ReverieandEnvisage

I do have a question for you though. You said you had been deployed. So obviously you are and have had military training. What do you think then of what happened with the banks? Because honestly, is this something you would have let happen if you had the power? I mean, to be honest, my opinion of the military is that if they really had cared about it's citizens, then it would not have let this happen. Especifically banks stealing and cheating it's citizens, and then being told that the banks were too big to fail.

In my opinion, this is something that perhaps law enforcement and military presence could have prevented. I mean, isn't it the military's job to protect it's citizens? Or perhaps I'm over stepping my bounds, but this seems like a really big problem to be honest. And if the military does have power then they could have perhaps called bullshit on this and helped out it's citizens.

amerikanoX

You have asked a very deep question and for that you will never get a satisfying answer to it. I would love to tell you that the United States Armed Forces, that I still currently serve in, is the last bastion of hope left in our great country.

Things are more complicated that right now. I once I asked a man who I really respected as a mentor and leader why he was getting out of the Army - he told me something that in time I would come to see with my own eyes.

"The people I respect and value are all getting out or retired, those who remain are those who could never compete in the outside market for a real job - the people who progress up the ranks simply by staying in and doing the bare minimum."

The professional forces are looking a lot more like a corporation now a days and unlike the younger American days where great people of virtue (Like Smedley Darlington Butler - who pretty much single handily prevented a corporate backed military coup in the United States) are no longer relevant in today's media climate.

The days of a charismatic leader rallying the masses into over throwing their oppressors are long gone. Those who fear Tyrants do so because they listen to the control narrative - which serve the status quo.

I ask you did Julius Caesar destroy the Republic or buy it another five hundred years? Was Lincoln as noble as the historic narrative tells us he is, or was he merely a tool to destroy state rights and solidify the Federal power over them - only to be killed after he served his usefulness.

Like I said boss.... DEEP QUESTION. I can give you some solace thought, many of us see what is happening, and if ordered to, would obey the constitution and our own morality over a political agenda, if seen as unlawful.

ReverieandEnvisage

Thank you. I honestly don't know what to say, but you have given a meaningful response that needs to be considered and thought of. I'm a bit more comforted that many do feel the same as you in the military and more importantly of your last comment. I often do wonder if individual morals play a part of how a soldier acts if he views something that doesn't fit well with the person himself.

Thanks again for your response.

Edit: I'm currently listening to Smedley Darlington Butler War is a Racket. I'm just starting to see what you meant by a lack of a charismatic leader rallying the masses.

PraiseIPU

330,000 people 1000 times less than the US

Donald Trump could have bailed out Iceland BY HIMSELF (they needed $4 billion)

IDK how things would have played out had the US been like Iceland. Nobody can predict that. Tiny little Iceland is so hugely different than the rest of the world financially.

BTW would you be ok with government controlled banks? Because thats how Iceland did it.

Sullysq

would you be ok with government controlled banks?

That's what we had before 1913, congress controlled the production of currency, and it was great. The US generated more wealth than any nation on earth. Then they turned control of the american currency over to a cartel of private banks and it's been nothing but inflation ever since. Which is nothing more than a tax on wealth. A tax that only goes to benefit the banks involved in the federal reserve.

amerikanoX

Brother, I don't even have the minute sense of expertise to even begin to answer that question.

All I know is that money was exchanged, their risky loans where paid off by "us" per say - and the bank instead of trying to work out some kind of deal found it more profitable to seize the asset and still take the government bail out. When I tried to use my VA loan to purchase the house from my mother, it wasn't allowed because I had a "personal interest" and that was against the rules - I feel like the banking system in general is out of control, my mother paid on time for ten years (out of that 30 year loan) and she only missed five monthly payments.

A government owned bank? What is the difference between corporate banks and state-owned banks? What is the difference between USAA and credit unions?

I do not know.

beijingsteamer

Because the have under 400k people. I think their comes a point when you're just so large as a country...the rich rule. It's also in their Nordic culture of taking care of one another. American or better yet 'Murica culture isn't like that. It's sink or swim.