Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

War Is a Racket (1933)

man.fas.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 235 posts

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#101

Post by lucas_membrane »

mrjangles wrote: post #77
dav_Oz wrote: post #58

Beforehand [0] the author of this text, Butler, the most respected general in the US at that time was offered to lead a coup d'etat to overthrow FDR and then to become effectively a dictator. [0] https://bigthink.com/the-present/fdr-coup/

>Remembering when bankers tried to overthrow FDR and install a fascist dictator Ironic considering that FDR's economic reforms were openly modeled on fascist Italy, and FDR was on good terms with Mussolini. He was also in the process of following Mussolini's lead and attempting to overthrow the American institutions that were in his way. He had already gone out of his way to install a KKK member on the Supreme Court,…

The conspiracy talk started around the end of FDR's first 100 days in office (mid-June 1933), during which he accomplished an awful lot (mostly later tossed out by the Supreme Court), and the malefactors of great wealth had reason to be frightened.

FDR was scheduled to address the American Legion (mostly WW1 veterans), an organization supported by conservative money and in the middle of most of the conspiracy allegations, at its convention at the end of September and start of October of 1933. An early draft of his remarks had him asking the veterans to serve as paramilitary reserve police to maintain civil order in the face of a collapsing economy. But he killed the whole idea, pivoting to be a much kinder and gentler middle-of-the-road kind of a guy. He was hitting his stride with no reasons to be tyrranical.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#102

Post by buzzard1 »

hilbert42 wrote: post #98

The tragedy is that poor unfortunate grunts only get to know it's a racket after it's too late - when half of them are already dead. Unfortunately, it seems to be a chararistic of the human condition that learning about war is a slow prossess and that the horrors of experiencing it cannot passed down from one generation to the next. Experience gathered over millennia has demonstrated that it's essentially impossible…

Do you believe that a just war has ever been waged?

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#103

Post by buzzard1 »

mrjangles wrote: post #77
dav_Oz wrote: post #58

Beforehand [0] the author of this text, Butler, the most respected general in the US at that time was offered to lead a coup d'etat to overthrow FDR and then to become effectively a dictator. [0] https://bigthink.com/the-present/fdr-coup/

>Remembering when bankers tried to overthrow FDR and install a fascist dictator Ironic considering that FDR's economic reforms were openly modeled on fascist Italy, and FDR was on good terms with Mussolini. He was also in the process of following Mussolini's lead and attempting to overthrow the American institutions that were in his way. He had already gone out of his way to install a KKK member on the Supreme Court,…

>their ashamed past

Where you from, partner?

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#104

Post by mrobot »

steelstraw wrote: post #89
the-dude wrote: post #28

We can clearly hear the drums beating from across the Atlantic. A new adventure was already expected with the change of administration.

Something I don't get: Why is the Ukrainian president less concerned about invasion than the US president? Anyone have a good answer to this?

Here is a video from RT about this "invasion". It contains Zelensky's reaction to the western media's fearmongering: https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1487395105023528960

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#105

Post by lucas_membrane »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #24
sorokod wrote: post #2

Do check out the author, major general Smedley Butler USMC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

2 Marines 2 Medals. Dan Daley and Smedley Butler!

After his military days, Butler had tried to translate his military skills into a term as head of the Philadelphia police, so you can see why a group of tyrants-to-be might want him to join a group trying to bring civilians under an authoritarian regime. You might also see why it is better to give former high-ranking military officers medals and pensions than to give them police departments.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#106

Post by kspacewalk2 »

GeorgeTirebiter wrote: post #48
raintrees wrote: post #34

If interested, for more data including names and dates, try Carroll Quigley's Anglo-American Establishment or his Tragedy and Hope. For a shorter version, try Joe Plummer's Tragedy and Hope 101. If true, not all is as it appears. But then, in the day and age of propaganda, when is it?

https://tragedyandhope.com/ The text is available for download. "Tragedy and Hope" is the most important History / Political book of the 20th Century. If you want to know how the world Really Works, this is your guidebook.

The synopsis on Wikipedia[0] makes it sound like a fairly quaint, run of the mill cabal-style conspiracy theory. What makes it stand out among dozens of others, exactly? Like, say I didn't have time to humour them all, why should I invest effort into this one?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_and_Hope

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#107

Post by kspacewalk2 »

mrobot wrote: post #104
steelstraw wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I don't get: Why is the Ukrainian president less concerned about invasion than the US president? Anyone have a good answer to this?

Here is a video from RT about this "invasion". It contains Zelensky's reaction to the western media's fearmongering: https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1487395105023528960

>Here is a video from RT

Here's a line that instantly disqualifies one from rational adult conversations about anything to do with Eastern Europe.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#108

Post by hilbert42 »

buzzard1 wrote: post #102
hilbert42 wrote: post #98

The tragedy is that poor unfortunate grunts only get to know it's a racket after it's too late - when half of them are already dead. Unfortunately, it seems to be a chararistic of the human condition that learning about war is a slow prossess and that the horrors of experiencing it cannot passed down from one generation to the next. Experience gathered over millennia has demonstrated that it's essentially impossible…

Do you believe that a just war has ever been waged?

Yes, but it ought to be absolutely the last resort.

In that sense I'm not a pacifist (I once had a unform on but I was lucky to avoid major trouble). If you've ever experienced the system and mil training it's impossible to unlearn it.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#109

Post by anm89 »

lifeplusplus wrote: post #96
landemva wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USA loves armed conflict so much it pays the EU to run their junior league fighters NATO. Just can't get enough of it.

money laundering at bigger scale... tax -> war -> defense budget -> military complex manufacturers

The idea of a government, especially the US, laundering money doesn't really make any sense. Generally, the point of laundering money is to pay taxes on it so it can enter the financial system. Governments (and especially the US who has the most control of international monetary pipelines like SWIFT) can freely do what they want with their money generally, at least within their own countries. Their money is going to make it into the financial system without any laundering.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#110

Post by kspacewalk2 »

mrobot wrote: post #93
phantomathkg wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the countries have two or two choices, align with Russia/China, or align with the West. Back in 2017, 69% of Ukrainian wants to join NATO[1]. It is Putin's own fascination that Ukraine should go back to Russia that starts all this mess[2]. Even if US has sponsored the color revolution, so what? Between two evils, choose the lesser one. [1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-nato-idUSKBN19V12... [2]:…

Lesser of two evils applies when there is a dichotomy of two likely outcomes both of which you see as evil. In this case, the United States can simply not invade. Then there will be no problem. The problem is that Jen Psaki is going on television and telling the country a bold-faced lie. It is just a lie, that is all there is to it. Russia is not the aggressor. The United State is the aggressor. No US invasion, no ev…

Amazing. It's like you live in a parallel universe where the US, not Russia, is preparing to invade by amassing a hundred thousand troops, issuing insane ultimatums, dehumanizing the enemy daily on its propaganda outlets, etc.
Post reply on HN