Text 21888, 149 rader
Skriven 2008-10-15 00:51:33 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Lee Lofaso (3:800/432.0)
Ärende: Socialism in the US of A
================================
Hello Lee,

On Tuesday October 14 2008 10:37, you wrote to me:

 MVDV>> Hmmm... Maybe for the citizens of the USA. Others may see it
 MVDV>> different.

 LL> Well, certainly the Taliban and al-Qaeda do see it differently.
 LL> As well as the former regime in Iraq.  Not to mention the dictator
 LL> of North Korea.  And the madcap president of Iran.

It isn't limited to those Lee. Not by far....

 MVDV>> The outcome of WWII was decided with the battle of Stalingrad in
 MVDV>> 1942. By then it was clear that Germany would lose the war. That
 MVDV>> was before the US got involved.

 LL> While it is true the bulk of the fighting was between Germany and
 LL> Russia over Eastern Europe, had it not been for the USA, England would
 LL> have fallen to the Germans.

No. The battle of Britain was settled before the US got involved.

Go back in the thread an d read Ward's messages, he expleined it very well.

 MVDV>> without the US, the war might have lasted longer, the eventual
 MVDV>> emerging balance of power might have been different, but the Nazis
 MVDV>> would not have won. They already lost in 1942 against the Russians.

 LL> Had the USA not intervened, Nazi Germany would have remained firmly
 LL> in control of Western Europe, as well as in Eastern Europe,

The Nazis would have lost no matter what. By 1942 they had run out of resources
needed to complete it.

 >> LL> If the United States would cease to be, what country would then
 >> LL> become the dominant power in the world?

 MVDV>> why would there have to be a dominant power?

 LL> Historically there has always been a dominant power.  Whether it be
 LL> the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Spanish, the French, the
 LL> British, or the Americans, there has always been a dominant power.

The Persians, the Greek and the Romans never ruled the world. Their influence
did not exend beyond Europe, Northern Africa and The Middle East. The Spanish
end the French (and the Portugese and the Dutch) were formidable powers, but
they never were a dominant power. There always were several players on the
field and no one was stronger than all the others together. Until the end of
the cold war...

 LL> Tomorrow it might be the Chinese who rule the world.  Or some other
 LL> great power that has not yet risen.  But a dominant power there is,
 LL> and will be.  It may not be the same dominant power that rules
 LL> forever, but there will always be a dominant power.

I should hope not. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 MVDV>> And if so why would it =have to be the USA.

 LL> Because, as the late Freddie Mercury said, WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!

Freddie Mercury was British.... (Born in Zanzibar)

 MVDV>> They did not do all that well did they?

 LL> Did well enough to free Europe from itself - twice.

No, they didn't. That is what you may have been taught in school, but that
claim does not stand up to scrutiny.

 LL> Did well enough to ensure the freedom for many other countries as
 LL> well.

Name three....

 >> LL> Would it be an expansionist Russia hoping to make Europe part of
 >> LL> its new empire?

 MVDV>> Russia *is* part of Europe....

 LL> Russia has never been accepted by Europeans as being part of Europe.

You do not know much about Europe. p until the Revolution Russia was fully
accepted as belonging to the European culture. Trade between Russia and the
rest of Europe was flourishing and there are lots of traces opf Russian
influence to be found all over the place.

 MVDV>> Chine does no need any alliances, they are big enough by
 MVDV>> themselves.

 LL> China has a lot of people. But so does India. Just because a country
 LL> has a lot of people does not make it a superpower, much less an
 LL> empire.

No, but if they get their economies going they will simply *buy* the US. Looks
like they are already doing that...

 >> LL>Israel will be the new empire, the Jews owning all the banks.

 MVDV>> Banks? Surely you are joking? Look at what is happening to the
 MVDV>> banks. The bankers have disqalified themselves for bridge duty. The
 MVDV>> won't be let near the helm for the next half of a century.

 LL> The Bush wants to nationalize the banks (or at least some of them).

Yeah, so much for capitalism classic style.

 LL> Europe is sure to follow the Bush's lead.

Not quite...

 LL> And who owns the banks? The Jews.

Not here...

 LL> IOW, the USA, Europe, and the world, will be indebted to the Jews,
 LL> having to pay interest on moneys/funds borrowed.  That is how
 LL> international banking works.

One of the reasons for the present crisis seems to be that *nobody* understands
how it works. You think you have the answer to it all?

 >> LL>And it will be the Jews who own all the gold.

 MVDV>> And what will they do with it? Eat it?

 LL> Hoard it.

And that will bring them what?

 MVDV>> Gold has no intrinsic value.

 LL> Gold is "potential wealth", not actual money or wealth itself.

Gold has very limited use as an industrial product. It is not very strong, it
is heavy. Its main virtues are high conductance and resistance to corrosion.

Look at South Africa. When I was there in the early seventees, the people there
were convinced that South Africa could never go down because they had gold,
they had diamonds, they had coal, they had everything except oil.

Look at where they are now....


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)