There are Veterans of Peace.
Nixon was a Quaker. I didn’t know that till maybe ten years ago. But I couodn’t rememner if the contrary was he served, or his role in Vietnam.
I’ve read that during WWII a “lot” of Quakers (and I assume the other traditional peace churches) went to war, the specific war overriding beliefs. But that’s countered with more people sitting out in CO camps and prison. After WWI, there was campaigning (including from the peace churches) to make CO status easier, and refusing was a far lesser sentence than in WWI.
2 Likes
The ends justify the means. It’s the repugnicons’ mantra. Whatever gets broken in the process is irrelevant. They are anything but institutionalists, these days. And they do not care that, if the tables are turned, such things may come back to haunt them, because they know the opposition believes in the means more than the ends.
4 Likes
3 Likes
THIS!!!
Isn’t it effing obvious by now?
Power for its own sake (which is, of course, power for the grifting opportunities it presents).
7 Likes
why do I feel so thick here?
I do NOT understand this thinking.
“the ends justify the means” to what end?
Power? what does that look like? Nazi Germany? Rome? Slaves of all “undercaste”? Prison or death (obvs) to all opposition, but ultimately, what is actually gained but a slave caste?
ooooooh. nevermind
5 Likes
Power is, among other things, an aphrodisiac, for some.
Moreover, it enables those in power to basically ‘get their own way’
Those with no notion of public service or any public goods, merely want to get their own way all the time without the tedium of opposition, scrutiny, or having to justify their actions. Getting their own way on … whatever … is the whole point.
As much to the point is also the fact that having power stops anyone they do not like, or whose views they do not like, having any opportunity to exercise power or bring their ideas to bear - because they might inconvenience them.
And ultimately, for many of them the end is merely money. And having power enables the removal of any encumbrances to getting that money. Indeed, it affords many opportunities to corruptly get more money. For others (especially the moral bigots) it is merely the satisfaction of imposing their views (but which often also lead to … guess what? Money!)
I really don’t see what’s so hard to understand. Sorry.
But if you’d like a simpler homily: The cruelty is the point. (They do it because they can and because they enjoy it. Political and social sadism for pleasure.)
6 Likes
Interestingly, Fox News’ own national correspondent Jennifer Griffin has independently verified the Atlantic story, as she details in a series of tweets.
Oddly her reporting on this subject has not yet appeared on the network’s web site for some reason even as Fox News continues to blast the Atlantic for using confidential sources.
16 Likes
8 Likes
Trump now trying to refute the story by openly speculating the source may be a retired Marine Corps General who is broadly respected by conservatives and served as Trump’s own Chief of Staff.
I… don’t think that’s a great way of convincing people the story was baseless?
“Who told you I dye my hair? It was my old hairdresser Steve, wasn’t it?? I’ll show that blabbermouth SOB to violate the privacy of his clients!!”
16 Likes
Ok, who were the “good guys” in the first world war? Was it the British who held the Empire Upon Which the Sun Never Set? Great guys? Was it France, the nation that unleashed Napoleon about 100 years earlier? Was it Germany, the newest player in the empire game, intent on getting their spoils like most of northern Europe?
If you think the United States was some sort of bastion of freedom intent on letting loose wonderful democracy upon the world, you should look up the role of American bankers in WWI and also how since the Spanish American war, the U.S, was focused on securing an ever expanding global empire.
No good guys in world wars.
Just saying.
6 Likes
You’re making it sound like Trump was questioning the moral basis for the war. That’s not what he was doing.
What Trump was questioning was why anyone would put themselves in harm’s way to serve their country when they weren’t being forced to. Or even when they were being forced to. He doesn’t think of himself as being better than the Americans who fought in Vietnam because he considered Vietnam an unjust war, he thinks of himself as being better than those who fought because he had the will and the resources to avoid the draft when others did not. In Trump’s world, anyone who puts themselves in harm’s way for a cause beyond themselves is a “sucker.”
One does not need to approve of a war to honor those who willingly put their lives on the line when their nation asked them to.
16 Likes
Sweden and Denmark had some modest colonial holding and Norway was doing quite well providing shipping to colonial empires but I wouldn’t say Northern Europe was really a big player even compared to Germany, and certainly not to Western Europe.
4 Likes
Exactly this.
Everything is TRANSACTIONAL with Trump. His entire life is all about how he can benefit. I’m sure he learned this from his father and it appears from his niece’s audio tapes that Trump’s sister, the retired federal judge, has a bit of this in her. Trump has also groomed his children to be just like him. This is what is truly sad.
18 Likes
Remember the good old days when the president didn’t have to deny calling dead soldiers losers?
10 Likes
Good times…
5 Likes
Keep in mind that those are the same people that for decades have been screaming about how they were going to defend America from the coming fascist government … so of course quick stepped over to be volunteer fascists at the first opportunity. (Did I mention I live in Kenosha, WI?)
11 Likes
Nah, I’m questioning any moral basis for war, and any excuse for empire. I guess my comment was tangential.
1 Like
Ok, Western Europe. Same point though.
1 Like
