The premise of this question is entirely flawed; there is no theory to it, it has been historically proven that totalitarian governments work. Ever hear of men like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Richard Nixon, or Doctor Johnny Hunt? They are the kinds of leaders who ooze charisma, poise, and intelligence. And just what do you think the "total" part of "totalitarian" stands for? Totally awesome, that's what.
The main benefit to this system is largely one that favors the general populace: the people don't have to think, just follow. that's right! While the great and mighty leader sacrifices his time, energy, body, mind, soul, and indeed his entire being, the populace can relax knowing they're safe and protected. That's another point: protection. If everyone is told what to do, then there's no room for anyone to do something wrong and hurt others. So very many advantages!
So why haven't we switched to this system yet? Because capitalist swine like Barrack Obama keep us from reaching political Nirvana. Maybe is he put his foot down and dictated -- like a president should -- what was to be done, we'd get somewhere. Just look at the great George W. Bush. He told us what to do, we did it, and we got to fight a decade long war that let us prove just how touch us American are!
God bless America.
Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Thursday, September 12, 2013
The whole Shebang
Syria. Right now, it's running rampant on every form of media. Or rather, the events that have occurred within its borders are running rampant; chemical weapons are quite an attention-drawing mechanism, aren't they?
This use of chemical weapons has really gotten everyone's panties in a bunch. Especially our country's. Mostly the president's. Of course, his panty-bunching has caused a domino effect of panty-bunching, so it's pretty safe to say that everyone's panties are in a bunch. Especially mine.
"But Kyle," you're already blurting in, "You don't wear panties, and mine aren't in a bunch." Both of those things are false, you liar. You shouldn't lie; liars go to Hell.
Anyway, a couple days ago, the president walked up "Osama is dead lane" to update all of us on his plan, which used to consist of "carrying out a remote missile strike and then backing out." Why we needed to be updated on a plan as simple as that, I will never know. I mean, even the idiots of this country can get something as simple as that. Apparently, that's not so, thus a speech was needed.
In his speech, Mr. Obama told us several things, of which I took some notes. They are (in bullet form) as follows:
If you don't understand any of that, this will be one of the few times I don't blame you. Just ask for clarification on them somewhere.
The gist of the whole speech is that the strike -- which was supposed to be immediate -- is being postponed for a Congressional vote and to await further U.N. investigations. This is probably because popular opinion pressured him into waiting, since we all know America is filled with a bunch of hippy wimps who just want to make love, not war.
Going based off of what was said in the speech (since I can't research anything offline), it's clear that the Syrian government was the one who initiated the attack. Of course, it wouldn't be too hard for the rebels to manufacture/acquire chemical weapons, but it's unlikely based on the location of the strikes. Unless the rebels are some evil masterminds and they did attack those neighborhoods so that the U.S. would strike the military bases, thus weakening the regime, thus allowing the overthrow the oppressive government! Yes, that's obviously what happened. Don't think beyond that, there's no reason to.
The main argument against a U.S. military strike is, according to popular opinions and plenty of differing polls, is that the American population is tired of war; that they just want to stay out of it and not worry about it. Honestly, I can see where they're coming from in that respect. The second, almost as major, point is that it'll just lead to a war (commonly referred to as World War III) and put boots on the ground. Ya know, contrary to what we were told.
This use of chemical weapons has really gotten everyone's panties in a bunch. Especially our country's. Mostly the president's. Of course, his panty-bunching has caused a domino effect of panty-bunching, so it's pretty safe to say that everyone's panties are in a bunch. Especially mine.
"But Kyle," you're already blurting in, "You don't wear panties, and mine aren't in a bunch." Both of those things are false, you liar. You shouldn't lie; liars go to Hell.
Anyway, a couple days ago, the president walked up "Osama is dead lane" to update all of us on his plan, which used to consist of "carrying out a remote missile strike and then backing out." Why we needed to be updated on a plan as simple as that, I will never know. I mean, even the idiots of this country can get something as simple as that. Apparently, that's not so, thus a speech was needed.
In his speech, Mr. Obama told us several things, of which I took some notes. They are (in bullet form) as follows:
- Ethos and Pathos appeals (attacks, imagery)
- Rules of war violated
- No civil war resolve [on the U.S. part] through force
- gas mask distribution [to regime], rockets launched
- Attacks on key neighborhoods (not military bases)
- Confirmation in government [Syria's] strikes
- [Appeal of] WWI + II gas attacks
- Threaten [U.S.] allies
- 0 tolerance policy with chemical weapons
- Congressional vote [on attacks]
- No boots on ground/no campaigns/no war
- Other means not working
- Russia is in
- Pressuring Asad
- Postponing strike
- Waiting for U.N. investigation
- Chemical reserves
- Slippery slopes: "if we don't act, gas will be used again" + other WMD's
If you don't understand any of that, this will be one of the few times I don't blame you. Just ask for clarification on them somewhere.
The gist of the whole speech is that the strike -- which was supposed to be immediate -- is being postponed for a Congressional vote and to await further U.N. investigations. This is probably because popular opinion pressured him into waiting, since we all know America is filled with a bunch of hippy wimps who just want to make love, not war.
Going based off of what was said in the speech (since I can't research anything offline), it's clear that the Syrian government was the one who initiated the attack. Of course, it wouldn't be too hard for the rebels to manufacture/acquire chemical weapons, but it's unlikely based on the location of the strikes. Unless the rebels are some evil masterminds and they did attack those neighborhoods so that the U.S. would strike the military bases, thus weakening the regime, thus allowing the overthrow the oppressive government! Yes, that's obviously what happened. Don't think beyond that, there's no reason to.
The main argument against a U.S. military strike is, according to popular opinions and plenty of differing polls, is that the American population is tired of war; that they just want to stay out of it and not worry about it. Honestly, I can see where they're coming from in that respect. The second, almost as major, point is that it'll just lead to a war (commonly referred to as World War III) and put boots on the ground. Ya know, contrary to what we were told.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)