Posted on 05/22/2018 7:10:34 AM PDT by Olog-hai
Poland
Bayer kills
Seimens Cat Scans yield false videos
That would make sense. Certainly would shut up the leaders there that called the USA “worthless” under Obama, as foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski said back in 2014.
Our “regime changes” didn’t work because the US left took over and allowed radicals to take charge. Remember that blather about “free and fair democratic elections”? That was in the context of “win(ning) the battle of democracy” as the Communist Manifesto outlined.
And the original template for stuff like that? Allowing Konrad Adenauer to take charge in Bonn.
Exchanging one enemy for another has to be a precedent that grinds to a halt, certainly, but leaving one particular enemy in place is no better and a false alternative.
Well, until we give most of the State Department their 1/2 helicopter rides, the same folks are in charge and we will get the same results we usually do.
Another maxim comes to mind: Don’t interrupt your enemy when he is in the process of making a mistake.
I would argue that the Euroweenies are making dreadful mistakes, that they are our enemies, and that we should depart and encourage them to continue their mistakes.
But they are not making mistakes, believe it or not. They are instead ruling by crisis. And again, they are “feign(ing) disorder”. (Obama was attempting the same thing.)
The big influx of Mahometans is designed to induce demand for more authoritarian leadership. The financial crisis of 2008, caused in a great deal by the European Central Bank raising interest rates eight times in a row from three years earlier (a fact not always reported; the sub-prime lending overshadows this), did not work towards that end.
They already HAVE authoritarian leadership.
What Europe needs is a Franco or a Pinochet.
Agreed. They’re looking for a dictator. Can’t let them get it.
Former Commission head Jose Manuel Barroso already called the EU an “empire” eleven years ago. That’s what kind of outlook they have.
It isn’t our business whether or not Europe gets a dictator. They already have an unelected dictatorial bureaucracy in the EU.
The EU is headed for a war. We should not be a part of it. We should sell weapons to both sides (cash only) and pop popcorn.
We thought the same thing twice before. And take note of their bellicosity towards us yet again.
At least the first time we were right. We never should have bothered with WWI.
When a president who campaigned on the slogan “He Kept Us Out Of War” suddenly goes to war, then there was certainly something to the Zimmermann communiqué. Of course, he could have continued to keep us out of war and risked a joint force from Mexico and Germany attempting an incursion at the southern border. Public opinion made him do the about-face.
Never mind leaving the Lusitania unavenged. As problematic as TR was, he would not have let the Kaiser away with that and reportedly said so at one campaign for Wilson’s opponent.
When Washington advised putting the USA on a “condition of complete defense” in his Fifth Annual Address to Congress of 1793, he did so in the context of the trouble that he expected from European powers.
No matter his campaign slogan, Wilson was trying to figure how to get us in WWI, just like FDR was trying to figure out how to get us in WWII.
The Lusitania was justifiable. It was carrying contraband ordnance.
The Zimmerman telegram was not really cause for war - the conditions in it required the US to join in the war on the Triple Entente side.
The average import tariff in Germany is 5% plus VAT. Granted that could be wore but the USA has basicaly no tariff so it is unfair to say the least.
Spot on Danny.
If it were true that Wilson wanted us in WWI, the Lusitania was the opportunity to put us in. To say it carried “contraband ordnance” is to echo the propaganda of the Second Reich, with all due respect, and also to have as much respect for the lives of the Americans on board as people like Hillary and Obama had for Chris Stevens’ life.
The Zimmerman telegram was a threat towards the Monroe Doctrine, among other things. There was a reason for the assertion of that doctrine in the first place, and now that people like Kerry declared it “over”, the very things that it was supposed to prevent are coming to pass, from both far east and near west.
I am not quoting the Second Reich - I am quoting archeology.
They have surveyed the wreck of the Lusitania - and they found evidence of the contraband.
The people who traveled on that ship were also warned that they were going into a war zone.
The Zimmerman telegram was irrelevant so long as the US stayed of the war. What did we get out it except 100K+ dead and the stage set for a second world war?
No evidence of such materiel was ever found, actually.
The Reich’s U-boats were firing indiscriminately on all boats in spite of the Laws of the Sea. All experts whether left or right agree that they committed an abomination by sinking the Lusitania. The only thing that Wilson did for years on end was send the Kaiser notes begging him not to do such things.
Again, George Washington in the Fifth Annual Address to Congress warned us against thinking that the USA can avoid all “painful calls to arms” by ignoring them, never mind such actions making us look weak.
Lusitania - contraband.
http://www.rmslusitania.info/controversies/contraband/
http://www.centenarynews.com/article?id=1616
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/01/lusitania-salvage-warning-munitions-1982
This is not debatable. The contraband was actually listed on her manifest.
As for unrestricted submarine warfare, the Germans tried to stop and search, but the merchies didn’t play - they would pretend to stop then ram. So the Germans took to just sinking them.
Besides why is unrestricted submarine warfare bad when the Germans do it, but heroic when we do it (in the Pacific in WWII)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.