<strong>Written By:</strong> RPW
<strong>Date:</strong> 2006-07-31 13:30:18
<a href="/article/203018116-world-war-iii-or-is-it-iv">Article Link</a>

<a href="http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/world/article.jsp?content=20060731_131110_131110">http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/world/article.jsp?content=20060731_131110_131110</a>

Comment:
Be it WWIII or WWIV, if it indeed be war, then in the name of democracy, let it be total war. And by that I mean, let us mobilize all our resources and throw them into this "war". By this I mean, when the words run out and the killing begins, in the words of General George Patton: "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." So let us mobilize our resources and make them available to the soldiers who must necessarily do the killing, and who must absorb the brunt of those trying to kill our soldiers. In the name of preserving our democracy, we on the home front, away from the direct horrors of the battlefield, must as well sacrifice what we can, just as we expect the men and women "in harm's way" to sacrifice themselves as necessary.

And the best way to do this? Put the whole of the population on a war footing. The men and women building the bombs and tanks and missiles would work for the cause, and not for recompense, as recompense will come when victory is assured. As well, manufacturers of bombs and tanks and missiles would work for the cause and not for recompense. Farmers would donate their crops and livestock; businesses would donate their products; oil companies and mines and smelters their wares; the citizenry and employees their time and expertise, all of which would be funnelled to the fighting men and women until the war is won.

But the gentlemen in the Maclean's article who fervently believe that WWIII (or IV) has begun, do not I suspect, envisage war preparations of this magnitude. Rather, they envisage very large profits to be made from a protracted struggle (as what happened in "WWIII" - aka, the "Cold War") They have, I suspect, little real interest in winning a war, so much as waging it (or rather, seeing it waged, and from a great distance). To them, it would be anathema to wage total war, with the idea that the ONLY driving force is to win, as quickly and as decisively as possible. They themselves do not see themselves sacrificing their own lifestyles to "the cause", forfeiting wages, benefits, and profits until the job is done - to put substance behind the rhetoric "let's roll!"

To eat cabbage soup for victory.........

   

Cold war wasnt a real war it was a proxy war. made a damn good book though.

Napoleaon created effectively the first truly 'Global' and multinational war. But if you also consider the numerical and geographical equillancy of the nine crusades than umm...were about up around World War 14 by now.
Hal, Ottawa

   

4 or 14......I am just wondering if all these guys who want there to be a war, are willing to throw their all into it as well as the poor buggers who will be getting killed "up front".............

---
"We can have a democracy or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of the few. We cannot have both."
- Justice Louis Brandeis

   

No i dont think it ever wroked that way. Im comming to belive wars are not so much caused as they are orchestrated. Zionist made clear their intentions with Palestine long before the holocaust. the big question for them in 1920 was how to get Achenazi Jews from Europe to migrate to Palestine? Hmmm ...think about that one...Ive also learned that not all Zionists are Jews.
Hal, Ottawa