Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, May 17, 2005.
i wonder how much longer i've got left on this planet.
Is it just me, or do actions like this make the NeoCon agenda very transparent?
Historically, world domination has failed time and time again.
Why does it even get to the point that world domination is attempted?
To accomplish this you would have to enslave the population in order to support the massive military involvement that it requires.
Ultimately you are both working against your own population and the population of those you seek to control.
The current shortage of military recruitment shows that people are reluctant to go beyond protecting the nation.
That makes actions like the draft necessary, and when you have to indenture people to your needs you are rarely going to have the full support of those forced to impose your will.
Why do I say enslave? Well, what is the draft? If you have to be made to serve a cause that you don't believe in, and most often doesn't benefit you, what else should it be called?
Two additional things to consider, most of the NeoCons deciding current legislation and/or supporting it have avoided going to war themselves. And yet, many of them are members of an organization called the PNAC (Project for a New American Century). The PNAC has some pretty blunt views about who they think should be running the world for the next 100 years, and obviously they don't feel like they should be the ones who put their lives on the line.
Considering all of that, should these people really be allowed to even make the attempt?
No, they shouldn't. But they are incredibly motivated and fanatical about at least attempting to. And because of that, they have hired some really clever people to try and make most people work against their own best interests in order to gain support for their own goals.
You may or may not have wondered why we currently face wedge issue after wedge issue that distracts the populace from what is really going on.
Really though, consider what this Administration is actually doing; what their future goals will require; and how it has historically turned out. Then consider how much of a precedent it would be to actually go against what has always turned out to be a disaster.
It's getting pretty close to that point, where if something doesn't change, the usual historical precedent is repeated one more time.