[BRL]

So is this a pro Trump or an anti Trump sentiment

[VitacoreVision]

Wait, I thought the New “World Order” was just a conspiracy theory.

How could it be collapsing?

[eyeamok]

“Americans should not take the current international order for granted,” Petraeus said at a House Armed Services Committee hearing. “It did not will itself into existence. We created it.

Now he is Believing in the “New World Order” and even claims we created it!! We all know it is just part of a Right Wing conspiracy theory, or so we have been told for 40 years./s

Petraeus should be immediately locked up for a 72 hour psychiatric hold for this obvious lunacy.

[BenLurkin]

Good.

The “world order” was bad for America and getting worse.

[TADSLOS]

We have sustained it. If we stop doing so, it will fray and, eventually, collapse."

Go complain to the UN, Dave.

[lewislynn]

No one that heard him knew WTF or who he was talking about. Or they interpreted it with different meanings...They were all to embarrassed to question WTF he just said.

Using big words in rambling garbled speech doesn't make you intelligent.

[Oratam]

The Post-War Atlantic Alliance no longer serves a purpose. The old Cold War alignment of nations no longer applies. Curiously, we have had nothing since but misguided or wasteful adventurism in the middle east since. (Sykes-Picot, anyone?)

Any international "order" must serve the present moment and benefit first the United States and her allies. Everything else takes second place.

[The Toll]

Practicing his DuckSpeak I see.

[mikey_hates_everything]

Perhaps “it” is a POS and needs to be replaced with something that more benefits the US, General.

[Sacajaweau]

It's pro-America so pro-Trump.

Obama created a lot of enemies.

[Jim Noble]

Americans should not take the current international order for granted

I don't.

The sooner it is destroyed, the better.

[AndyJackson]

The latest move by the D.C. punditocracy and consultantocracy is the attempt to save their well-paid jobs through positing this false dichotomy - we move forwards as we have, or we move backwards. They are not deft enough to follow Trump's spider jump 3 blocks to the side, 4 backwards and 17 ahead along a different axis.

They simply see it in terms of frontal warfare, and cannot see that we and the world need to be in another place altogether. Defend America, defeat ISIS and not become guarantor of all the world's troubles. You cannot do that - they say. It doesn't compute in their small brains.

Sad to see Petraeus as a member of this crowd, but there you have it.

[Billthedrill]

What he was talking about (I think) was that the system of collective security set up by the U.S. and allies after WWII is becoming less effective due to lack of determination on the part of U.S. administrations. While this may contain a germ of truth, in fact that system of collective security (1) never did subsume the UN as hoped; (2) has been threatened more by lack of investment of resources by the other members than the U.S., a point Trump has made repeatedly, and (3) is simply not configured to deal with the new geopolitical realities of incredibly well-funded Islamic expansionism. It isn't that increased U.S. attention and determination is required, in my view, it's that it needs to be pointed in another direction and its focus refined. The notion that the "North Atlantic" nation of Turkey might, through NATO treaties, commit the U.S. to action against U.S. interests with regard to the Middle East is only one example of this altered focus. That wasn't what we set up NATO for.

Any world order other than that would be a reference that Petraeus really needs to define if he intends it to be intelligently discussed. If it is a reference to supranational organizations such as the EU, good riddance in my opinion. If it is a defense of the wildly proliferated galaxy of NGO's for all the international good they're doing, I'd like to hear precisely what that is and what it is that is threatening it. If it is some weird cabal of unelected international gnomes attempting to sway world resources into some mystic direction for our own good, thanks but no thanks. They can look out after themselves.

[Darksheare]

“General”, you broke faith with us.
Get your stupid backside off the stage, you had your time, so stop opening your yap.

[Sacajaweau]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/david-petraeus-says-efforts-to-beat-extremists-online-fall-short/

[Mr. K]

IF THEY HADN’T LIED TO US AND TRIED TO SET UP A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT IN SECRET IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN BENEFICIAL TO THEIR CAUSE.

The US constitution has 50 seperate states, all under one Federal government because it ONLY had certain enumerated powers, souch as national defense and interstate commerce, and States can otherwise do what they want. (At least that’s how it’s supposed to be)

Why not make a “United Countries of Earth” Constitution that works the same way. It has certain enumerated powers, such as Earth defense, and trade between countries, but otherwise leaves the countries alone.

[Yaelle]

Who’s this “we,” kemosabe?

[WKUHilltopper]

I thought the MSM told us that the idea of a one world order was a tin foil hat thing.

[867V309]