Posts Tagged ‘war on terror’

Perpetual Wars

Thursday, June 8th, 2017

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the war on drugs and the war on terror have been spectacular successes, at destroying our liberty. Both have been amazingly successful in separating us from our rights as enumerated in our Constitution. Today we accept, with aplomb, that which would have brought the masses onto the streets with guns, inciting revolution. Anyone who reads the Federalist Papers, by Madison, Jay and Hamilton, cannot help but recognize in the US today, the very tyranny they warned us about. From the law being so arcane that even lawyers cannot know them, to electing representatives who act above the law, our government has utterly separated itself from it’s foundation. The lever the elite have used to create this situation? The war on drugs and the war on terror.

It is human nature to want power, money, sex, fame, etc… The ancient Greeks had entire philosophies devoted to mankind’s thirst for pleasure and repugnance of pain. We all seek pleasure and avoid pain. The elite have the singular ability to achieve this… if only they can effectively destroy our Constitution, a limiting document specifically designed to control their power and ability to exploit their positions of power to their own ends, at cost to the rest of society. As they are elevated above the law, by undermining our constitution, their ability to meet their wants is elevated as well. Today a politician can get away with breaking almost any law with impunity. The examples are far too many to list but I know you can think of multiple examples yourself.

To fight the war on terrorism we have cheered the limitation of almost every Right enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Our first amendment Right to free speech and freedom of religion has been undermined by the government, to “protect us,” from Islamic terror. We must now pay the Jizya, in the form of welfare to “refugees” and submit to Sharia, by limiting our Right to speak freely as in Charlie Hebdo, else the Muslims will kill a bunch of us. How is that working out in Europe? Moreover isn’t that a slur against Muslims?  We have to accept infringements on our Second Amendment Right to keep and bare arms, so the drug dealers won’t be able to shoot people, how is that working out in Baltimore, Chicago and Detroit, cities in the US with the strongest gun control?

The fourth amendment is now a standing joke. Illegal search and seizure is now as common as the cold. Roe V Wade was based on doctor client privilege, but today doctors are required by law to ask, if you have a gun in your house! Apparently exercising your second amendment rights will get your fourth amendment rights violated by the government. A Right to privacy? Government agents can demand your cell phone, passwords and look through your Facebook, twitter and any other personal information they want. If you refuse you will be jailed.

The fifth Amendment says we have a right to life, liberty and property. The slippery slope of extra judicial killings, as Obama did to terrorists who were American citizens, is now perfectly legal, despite the Constitution’s limitations. The government can seize our homes and property at will in the war on drugs. If you are pulled over and a police officer asks if you have cash, and you stupidly say yes, because it is illegal to lie to the government while it is perfectly acceptable for government to lie to you, that officer will seize the money at gunpoint, like any other highwayman, and good luck trying to get it back. Ever heard of extrajudicial rendition?

The Right of accused persons is now the right of kings to abuse the accused. I have a friend who was sleeping off a drunk night in the back seat of his car… when he awoke to being beaten by billy clubs. He was later charged with DUI and pushed down a flight of stairs with his hands cuffed behind his back. I have another friend who was accused if DUI by the same officers. In court, the police lied under oath, it was proven they lied… but the judge said that didn’t negate the “fact” Jimmy was driving drunk. So much for the Rights of the accused. When Bill Clinton was accused of lying under oath, the media went overboard claiming lying under oath is perfectly acceptable. If that is so, you try it, see how that works out.

War is political action by violence… therefore, war is politics. The war on drugs and the war on terror are the mere political maneuvers of our leaders engaging in political violence against, not another state, but against us. Such a war can never be won in the traditional sense, because a tactic like terror or an action such as taking drugs, will never go away. That is the beauty of it all… it is an unending war. Perpetual war, as we were warned about by the founding fathers, is the surest means to wipe out liberty, and the wars on drugs and terror are as perpetual as possible. Both have resulted in the direct opposite of their stated “intention.” Terrorism has become the new normal, and drug use, especially hard drugs like Heroin and cocaine, have got utterly out of control, justifying the need to take away more of our rights. Proving the axiom… The more government fails the more power it gets. Under such a scenario failure becomes intentional.


John Pepin

Obama’s Policies Against Islamofascism

Thursday, December 3rd, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the Obama policy of making friends with Islamofascist terrorists has been an utter failure, in every way and in every sense. Say what you will about Bush, and I have plenty, but after 911 he did keep the nation safe from terrorist attacks by Islamofascists. Obama on the other hand has overseen dozens of Islamic terrorist attacks on American soil. Obama’s only cogent policy for preventing terror attacks on American soil… is to call them something else. The classic example, and you have to admit, it was classic Obama, was to call Major Nadal Hassan’s terrorist attack, workplace violence. It really is hard to get your head around that one. The difference between the results of Bush and Obama is startling. Without making judgments about the intention, and giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, the results of his policies have made the US and the world far more dangerous. It would appear that coddling Islamofascists, arming them, overturning national governments then supporting their rise to power and refusing to name the enemy, shockingly, hasn’t hindered the spread of that violent version of Islam but emboldened it.

Before Obama was elected talk about a new caliphate was considered absurd. Glenn Beck said there were people who wanted to start a new caliphate and was lambasted for it. The media, on all sides, was aflutter explaining how insane Beck was for saying the Islamofascists want a caliphate. Everyone attacked Beck rather than debated him, because, unspoken everyone understood a caliphate would lead to slaughter. Since the idea was so scary it had to be wrong. Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood who have in their charter the demand for a caliphate! When Obama unilaterally pulled out of Iraq, all generals and policy experts said a vacuum would be created that would lead to chaos, he did it anyway. Well folks, there is a caliphate and it is called Islamic State. The Islamofascists who run the caliphate have wiped Christianity from that part of the world. Every dark fear of what a caliphate would be has come true.

Obama’s obvious weakness has not disarmed our enemies but heartened them. The media that calls itself unbiased has maintained that fighting Islamofascists only makes more of them, while Bush and others argued that killing them, made it seem like a dead end career choice to be a terrorist. Moreover, in every foreign policy question Obama has chosen weakness instead of strength, in Syria when he made the red line a chemical weapon attack, leading from behind in the Libyan debacle, puling the anti ballistic missiles from Poland unilaterally, bowing to every despot he could find on the planet, etc… I could go on and on. By his weakness in the face of aggression, Obama has again proven the old maxim true, “If you want peace prepare for war.”

Despite his utter failure to stem attacks on US citizens in our own nation Obama is importing tens of thousands of potential terrorists. Now he is doubling down on his failure to protect Americans, his number one job, by uprooting whole Somali villages and planting them in the US, allowing thousand upon thousands of Muslim refugees while denying any Christian refugees entry. Obama continues to put Americans in jeopardy by his failed policies. Some people have the capacity to learn it is clear Obama lacks that most basic quality of most human beings.

Obama has bent over backwards to make Muslims feel good about themselves. Remember when Obama ordered NASA to change it’s goal from human space flight to making Muslims feel good about their contribution to space flight? The White House and it’s apparatchiks refuse to call Islamic terror, Islamic! He claims the Caliphate, Islamic State, isn’t Islamic! Obama didn’t stand with Paris after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, he supported the Muslim Brotherhood’s usurpation of power in Egypt and then turned a blind eye to their attacks on Christians and churches. Obama has bent over backwards to avoid angering Muslims but what has it brought us? More terrorism than ever before! More terrorist attacks, more recruitment for the caliphate, more demands for sharia law and more of everything he said would go away when he kissed their derrieres.

In contrast to Bush’s ability to prevent terrorist attacks on American soil Obama’s policies have met with total, utter and complete failure, getting more of what we don’t want and less of what we do want. Islamofascists are marching across Africa and the Middle East because of Obama’s failures. Giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, and for the sake of argument, say he wanted to stop Islamic terrorist attacks, by any measure, his policies should go down in history as epic bungling on a magnificent scale. So, Obama is either a fumbling fool, or to deny him the benefit of the doubt, he is a villain of the highest order.


John Pepin

What Could Have Been… But Wasn’t.

Monday, February 2nd, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the state of humanity would be much better had Richard Nixon had continued the space program, and his successors had followed. Instead of fighting a war on terror we would be racing against each other for the stars. The Moon would have people living on it, Mars would be being colonized as this is written and humanity would be mining the asteroids. The economic might such a environment would create, would demand tens of millions of well educated, well paid people, in every field of human endeavor. The trickle down effect of those well paid people buying the production of everyone else would have enriched people in every industry. For the amount of money we pay for Obama’s vacations, we could be doing all these things, had we been investing that money from the 1970’s. Instead, our government has used exponentially more money to send our children to die and be wounded in the desert, spent trillions bailing out the too big to fail banking system, inflated bubble after bubble to create the appearance of growth, and have installed a surveillance state.

The only government spending that has ever paid a real dividend is the space program. Our world today is largely the result of technological spin offs resulting from it. Everything from the digital revolution and cell phones, to the Temperpedic mattress, are directly the result of the space program. So much of what we take for granted, we have, because of that spending way back in the 1960s. Since then the amount of money spent on the space program has shrunk, while the vision has become more and more myopic, until today Obama has set NASA’s priority… to make Muslims feel good about their contributions to space exploration.

In the 1960’s the US had ambitious plans to build a Moon base and go to Mars. That would have led to countless spin off technologies. Spin offs that, as shown by history, would have created destabilizing businesses. Those would in turn kick off cycle after cycle of creative destruction, (the only real source of economic growth in an economy). Those cycles of creative destruction would have put countless people to work, around the world in ever higher paying, stable jobs, supporting that endeavor. There would have been opportunities for adventurous people to man those missions and take those chances. Opportunities would abound for scientifically minded people to build the hardware and mathematically logic oriented people to write the software.

Had the US continued the space race, the USSR would have been bankrupted much earlier… or they would have competed. Either way… the single minded absorption of our leaders how to most effectively end life on the planet, would have been turned to expanding humanity’s sphere of influence in the solar system. Each advancement would lead to the next. Driving humanity from the Moon, to Mars, then the Main belt of the asteroids for needed resources. The result would be that the likelihood of humanity becoming extinct would have largely been eliminated.

There would be no need for the war on terror, because the huge gobs of money that have gone to those regimes that inculcate the most violent interpretation of Islam, would have had to turn their attention to catching up with the US and Russia, (or USSR), in the colonization of space. Instead of cutting off the heads of infidels and Jews, those who seek Islamic global domination would have to hire them, so they could get off planet too, else risk being left behind. They would have spent all that money on building the infrastructure and technology, or buying it, to get off planet. There would be none left for expensive war.

The boon to humanity would not have stopped there. In addition to creating tens of thousands, perhaps millions of high paying good jobs, an elevation of the standard of living the world over, protecting the human race from extinction for any number of reasons, and undercutting the reason for the war on terror… had we continued on the path Kennedy put us on, young people would have a grand vision to look forward to. Instead of the fatalism, driven by their lack of feeling they have a stake in it all, our young people would have something to strive for… rather than doing drugs, creating fatherless children, traveling across the planet to engage in Jihad and becoming dependents of the state.

Sadly, Nixon hated Kennedy and the space program as well. Nixon had no vision, other than his naked political interests, and those didn’t include advancing Kennedy’s legacy. He instead used the money he had “saved” from the space program to create the EPA. A total catastrophe for the American economy. A catastrophe that resulted in a diminished standard of living, lower expectations, a fatalistic attitude for our children, and the rise of the bubble economy to hide the fact. The last 40 years could have been years of progress, excitement and technological advancement, like the human race has never seen before. But in their infinite wisdom, our leaders thought a better use of that money, was to create generational poverty through welfare state capitalism, enrich Wall street bankers at the cost to the rest of the economy, build nuclear weapons, fight needless wars, usurp unconstitutional authority, prop up dictators, set up a surveillance state, etc… And now, for our leaders to take hundred million dollar vacations. Yup, the world would have been a much better place had our leaders spent all that money on the productive use of space. But hindsight is 20-20, and our leaders are who they are… too bad we all suffer for it.


John Pepin

Obama’s War on Ideas

Thursday, January 15th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the newest war the US and Britain are fighting, the war on extremism, is a very dangerous slippery slope. The bottom of that slope is arbitrary rule. A slippery slope is when doing a thing, leads to another, then another, until eventually you have gone far beyond where you planned to go, like sliding down a slippery slope. A lie is a form of slippery slope. A white lie leads to another, then another, until they are no longer white lies they are bold faced lies… all to cover the initial lie. Once you step out onto that slope, the slide is unstoppable until the bottom is reached, then there is usually no way to get back up. The damage is done. Those who wield political power are many things, but stupid they are not, so the fact our leaders are moving us onto that slope is telling of their diabolical nature.

I would like to remind people that scientific progress, social evolution and political evolution depends on extreme ideas. When Columbus said the world is round he was an extremist, when Kepler said Earth revolves around the Sun and not visa versa he was extreme, when Einstein came up with his theory of relativity it was extreme, when Thomas Jefferson penned our Constitution it was extreme too. Every advance of humanity was called extreme at the time! To eliminate extreme ideas is to stop humanity in our tracks. New ideas are always extreme, to stop all new ideas is a recipe for stagnation and decay of a culture, it’s people and government.

As Clausewitz said, war is politics by violence, since the government has declared war then by definition, they mean to use violence for political ends. State violence is like a Pandora’s box. Once it is opened it cannot be unopened. Once someone is dead they cannot be brought back, (except by Jesus Christ as Lazarus). Therefore, before a government uses violence, it had better make sure the violence is justified. Violence is far more horrible than people realize, especially State violence, (war). So when a state resorts to violence, the enemy must be identified, the threat must be real, the goals set and the exit strategy decided. Else a war gets quickly out of hand and becomes an unending quagmire. The question now is, who will they use violence on?

As long as a faction isn’t violent who is to say it is extreme? Extreme is in the eye of the beholder. Many think the Mennonites are extreme, but not at all violent, so does that put them in our government’s sights? What about a saint? No one is more extreme than a saint. In the war on extremism both the US and Briton made sure to inform us that violence is not the defining factor… Extreme ideas are. The founding fathers were definitely extremists, and today, agreeing with them is one of our government’s definitions of extreme. A belief in individual liberties puts you on the extreme list. An anti abortion stance is another position that puts a person on the governments hit list. In fact, anything not in the new class progressive philosophy, is extreme, as defined by our government! Well, except for violent Islamic terrorism, but then again they did tell us it isn’t about violence, it is about ideas. Basically, anyone who disagrees with the government line, is an extremist.

It is the fear of Islamic terrorism that is the foot in the door for government to declare war on anyone who doesn’t agree with their new class philosophy. Yet the US government refuses to name Islamic terrorists as the target, in fact, they are careful not to. The lists put out by the US government and the British government on whom is extreme should make any liberty loving individual’s blood run cold. Throughout the ages, whenever a government wanted to usurp power, an enemy of the state has been the means, and Islamic terrorism provides just that means, and so must be protected, nurtured and husbanded. Now that we have allowed Obama to arbitrarilly decide who should be executed, out of fear of Islamic terrorists, there is no real limit to his power. Yesterday, Obama arbitrarily ordered Anwar Al Awlaki killed, for inciting Islamic terrorism, tomorrow, it will be Joe Smith, for reading the Constitution aloud in the public square.

So what does it mean to have a war on extremism? Simply stated, it means government will do violence to anyone who they disagree with or disagrees with them. Islamic terrorism provides the propaganda, but the real war is against the citizens of the US and Britain. Those governments bend over backwards to kowtow to violent factions within the Islamic community and never miss an opportunity to poke Christians in the eye. Remember Obama’s jailing of a film maker because his film offended Muslims? Last week Obama refused to attend the rally supporting Charlie Hebdo, and do you wonder why the US CIA is sending so much money and arms to Islamic terrorists around the world? Why were Christians forced at gun point to fund Piss Christ and a picture of the Virgin Mary in dung? Feces is the sign of Baal. So, if our governments are fighting a war on extremism, why do they engage in all those counter productive things? Because their war is not on Islamic terrorists it is against their own citizens!

Why would government wage a diabolical war against it’s own citizens? To disconnect us from our founding principles and documents. Obama himself said Our Constitution is too limiting he would like to change it, to empower government, not limit it. His war on extremism is just the bill to do that. Obama, and other world leaders are willing to let a few thousand children be killed horribly, they are willing to accept violence on our streets, rape as a weapon of war doesn’t bother them, they will tolerate the slaughter and even the extermination of Christianity, as well as genocide, human suffering to them is a means to an end, in short, those who will wage war on extremism, (do violence to those citizens that disagree with the elite), have no conscience and no morality, power is their only love. Oh, they will shed alligator tears over the suffering they cause, but that is only propaganda too.

To wage war against one’s own people is a description of truly evil person. In their war on us and our liberties Islamic terrorists are the new class progressive elite’s allies. Moreover, crushing ideas that the elite call extreme, is a certain way to stop humanity’s social, cultural and political evolution. War is politics by violence and by declaring war our government has avowed to use violence on anyone they deem extreme. Since they refuse to call Islamic terrorists extreme, but do call Tea party members, anyone who speaks of individual liberty, constitutionalists, returning US soldiers, gun owners, pro lifers, etc… extreme, it is clear the citizens of the US and Briton are the target of their war. Talk about slippery slope! Now that you know your government is planning on doing violence to you and your loved ones… what will you do about it? Oh, never mind, dancing with the stars is on… go back to sleep.


John Pepin

Pseudo Wars

Monday, November 10th, 2014

No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
? James Madison

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, all the “wars” the US has engaged in as of late, are nothing but pseudo wars, not wars at all but a way to take away the liberty of the people. I am of course talking about the war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war on terror, the war on obesity, and so forth. These cannot be termed wars anymore than any other policy a government enters into to meet a non corporeal problem. War is violent, terrifying and expensive way to defeat a corporeal threat. Moreover, calling such things wars, lowers the brutal reality of what war is, and creates a situation where the elite can keep a nation in a state of perpetual war. The appointing of “Czars” to oversee these “wars” is more proof they are overtly a means to evolve us to tyranny, war has generals, Czars are despots. If we want to stop the slide to tyranny we must examine the ways the elite evolve a nation to despotism and demand they be stopped.

Let’s face facts, a war on fatty food is an unwinnable war, like a war on terror or a war on poverty, by their very definitions they cannot be won. It is impossible to eliminate fat from foods. Fat is an essential nutrient that provides the calories we need to live. Like anything that is good, when overused, like the term war, it leads to all sorts of bad consequences. To fight a war on the strategy of an enemy, so as to avoid naming that enemy, is as certain a way to loose the war with the unnamed enemy, as it is to loose the war on their strategy. Imagine how the Second World War would have turned out of the allies fought a war on Blitzkrieg instead of the Nazis. Poverty will always be with us it is a human condition. The definition shows how absurd it is to fight a war on poverty, poverty is the lowest ten percentile of a people, economically, it is a relevant statistic. Even if a government were to execute the poorest ten percent there would still be a poorest ten percent. Even if ninety nine percent of the population were executed there would still be relative poor!

Embarking on fictitious wars has the propaganda value of claiming the government is doing something about a perceived problem. The term war focuses the mind and implies all a nation’s might will be brought to bear on the problem. The leader who coins the war will be thought of as really caring, to be so adamant about fighting such and such a problem, that they go to war with it. The value is only to the politician who names it… not the people, government, society or culture, they are damaged by the “war” effort. Everyone but the politicians must give up some sovereignty, money and liberty to the politicians during times of war, and so a fictitious war is a way of prying our liberty’s and largess from us, not to achieve some excellent goal.

War cannot be fought against an idea, tactic, class or food, it can only be fought against an enemy nation by killing and maiming real human beings, and destroying the infrastructure that supports their war effort. Von Clausewitz said that war is politics by violence. No one wants our government to do violence to the poor, we already do violence to our food simply by eating it, and ideas cannot be suppressed by violence. Look at the Second World war again, it was supposed to be against fascism, but how many fascists nations did the US and Europe support during the Cold War? WWII was against the Axis powers of Germany, Japan, Hungary, Romania, Finland and Italy. Four of which were not fascists at all! The war was against those nations, not the tactics they used, not the food they ate and not the political systems of their various governments… the war was against those states, period.

War against an idea, tactic or some other nebulous “enemy” is an absurd distraction from solving a real problem. It gives the people the idea something substantial is being done, but in fact what is really being done is, the liberty of the people is being stolen. The propaganda of a war against a non corporeal enemy is effective at reducing a country to despotism through the costs of continual warfare and a war mindset. It does nothing to solve the problem the elite are ostensibly waging war against, but through a constant chipping away it destroys the wherewithal of a people, saps our resolve to meet actual existential threats, and the lack of any possible victory corrodes our self esteem. War can only be fought against corporeal enemies that can be killed, maimed, impoverished and thereby forced to knuckle under. Further, to wage war against an enemy’s tactic, to avoid naming that enemy, is a sure way to loose the war with that enemy. It is time to complain loudly and forcefully whenever our leaders claim we should launch into another war against a non corporeal enemy and stop the ones our leaders have pulled us into already. Else our lot and the lot of our children will be despotism and poverty.


John Pepin

Water No Longer Wets Us…

Wednesday, September 10th, 2014

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, our leaders want us to believe, that water no longer wets us and fire no longer burns. Taken from a line from the Rudyard Kipling poem, Gods of the Copybook Headings, it describes the absurdity we are expected, to not only believe but invest our lives, fortunes and the well being of our children in. From the War on Terror to monetizing debt what used to bad we are told is good and what was good is now bad. Our leaders have managed to break the most effective wealth creation machine ever invented in part by convincing us want is good and wealth is bad. They manage information via the unbiased news, insuring we never get the whole truth, only part truths, out of context and mixed with many lies. The path they have put us on can only lead to disaster.

The war on terror is a good example of this. Our leaders have placed members of the Muslim brotherhood in key positions of national defense. This despite the fact Al Queda, ISIS, Hamas, and many other terrorist organizations are a spin off of the Muslim Brotherhood. Even the founding documents of the Muslim brotherhood says they seek a Caliphate. No sane person would put someone who has sworn to be an enemy in a position to decide our strategy against them, but someone who is convinced water will no longer wet us and fire will no longer burn, would do it and call it a good turn.

Monetizing debt, we are told, is the only way to escape the economic doldrums the elite have put us in. History is adamant that such policies always lead to economic collapse by run away inflation. History is filled with examples where printing money to gin demand has led to disaster, Wiemar Germany, Argentina, Czechoslovakia, Colonial America, the list goes on and on. There is not one example where printing fiat money did not destroy a nation’s currency. Today however, we are to believe that water will no longer wet us and fire will no longer burn, and inflation can never return.

Our leaders tell us insistently they would never become tyrants and that Our Constitution is an outdated document. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Supreme Court Justice, entrusted with protecting our Constitution, said as much in a speech a few years ago in Egypt. She said if she were writing a Constitution today, she would not use the outdated American example, but the South African communist one instead. We are to believe that today’s leaders would never become despots because they care too much to do that. History on the other hand, is filled with examples of nations giving up their freedom to those who claimed to be human hearted, the story of Dion in Plutarch’s lives is a perfect example. Modern wisdom is, human nature has changed, or in other words, water no longer wets us and fire no longer burns, the goodness of our leaders is a trait that can be learned.

Even socialism is sold to us as a wonderful fix for all the problems that plague humanity. History is adamant that every time socialism has been tried, it has resulted in famine, slaughter and tyranny. Yet our progressive leaders, especially in academia, claim real communism has never been tried! Millions buried in rice paddies in Cambodia might disagree. But this time it will be different we are assured. Socialism will make every one equal, eliminate disease, conquer death, put an end to war and cause benevolent space aliens to land and help us… because they will be so impressed at our advanced social evolution. Water will no longer wet us and fire will no longer burn, the future is great and enlightened, and people will never more yearn.

Once a people have become transfixed with “magic,” it is hard to get them to look behind the curtain, especially if we are told by the unbiased media things are going great, if not in our own lives at least in everyone else’s. It takes strength of will and requires we use our brains to deny the dangerous fiction we are being sold. Those that do will always be vilified by those seeking to trick us into damaging our self interests, and the interests of humanity as a whole, in favor of their narrow selfish interests. If we fall for the delusion we have no one else to blame. Because we know in our hearts, water will always wet us and fire always burns, to ignore reality ensures, the Gods of the copybook headings, with terror and slaughter return.


John Pepin

Appeasement Begets War

Thursday, July 25th, 2013

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, it takes two for peace, and only one for war. Where one party to a conflict is intent upon war, war is inevitable, usually on the aggressor’s terms. No matter how much the pacifist party may want peace, war will be thrust upon them, especially if they display sufficient weakness to give the aggressor a good chance at winning. This is a universal truth about humanity. History is clear on this subject, if a political union wants war, no matter how much the other side doesn’t… there will be war. It seems our politicians have forgotten this basic truth.


History is full of examples where this has happened. The Greeks didn’t want war with Darius, but Darius made war on them, the Persians didn’t want war with Alexander, but they became his subjects, the Russians didn’t want war with Tamerlane, but millions of Russian Christians were slaughtered and enslaved by his invading army, and the French didn’t want war with Nazi Germany, but they were invaded and conquered within a month. History is rife with thousands of examples of people who wanted only to live in peace, but were forced to fight a war.


History is so absolute on this subject it must be understood as a fundamental rule of state interaction. The only cases where war has been avoided, is where the aggressor couldn’t get a tactical or strategic advantage, and so all out war was avoided. The Cold War is an example of this. An understanding of this basic human attribute is where the phrase, “if a nation wants peace, it must prepare for war,” came from. Those who wield political power have the best educations but have a blind spot for this truism. They try to pacify the war monger with concessions of land, subjects and money.


The Turkish empire demanded money and children from Europe in the dark ages. Many children were sent to the Ottomans, who were then forcibly converted to Islam, and made into Janissaries. They became shock troops for future invasions of Europe. Millions of dollars of ransom was paid to the Barbary Pirates to protect shipping, and to get back captured people who were enslaved, even in the modern era, Chamberlain signed a “peace” treaty with Hitler, and we all know how that turned out. History shows that appeasement is the surest way of being subjected to war.


Millions upon millions of human beings have died at the hands of those who sought war. The suffering that appeasement has brought into the world is as heartbreaking as it is mind boggling. No amount of supplication will change the minds of evil men who seek power, glory and wealth, it only encourages them. To encourage evil is to be evil. Those that claim, if we enrich those who openly call for our destruction, it will make them like us… are either stupid or treasonous. If they understand history and the ramifications of it, they are traitors, and if they are so profoundly stupid they don’t understand this attribute of human nature, they have no business anywhere near the reigns of power.


That is why Ronald Reagan sought peace through strength. His policies headed off a nuclear war that could have wiped mankind and most of the ecosystem from the face of the planet. He understood history and the lessons that it teaches. Moreover, he was a patriot, wanting to see the US avoid all out war. Our leaders today, on the other hand, give billions of dollars to those who openly call for our destruction. They bend over backward appeasing those that chant “Death to America” and call the US “The Great Satan.” Our mortal enemies are given total access to our defense department’s top secret documents, and our politicians even allow people with ties to Islamofascists, to edit our policies how to fight the war on terror! Our government calls Christians, patriots and constitutionalists, terrorists but not Muslims who detonate bombs in marathons. Shooting our troops in our own base while chanting alou akbar is called “workplace violence!” So I ask you, is the President an absolute fool, or is he a traitor? Because there are no other possibilities.





John Pepin