1/3 of Americans Would Support a Military Coup

[Gulag]

"Blame the 2016 Republican presidential candidates (cough, Donald Trump, cough) or the recent stock market meltdown or Americans' general conviction that the country is going to hell, but a recent poll showed that one-third of U.S. citizens aren't satisfied with their government. In fact, 30 percent would support a military takeover, The Guardian reports."

http://news.yahoo.com/one-third-americans-fine-military-184519729.html

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

From the article:

Abraham Wyner, director of the undergraduate program in statistics at the University of Pennsylvania, said that online polls are suspect when it comes to getting accurate results. "People who are participating in an online poll are generally attracted to that poll because of some variable," he said. In other words, people who respond to the poll tend to feel strongly about the poll's subject matter, so they're inherently biased.

What a waste of time that article is, I'm gonna make myself a real cup of coffee.

Cheers,
Bart

[fdisilvestro]

There cannot be a military takeover in the USA because there is no US embassy there (Latin american joke)

[Justinr]

Yeah. They were dumb enough to pull the British and French out of the fire twice.

They didn't come away completely empty handed - jet engines, modern computers, rockets, radar, US bases in Europe and the Brits did give them a hand in the pacific. 

[RSL]

The Brits, the Australians, the Canadians all were magnificent, but without the U.S., Europe would be a Nazi fiefdom right now.

[Gulag]

The Brits, the Australians, the Canadians all were magnificent, but without the U.S., Europe would be a Nazi fiefdom right now.

By the way it was the Soviets who defeated Hitler.

This book -- Hitler's revolution -- reexamine the real history of the Third Reich from the German perspective because truth is singular.

http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-revolution-Richard-Tedor/dp/0988368226/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1442162864&sr=8-1&keywords=Hitler+revolution

Let me quote

"Despite objections from Schacht, the president of the Reich’s Bank, Hitler withdrew Germany’s money system from the gold standard…Hitler substituted a direct barter system in foreign dealings. German currency became defined units of human productivity.

In January 1938, the Soviet diplomat Kristyan Rakovsky commented on the German money system. Rakovsky had held posts in London and in Paris and was acquainted with Wall Street financiers. He explained, “Hitler, this uneducated ordinary man, has out of natural intuition and even despite the opposition of the technician Schacht, created an especially dangerous economic system. An illiterate in every theory of economics driven only by necessity, he has cut out international as well as private high finance. Hitler possesses almost no gold, and so he can’t endeavor to make it a basis for currency. Since the only available collateral for his money is the technical aptitude and great industriousness of the German people, technology and labor became his ‘gold’…. As you know, like magic it’s eliminated all the unemployment for more than six million skilled employees and laborers. “

Germany’s withdrawal from the gold-based, internationally linked monetary system in favor of a medium of exchange founded on domestic productivity corresponded to Hitler’s belief in maintaining the sovereignty of nations. This was an unwelcome development in London, Paris and New York, where cosmopolitan investment and banking institutions profited from loaning money to foreign countries. Germany no longer had to borrow in order to trade on the world market. Foreign demand for German goods correspondingly created more jobs within the Reich."

— Richard Tedor, Hitler’s Revolution, Chapter 2 The New Germany

[RSL]

By the way it was the Soviets who defeated Hitler.

With a massive infusion of Lend-Lease from the US.

[Rob C]

Hitler’s belief in maintaining the sovereignty of nations. This was an unwelcome development in London, Paris and New York, where cosmopolitan investment and banking institutions profited from loaning money to foreign countries. Germany no longer had to borrow in order to trade on the world market. Foreign demand for German goods correspondingly created more jobs within the Reich."

— Richard Tedor, Hitler’s Revolution, Chapter 2 The New Germany

Now we have entered the world of madness! Nobody remember WW2? Whose sovereignty was being 'maintained', I wonder?

Rob C

[drmike]

The Brits, the Australians, the Canadians all were magnificent, but without the U.S., Europe would be a Nazi fiefdom right now.

Personally I don't believe that from what I have read. After the Battle of Britain which caused Germany to abandon the invasion of Britain and to open its Eastern front they couldn't actually win the war. Eventually Europe and the Soviets would have worn them down to some sort of agreement or defeat. It would have taken far longer but it would have happened - all of course IMO based on what I have read.

It is very easy to forget the huge sacrifice the Soviets made in terms of people and how good their army became while those sacrifices were made. They didn't win the war though, their sacrifice made it possible for the war to be won. By the way I am no apologist for the Soviet Union it was clearly not a good place to be and as for Stalin so no politics here.

[Gulag]

With a massive infusion of Lend-Lease from the US.

Stalin told FDR the only American military weapon didn't suck was Jeep, which is confirmed by every Soviet WW2 footage from Stalingrad to Berlin.

Here is a nice video on WW2 data:

[Gulag]

Now we have entered the world of madness! Nobody remember WW2? Whose sovereignty was being 'maintained', I wonder?

Rob C

Unfortunately historical facts tell us it was the war of the Street,  by the Street and for the Street.

"A definitive characteristic of National Socialism was its rejection of foreign beliefs, customs and ideas within the German community. It holds that a nation consists of its blood and soil: an ethnically homogenous people and the land they cultivate, the domain that provides shelter, refuge and nourishment from the soil where their ancestors lie buried. Through self-development will a people realize their potential; through awareness of their intrinsic identity will generations fulfill the role nature and providence intended. The NSDAP (National Socialist German Labor Party) held that every nation exhibits a collective personality. The influence of foreign peoples whose life experience, environment and ancestry formed them differently will debauch the nation and is hence immoral. Leers saw the introduction of liberalism and Marxism to Germany during the 19th Century as “threatening to destroy our own values …. The history of the German people is a centuries-long struggle against spiritual foreign penetration into the realms of politics, law, tradition and our way of life, a struggle against the destruction of our race and perversion of our souls.”"

— Hitler’s Revolution , Chapter 1 Ideology, Nationalism, by Richard Tedor

[ddolde]

Oh boy just what we need more military = more wars. Screw that !

[petermfiore]

If my memory serves me , I seem to recall the Second World War was also comprised of a "small action in the South Pacific...
I think the US was sort of important there.


Peter

[drmike]

Of absolute importance I'd say.

[petermfiore]

Of absolute importance I'd say.

MeTOO!!!!!! Just saying...

Peter

[luxborealis]

"Blame the 2016 Republican presidential candidates (cough, Donald Trump, cough) or the recent stock market meltdown or Americans' general conviction that the country is going to hell, but a recent poll showed that one-third of U.S. citizens aren't satisfied with their government. In fact, 30 percent would support a military takeover, The Guardian reports."

http://news.yahoo.com/one-third-americans-fine-military-184519729.html

Getting back to the original quote... It's nothing new. In fact, it's probably true on any given day, at any given time, in the United States, no matter who is in power or how strong or weak the economy is!

[RSL]

Stalin told FDR the only American military weapon didn't suck was Jeep, which is confirmed by every Soviet WW2 footage from Stalingrad to Berlin.

And so, Stalin started refusing Lend-Lease? I was around during that war and I've read tons of stuff about it, and somehow I missed that fact.

What the Soviets had, outside of that stuff that "sucked" was. . . nothing! They'd already killed off the people in their society competent enough to produce stuff that didn't "suck."

[RSL]

"Blame the 2016 Republican presidential candidates (cough, Donald Trump, cough) or the recent stock market meltdown or Americans' general conviction that the country is going to hell, but a recent poll showed that one-third of U.S. citizens aren't satisfied with their government. In fact, 30 percent would support a military takeover, The Guardian reports."

We did that once, Gulag. It was called the American revolution. And the people who prevailed in that revolution advised us always to be ready to do it again if necessary. I think you're going to see something rather interesting next year during the coming election. The beauty of our system is that the government can be overthrown without shooting.

[Rob C]

Unfortunately historical facts tell us it was the war of the Street,  by the Street and for the Street.

"A definitive characteristic of National Socialism was its rejection of foreign beliefs, customs and ideas within the German community. It holds that a nation consists of its blood and soil: an ethnically homogenous people and the land they cultivate, the domain that provides shelter, refuge and nourishment from the soil where their ancestors lie buried. Through self-development will a people realize their potential; through awareness of their intrinsic identity will generations fulfill the role nature and providence intended. The NSDAP (National Socialist German Labor Party) held that every nation exhibits a collective personality. The influence of foreign peoples whose life experience, environment and ancestry formed them differently will debauch the nation and is hence immoral. Leers saw the introduction of liberalism and Marxism to Germany during the 19th Century as “threatening to destroy our own values …. The history of the German people is a centuries-long struggle against spiritual foreign penetration into the realms of politics, law, tradition and our way of life, a struggle against the destruction of our race and perversion of our souls.”"

— Hitler’s Revolution , Chapter 1 Ideology, Nationalism, by Richard Tedor

That's irrelevant nonsense.

Stick to the quoted point: Hitler’s belief in maintaining the sovereignty of nations. If that's not the greatest example of irony, then one of us hasn't any idea what irony is. Did someone forget France etc. all over again? Oh, I forgot: it was a holiday trip.

Rob C

[drmike]

And so, Stalin started refusing Lend-Lease? I was around during that war and I've read tons of stuff about it, and somehow I missed that fact.

What the Soviets had, outside of that stuff that "sucked" was. . . nothing! They'd already killed off the people in their society competent enough to produce stuff that didn't "suck."

I thought they made tanks that had good armour and were simple to keep running, also artillery. I think you're being a bit harsh. Wasn't half the point of the siege of Stalingrad (if I recollect correctly and I'm not checking now, it's late) that while it cost many lives it bought time to make these tanks and equip for the counter offensive?

Good grief why are we having this discussion on LuLa