Jump to content

Blood Feuds and the Western Mentality


Recommended Posts

Blood feuds are essential to understanding America's military justifications. The most famous one being the Hatfield-McCoy feud:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield-McCoy_feud

Smart people realize that the USA merely wants oil from Iran, but the truth is not necessarily useful to fight against an argument that is based on another fallacy. That fallacy might not be disturbed by the truth.

Such are our military activities. We say that it is smart to hurt a Serbian civilian family or an Iraqi civilian family, if it prevents our own families from being hurt. We would hurt an Iranian civilian family preemptively, if we believed it would protect our own.

This mentality is part of American popular culture, in such TV shows as Breaking Bad, where a highschool chemistry teacher begins hurting others and their families in order to insure the prosperity of his own. The message is that it is smart to behave thus.

Is it so smart? Are there no other forms of diplomacy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blood feuds are essential to understanding America's military justifications. The most famous one being the Hatfield-McCoy feud:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield-McCoy_feud

 

Smart people realize that the USA merely wants oil from Iran, but the truth is not necessarily useful to fight against an argument that is based on another fallacy. That fallacy might not be disturbed by the truth.

 

Such are our military activities. We say that it is smart to hurt a Serbian civilian family or an Iraqi civilian family, if it prevents our own families from being hurt. We would hurt an Iranian civilian family preemptively, if we believed it would protect our own.

 

This mentality is part of American popular culture, in such TV shows as Breaking Bad, where a highschool chemistry teacher begins hurting others and their families in order to insure the prosperity of his own. The message is that it is smart to behave thus.

 

Is it so smart? Are there no other forms of diplomacy?

But in the end Walter White lost his life.

 

And Jessie got redemption

 

And Skylar and son got closure

 

The message is bad things happen to people breaking bad!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not about "america wanting oil". it never has been. libs whined and cried this "war for oil" chant repeatedly about iraq

and then we watched as the chinese got all the iraqi oil contracts. it's about the bankers and currency control. afghanistan,

iraq, libya, syria, egypt, tunisia and iran all have 1 thing in common. they had nationalized their banks and refused to

surrender control of them to the international investment banking and currency cartel. these wars really have nothing to

do with america, per se. but america is the globalist police force wresting control of these countries for the banks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not about "america wanting oil". it never has been. libs whined and cried this "war for oil" chant repeatedly about iraq

and then we watched as the chinese got all the iraqi oil contracts. it's about the bankers and currency control. afghanistan,

iraq, libya, syria, egypt, tunisia and iran all have 1 thing in common. they had nationalized their banks and refused to

surrender control of them to the international investment banking and currency cartel. these wars really have nothing to

do with america, per se. but america is the globalist police force wresting control of these countries for the banks.

I think your right!

 

Its all to protect the falling dollar and the Fed Reserve Cartel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not about "america wanting oil". it never has been. libs whined and cried this "war for oil" chant repeatedly about iraq

and then we watched as the chinese got all the iraqi oil contracts. it's about the bankers and currency control. afghanistan,

iraq, libya, syria, egypt, tunisia and iran all have 1 thing in common. they had nationalized their banks and refused to

surrender control of them to the international investment banking and currency cartel. these wars really have nothing to

do with america, per se. but america is the globalist police force wresting control of these countries for the banks.

Mayer Rothschild said something about that...give me control of a nations money and i dont care who makes its laws

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is somewhat about oil protectionism then. As you say they had nationalized their oil. The USA and the UK have generally been the denationalizers of oil. For instance previously when the USA and UK deposed Mohammad Mosaddegh after he nationalized the oil in Iran.

 

Then Russia also defies sanctions continually to get oil from Iran. This seems to annoy the west.

 

http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=50243

 

http://www.newsmaxworld.com/GlobalTalk/iran-russia-sanction-defies/2014/01/10/id/546343


Regardless of whether its oil or what, my original post was to question why Americans go along with this, after all they are the ones that end up getting hurt, as our soldiers go over there continually over the years.

 

I was thinking about Albanian and Brazilian blood feuds between families, and about the Hatfield versus McCoy blood feud, that this primitive American mentality keeps us fighting in wars for the US government or global elite or whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not about "america wanting oil". it never has been. libs whined and cried this "war for oil" chant repeatedly about iraq

and then we watched as the chinese got all the iraqi oil contracts. it's about the bankers and currency control. afghanistan,

iraq, libya, syria, egypt, tunisia and iran all have 1 thing in common. they had nationalized their banks and refused to

surrender control of them to the international investment banking and currency cartel. these wars really have nothing to

do with america, per se. but america is the globalist police force wresting control of these countries for the banks.

And guess who "the international investment banking and currentcy cartel" is? I'll give you 3 guesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of reasons to go into Central Asia and Islamic lands, but no real answer as to why normal Americans are willing to do it, psychologically speaking.

 

http://www.mining.com/tag/afghanistan/

 

it may go as far back as the puritan's vision of themselves as god's chosen people. just look at the Massachusetts Bay Colony's official seal. it pictures an indian in loincloth holding a bow in one hand and an arrow in the other. words are coming out of his mouth. it says "come over and help us". that is really what it says. and like everything else the puritans believed, it is derived from scripture - Acts 16:9

psychologically speaking - captain america syndrome

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Muslims definitely are not allowed usury. The Islamic banks are on the rise.

 

http://www.africanbusinessmagazine.com/african-banker/islamic-banking/the-rise-and-rise-of-islamic-finance


 

it may go as far back as the puritan's vision of themselves as god's chosen people. just look at the Massachusetts Bay Colony's official seal. it pictures an indian in loincloth holding a bow in one hand and an arrow in the other. words are coming out of his mouth. it says "come over and help us". that is really what it says. and like everything else the puritans believed, it is derived from scripture - Acts 16:9

psychologically speaking - captain america syndrome

 

I know about that. That is part of the Yankee arrogance. I once read a very hostile book, or should I say skimmed as most of it was so subjective that it ruined the more interesting parts, called Yankee Babylon. Had some interesting bits about the puritans or "roundheads" and the rise of secular capitalism and attempted to position the Yankees as the leaders of some sort of empire to which the "southerner", who according to this book is "not of this world", is but a slave who has had his own god given "darkies" taken from him.

 

The Roundheads were not very popular in the UK either, so called because they cut their hair short.

 

Nevertheless, global slavery is strongly reminiscent of the American southerner's slavery, and it is southerners who often seem interested in enslaving Mexicans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a fan of the USA in general, Puritans in the North or Presbyterians in the South. They both have a banjaxed way of thinking.

 

I am not a fan of the Atheist church known as "Unitarian" either, as it is directly descended from the Puritans.

 

My atheism is NOT related to the Puritan offshoot movement of secularization in the Unitarian religion. Though I suspect the founding fathers of the USA were sort of Unitarian Universalists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a fan of the USA in general, Puritans in the North or Presbyterians in the South. They both have a banjaxed way of thinking.

 

I am not a fan of the Atheist church known as "Unitarian" either, as it is directly descended from the Puritans.

 

My atheism is NOT related to the Puritan offshoot movement of secularization in the Unitarian religion. Though I suspect the founding fathers of the USA were sort of Unitarian Universalists.

yeah, americans are too stupid for democracy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...