During the 2008 Presidential election, the Democrats rallied against the war and Republicans, except for one who said these wars will help contribute to bankrupting our nation, all approved of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That one individual who everyone knew just wanted to “bring our troops home,” was Ron Paul (this is the part where neo-conservatives reading this cringe).

As we all know, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost us over $1 Trillion since their beginning and Obama hasn’t ended any of the wars as promised, but escalated them by sending more troops to Afghanistan. Not to mention, of course, the countless innocent victims and the deaths of thousands of our armed forces.

The following is one of those forwarded emails from a friend and my polite discussion with him that follows. I know why he thinks like he does because he has family who has served in the Armed forces. Many of us typically follow the patterns set by our parents, whether we are aware of them or not.

For quick proof of this, I’ll bet most reading this are of the same party, democrat or republican, as their parents were. To this I simply ask why? Do you agree with the basic platform of the party? Is there a real reason why you are one or the other? Or do you hate the other side just because, well, they’re the other side? Are they really the “other side?”

In the weeks and months to come, I want to start challenging democrats and republicans, from a Christian perspective as to why they think the way they do, and in particular, see if this thinking is Biblical in its structure.

Here’s the discussion I had with my friend, starting with the email he sent, and my replies. All of these discussion took place on 4/22/2009.

My friends comment to this email was: “I agree with her sentiments completely!!”

My reply:

Hey Mike….(if I may respond my friend….)

Did you know that Osama bin Laden is not being sought after by the FBI for 9/11?

Personally, as a Christian, I don’t like the attempt by the author of this piece associating Jesus Christ with “soldiers.”  Jesus Christ, according to the New Testament, never utilized wars to justify his message.  He was the “Prince of Peace!”

The reason I reply to these kinds of email is because I’m writing about it in my book…, exposing how Republicans used to be against war, but this new “neoconservative” Republican party is pro-war. It was their downfall in the 2006 mid-term elections and is their downfall today with Sean Hannity, Neal Boortz (who calls him self a libertarian, but isn’t), Michael Medved, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levine and even Ba Ba O’Reilly spreading their propaganda in support of war to this day.

Most Republicans have not researched the Bible, let alone just war theory.  And believe it or not, this war was never “declared” as our Constitution mandates.  Neither was the Vietnam war or the Korean war (both started by Democrats) and we both know how those ended up with over 50k U.S. soldiers killed.

The goal of that section of my book is “To Love Thy Neighbor!”

IMO, it is the Left and the Right that are bankrupting our Country.  I’ve been saying this for some time as you know mi Amigo….

Peace!

Doug

P.S.  Always open to your thoughts.  I debated Republicans (I’m not a democrat by the way) on this all last year leading up to the election of Obama. Now all of a sudden, free markets are important again to them, but they still don’t get the pro-war issue.  I’m more of an old school Republican, not this new version.  I won the debates and recommended people read the book, “The Betrayal of the American Right” by Murray Rothbard, which showed that this “new” Republican party’s roots can be traced back to Irving Kristol and company, father of Bill Kristol, a guy who really, really likes war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyDx1WJiSRw

His Reply;

Doug, good thoughts and I agree with the bulk of what you say … certainly the sentiments.  I do agree however that we can’t fight the irrational global terrorism machine without firm tactics.  The key question is what to use and how far to go.  The answer is not backing off all together!  Independent of if this is a “War” or not, we have a solid responsibility to protect American lives both here and abroad, especially from those who have openly declared War on us and who’s sole purpose is to kill Americans!  Any other theoretical argument is secondary to stepping up to this severe threat across many fronts.  The Bible does say “eye for an eye” (among many other passages that related to confronting evil )… does it not?!

My Reply:

Hi Mike…appreciate the feedback and conversation!  It’s not easy to talk about some of these emotionally charged issues….

Yes, the Bible does speak about an “eye for an eye.”  However, I’ll quote how that Bible Verse should be interpreted;  “It was saying that the penalty imposed on a person should be in line with the damage that they caused. If they killed a cow, they were to repay the value of the cow. If they burned a field, they were to repay the value of any crops of future production lost from the land. If they damaged a person’s tooth, they were to pay the cost of any medical bills, etc. connected with the injury. If they damaged an eye, they were to pay medical bills and any loss of income. If they harmed another person, they were to repay that person the value “a cow for a cow, a field or a field, a tooth for a tooth, and an eye for an eye.”

By the time Jesus came along, people had begun to misuse that scripture, and to claim it gave them the right to take revenge on another person. They were twisting the quote (as people often do even today) to mean that “if you damage my tooth, I can damage yours.”

The old testament is full of war. When God’s people were with Him, they won the wars. When they were against him, they lost.

With the introduction of the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus Christ, came this verse; “But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

Keep in mind that this is different than if one is attacked where you are allowed to defend yourself.

Luke 22: 35-36: Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”  “Nothing,” they answered.  He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

Iraq did not attack us. Afghanistan did house the Taliban who were blamed for the attack (not individually). But congress were derelict in their duty by not “declaring” war per the U.S. Constitution, Article 1 Section 8.

What’s interesting is that most of the hijackers from 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia, a country that houses the most radical terrorist organization on earth, the Wahibbi’s. The Wahibbi’s definition of rape is that 4 males must witness “penetration,” and he women can’t testify.  Not 3, not 2, but “4!” They also say that “if you don’t believe what I believe, then I have a right, according to their interpretation of the Qu’ran, to kill you.”

So why didn’t the U.S. go into Saudi Arabia?  GW and his father have deep ties with the Saudi Royalty.  It wasn’t in their best “interest.”  You never hear anything from Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. about Saudi Arabia and the Wahibbi’s.  Why is that?

The other ironic thing is we have our troops protecting 130 other countries borders, at the taxpayers expense, but leave our borders unprotected.

Lastly, “worry” is a sin according to the Bible.  My goal in the book I’m writing is to stop believing the propaganda that is espoused by the media that plays on ones fears.  As a Christian, “don’t worry, be happy” and go about doing His work. The worst that can happen, if you are a believer, is you die and go to heaven.  How cool is that?

Personally, I don’t live in fear.  I don’t believe a word a politician or media pundit says and I am “Fed Up!” with where they have taken this great nation and I’m trying to “enlighten” those who will listen (there’s much more to it than just this issue).

I’m also having fun with it….and I pin much of what is happening on the Federal Reserve and Congress, because without “golden handcuffs,” they have the ability to print as much money as they want to fund their wars.  Take away that ability, and they won’t go “marching off to war” as they’ll have to choose between spending money on unnecessary things like war and rather where it is needed at home on infrastructure and things of that nature.

Hope that clears things up a bit Mike….and I don’t claim to know everything…but I do feel the wool has been pulled over my eyes long enough in countless ways, and I’m exposing it as much as I can.  It takes much convincing to reverse the years and years of propaganda touted by media, government and especially our education system (that I was a victim of).  I really think you’ll like the book! (not a sales pitch, lol…but I can’t wait to get it out to the public!)….

Peace!…and thanks for the exchange as I’m always open to opinions…..

Doug

My friends reply;

Doug, I really appreciate the range of your ideas!  Can’t wait for the book.

End

While neo-conservatives or this “new” republican party may mock Ron Paul and those who are against these unnecessary wars, I challenge them from a Biblical basis for their infatuation with death and destruction. If anyone wants to take the position that an “eye for an eye” is justified Biblically, then let them show what Bible verses from Jesus teachings in the New Testament back up this point of view. I’m all willing to listen to that for which I do not know.

I am still working on the book that I mentioned in that email exchange. I have just completed my first book, “Buy Gold and Silver Safely” that is available soon on Amazon.com or my website; http://buygoldandsilversafely.com

Since that book is finished, I can start concentrating on this political/Christian book and hopefully make a difference in this world.

I’m not sure if I’ll keep the name “Fed Up!” as Texas governor Rick Perry is coming out with a book of the same title later this year. Being that Rick Perry was a big spender governor, it doesn’t make sense that he’s “Fed Up” with big government. Yet he’s writing about the problems of big government despite having “doubled state debt and accepted almost $23 billion in stimulus dollars.”

I do have a second title that I think will work. I’ll keep it a secret for now.

Related posts:

1. Conversations With A Neo-Con, Circa 2010
2. The Left and Right Love and Need War

During the 2008 election, I battled it out with the neo-con’s on Michelle Malkin’s site. The moment I mentioned anything about the war, they immediately tried to paint me as a democrat (of course they can’t do that any longer).

I learned that before making comments on these types of neo-conservative sites, I need to write a disclaimer for each reply. The moment I mentioned Ron Paul’s name, the same disclaimer had to be expanded to include; “I’m not a conspiracy nut, don’t wear a tin foil hat, and I’m not a racist, let’s debate the issues.”

With that said, I weeded out 95% of the responders. The other 5% and I had good “discussions” with. Which leads me to the topic of this post; how to approach the neo-cons circa 2010.

Since facebook is more prevalent than it was in 2008, this is a good place to have these types of discussions. The importance here is to keep it as a discussion, and not an argument. Human emotion takes control of us sometimes and a simple reply of malice intent can ruin the whole effort to convert to your point of view.

It is not easy to enlighten some of the neo-cons. I consider the following facebook conversation (see below) with a friend of mine, to be a perfect example. Not too many people reply to his constant, pro-Republican, pro-war, pro-Israel posts. He knows where I stand on things because I do reply. While he tries to spin my comments into a mocking of myself (I’m sure if he were in charge, I would have been accused of being a heretic and burned at the stake if in another era), I try to keep on track and make my points with solid facts. Because of our friendship, I don’t reply to ALL his posts…but pick and choose.

I haven’t won him over, but with some of these neo-conservative types, it won’t be possible to do so. But the important thing is, all of his 100 or so friends are reading what he and I are writing. And that I believe is a good way to win people over…without ever meeting them.

If I choose to make him look like a fool, which I could easily do, it is I who looks like the fool to all HIS friends.

This is the message I’d like to convey moving forward. Keep your cool and have a good discussion. Keep the friendship…and know others are watching (also, when they make a comment like “I’m done,” which has happened with a couple of these people I have spoken with, take it as a silent victory, and don’t gloat!).

Here was my latest conversation – he already knows I’m a Ron Paul supporter from prior conversations – and so do his friends (last names withheld):

Jim (first post):
New UK Prime Minister David Cameron gets it: succeed in Afghanistan, secure economic growth and fight protectionism. Any chance we can trade Obama for Mr. Cameron? We will likely need to throw in some cash and a player to be named later.

Doug:
Succeed in Afghanistan while Rome burns?

Jim:
Isolationism is not a solution.

Doug:
At a cost of over $1 Trillion since the war began, our politicians choose non-declared war interventionism against no country, but a group (al-qaeda). The Russians tried fighting this group and it bankrupted their country. At some point we will walk away from these wars and some in power will claim victory. The question is, will it be before or after said bankruptcy that is hurried along by the Obama administrations spending spree (including increasing the presence of the troops in Afghanistan). Hey…that’s something you and Obama do agree on! lol
Time will tell Jim…

From a Christian standpoint…and the thesis of my second book, I will state the case against the wars despite Billy Kristol’s (not Billy Crystal to anyone reading this) best efforts. The same goes for Warlord Sean Hannity.

Isolationism and non-interventionism are two separate things. I’m all for trading with “all” neighbors…we could use some of them buying our stuff to help out GDP!

Jim
Islamic extremists have declared WWIII. We can ignore them and continue to pay the consequences, or stick our head in the sand because they are an untraditional enemy without defined borders. Losing this war will cost exponentially more in dollars and lives than the cost of fighting back. Semantics aside, your “non-intervention” strategy is a loser on every level.

Doug:
Moving stuff into storage now Jim…obviously we see things differently. But you already know that. Will reply later…

Doug:
Islamic extremism is today what communism was in decades past. The elite always need a cause to “defeat” in order to keep their well funded military industrial complex well oiled (if you get my drift).

We defeated communism without war. All “they” want is the reasoning and people like Billy Kristol, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity from the right and all the folks from the left who forgot what Obama’s campaign promises were are just as guilty.

Be careful what you wish for: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/nick-cle…

Jim:
So your position is that Islamic extremists are the victims of America’s elites? Suicide bombers, terrorist training camps, exploitation of women, 9/11…perpetrated by a conspiracy of Dick Cheney and his ilk…and Sharia Law is as harmless as Communism. Okay, I’m sold.

Doug:
As far as Islamic extremist go, if America wanted to, they would have gone after the 17 out of 19 terrorists who were from Saudi Arabia, part of the most radical Islamic group in the world, the Wahabbis. But instead, Bush took the war to Iraq? This isn’t a conspiracy, it’s fact.
What neoconservatives want to do is take the war everywhere to fight an enemy that is fueled further by the innocent victims seeking revenge (read the book “Blowback” to understand this). They should also study just war theory, especially those who call themselves Christian.

It’s as if these folks never played the game of Risk. Meanwhile, China, if they wanted to, will just wait for America to implode. And implode we will Jim. The right will blame Obama. The left won’t have a leg to stand on. Both the right and the left are complicit. When they come to require the youth to fight their bloody wars, that will be the last straw. The youth won’t go for it. Meanwhile, the police state grows, TSA lackies frisk 12 year old girls and Homeland Security lets gang members cross the borders by the hundreds every day. Don’t you think our priorities are a little ass backwards?

“The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.” Sun Tzu

Jim:
The 9/11 terrorists and many others are Saudis, but train in Afgan, Sudanese and Somali camps. Bush’s recognition of the Islamic threat and vision was soundly documented in his National Security Strategy documents of 2002 and 2006, and his Iraq strategy was endorsed by 17 mostly-unanimous UN resolutions over three years. Unfortunately it helps to be right AND execute well. Either way, your NeoCon conspiracy theories (and lingo) are straight out of 1996 and your isolationist solutions date back to 1916, though your extremist appeasement leanings smack of Obama 2010. I am an optimist and I trust the American people to swing the pendulum back to common sense (vs. PC), economic growth (vs. wealth redistribution) and the principles outlined by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution. It’s not rocket science, it is not a conspiracy and the U.S. will not “implode” (whatever that means). Agree to disagree. I’m done.

Doug:
It’s ok Jim… I’ll let my book do the talking… But the wars were not “declared” per the Constitution. Have a good one…

(I could have easily addressed the issues of his last post, but chose to take up the battle, erm, discussion, at a later time, respecting the fact that it is his facebook page I’m commenting on).

Share your thoughts and tactics…would love to hear them…

Related posts:

1. Conversations With A Neo-Conservative From A Christian Perspective

Why would these two pro-conservative, highly influential media pundits not say one thing about the Audit the Fed bill winning a vote in the Financial Services Committee to be included as part of another bill?  This is big news and has a real impact on our economy if it passes.

75% of Americans want this bill to pass and only 9% opposed it.  15% were not sure how to vote and I would speculate this is because they really don’t understand the Federal Reserve and what it does.  Most in America don’t.

I’ve been asking Limbaugh and Hannity since July as to why they don’t support the Audit the Fed bill and they continually refuse to bring up the subject to their listeners who follow their every word.

Why don’t they support the bill?

Because it would allow the monitoring of the one entity that allows the neoconservative arm of the Republican Party to fund their beloved wars and Congress to continually spend what they don’t have.  And not to leave out the neo-liberal arm of the Democrat Party as they love war too, there was also no mention of the Senate Finance Committee vote by Rachel Maddow, the Keith Olbermann Show (who had a guest host), or Joy Behar.

No Mention By the Media, So What Would an Audit of the Fed Actually Accomplish That Makes Them So Afraid?

It is the Audit of the Fed that is necessary to keep the Fed from handing out favors to connected individuals and keeping failed businesses afloat.  But it is the End of the Fed that is necessary to keep Americans from experiencing these boom and bust cycles and depreciation of our currency via inflation that really has them scared.

Auditing the Fed is the first step in taking back control from the folks who cause the problems to begin with.  Ending the Fed will guarantee that Congress doesn’t possess the tools that are turning us into serfs.

There is no way in hell the health care bill will pass if Congress had to actually use tax dollars to fund it.  There is no way in hell that our troops would be in 130 nations and we’d be fighting two wars and threatening more if Congress actually had to use tax dollars to fund them.

How is it that Limbaugh and Hannity don’t ever mention this?

How is it that most in the media don’t mention this? Why are some so upset that this bill is garnering bipartisan approval?

Watch this video and see what Senator Judd Gregg (NH) had to say about the Fed on CNBC.  He said that “one of the great strengths of our nation is an independent Fed.”  Nothing could be further from the truth folks. It is individuals like Senator Gregg that are fooling you into thinking the Fed is necessary for monetary policy.  Is it any wonder that Gregg also believes that the War on Terror and WMD are of greater concern than the deficit and voted yes on the Bush bank bailout bill.  The Fed is at the root of the problem, not the solution.

These are the people that we elected who are in collusion with the Fed as their adamant support of  the Fed allows them to continue to fleece the American public.

What would Congress be able to do without the Fed?

The only real answer to this would be, live within their means.  Wouldn’t the dollar automatically be stronger and maintain its purchasing power if this were to occur?

Does the Fed Existence Interfere With Your Freedom?

I believe that those of us who truly want personal liberty, limited government, free markets and a strong national defense will be continually pressed to follow the Limbaugh and Hannity mantra of war unless we curtail the entity that gives Congress the ability to fund wars.

It is through the exposure of Limbaugh and Hannity’s lack of support for a bill that can change the course of America forever that I hope to win over those who have been swayed away from what the Republican Platform used to stand for;  Limited Government, Fiscal Conservatism, Personal Liberty and a Strong National Defense and get them to return to their Republican roots of getting us out of wars and living within our means.

The goal here is to take back the Republican Party from those who hijacked it.

It is only through this kind of action that we can return America to what it used to be and build her back up with a strong foundation built upon a fiscally responsible Congress.  I will be going into more detail on this in my forthcoming book, “Fed Up!”

What Needs to be Done Now

The way to get the things on the right track is to keep exposing the economic weakness of the Left. But at the same time, mandating that the candidate for the Right will hold true to fiscal responsibility. Not George W. Bush fiscal responsibility, but fiscal responsibility that any educated individual can get behind.

No candidate from either party can hold to fiscal responsibility until the means to which they are allowed to spend more than they have loophole is closed. The “means” referring to the Federal Reserve.

This Audit the Fed bill would be the first step to tie the hands of all candidates, both left and right and again, is something that only 9% of Americans oppose.

Flashback January 2008

There was a candidate for President that did have all the answer of what our nation needed to do.  He was the only Republican candidate that wanted to “just bring our troops home.”  He was the only Republican candidate that understood economics and schooled John McCain on economic policy.

Yet this candidate was mocked by Sean Hannity.  He was never promoted on either Limbaugh’s or Hannity’s shows.

His name is Ron Paul.

I used to continually debate people on Michelle Malkin’s website warning them that the Republicans don’t stand a chance of winning with the same pro-war mantra that lost them the House and Senate in 2006.  This prediction came true as John McCain, the one who wanted to “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran” was soundly defeated by Obama.

Now we are stuck with a nightmare of spending that if the People don’t start pressuring their Congressman soon, will lead to major problems for the dollar.

My first blog, January of 2008 was in support of Ron Paul and his “message.” The Ron Paul rEVOLution, Super Tuesday and “The Message!”

I was warning people back then as to what the Fed can do to cause harm to our nation.  The message then was about “eliminating the tool of destruction, the Federal Reserve.”  Just look what has happened since then!  Now the Fed wants even more power. Don’t let them have it!

Implore your Congressman to make sure this Audit the Fed Bill passes….or else make sure they are replaced by a Freedom Loving candidate who understands economic policy and monetary policy!  This candidate may not have the financial backing of the military industrial complex and those Wall Street and Union lobbyists, but they only need your vote.  Do your homework and find out who they are and what they stand for.  Ask questions!

For more information on asking your current Congressman questions and directing them to do what most in America want, Audit the Fed, contact them via the Campaign For Liberty website.

Hannity and Limbaugh need to support the Audit of the Fed bill to be taken seriously in their attempts at being “conservatives.”  Remember, they really didn’t say too much when Bush was doing all his spending and taking away our liberties.

Hold their feet to the fire and continually ask them why they don’t support it.  I believe I know the answer, but I’d like to finally hear for once their take on it.  It’s been over three months and I don’t expect to hear them talk about it anytime soon.

Are we supposed to believe they are in the best interest of Conservatives when they won’t advertise getting rid of the one main entity, the Federal Reserve, that is bringing down our nation?

I’ll give you the answer from Sean Hannity now….

Comment by Doug Digger Eberhardt on 8 August 2009:

I decided to join Sean Hannity’s discussion forum and ask the question why Hannity doesn’t support H.R. 1207.

Here’s the questions I asked:

Why doesn’t Hannity support the Audit the Fed bill?

I’d like to see him support it too, but I think there’s more to it than meets the eye. I wrote an article on the subject recently.

http://fedupbook.com/blog/federal-reserve/why-dont-limbaugh-and-hannity-support-bill-to-audit-the-fed/

Maybe he doesn’t want to be associated with anything to do with Ron Paul, the author of the bill?

Yet over 60% of the House supports the bill and 75% of the American people do according to a Rassmussen poll.

I’d just like to hear if anyone has heard him even talk about it…

The result? Click the following url to see:

http://docs.google.com/View?id=dd8ngkwz_5fcz9v372

For those that can’t click or can’t read it, the result was that I was “banned for life.”

I guess Hannity doesn’t like it when he’s challenged…

Audit the Fed then End the Fed!

Feel free to comment and discuss….

Related posts:

1. Why Don’t Limbaugh and Hannity Support Ron Paul’s Bill to Audit the Fed?
2. Top 5 Articles of 2009
3. Left and Right Media Misinforming Public About Auditing the Fed

“Most of you know I opposed this war from the start. I thought it was a tragic mistake. Today we grieve for the families who have lost loved ones, the hearts that have been broken, and the young lives that could have been.

America, it’s time to start bringing our troops home. It’s time to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else’s civil war.” 

Excerpt from Barak Obama’s announcement to run for President, 2/10/2007

Our Nation Cannot Afford Wars at This Point in Time

Why are we sacrificing the lives of young men and women, fathers and mothers who are fighting against an unnamed country?  We’re not at war with Iraq or Afghanistan, but with an enemy that has no country, “Al Qaida.”  It’s a war that is impossible to win while at the same time we are inspiring a larger enemy because of killing innocent men, women and children while going after enemy targets.  Collateral damage has its effects.

The Peace President

While our infrastructure is crumbling at home, the economy supported only by government spending, and our nations debt spiraling out of control, Obama is currently contemplating sending 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan.  This after he already sent 4,000 additional troops in February, soon after being sworn in.

Many say that the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Obama was a preemptive move to force Obama’s hand to do the right thing; end the wars.

The Peace Prize winning President however continues to be involved in Pakistan’s affairs ordering a missile strike in August and continuing the Bush administration mantra of  continually warning Iran over Nukes as well as renewing the sanctions against Iran and threatening to add new sanctions.

Does this sound like a Peace Prize winning President to you?  Can you really tell the difference between George W. Bush and Obama?  But the worse of this is not the fact that there is no real difference between the two political parties when it comes to war, but rather the neglect for protecting our own borders.

A Strong National Defense

Ronald Reagan called for “a strong national defense.”  Did Reagan mean the defense of other countries borders or our own?

If you would just like to protect our own borders rather than the borders of other countries; if you would like to take care of our own economic woes, crumbling infrastructure and support a stronger dollar, then write your congressman or woman and tell them so.

From a Christian Perspective

If you disagree with just bringing our troops home, and are a Christian, then ask yourself, what Biblical reasoning is there for the actions of a government when the Bible clearly speaks to “defending” oneself rather than “killing them before they kill us” as one former Christian Presidential candidate emailed me.  He refused to quote me a Bible verse that backed his words and told me the “conversation was over.”  I guess that’s how we talk to our enemies too.  One sided.

What ever happened to “love thy neighbor as thyself?”

The War Body Count

2,976 died on 9/11/2001.  4,364 U.S. soldiers have died as of yesterday, 11/19/2009 in seeking revenge.  This does not include the coalition forces deaths (325), Afghanistan military deaths (923), journalists deaths (335), contract employee deaths (1,395), or the 1.3 million Iraqis killed since the war began.  Lastly it doesn’t include the overlooked 100,000 plus injured or traumatized.

They say in the investment world that nothing goes straight up.

With war, there is something that goes straight up.  The body count.

How many have to die to prove a point?

Conclusion

President Obama ran on a campaign of ending the wars but is currently contemplating sending more troops to Afghanistan.  Both Republicans and Democrats support the military industrial complex.  Republicans used to get us out of wars (Vietnam and Afghanistan) and now these “new” Republicans, also called “neoconservatives,” hijacked our liberty since 9/11 as well as forgot the Reagan “old Republican party” stance of a “strong national defense” while the “neo-liberals”  infatuation with war and the threat of war charade continues without any media objection.

Our borders are wide open to any individual who can get across.  Even a Mariachi band and a guy riding on an elephant can cross our borders undetected giving the opportunity for terrorists access to our country, let alone illegal aliens who burden our economic prosperity.

WHAT ABOUT PROTECTING OUR OWN DAMN BORDERS?

What have the left and right done to help our our own economy except add more debt?  Why don’t they cut spending by reducing the biggest expenditure, the military expense?

Wouldn’t money spent on war and protecting other countries borders really be better spent fixing our own crumbling infrastructure?  Do we have to wait for another bridge to collapse before doing something?

It is up to us to tell Congress what to do, not for Congress to dictate things to us.  The left and right may need war in allowing the military industrial complex to profit, BUT WE DON’T!

When Do We Tell Congress We Need to Take Care of Our Own?

The answer is now!  Maybe it will make your dollars maintain their purchasing power.  Maybe it will save a soldiers life…

Related posts:

1. Conversations With A Neo-Conservative From A Christian Perspective

T. Boone Pickens has a plan to reduce the need for oil in the U.S. by using wind for electricity instead of natural gas, thus allowing the U.S. to use natural gas instead of oil for energy needs, a total reduction in costs to be about 22% or $300 billion a year.

He doesn’t want to utilize nuclear energy because he claims it will take too long.

But to lower our costs for oil, can’t we just take over all the oil producing nations and lower the price? Iraq is taken care of…Iran next, then Venezuela. Don’t have to worry about time-frames then do we?

(oops, I just gave the plan away didn’t I?)

I mean…what’ wrong with being an imperialist nation as long as we U.S. citizens don’t have to pay more? Isn’t that what it’s all about?

Well, maybe to U.S. leaders it is.

The U.S. diplomat heading to Iran, William J. Burns, said this on July 9th about Iran’s noncooperation “we do not exclude engagement.”

Was his trip to Iran this past weekend just a good faith gesture on behalf of the U.S., only to find the conclusion being the same with Iraq “not cooperating” thus leaving only one choice for the U.S.; “engagement?”

I’d like to know specifically the results of the IAEA’s new way of testing Nuclear Reactors. Let U.S. citizens see the results for ourselves before you march off to another war.

Enquiring minds will soon find out what U.S. leaders are up to…..and yes, I was being sarcastic in my opening comments about the U.S. energy plan (although the pieces of the puzzle are coming together aren’t they?).

I’m sure Pickens has his reasoning ($$$) for wanting “everyone in the U.S.” to back his plan. Want to make your stock go higher? Come up with a plan! But I have to ask the question, if Pickens was heavily invested in Nuclear Technology, would he be “pushing” it as a solution? Of course! The rich know how to get richer. Just ask Al Gore!

Doug Eberhardt

Related posts:

1. The Enemy of My Enemy is NOT My Friend

Stock market is falling apart…

Dollar has fallen 40% since the war began…

World food crisis because of rising food prices…

More people IN THE U.S. getting food from local food banks…who are low on supplies…

Real inflation rate in double digits (you know..utilizing the same criteria for figuring inflation from the Carter years)…

Housing bubble has burst…

Consumer debt over 2.6 trillion…

National debt over 9.3 trillion…

Trade deficit averages 58 billion a month…

Budget deficit in the hundreds of millions doesn’t even include the cost for the wars…

Real Unemployment near 14% when you include the “discouraged workers…”

Industrial production has contracted year over year…

Oil and Gasoline prices at record levels…

There are no consequences to our actions around the world are there?

Things are going real well! We’re winning! We’re winning!

Meanwhile, seniors on a fixed income are crying…

Where we go from here I prefer not to dwell on…

But hey! …we’ve got Obama or McCain to save us!

Editor’s note: I did not include in the above analysis, the losses of liberty to include; the patriot act, various house and senate bills that will take away more of our freedoms, including your right to free speech in criticizing the U.S. government that passed the House by a huge margin (Senate Bill – S. 1959), legal wire tapping and domestic spying (FISA), right to detain indefinitely, TSA pat down search abuse and now body scanners, terrorist watch list now over 900,000, real ID in the works, International Cyber Crime Treaty and loss of private property through Eminent Domain to name a few.

YOUR ELECTED CONGRESS HARD AT WORK!

To do something about those elected Congressmen and women, read Alex Wallenwein’s fine column.

Doug Eberhardt

Related posts:

1. Social Security Will Be There For You, However…
2. America’s Infrastructure In 2009: Grade “F”

We currently don’t have a draft, but it is law that a male aged 18-25 must sign up for the Selective Service, so they have the names and addresses.

I somehow managed to not have to sign up for Selective Service because I fall into a group that happened to be born at the right time.

“Men born from March 29, 1957, through December 31, 1959, were not required to register with Selective Service because the registration program was suspended when they would have reached age 18. The requirement to register with Selective Service was reinstated in 1980, but only for men born January 1, 1960, or later.

Men born between these dates will not have a Selective Service number; however these men are still eligible for all the benefits and programs linked to the registration requirement.”

Well that’s interesting. I wonder what “benefits and programs” I’m missing by not signing up? Is it the benefit giving me the opportunity of fighting undeclared wars? Or is it the program of being on a special list so I can have my body immunized against anthrax?

I think I’ll pass.

One thing you must do now and that is tell all the illegal immigrants who cut your lawn and pick your fruit that it’s the law that they must go down to the U.S. Post Office and register with the Selective Service:

ATTENTION, UNDOCUMENTED MALES
& IMMIGRANT SERVICING GROUPS!

If you are a man ages 18 through 25 and living in the U.S., then you must register with Selective Service. It’s the law. You can register at any U.S. Post Office and do not need a social security number. When you do obtain a social security number, let Selective Service know. Provide a copy of your new social security number card; being sure to include your complete name, date of birth, Selective Service registration number, and current mailing address.

Selective Service does not collect any information which would indicate whether or not you are undocumented. You want to protect yourself for future U.S. citizenship and other government benefits and programs by registering.”

It’s rather laughable eh? Make sure and point out to the illegals you speak with that by signing up, it will lead to U.S. citizenship and all those “benefits and programs.” I guess that’s one way to solve the illegal immigrant problem huh?

But what is it with war anyway? Why is the U.S. the big bully on the block these days? What the heck are we doing and why?

One reason is that it its easier to defeat a weak enemy now than ever before. It seems that today the way to go to war is via the air first, and then send in the ground forces to pick up the pieces and restore order. It’s working so well in Iraq right? Ha!

If you’ve ever played the game of “Risk,” you know that spreading yourself too thin is paramount to defeat. This is what the U.S. is doing by occupying 130 nations and currently warring with two. So this leads us to the coming draft.

With our armed forces already strained from duty, more battle ready souls are needed. If the draft is incorporated into the picture to supply these needed bodies, I think you would see a drastic change in the attitude towards the administration(s) that want to continue drilling for oil, erm, I mean spreading democracy to other countries.

It’s much easier to just take another countries oil than drill in our own back yard. I mean…we can use our own oil as a last resort right? So let’s just take everyone else’s until that time ok? A few lost souls obtaining it won’t matter as long as you have affordable gasoline! Oh…wait a minute…. we don’t have cheap gasoline….

There is no way I would allow my child to be drafted to fight these types of wars. They would be conveniently out of the country on vacation and I wouldn’t know where they are when the Selective Service came a knocking (thanks to Richard Maybury for that idea in recommending that children that are selective service age – or before that age – obtain a passport now).

But since I don’t have a child living here, I have to speak up for my nephews who are of age, as well as those who I’m not related to (someone has to speak for them right!).

When the draft is implemented, the government and media twist will be that you are not patriotic if you don’t do what the government and selective service says to do and be there when they come knocking.

I’m sure I’ll see some of you in the Swiss Alps. I’ll recognize you by your constant looking over your shoulder. We’ll have a drink and say a prayer for those who got caught up in the government’s game of Risk.

The above article is a reality folks. The complacency of the American public and their being fooled by this “War On Terror” will lead to the eventual drafting of your sons, and if necessary, your daughters (because of some lawsuit for equal rights).

Personally, I’m doing something about this nonsense. What, may I ask in a non-offending way, are you doing?

Lastly, I have one last question. What happens when all the folks who are aged 18-25 are conveniently vacationing when the Selective Service calls? Who will fight their wars then?

Doug Eberhardt

No related posts.

I’m always asking myself…”What is the U.S. Government thinking when it comes to foreign policy, and then I set out to try and prove my speculations with hard facts.

After a brief potential conflict in Colombia ended without bloodshed in the U.S. governments quest to police the world, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday that sending a second U.S. aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf could serve as a “reminder” to Iran, but he said it’s not an escalation of force.

We believe you Mr. Gates.  Wink, Wink…

There has been much written on the potential of a conflict with Iran.  It seems things are heating up of late.

It’s not a secret that the MSM has stepped up the rhetoric  just as they did during the run up to the Iraq war as exposed in the BBC Documentary, “Power of Nightmares.”

We’re constantly hearing the following mantra from the media: “U.S. officials continue to accuse Iran of increasing its efforts to supply weapons to militants in Iraq.” It’s no surprise this rhetoric started with a War Street Journal article. (The Wall Street Journal is now owned by Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Corporation for those that didn’t know – hence the play on names).

Outside of the little speedboats allegedly buzzing U.S. Navy ships, this seems to be the only justification necessary to attack Iran as there has been no proof of any nuclear program found there, just as there wasn’t any found in Iraq prior to it being attacked by the U.S.

Iran and Iraq have been at war for centuries with the latest war just ending 20 years ago.  Saddam was even  threatening Iran as late as 1999.

U.S. leaders don’t agree with the Proverb…… “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” do they?  Well, they did at one time when they supported Iraq and Saddam’s regime against Iran in that 1980 war, but I want to stay current here.  It’s not like the U.S. relies on history before making important decisions like war anyway (Vietnam, Korea).  Sarc off.

Does the following “current” scenario sound familiar?

UN inspectors to return to Iran
Tehran, April 27, 2008

The IAEA inspectors want answers from Tehran regarding intelligence received from Western member states on alleged studies on uranium conversion, high explosives testing and work on a missile re-entry vehicle, which all have potential nuclear weapons applications.

Ex-U .N. inspector: Iran’s next

“Scott Ritter, former chief United Nations weapons inspector, speaks Sunday at the James A. Little Theater on how no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. He also predicted the U.S. will go to war with Iran.

The former U.N. weapons inspector who said Iraq disarmed long before the U.S. invasion in 2003 is warning Americans to prepare for a war with Iran.

“We just don’t know when, but it’s going to happen,” Scott Ritter said to a crowd of about 150 at the James A. Little Theater on Sunday night.

Ritter described how the U.S. government might justify war with Iran in a scenario similar to the buildup to the Iraq invasion. He also argued that Iran wants a nuclear energy program, and not nuclear weapons. But the Bush administration, he said, refuses to believe Iran is telling the truth.

He predicted the matter will wind up before the U.N. Security Council, which will determine there is no evidence of a weapons program. Then, he said, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, “will deliver a speech that has already been written. It says America cannot allow Iran to threaten the United States and we must unilaterally defend ourselves.”

“How do I know this? I’ve talked to Bolton’s speechwriter,” Ritter said.”

Even though Bolton has bolted, look who replaced him as the U.S. Representative to the UN in 2007:

On April 23, 2007 Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad began as the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations.

Who is Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad?

The following from Wiki:

“Khalilzad worked for Paul Wolfowitz.  He consulted for Cambridge Energy Research Associates, which at the time was conducting a risk analysis for Unocal, now part of ConocoPhillips, for a proposed 1,400 km (890 mile), $2-billion, 622 m³/s (22,000 ft³/s) Trans-Afghanistan gas pipeline project which would have extended from Turkmenistan to Afghanistan and further proceeding to Pakistan. He acted as a special liaison between UNOCAL and the Taliban regime.

He is one of the original members of Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and was a signatory of the letter to President Bill Clinton sent on January 26, 1998, which called for him to accept the aim of “removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power” using “a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts.”

A White House favorite whom Bush calls by his nickname, Zal, Khalilzad has worked in two other Republican administrations, those of President Ronald Reagan and Bush’s father, President George H.W. Bush.

Khalilzad headed the Bush-Cheney transition team for the Defense Department in 2000 and served as a counselor to former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Connections run deep don’t they?

Lastly, Khalilzad is a Muslim.  More on this in a moment.

Khalilzad told the media, soon after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released its report on Iran, that the Iranian government is clearly going ahead with its nuclear program.”

And what did Khalilzad say over the weekend?

“Iran and Syria must stop the flow of weapons and foreign fighters into Iraq, and their malign interference in Iraq,” U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said Monday in a report to the U.N. Security Council on behalf of the multinational force in Iraq.”

So if a Muslim says it’s ok to attack another Muslim country, it’s justified then right?  This way it can’t be called a Crusade right?

What did the U.S. top military official say last week?

“The U.S. ambassador’s report to the council echoed the assessment last week by Adm. Mike Mullen, the top U.S. military official, who said it is clear that recently made Iranian-made weapons are flowing into Iraq, including to insurgents leading the fight recently in Basra in southern Iraq.”

“But Mullen, who chairs the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he has “no smoking gun” proof that the highest leadership in the Iranian government has approved the stepped up support for insurgents who are killing U.S. and Iraqi forces.”

Anyone care to guess where the “smoking gun” will come from?  My guess is their inside man, Khalilzad, but seriously….does it really matter what the smoking gun is?  Does it really matter what the majority of American people want?

Of the 68 million people living in Iran, 1.3 million are not Muslim.  Many of those 1.3 million people are Christians and Jews.  All 68 million are humans. I guess they’re all just collateral damage just like all those people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and of course, Iraq, the “enemy of my enemy.”

Do we really want 68 million more people upset with the U.S. Government or does it make more sense to ”Love thy neighbor?”

A good start is to ask your neighbor, and give him this book at the same time.

Remember, the antonym to enemy is friend.  If our government doesn’t stop this nonsense, we may not have any friends left in the world.

Doug Eberhardt

Related posts:

1. The Pickens Energy Plan vs. the U.S. Imperialism Plan