minus a select few like-minded) they assume I’m just a conspiracy nut. My views are too foreign to most people, even though my solution is as simple as converting our current political system to the stricter and more efficient version lain out in Plato’s Republic in order to prevent corruption from the get-go.
Maybe whats best for us (as a nation and as a world community) is what we’re most afraid of: War.
Don’t mistake me, I’m not some war-mongering chaosist, but consider what results a world war in this day and age would bring about. A very wise family member once told me that when contemplating anything, to always consider the worst possible outcome, and try to decide if you could be ok with it or not. If not, then do everything in your power to prevent or at least prepare for it.
A world war would not bring about the destruction of civilization as we know it, because no world war has done so thus far, and the only thing thats changed since then is the development of nuclear weapons. No world power in their right minds would actually use nukes if it came to war.
Think of the major players in this possible war, America, Russia, China. None of these would allow the use of nuclear weapons by any of their pawns, as it would cause irreversible damage to any resources they would hope to gain from war, the chief resource being land, and it would bring equal and opposite reaction upon themselves(MAD). MAD doesn’t negate the possibility for World War, it merely deters from the possibility of a Nuclear World War.
World War would, on the other hand, serve to shake and wake more people up, make them question everything (What caused this? Who’s responsible? What can I do to help/change/prevent whats happened from happening again?). It would bring the true patriots out of the woodwork and serve as validation and a boost for such movements that you’ve mentioned.
That being said, what else is there to do to open the eyes of the proverbial herd, if not war on a global scale? Americans are so detached from world matters for two reasons: mainstream media downplays all of it, and they don’t feel the immediate effects of any global issues, only the residual effects that can easily be assigned a scapegoat.
Revolution is not an option in this nation, as it has been in other countries recently, because we (as a nation) are too vast and dispersed, too ignorant and gullible, and too reliant on our society as it stands today. There can never be a “V for Vendetta” scenario, as much as people may hope for it, because life isn’t a movie, and the majority of people aren’t pissed off enough yet.
What, aside from a World War combined with our plummeting economy, can bring about a REAL change in our society?
Where is the REAL public interest think-tank?
Where are the ones who will bring our nation back to the truest form of Liberty and where do I sign up?

“To revolt is a natural tendency of life. Even a worm turns against the foot that crushes it. In general, the vitality and relative dignity of an animal can be measured by the intensity of its instinct to revolt.”
-Mikhail Bakunin

[Hidden]
Anonymous (3) (@) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@johnnymorris128, If every human who made significant change in our world had instead believed that we’re stuck with the reality and have to play into the system, nothing would have happened in the last ten thousand years. We would still be hunter gatherers. But our species fucked our own reality when we discovered fire, agriculture, architecture, stone weapons, metal weapons, guns, bombs, nuclear warheads. We’re also constantly changing our political systems and concepts on how we function in our world. The evolution of our system and species isn’t just a possibility, it’s inevitable.

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@aidenblair, “Americans are so detached from world matters for two reasons: mainstream media downplays all of it, and they don’t feel the immediate effects of any global issues, only the residual effects that can easily be assigned a scapegoat.
Revolution is not an option in this nation, as it has been in other countries recently, because we (as a nation) are too vast and dispersed, too ignorant and gullible, and too reliant on our society as it stands today. There can never be a “V for Vendetta” scenario, as much as people may hope for it, because life isn’t a movie, and the majority of people aren’t pissed off enough yet.”

Well said.

[Hidden]
cheeky (76) (@cheeky) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@chodebalm, thats funny, i also thought he would be an amazing president.

[Hidden]
yoinkie (1,498)C (@yoinkie) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@chodebalm, yes, basically. The interest in having Israel as an ally has always been there, because for the most part, they respect and want democracy more then any middle east country. U.S. Started supporting Israel after World War 2 mostly to keep Soviets away from them. Soviets believed that when Israel declared itself a state after the war, it would be the perfect entry way for the soviets, and let them take major control over the Middle East. Henry Truman blocked this because we were already bitter with the Soviets(a bitter relationship that has lasted since), and made Israel an ally. But they were never strictly called an ally, and relations between them and us soured in the 60’s. They were a crucial ally in the Cold War however, providing us with bases and military intelligence on the soviets and what not.

Our relations have been quite good since. On average, Israel sides with Americans in United nations votes on foreign policy almost 90% of the time, more so then any other country in the world. Israel has a powerful army, weapons and personal among other things. Also a solid democracy inside the middle east. Of course im missing a lot of history(the six day war among others), but thats a basic jist of why we have to keep Israel an ally and cant desert them.

If we are speaking politically incorrect, Israel is very advanced in thinking and philosophy among middle east countries, who are run by tyrants, dictators, and overall assholes. Why not keep them an ally, right?

And if you want conspiracy theories(which I know you love, haha), Jews control a lot of the money in America. And Israel is holly land to who?

[Hidden]
yoinkie (1,498)C (@yoinkie) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@aidenblair, some fickle ground you walk on with those thoughts. I think you are making some assumptions; like Iran would give a shit what China and Russia think when they want to launch Nukes at the US and Israel. All it will take is one nuke from Iran, and US will retaliate with everything they have, assuming that China and Russia were involved in the orders.

Even if we dont use nukes in World War 3, there are better ways to convert the minds of Americans then a full blown war. We are talking a draft on the scale of one we have never seen(russian and Chinese ground forces number more then us almost). We are talking about probably fighting the war on our turf, something that has never happened. You are also talking about the possibility of a Civil War breaking out DURING the World War(which would all but seal the fate of America). A world war will solve less then it would harm; as in the lives of millions if not billions. There is better ways, man. Much better ways.

[Hidden]
[Hidden]
Aiden (63) (@aidenblair) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@yoinkie, I can concede to every single point you’ve made, mostly because I have the same fears/hopes/thoughts on my mind as well. My problem is that I’ve lost almost all of my hope (NONE of my patriotism, mind you…) in this nation ever changing the direction its currently headed. I agree that there are better ways, I’m just making a prediction based on logical probability (I apologized if I stated anything as fact that isnt necessarily fact), but I challenge you or anyone to show me an organization or movement that has a high probability of success in diminishing the power of “Big Brother” and returning power to “the people” i.e. the ones who will actually USE it to better our culture and not abuse it. If I can be convinced of the probability while simultaneously agreeing with more than half of their philosophy, then I would be willing to put all my effort towards furthering its success, but as it stands now, all I can do is prepare for the storm and take care of me and mine…

[Hidden]
pat (169) (@epath) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

I disagree that voting for Obama will bring more war. I will vote for Obama due for his support of social issues that are important to me. And I don’t see any other candidate that is any better.

[Hidden]
Johnny Morris (8) (@johnnymorris128) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@chodebalm, If Bill Murray was in the conversation, I think he would be in the Oval Office in no time. But, I don’t know what the election will look like, only because this race is probably one if not the most important campaign in the history of the United States. The question is, will we survive as a nation if one candidate catapults our debt even further? Debt and apathy serve as our weakness. We have gotten lazy, but it’s not too late for change in that department. Right now, we have a few carrying the load of the many. I’d prefer that than intentionally killing off innocent lives. And…. also…. @aidenblair

To put our country in the middle of a large-scale war is hopeless. I don’t see any positive reasons as to why a war would be the best case scenario. War is and has always been the worst case scenario.

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@johnnymorris128, “Will we survive as a nation if one candidate catapults our debt even further?”

That’s a rather silly question, because we’re going to slip further into debt regardless of who is president. That’s just how the money system works. Money can’t exist without debt. So we’re fucked in that department either way.

[Hidden]
Johnny Morris (8) (@johnnymorris128) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

There’s deep debt and then there’s keeping a constant. I’m not an economics major, but I do know the difference between owing someone ten dollars and fifty dollars. When you feel like your being screwed with, then your more prone to beat the shit out of whoever owes you the money, but if you keep your reputation as someone who does the best they can with what they can, then the person might give you some lee way. So I pose yet another question. Do you believe that Mitt Romney has a plan to keep the peace with China? Because form what I hear, Mitt’s going to do everything he can to get “tough” on China. Well, China wouldn’t be screwing with us if we didn’t screw with them in the first place. China is taking advantage of our mistakes. That doesn’t make China our best friedns, but there’s no reason they should be our worst enemy.

[Hidden]
Aiden (63) (@aidenblair) 7 years, 11 months ago ago

@johnnymorris128, I don’t have any misgivings about the severity of a World War, and actually, in my original post I stated, “when contemplating anything, to always consider the worst possible outcome, and try to decide if you could be ok with it or not.”
I’m not saying I hope for nor condone it, Im just saying, for one, we dont have a choice in the matter, and for two, it most likely wont be as bad as youd think. Sure there would be alot of destruction, but destruction breeds creation and is a natural part of life. Consider burning a meadow; yes you destroy the grass, but you simultaneously fertalize the field for future (and possibly more abundant) growth. And yes, there would be numerous and tragic loss of life, but look at it pragmatically, how many resources would that free up for the remaining survivors/victors?
And speaking of victors, whoever wins (which could be any one of the possible major players as it stands right now) would set the standard for world trade and world policy just like the US did after WWII, not to mention the resources gained I.E. the “spoils of war.” and whoever wins is obviously the better because they won and natural selection strikes again.
Please keep in mind this is all strictly hypothetical and are all of the things I took into consideration when contemplating the worst possible outcome aka worst case scenario.

@chodebalm, “Money can’t exist without debt.”
I MUST disagree with that statement, as money is based on resources such as precious metals and a nations import/export rates. Debt only becomes a factor when trust is used as a resource when in fact it is not a valid or reliable resource, which is why our economy is flawed and currently headed down the shitter.
Our debt is caused by generations of corrupt politicians, “your argument is invalid.” :P

[Hidden]
load more