1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Last Days of the American Empire?

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by righteousdude2, Apr 23, 2008.

  1. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ontario speaks English. It is Quebec that is francophonic.
     
  2. NiteShift

    NiteShift New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rhetorically-speaking, an empire I guess. Or maybe a theoretical one.

    Anyway, R-D is playing devil's advocate with this post.
     
  3. betterthanideserve

    betterthanideserve New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please check out www.spp.gov then come back to the board and say that they are not geting ready to bring canada,mexico and america into a north american union . CANAMEXAMERICA.

    www.keeptexasmoving.com Please don't beleive me do your own homework....
     
  4. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    The US, Canada, & Mexico will merge and Elvis will fly his UFO back to Graceland to become President.
     
  5. Alcott

    Alcott Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    9,405
    Likes Received:
    353
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Do it. It would solve illegal immigration without our lawns and hedges getting shaggy.
     
  6. righteousdude2

    righteousdude2 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    11,154
    Likes Received:
    242
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It's OKAY Magnetic Poles, It's Really OKAY

    It does not matter if you believe or not, it is going to happen, the plan is already being implemented, and Bush may be the first elected leader of this new Union of nations. Obama or Hillary will be merely the President of this nation, while they serve under the leadership of Bush.

    I have no doubt that there will be many who will resist this change, but to borrow a phrase from Star Trex and the Borg: "Resistance is FUTILE!"

    Keep safe...and in your spare time read this article: http://www.ssp.gov and tell me how you don't think it will happen.
     
  7. poncho

    poncho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    You're begining to sound as though you're here to talk us all into surrendering. Don't know about the rest of these folks here but you aren't going to make me feel all depressed or alone and helpless. That's how the globalists want us to think.

    George Washington might well have looked at the situation in his day and said "resistance is FUTILE!" but he didn't, Did he?
     
  8. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you believe that, you are truly living in delusion. Seriously dude, you need help.
     
  9. poncho

    poncho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    I don't think Bush leads anything personally. He leads by telling Americans what his "advisers" think up and speech choreographer teach him to enunciate that's all.

    He's "made for television".

    I dunno though anyone today that doesn't believe the USA, Cananda and Mexico are being merged for the purpose of a supranational central planning authority must be living in a closet a dreamworld or a closet in a dreamworld. It's so in your face. That's all I can say.
     
  10. righteousdude2

    righteousdude2 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    11,154
    Likes Received:
    242
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Free trade to loss of freedom

    When I said resistance is futile, I simply meant that the majority of the peple in these three nations will be so frustrated with the current problems that this merger will be like fresh air to a society choking on the political corruption of this day.

    It will fast, and almost painless. As a friend said a few years ago, his bank [a major player in today's economy] is ready to close on Saturday afternoon, and open on Monday morning with a completely new currency system. He told me that the new Americas currency is ready to be printed and distributed. If this happens, it will be a revolution without shooting.
     
  11. betterthanideserve

    betterthanideserve New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have heard that it is already printed and in certain banks,just waiting to be told to put it into circulation.
     
  12. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    You've been told wrong by someone who has no idea what they are talking about.
     
  13. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again, my generic conspiracy defuser:

    Those who know something do NOT talk;
    those who do NOT know something talk.
     
  14. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh- since it hasn't gotten through on three other threads, does anyone think it matters, even just a little bit, that the United States is not, was not, and has not ever been an Empire?

    Does anyone think I might get through on try #4?

    Let's see.

    The next day that the United States (and Canada, for that matter) is an "Empire" wil be the first day that either of them is or was an "Empire". (Mexico was an empire, two different times, for a while.)

    Are the words "Constitutional Republic" really too difficult to comprehend, as to their meaning, here?

    Ed
     
    #34 EdSutton, Apr 26, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 26, 2008
  15. Alcott

    Alcott Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    9,405
    Likes Received:
    353
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Wha-at?! From the founding of the USA it claimed sovereignty over the lands from the original colonies to the Mississippi River, mostly still lands of natives who did not recognize its authority. Then there was the vast purchase of huge land of more natives who did not recognize its authority; we settled there and put down uprisings among these natives. Then we annexed a contry tentatively independent of Mexico, and went to war to keep it and more vast lands of the western part of the continent, again putting down uprisings among the natives. Then conquering again those lands that claimed independent sovereignty from the centralized government of the US of A; putting down a big revolt from those that had conquered the lands for the cental government. And finally purchasing or conquering more lands, usually with less uprisings, but certainly not with no troubles at all from the more varied natives.

    Say that again... the United States was never an empire??? That's lunacy!
     
  16. The Scribe

    The Scribe New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
  17. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whether or not England, France, Holland, Spain, Russia, or Denmark 'acquired' the sovereignty they possessed in a 'legitimate' manner, is one "debatable" question, I guess. And whether or not 'we' treated the native dwellers in an honorable manner, is debatable question #2? However, neither of these changes anything, except your desire to redefine "Empire", to suit your definition.

    Fact is, the United States was founded as a result of a revolution of British 'citizens' against England. We fought a war; we won. America now is an independant nation formed from territories that were formerly British, and previously granted to the 13 colonies by that country. (Or in your mind, was the United States only "tentatively independent" in 1781 after Yorktown, and the subsequent Treaty of Paris? England may have wished this, but ...) As an independent nation, her emmisaries purchased, albeit technically illegally, the entire land known as the Louisiana Purchase from France, doubling the size of the nation, with cold hard cash. "Florida" was purchased from Spain. The Republic of Texas proclaimed her independence in 1836, and was effectively a free and independent (Oh, excuse me! Make that "tentatively independent") republic, after San Jancito in 1836. Annexation was initiated on behalf of Texas, and did not occur until almost a decade later in 1845. The Mexican Cession occurred in the aftermath of the Mexican - American War initiated by the ever disingenious Santa Anna, an obviously slow-learner in some ways, but a quick study when it came to pocketing the cash. We paid $18 M in compensation on the Mexican 'Cession'; bought the Gadsen Purchase for another $10M, bought Alaska, ;'bought' Cuba, Phillipines, Puerto Rico, and Guam, in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War, and later gave the first two their independence, of our own free will, bought the Canal Zone, and twice, at that, paid for the Canal, plus paid "big bucks" royalties to Panama for many years, and still gave the CZ back to Panama, as well.

    In fact, the only significant amounts of lands the USA ever out and out "occupied", were some smaller portions of American Samoa, and even that had to do with a reaction to some German provocation.

    And you are surprised that we went to war (not a single one of which we ever initiated, after the American Revolution) to defend and keep United States Territories, rather than just let anyone have them who happened to want them, a la Kaiser Wilhelm, Hitler, Santa Anna, or Ol' Sad'm?

    That, my friend, that seems to be what you are suggesting, is what is lunacy!

    Ed
     
  18. Alcott

    Alcott Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    9,405
    Likes Received:
    353
    Faith:
    Baptist
    My definition is this one:

    Main Entry: em·pire [​IMG] Pronunciation: \ˈem-ˌpī(-ə)r\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French empire, empirie, from Latin imperium absolute authority, empire, from imperare to command — more at emperor Date: 14th century 1 a (1): a major political unit having a territory of great extent or a number of territories or peoples under a single sovereign authority; especially : one having an emperor as chief of state (2): the territory of such a political unit b: something resembling a political empire; especially : an extensive territory or enterprise under single domination or control2: imperial sovereignty, rule, or dominion
     
  19. poncho

    poncho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Semantics. We as a people and nation aren't an empire but those who rule over us the international corporitos have used us and our nation to build a very impressive empire...with our tax dollars since 1898 when our military was used to protect United Fruit's assets from those "evil terrorists/communists" who wanted to nationalize their own resources.

    Where do you think the term "banana republic" came from?
     
  20. betterthanideserve

    betterthanideserve New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    0
    It must be nice to be able to make judgements without knowledge.
     
Loading...