Overthrowing oppressive regimes by military force

[Wyrd of Gawd]

You can read all about it in the New York Times archives.  It's real history instead of the Jewish fairy tales you love so much.

Maybe you could, I dunno, post some links, maybe provide some evidence for your bullshit.

Probably, you won't can't, but I thought I'd throw the idea out there for you.

You can search the New York Times archives yourself at your convenience.  Some articles are free but you will have to pay for a lot of them.  Once you get the hang of using key words in your searches you can trace stories on all subjects day by day from 1851 to the present.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/nytarchive.html

Here's a few relevant articles.  You can access them if you want to.  

If you have never read Theodor Herzl's 1896 book "The Jewish State" you can read it at this link.  https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso...erzl2.html  Read it and you will see how they manipulated events to make it happen.  


These are from the NYTimes archives:

Boycott of Jews Eased Under New Reich Order
By The Jewish Telegraphic Agency. ();
October 18, 1933,

JEWS APPEAL TO WORLD.; American Group Will Continue to Stir Opinion Against Nazis.
to arouse public opinion against Adolf Hitler would be continued until Jews were restored "to complete equality with all other inhabitants of Germany."JEWS APPEAL TO WORLD. American
May 20, 1933 

Assails Assimilation.
By The Jewish Telegraphic Agency. ();
August 22, 1933,
, Section , Page 13, Column , words
[ DISPLAYING ABSTRACT ]
PRAGUE, Aug. 21. -- In his speech opening the Zionist Congress tonight Dr. Nahum Sokolow, referring to what he called "the lie in our midst," described assimilation of the Jews as attempting "to put blinkers on our public opinion" that it might not see "the handwriting on the wall, the danger threatening a spiritual epidemic of anti-Semitism."
, Section , Page 3,

Boycott of German Goods Urged.
Special to THE NEW YORK TIMES. ();
April 24, 1933,
, Section , Page 5,

NAZIS TO TOLERATE FUND TO AID JEWS; Officials, in Absence of Hitler, Foresee No Objection to Our Sending $2,000,000. BOYCOTT STILL PERSISTS Names of Persons Trading at Jewish Stores Posted -- Papers Urge Penalties for 'Traitors.'
Wireless to THE NEW YORK TIMES. ();
May 21, 1933,
, Section , Page 26, Column , words
[ DISPLAYING ABSTRACT ]
BERLIN, May 20 -- A report that the Jewish Congress in New York had announced a campaign to raise $2,000,000 to aid the suffering Jews in Germany was received in government circles today with an attitude which varied from indifference to surprise.

NAZI WOMEN URGE 'HOLY WAR' ON JEWS; Their Federation Calls on the German Hoasewives to Fight Till Jewry Is Destroyed.

ASK PRESIDENT TO END TRADE WITH GERMANY; Jewish War Veterans, in Convention, Urge Congress to Condemn Acts of Nazis.
(AP). -- Delegates to the national convention of Jewish War Veterans of America today adopted a resolution asking that President Roosevelt and Congress "officially condemn the Nazi persecution of Jews in Germany and
September 02, 1935 -

UNTERMYER URGES ANTI-NAZI BOYCOTT; Jews Would Be Justified in Refusing to Buy Any German Goods, Ha Declares. HIS GIFT IS DEDICATED Hebrew University Accepts Memorial Theatre -- Dr. Magnes Heard Here by Telephone.
Untermyer, the donor, said the regime of Adolf Hitler had cast a pal over the dedication.UNTERMYER URGES ANTI-NAZI BOYCOTT Jews Would Be Justified in Refusing to Buy Any German Goods, Ha Declares. HIS GIFT IS DEDICATED Hebrew
April 14, 1933

BIGOTRY; American Jewish Congress Hears Plea to Christians to Stand Up for Humanity DICTATORS ARE ASSAILED Senator and Others Urge the Democracies to ResistBritain Is Criticized Would Check Bigots Here Goldmann Counsels Calm Zuckerman a Speaker
BIGORYr American Jewish Congress bears Plea to Christians to stand Up for Humanity DICTATORS ARE ASSAILED Senator and Others Urge the Democracies to ResistBritain 15 Criticized The necessity for action by everywhere in a program to
October 31, 1938

RUSSIAN JEWS HOPE FOR ALLIED VICTORY; See Their Best Chances of Future Reform in Triumph of Democracy. GERMANY THEIR WORST FOE Most Reactionary Elements in Muscovite Officialdom Said to be of Teutonic Origin.
HENRY SLIOZBERG ();
October 16, 1916,
, Section , Page 8, Column , words
[ DISPLAYING ABSTRACT ]
PETROGRAD, June 9-22, 1916. -- During the years just preceding the war the Jews in Russia were passing through a grievous period: the Government's anti-Simistan and ineras.

WAR WILL BENEFIT JEWS IN GERMANY; Ambassador von Bernstorff Predicts Obliteration of All Anti-Semitic Sentiment. NOBILITY LOSES POWER Spread of Democracy and Removal of Ban Against Jewish Army Officers Great Factors.
The prediction that the present war will do away with anti-Semitism altogether in Germany and the assurance that, by "lessening the power of the nobility and democratizing the people," it already has removed most of
February 12, 1915 -

JEWS HERE DECREE BOYCOTT ON REICH; Defense League Asks 2,000,000 in City Area to Stop Buying German Goods and Service. CHRISTIANS URGED TO JOIN Untermyer, Cerard, La Guardia Back Move -- Say Nazis Menace World Peace. JEWS HERE DECREE BOYCOTT ON REICH
An economic boycott of Germany until the rights of German Jews are restored and the discriminations to which they are subjected under the Hitler regime are ended, was proclaimed in the name of the 2,000,000
May 15, 1933

RUSSIA'S EVICTION OF JEWS; AN INTERNATIONAL PROTEST MAY BE SENT TO THE CZAR. Ex-Commissioner of Immigration Weber Declares that the People Now Sentenced to Banishment from Poland Are a Most Undesirable Class, Because They Have Been Coerced Into Habits
London correspondent concerning the ejectment of the Jews from Poland in obedience to edicts issued by the Russian Government during the last three months has aroused the interest of Christians as well as Jews in
May 10, 1893 -

[Minimalist]

In his conclusion of "And Then All Hell Broke Loose" NBC correspondent Richard Engel, after cataloging the catastrophes which have led us to the point we are at, writes:

I can only guess what will happen next. I suspect that over the next several years, we’ll see strongmen back in power in all or most Middle East countries. Out of the chaos, new dictators will offer themselves as an alternative to the horrors of ISIS, the Sunni-Shia bloodshed, Turkish-Kurdish enmity, and Arab-Persian proxy wars. Once in power, the new dictators—the ones to establish a new status quo—will likely be worse than the old strongmen because they’ll be able to use new technologies to identify and hunt down their enemies by their digital fingerprints. They will have the ability to point to the ugliness of recent history as a justification for taking their citizens’ rights. “Give me your freedoms unless you want to return to the way things were,” they might say.

But these would-be strongmen face a difficult path ahead. Many dictators will try to assert themselves. Not all will survive. The chaos that has been unleashed by the breaking of the old status quo won’t easily be contained. ISIS supporters will fight to the death to retain the foothold they’ve taken for themselves. A lot of killing remains to be done before leaders of stature emerge—and before the fires of chaos are tamped down once again.

We'll see how long it takes...and how many have to die...before we get back to the only status quo which has a chance of working in that shithole.  Too bad Bush didn't stop to think.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Okay, so the Americans are currently seeing some very extremist political forces. Some of the GOP candidates are so backward that they put Adolf Hitler to shame.

And the reason I say that is because Hitler and the Nazis hid their true agenda from the public until they had control. But what I'm seeing at the moment is that GOP candidates are unashamed to be extremist conservatives, with awful and extreme hateful polices. It will make USA easily the most oppressive western government in current times, if it isn't already.

Now we know what the problem is let's talk about the solution. The solution, according to USA when this happens in other places, is that you go in and overthrow the democratically elected government by force. Well first you say that you don't recognise the authority of the current government, and that gives you justification to go in and overthrow it because it's run amuk. This is similar to the sins of colonialism only more extreme.

The USA has set the precedent that they believe it's OK to overthrow democratically elected governments such as Guatemala in 1954 if it serves their own purposes. But this plan of theirs never, ever has a happy ending for the sovereign State they've overthrown. It pushes the State into depression, it stunts their economic growth, it destroys employment, etc.

Meaningful change must come from within. The USA's repeated destabilisation activities undertaken in the Middle East have facilitated the creation, rise, and expansion of Al Qaeda, DAESH, and other militant rebel groups in the area. It's funny actually to then see them blame Islam for a problem that they are wholly responsible for creating. The point is that after more than a century of this shit we know what to expect.

Personally, I'd like to see the USA overthrown by military force. It would be terrible for their State, but it would be a much needed reprieve for others facing oppression under the constant threat of military action from USA. It would finally give those countries the chance to grow from within, a chance they don't have at present.

Oh, we aren't all that bad in 'Murrica - during WWII, we fought the Nazis and a worldwide expansionist Japanese Emperor while we already had our own concentration camps for those who shared race and only that in common with Japan, we had Jim Crow laws, segregated schools, "Coloreds" were forced to ride in the back of the bus, and interracial marriages were illegal. We still have racial violence, but we aren't about to go back anywhere close to the evil practices which prevailed when the world regarded Uncle Sam as a friend. We haven't moved backward, we've just been slow as usual at making forward progress, and the idiots such as Trump and worse who you see are the sideshow of the losers who are actually allowed to speak their minds and make fools of themselves. Maybe this alone is what offends those in other "Western" countries the most, where anti-blasphemy and anti-libel laws can actually get people put in jail.

[Rayaan]

I agree with the OP's observation.

The US and its allies in many ways have used all these extremists groups in order to further destabilize the Midde Eastern regimes. This is something increasingly evident in the recent situation in Syria and with ISIS.

For instance. a document obtained by Judicial Watch on May 18, 2015, formerly classified as "secret," is a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document that provides evidence of Western support for Islamist extremists. The DIA report, dated August 12, 2012, reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent extremist groups for the purpose of destabilizing Assad, and that these “supporting powers” desired the emergence of a "Salafist Principality" in Syria to "isolate the Syrian regime."

The rise of such a Salafist Principality in the region would offer the supporting powers (the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey) a tool for regime change in Syria, which is exactly what they want. As the document states, "If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)."

According to Brad Hoff, an independent journalist, teacher, and former US Marine who served during the early years of the Iraq War, the DIA report provides extraordinary confirmation that US intelligence envisioned the terror group ISIS as "a US strategic asset." As he wrote in the Levant Report on May 2015, "US intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a US strategic asset."

The pararells are many ...

A December 13, 2006 cable, titled "Influencing the SARG [Syrian government] in the End of 2006," reveals that as far back as 2006 - five years before the "Arab Spring" protests in Syria - destabilizing the Syrian government was a central motivation of US policy. The cable, written by William Roebuck, a former US Ambassador to Syria nine years ago, outlines strategies for taking advantage of conflicts and "looming issues" in Syria so as to make President Assad weaker and more vulnerable. In his summary of the cable, he wrote:

"We believe Bashar's weaknesses are in how he chooses to react to looming issues, both perceived and real, such as the conflict between economic reform steps (however limited) and entrenched, corrupt forces, the Kurdish question, and the potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist extremists. This cable summarizes our assessment of these vulnerabilities and suggests that there may be actions, statements, and signals that the USG can send that will improve the likelihood of such opportunities arising. These proposals will need to be fleshed out and converted into real actions and we need to be ready to move quickly to take advantage of such opportunities."

So, in public the US was in favor of economic reform, but in private the US saw conflict between economic reform and "entrenched, corrupt forces" as an "opportunity." In public, the US was opposed to "Islamist extremists," but in private it saw the "potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist extremists" as an "opportunity" that the US should try to take advantage of.

[Rayaan]

In June 2012, the New York Times reported that the CIA was working with Syria's Muslim Brotherhood to channel Turkish, Saudi, and Qatari-supplied arms to the anti-Assad rebels: "The weapons, including automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, ammunition and some antitank weapons, are being funneled mostly across the Turkish border by way of a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood and paid for by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the officials said." Then the same article states that, according to one American official, the CIA officers were there "in part to help keep weapons out of the hands of fighters allied with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups." However, this statement is most likely just a cover, because it is easily predictable that the weapons being distributed to the Syrian rebels can very likely end up in the hands of ISIS. Or perhaps the rebels themselves were extremists to begin with, as opposed to the media claims that the rebels are "moderates."  

Another article in the Times states that some European allies remain skeptical about the efficacy of arming Syrian rebels. "Germany, for instance, has been arming and training Kurdish pesh merga forces in Iraq, but has resisted doing the same for any groups in Syria — partly out of fear that the weapons could end up in the hands of ISIS or other radical groups." As Peter Wittig, the German ambassador to the United States, wisely said, "We can’t really control the final destination of these arms."

We also find that the same pattern existed in Libya.  The US supported Al Qaeda in Libya in its effort to overthrow Gadaffi. These are just two examples (Syria and Libya) where the US covertly worked with terrorist groups and rebels who they call "moderate" only to stoke more violence in the Middle East and to eventually facilitate regime changes.

[Rayaan]

"The majority of Syrians interviewed said they believe that the situation is worsening, and only 21 percent said they preferred their life today than when Syria was fully controlled by Bashar al-Assad's regime. Nearly half of Syrians surveyed said they opposed U.S.-coalition airstrikes, and nearly 80 percent said that the war has gotten worse because of the influx of foreign fighters."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worl...poll-says/

[God of Mr. Hanky]

---

Okay, so the Americans are currently seeing some very extremist political forces. Some of the GOP candidates are so backward that they put Adolf Hitler to shame.

And the reason I say that is because Hitler and the Nazis hid their true agenda from the public until they had control. But what I'm seeing at the moment is that GOP candidates are unashamed to be extremist conservatives, with awful and extreme hateful polices. It will make USA easily the most oppressive western government in current times, if it isn't already.

Now we know what the problem is let's talk about the solution. The solution, according to USA when this happens in other places, is that you go in and overthrow the democratically elected government by force. Well first you say that you don't recognise the authority of the current government, and that gives you justification to go in and overthrow it because it's run amuk. This is similar to the sins of colonialism only more extreme.

The USA has set the precedent that they believe it's OK to overthrow democratically elected governments such as Guatemala in 1954 if it serves their own purposes. But this plan of theirs never, ever has a happy ending for the sovereign State they've overthrown. It pushes the State into depression, it stunts their economic growth, it destroys employment, etc.

Meaningful change must come from within. The USA's repeated destabilisation activities undertaken in the Middle East have facilitated the creation, rise, and expansion of Al Qaeda, DAESH, and other militant rebel groups in the area. It's funny actually to then see them blame Islam for a problem that they are wholly responsible for creating. The point is that after more than a century of this shit we know what to expect.

Personally, I'd like to see the USA overthrown by military force. It would be terrible for their State, but it would be a much needed reprieve for others facing oppression under the constant threat of military action from USA. It would finally give those countries the chance to grow from within, a chance they don't have at present.

---

There you go again, Aractus Erectus, the Rush Limbaugh of Asstralia! You are by far that one's ethical counterpart.

I'm all for your Julian Assenge in revealing dirty secrets of a our government killing civilians - in any world military power, there's sure to be corruption, would if only Australia was in that position. But you are no better than any American asshole on FauxNews (and this may surprise you but we don't all watch that shit) when you equate idiots who face a democratic showdown in November which they really have no hope of winning with the speeches of Adolf Hitler, given with military troups under his control marching around Berlin. Not only are they in no way nearly as powerful, they haven't really said anything half as offensive - oh, and we can still count on our press to report that sort of shit when they say something particularly juicy.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

I agree with the OP's observation.

The US and its allies in many ways have used all these extremists groups in order to further destabilize the Midde Eastern regimes. This is something increasingly evident in the recent situation in Syria and with ISIS.

For instance. a document obtained by Judicial Watch on May 18, 2015, formerly classified as "secret," is a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document that provides evidence of Western support for Islamist extremists. The DIA report, dated August 12, 2012, reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent extremist groups for the purpose of destabilizing Assad, and that these “supporting powers” desired the emergence of a "Salafist Principality" in Syria to "isolate the Syrian regime."

The rise of such a Salafist Principality in the region would offer the supporting powers (the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey) a tool for regime change in Syria, which is exactly what they want. As the document states, "If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)."

According to Brad Hoff, an independent journalist, teacher, and former US Marine who served during the early years of the Iraq War, the DIA report provides extraordinary confirmation that US intelligence envisioned the terror group ISIS as "a US strategic asset." As he wrote in the Levant Report on May 2015, "US intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a US strategic asset."

The pararells are many ...

A December 13, 2006 cable, titled "Influencing the SARG [Syrian government] in the End of 2006," reveals that as far back as 2006 - five years before the "Arab Spring" protests in Syria - destabilizing the Syrian government was a central motivation of US policy. The cable, written by William Roebuck, a former US Ambassador to Syria nine years ago, outlines strategies for taking advantage of conflicts and "looming issues" in Syria so as to make President Assad weaker and more vulnerable. In his summary of the cable, he wrote:

"We believe Bashar's weaknesses are in how he chooses to react to looming issues, both perceived and real, such as the conflict between economic reform steps (however limited) and entrenched, corrupt forces, the Kurdish question, and the potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist extremists. This cable summarizes our assessment of these vulnerabilities and suggests that there may be actions, statements, and signals that the USG can send that will improve the likelihood of such opportunities arising. These proposals will need to be fleshed out and converted into real actions and we need to be ready to move quickly to take advantage of such opportunities."

So, in public the US was in favor of economic reform, but in private the US saw conflict between economic reform and "entrenched, corrupt forces" as an "opportunity." In public, the US was opposed to "Islamist extremists," but in private it saw the "potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist extremists" as an "opportunity" that the US should try to take advantage of.

France, England, and the US have been fucking over Syria for over 100 years non-stop.  The idea of Syria having stability, even under the dictators Assad, has simply driven the French, English, and Americans insane so they are completely destroying Syria.  http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesear...o19400101/

[Heat]

Unrealistic.

I don't even know if this would be good in theory. What I do know is that America is not some small country with an oppressive leader that is clearly bad for the country. We have one of the biggest military's in the world. We have 300 million people here. If this happened there would be a hell of a lot of death, which is not worth it whatsoever for the hope of the theory that it would help us in the long-term being correct.

Plus I don't think this should even be theorized as an option yet. Unless Trump wins and ruins the country which will likely happen, we shouldn't act as if it's at that point yet.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Unrealistic.

I don't even know if this would be good in theory. What I do know is that America is not some small country with an oppressive leader that is clearly bad for the country. We have one of the biggest military's in the world. We have 300 million people here. If this happened there would be a hell of a lot of death, which is not worth it whatsoever for the hope of the theory that it would help us in the long-term being correct.

Plus I don't think this should even be theorized as an option yet. Unless Trump wins and ruins the country which will likely happen, we shouldn't act as if it's at that point yet.

Don't you think that it's possible for people to simply stop caring like they did in the European commie countries which led to the collapse of the commie governments?  One day people woke up and said that they had had it and the commie governments were no more.  There wasn't any violence to speak of.  It was really amazing.