Tag Archives: FDR

Incrementalism and Gradualism, Engineering the means to the end Part 1

Posted on by

Incrementalism, a policy or advocacy of a policy of political or social changes by degrees.
Gradualism, the policy of approaching a desired end by gradual stages.
Those two words best sum up the Domestic Policy of liberal progressives and especially the current administration. Bit by bit, bringing America down to the level of the rest of the world. Liberalism and progressivism are not just confined to the Democratic Party, it also exists in the Republican Party. In that context when the term “liberal progressive” is used it does not necessarily mean a democrat. Perhaps a better term would be “social progressive” or “political progressive”, that would eliminate some confusion.

The easiest population for government to have absolute power and domain over would be best described as a population of totally compliant Peoples, the ones that are most referred to as sheep, aka “sheeple”. By contrast the hardest people to have absolute power and domain over would be those that believe in the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

There are only two types of governments around the world.
1 The governments founded on a principle that denies basic rights to the citizens and power is retained by the government, even if that government is composed of only one person. In these countries the constitution, if the country has one, gives power to the government, which by default limits, denies or removes power from the people. These countries are ruled by force not consent, a totalitarian government. The people have no rights and have no choice but to comply with government. The inhabitants are property of the State and are passed along to the next Ruler. This is an example of a Democracy, rule by the majority. Actually the people do have somewhat of a choice, they can choose not to comply, which will have dire consequences.

2 The governments founded on the principle that the government has power only because the population gives their consent to be governed. These countries are governed by consent not by force. In these countries the power remains with the people, a representative government. In these countries the Constitution is to limit the powers of the government, not the people. Not only do the people have and are guaranteed, not granted, their rights, they are also free to exercise them or not, as they choose. The Constitution in these countries limit the power of government, each branch has its own specific roles and limitation and operate on a system of checks and balances.

The question at this point would be do you wish to live under a government or with a government?

If your answer was to live under a government, this is what you chose.
You have only the rights given to you by government and can only exercise them as long as government allows. What the government gives the government can take away.
Basically this sums it up best. Rights when granted are not granted equally. The government has complete and total control over your life and all aspects of it from cradle to grave. Government control is total and limitless. A government that tells you what you can do, when you can do and for how long. A government that tells you what you can buy and when. A government that tells you what you will or will not buy.

If you chose to live with a government, this is what you chose.
You recognize and accept that you have Certain Inalienable Rights namely Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The usage of the word Certain in the previous sentence is the same as the Founders and Framers intended as to mean Absolute. You are responsible for your life from cradle to grave. You have rights that are granted by the Creator of the Universe. They are yours, you can not transfer them, they are yours. You have a choice when it comes to “Certain Inalienable” rights, you are free to exercise them or not. That is real Freedom and Liberty.

Given the choices above and the question of which would you rather do live under a government or live with a government, there arises a new question. Why would a people who had so happily lived with a government would now voluntarily give that up and choose instead to live under a government? Going from being governed by consent to being ruled.

This brings up another question. At what point is the government no longer content with the idea of governing by consent?

There comes a time when government begins to see the population as “a thorn in its side”. When government reaches that point governing by consent goes out the window and rule by force becomes the government. There are only two ways implement a government ruling by force in a nation that had up to that time been governed by consent. The first is Fast and Brutal, in a large nation fast and brutal has inherent problems. The second is in slow, planned, and gradual or incremental steps and requires patient engineering. As I have written before government is about power and control. Government is only concerned with the continued existence and well-being of government. The larger government grows the harder it is to control, at some point it goes out of control, out of control of the people, that is. The larger government grows the more power it has or takes and the more power it wields over the population. Soon the population is powerless to resist the force of government.

Once, Twice, Three Times

Posted on by

Will the third time be a charm? The U.S. Military will be headed to the lovely country of Iraq for a third time. BHO made it clear in his own way that they will only be advisors and not engaging in combat roles, and we all know that we can trust every thing he says. He never lies to the people, right. We already did the advisors only once and that cost us over ten years and over 50,000 killed in action and nearly destroyed America will internal strife, rioting and protests. Our Military won all of the battles but the politicians managed to lose the war. Ten years of blood and sacrifice was for what, nothing was gained and every thing was lost. Returning soldiers were spat on and called baby killers. Who was to blame? Politicians and the news media. From the beginning of that there was no clear plan to win. LBJ came up with the policy of Vietnamization of the war, letting them defend their own country, and the drawdown began, we saw how that came out in May of 1975, this country left behind many friends who had to live through, the few that did, the onslaught of the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong. The U.S. involvement in Vietnam began as far back as WW 1 by political and foreign policies and were set in concrete at the conclusion of WW 2. But the matter of Vietnam is for another post and another time. This post is About Iraq and our involvement there and the failure of politicians and failed foreign policies, and most importantly the political expediency that has our Military facing a foe for the third time.

The first military action against Iraq, in recent history, was brought about by the attack on, defeat of the Kuwaiti military and the occupation of Kuwait in August of 1990, by Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi military. The U.S. military was deployed to Saudi Arabia to defend that country from invasion by Iraq. The U.S. Military sat in Saudi Arabia training and preparing for war while waiting on the politicians and the U.N. to form a coalition of the willing to fight Saddam Hussein’s military. We were perfectly capable of defeating Iraq without any help, and it would have been better for the world if we had gone it alone. The coalition was formed, the U.N. set the rules and terms for disengagement and an attack was launched against Iraq. It all began with an air attack aimed at weakening and destroying Iraqi air defenses and ground equipment, then the ground war began. The Iraqi military was soundly defeated on the battlefield in pretty short order, we thought we were in it to win it and we set our sights on Baghdad. An early morning briefing was set for another day to face the enemy and objectives. A crisp and shiny officer came to the briefing an said that it was over, we thought Iraq had surrendered. We learned a short time later that Iraq had not surrendered that had only in fact met the requirements set by the U.N. and were leaving Kuwait. The army of Iraq was only to leave Kuwait and return to their own borders and remain in their own country. To make it short and simple Saddam Hussein got a sweetheart deal after leaving Kuwait. Not only did Saddam Hussein get to remain in power he was able to maintain what was left of his Military including aircraft. A senior commander was also dismayed by the terms set by the U.N. and simply said, we would be back in ten years, he was wrong about that it took, 12 years. Once again the American military won all the battles and the politicians ended up losing the war. The fact that Saddam Hussein remained in power and still had fighting assets, led to airstrikes on Iraq once again when he deployed his assets against The Kurds in repayment for their being disloyal to him. More airstrikes and still no complete victory and still he remained in power. The coalition of the willing was to satisfy or pacify the Arab world not to win a war. Failed policies, political correctness, politicians and political expedience will doom the civilized world.

The next military action against Iraq in 2003 was over alleged weapons of mass destruction and Congress approved the use of force resolution. Once the bombs starting falling and the U.S. military crossed the border the existence or absence of WMD’s no longer mattered the U.S. had invaded another country. The intention of this invasion was to remove Saddam Hussein from power and destroy his weapons. If the U.N. had kept their nose out of the first military action in Iraq and if the administration at the time had been less concerned about the feelings of the Arab world Iraq would have been totally beaten and forced to surrender and Hussein would have no longer been a problem to Iraq or the world, problem solved. The war with Iraq from 1990-1991 was for what purpose, it settled nothing and failing to finish that one led, to but did not cause the next one in 2003. The 2003 war with Iraq came to a close in 2011, fulfilling a campaign promise. The American military had once again won all of the battles, and again the politicians with their own agendas and promises once again failed to win the war. America had faced and beaten the same enemy twice and still nothing was finished.

Military Leaders and Kings of long ago had a saying, it went something like, One should not make war with the same people too many times, they will learn your tactics and use them against you.

As to Iraq the failures of 1991 led to the failures of 2011 and are leading us to repeat it all in 2014 all in the name of what, political correctness, political expedience and political agendas. The administrations abandoned the Kurds in 1991 and 2011, yet they still trust us. They suffered under Saddam Hussein and are now threatened by ISIS.

The failures of 1991 were not the direct cause of 2003, but the failures of 2011 are the direct cause of events in Iraq in 2014

As to the matter of the Iraqi Kurds, maybe the time has come to recognize who would be a friend and ally, and treat them as such. The Iraqi Sunnis and Shiites, will one day be a friend and ally once they overcome their religious differences and not until, and should be treated as such.

Now The U.S. prepares to send troops to Iraq for a third time, even if they are only advisors they are still American Military sent back to a country that had already been beaten twice. If you ask why, the answer is because of politicians, political correctness, political expedience and failed political policies just like all the other times in history. Politicians, political policies, political correctness and political expedience will doom the civilized world.

Kings and military commanders of times long ago recognized the dangers of fighting an enemy too often, they would adopt and use your tactics against you. In today’s world the presidents or prime ministers are the military commanders, or they are labeled as such though most if not all have no military experience. Our present administration may have committed the biggest possible military “sin”, not only is our military fighting the same enemy too often they are training them with our tactics and equipping them with our equipment.

If the U.S. is forced into another ground war in Iraq against the ISIS fighters the military will be facing an enemy using the same tactics and weapons, a little hard to win. Our military may be forced into finding out just how good our training and equipment is. With both sides using the same equipment and maneuvering in the same manner, many lives may be lost to “friendly fire” incidents.

BHO like LBJ previously, is sending out an aircraft with a pilot on board to bomb a truck. Many jets and pilots were lost looking to bomb ox carts in Vietnam. ISIS will acquire surface-to-air missiles and deploy them, again history may repeat itself, men and equipment lost looking to bomb trucks, not an army or a legitimate military target. BHO like LBJ previously, set about of forming a policy of Iraqization of the war. The war was started by the U.S. and should have been finished by the U.S.

The reason Kings and Military Commanders of long ago avoided fighting the same enemy too many times is that they went with their men into battle, and sooner or later they too would be killed by an enemy using the same tactics that were used to defeat him. The victor taught his enemy to be the victor, and soon the victor became the vanquished. It is real hard to beat yourself at anything.

Todays world is quite different Kings, Presidents, Presidents who see themselves as Kings and Military Commanders sit in a war room far removed from the battle make the rules and some even pick the targets for military action. They lead from the rear and never experience the dangers they order others to face. Few of the Leaders of the world have had any military experience and their children are too privileged to go into combat.

In my unit in Iraq in 1991 there were several Vietnam veterans, Warrant Officers and Non-Commissioned Officers, I looked up to those men. I came to a realization they had twice in one lifetime and in one military career, they had won all the battles but were denied victory, a victory they had fought for and seen many of their friends dying trying to achieve.

Some of the advisors now going to Iraq may have never seen combat, but some of them that will be going may have been there in 1991 and many times from 2003-2011 and like all previous they too have won all the battles and never achieved total victory.

It is time for the politicians to either pony up and go or give the Generals the order and then get the hell out-of-the-way and shut-up.

Saddam Hussein remained in power with what remained of his military in tact just by meeting the U.N. resolution and withdrawing and returning to his country. Imagine a world if the U.N. was in existence in WW 2 and only demanded Germany, Japan and Italy to go home and stop fighting and the war would end. While in their own country with the leaders still in power still developing weapons and then breaking out and being set loose on the world once again. What is your favorite foreign language? It doesn’t matter because it would be English as one of the three aforementioned would be your primary language. Wars must be fought to a conclusion, there must be a victor and a vanquished or you will meet again in battle. If this non-sense of a draw or a truce continues the shoe may be on the other foot, as they say.

Take a stand

Posted on by

The insanity at the White House has reached epic proportions, the President seems to think he can devastate our Military and threaten Putin and the Russian Military at the same time. Putin has no fear of BHO or the United States of America. BHO has so weakened this country financially and militarily that no nation on this planet fears us and not a one has any respect, nor does anyone trust this corrupt government, and why should they. BHO has used the NSA to spy on our Allies and every citizen in this country.
BHO is a strange combination of Neville Chamberlain, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Franklin Roosevelt and somewhat like Winston Churchill, but the true oddity lies in his similarities to Viktor Yanukovych and Hugo Chavez.

Chamberlain did with Hitler, as BHO is doing now in the Middle-East in regards to Israel and the Palestinians, he is seeking to gain peace through appeasement. BHO somehow thinks, or rather believes that if Israel would return to its 1967 borders all will be well and peace will suddenly return to the Middle-East. He also believes that if only the Palestinians had a country to call their own then, they would accept that Israel has a right to exist and again all would be well. There could already be a Palestine, but it would have come at the cost of recognizing Israel and its right to exist. Golda Meir said it best “There will be no peace until they love their children as much as they hate us”. The Palestinians will not appease the world in order to gain land, which is just as well, it would become an even greater financial burden on the world than it is now in its current state of existence as the Palestinian Authority. Chamberlain also did as BHO is doing, cutting the Military to pay for social reform and pay-off debts from WW 1. History is indeed a cruel teacher, for no sooner than the debts of WW 1 were satisfied, at the cost of losing military strength, Hitler arrived on the scene and the borrowing to build-up the military began again. Maybe the social reforms should have waited, appeasement was used to buy time. Appeasement did not stop WW 2 from coming, and appeasement will not stop the next war. The most effective prevention of wars and attacks is to have a strong military and a nation of strong resolve and good moral character. When will BHO appease the world by suggesting that America return to its original borders, and what time in history will he pick?

Stalin did to the military as BHO is doing now, the only difference is that Stalin’s Military purge came with the murders of the top military leaders that he did not trust. At least BHO has not ordered the execution of the top Military leaders he does not trust. But why does BHO not trust the top Military commanders? Stalin had a big problem, shortly after and during his purge of the military Hitler came calling. Russia was ill-prepared for war, when Russian troops took to the field without experienced leaders they were slaughtered, no one would speak-out against Stalin or his plans as that would surely invite death. As now with BHO if a senior military commander speaks-out he will be purged from service, we may well find out one day that BHO used the same tactics and lies as Stalin. When an enemy comes calling, will we have enough Military members left to repel the attack? I think not, what few are left will be sacrificed in fighting a delaying action to buy time. After they are used-up, we will be forced to do as Stalin did and rely on scorched earth policy to deny the enemy any useful resources. We will have done at that time what no country on earth was capable of, we will destroy our own country because the uninformed public could so easily be bought with lies and deceptions. Like lemmings the liberal left will follow BHO right over the cliff. I may have just insulted the lemmings by using them and liberal left in the same sentence, but no matter they have already perished.

Hitler gathered a coalition of useful idiots then as BHO has done now and will use them in the same manner. Like Hitler, BHO has no shortage of useful idiots, but I caution you, when they were no longer of any use Hitler purged them from his legions. During his rise to power he gladly accepted assistance from Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals and many other groups and sects, only to destroy them one-by-one as their help was no longer required to go to his next phase on the road to world domination. His most effective weapon was empty and idle threats, but he was feared by the appeasers of the world. The more he was appeased the stronger he became, he was able to conquer much of Europe with-out firing a single shot. With each gain of land he was able to increase his legions with the vanquished and each swore an allegiance to him. We now have legions of useful idiots here in America for BHO to gather-up as he goes along telling them that they are oppressed or have been denied something and promises that all will be well, the government is here to help and will save you. As I have stated before, the government has placed them where they are, but the government can not force them to stay where they were put. The fact that they need the government to save them is that they made a conscious decision to remain and therefore they deserve what they have gotten. They have chosen to, by inaction, to be assembled into a legion of useful idiots. Hitler was and, BHO is a master at playing the blame game, even when, and I submit that most often, it is his fault he comes up with a group or individual to place the blame on and fault anyone that opposes his ill-fated policies. He has even said that his programs and policies fail because of the divided government. Our Constitution set up a Divided Government to keep people like BHO in check. Hitler played the ultimate blame game and nearly destroyed the entire Jewish population, and brought the world to war and was only prevented from achieving world domination by a nation with tremendous resource and resolve, America. When the BHO legions are unleashed on this nation who will come to our rescue? I would venture to say no one will come. This to is okay fine, our forefathers needed no outside help, they did it on their own, all it took was a strong resolve to remove the yoke of tyranny.

Roosevelt played to the notion of inequality and was elected on a notion of “happy days are here again”(quite a catchy tune), similar to how BHO was elected on a notion of “hope and change”. Both assembled a coalition of useful idiots to help them get elected, but neither of them solved the inequality that everyone on the left seems to think is so prevalent in this country. The difference between them is that Roosevelt truly believed in the greatness of America and its people. Roosevelt’s social programs were designed to bring America out of the depression, and return us to a nation of greatness. Some of his programs led us only to temporary financial strength, and led us right back into a deep recession. Still some of his other programs created a dependence on government that continues to this day. He wanted to stay out of the war in Europe, but would provide material support to England in the form of Lend-Lease, and would become the Arsenal of Democracy. The attack on Pearl Harbor by the Imperial Japanese Navy caused the U.S. to enter the war. BHO on the other hand has created social programs that has caused us to remain in a recession. “Monkeying” with the numbers and definitions to cause the appearance of economic recovery does not make it true, we are still in a recession, the jobless numbers should indicate that. ‘Monkeying” with the unemployment numbers does not mean that jobs are created. While on the subject, just what the hell is “seasonally adjusted”? When I was coming up seasonal work was a way for a working man to “moon light” and get some extra “folding” or “walking around” money. Moving money from one pile to another does not create wealth. Unemployment checks and the minimum wage were never meant to become a lively hood or to support a family. Raising the minimum wage will not lift a person out of poverty, raising the minimum wage will only cause the cost of goods and services to go up also, and therefore any gain in pay will be lost. It will however, generate more tax revenue but that too, will be lost as raising the pay of one will cost another their job. Welfare and food stamps were supposed to be temporary assistance and they too have become a lifestyle. All of these social programs cost money, a lot of money, and will eventually break the bank. Roosevelt at least did not scrap the military to pay for his social agenda. When the enemy comes calling, I suggest that the “social parasites” and “moochers” be sent in first and used as “cannon fodder” to buy time for the Militia to assemble, after all the Military will have already been sacrificed to pay for an ever-expanding social agenda. Their demise would at least in part remove some financial burden. One final note, FDR wanted to provide an “arsenal of democracy”. BHO wants to provide an “arsenal of insurgency”. I will expound on this later.

Yanukovych lived a lavish lifestyle while serving as the President of Ukraine, much the same as BHO has done and will continue to do here in America. BHO has been on what seems a perpetual vacation since being elected. The office of President of the U.S.A. is not supposed to be a never-ending party. Even during the sequester BHO was flying around the country and even the world. Apparently BHO will not be deprived of lavishness even if it causes even more pain and suffering here in America. The sequester was his idea and he knew how much it would affect America if it was ever implemented. He knew that Congress would never get a budget done in time, after all no budget was proposed during the time the Democrats controlled the House, Senate and the White House. There would be no one to blame when the budget devastated our nation. BHO also seems to think the as President he is above the Constitution, changing already passed and signed Legislation, normally called Laws, to suit his need to pander to any supposedly disenfranchised group or special interest group. He is using a delaying tactic to lessen the loses to the Democratic Party in the upcoming mid-term elections, but in the end this monstrosity of a law will be implemented. There are so many things hidden in Obamacare that have been revealed since, “you have to pass it to find out what is in it”, and more is sure to come. But no matter, BHO and Congress are above the law and therefore are above the destruction that their arrogance and vanity will inflict on the general population. It may take years to undo the damages done while BHO has been in office.

Chavez was a Socialist, the same as BHO is. Chavez was on the way to nationalizing the entire country of Venezuela, much the same as BHO envisions for America. At least Chavez had the “intestinal fortitude” to come out and say what he wanted. He wanted to be “President for Life”, aka dictator, and did his best to try to make that happen. His time on earth was cut short, even government medicine could not save his miserable life. BHO do yourself and us a favor, it would be much easier on all concerned if you would kindly remove the “mask” and reveal what it is that you truly want. Stop all this ‘beating around the bush” and get to the point, you have already said you will act without Congress, break out your phone and your pen along with your big pad and just tell us. Those of us who do not trust you, already know what you are about most of us knew early on while some came to that realization over the course of time however, your legions of useful idiots do not and will not believe us, you must tell them.

You need not worry, you will not be chased out of this country as was the fate of Yanukovych, and that is due to the fact that, as much as you will not admit it and constantly deny it, America is truly an exceptional country. We that understand the Constitution live by it and want our way of life preserved, unlike you seeking to destroy America and its way of life. The Founding Fathers of this nation got it right, Putin is not on the wrong side of history, you are. Your legions will continue to follow you and some even worship you and will be loyal as long as you can continue to purchase their loyalty. As with the Founding Fathers, men of good character and good conscience can be pushed only so far. Maybe you recognized this, and that is what caused you to say, We need a civilian force as well-trained and equipped as the military. As for me, I will not wear a yoke, hell man I despise a neck tie as I find it to restrictive.

As for the matter of FDR’s “Arsenal of Democracy” it was in the beginning meant as a tool to resist Hitler and his conquest of Europe. As to your “Arsenal of Insurrection” from the beginning it has been meant to spread instability throughout the world, but only in the parts of the world that you want to be de-stabilized or at least remain in a pitiful state of purgatory. You chose not to assist the Iranians during their short-lived protests. You chose to take it upon yourself to use airpower to unseat the Libyan dictator. You threatened to assist the terrorists trying to over-run Syria. Now you offer financial assistance to The Ukraine, while threatening Russia. Russia may be occupying parts of The Ukraine unlawfully, but must protect its interests and military bases. How would you act, or would you even care if one of our neighbors were to act as The Ukraine has acted. They have de-stabilized their own nation, ousted their duly elected President, and all of this was done without a plan to right the country afterward. But, true to your dreams and previous actions you will sneak some social agenda in while the world watches what Russia does in regard to the Ukrainian Crisis. You may even be able to expand on your legions during this crisis and get through your amnesty program, after all you should never let a good crisis go to waste.

One last closing thought on this post. How can this be the same government that supports insurrections throughout the world be the same Federal Government that spared no cost in militarily crushing the South when they attempted to break away and form their own government?