Guest Post: If Only The U.S. Had Stayed Out Of World War I

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by David Stockman via The Japan Times,

The first big wave of embracing a liberal international economic order - relatively free trade, rising international capital flows and rapidly growing global economic integration - resulted in something remarkable.

Between 1870 and 1914, there was a 45-year span of rising living standards, stable prices, massive capital investment and prolific technological progress. In terms of overall progress, these four-plus decades have never been equaled — either before or since.

Then came the Great War. It involved a scale of total industrial mobilization and financial mayhem that was unlike any that had gone before. In the case of Great Britain, for example, its national debt increased 14-fold.

In addition, England’s price level doubled, its capital stock was depleted, most offshore investments were liquidated and universal wartime conscription left it with a massive overhang of human and financial liabilities.

Despite all that, England still stood out as the least devastated of the major European countries. In France, the price level inflated by 300 percent, its extensive Russian investments were confiscated by the Bolsheviks and its debts in New York and London catapulted to more than 100 percent of GDP.

Among the defeated powers, currencies emerged nearly worthless. The German mark was only worth five cents on the prewar dollar, while the country’s wartime debts — especially after the Carthaginian peace of Versailles which John Maynard Keynes skewered so brilliantly — soared to crushing, unrepayable heights. In short, the wave of debt, currency inflation and financial disorder from the Great War was immense and unprecedented.

With all that in mind, one important question only rises in importance: Was the United States’ intervention in April 1917 warranted or not?

And did it only end up prolonging the European slaughter?

Never mind that it resulted in a cockamamie peace, which gave rise to totalitarianism among the defeated powers. Even conventional historians like Niall Ferguson admit as much.

Had President Woodrow Wilson not misled the U.S. on a messianic crusade, Europe’s Great War would have ended in mutual exhaustion in 1917.

Both sides would have gone home battered and bankrupt — but would not have presented any danger to the rest of mankind.

Indeed, absent Wilson’s crusade, there would have been no allied victory, no punitive peace — and no war reparations. Nor would there have been a Leninist coup in Petrograd — or later on, the emergence of Stalin’s barbaric regime.

Likewise, there would have been no Hitler, no Nazi dystopia, no Munich, no Sudetenland and Danzig corridor crises, no need for a British war to save Poland, no final solution and Holocaust, no global war against Germany and Japan — and, finally, no incineration of 200,000 civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Nor would all of these events have been followed by a Cold War with the Soviets or CIA-sponsored coups and assassinations in Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Brazil, Chile and the Congo, to name just a few.

Surely, there would have been no CIA plot to assassinate Castro, or Russian missiles in Cuba or a crisis that took the world to the brink of annihilation.

There would have been no Dulles brothers, no domino theory and no Vietnam slaughter, either. Nor would the U.S. have launched a war in Afghanistan’s mountain valleys to arouse the mujaheddin from their slumber — and hence train the future al-Qaida.

Likewise, in Iran there would have been no shah and his Savak terror, no Khomeini-led Islamic counter-revolution, no U.S. aid to enable Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s gas attacks on Iranian boy soldiers in the 1980s.

Nor would there have been an American invasion of Arabia in 1991 to stop our erstwhile ally Saddam from looting the equally contemptible emir of Kuwait’s ill-gotten oil plunder — or, alas, the horrific 9/11 blow-back a decade later.

Most surely, the axis of evil — that is, the Washington-based Cheney-Rumsfeld-neocon axis — would not have arisen, nor would it have foisted a near-$1 trillion warfare state budget on the 21st-century U.S.

The real point of that Great War, in terms of the annals of U.S. economic history, is that it enabled the already-rising U.S. economy to boom for the better part of 15 years after the onset of the war.

In the first stage, the U.S. became the granary and arsenal to the European allies. This triggered an eruption of domestic investment and production that transformed the nation into a massive global creditor and powerhouse exporter, virtually overnight.

U.S. farm exports quadrupled and farm income surged from $3 billion to $9 billion. Land prices soared, country banks proliferated and the same was true of industry. For example, steel production rose from 30 million tons annually to nearly 50 million tons.

Altogether, in six short years from 1914 to 1920, $40 billion of U.S. GDP turned into $92 billion — a sizzling 15 percent annual rate of gain.

The depression that could have been avoided

Needless to say, these figures reflected an inflationary, war-swollen economy. After all, the U.S. had loaned the Allies massive amounts of money — all to purchase grain, pork, wool, steel, munitions and ships from the U.S.

This transfer amounted to nearly 15 percent of GDP, or an equivalent of $2 trillion in today’s economy. It also represented a form of vendor finance that was destined to vanish at war’s end. As it happened, the U.S. did experience a brief but deep recession in 1920. But it was not a thoroughgoing end-of-war one that would “detox” the economy.

The day of reckoning was merely postponed. It finally arrived in 1933 when the depression hit with full force. The U.S. economy was cratering — and Germany embarked on its disastrous “recovery” experience under the leadership of Adolf Hitler.

These two events — along with so many of the above-listed offenses later on — could have been avoided if only the U.S. had shown the wisdom of staying out of World War I.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
CashCowEquity's picture

USA was on its way to GOAT nation status, The Fed made sure that didnt happen.

TeamDepends's picture

If only the serpent had not approached Eve.

Manthong's picture

Woodrow Wilson: "I have unwittingly ruined my country"

The New Freedom by Woodrow Wilson - Project Gutenberg

.. and apparently, the rest of the world.

Manthong's picture

“Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?”

TahoeBilly2012's picture

Rothchilds (red child) pushed US into war with Germany, who didn't want war. Rothchilds wanted control of Germanic empires and seem to at this time finally have control, but the German's are waking up yet again to their crafty monetary City of London masters. 

0z's picture

It means red shield, and it's a very common name. The Great War was very bad for the Rothschilds business, but they nevertheless tried to profit from it as much as possible.
That being said, America was founded on stealing lands, plunder and slavery. So it shouldnt be a surprise that they conquered Western Europe after it had been weakened by 3 years of intensive War. Then they exported the model, which is still all the rage around here in Burma, where tribes are being genocided because they don't want the oil drills to come destroy their lands. 500 years of the same thing, over and over again. I call it the 500 year War.

ZerOhead's picture

"I call it the 500 year War."

And they call it "Business as usual" same as it ever was...

JoeSexPack's picture

Close Billy, Rothschilds are red-shields, as in Red Hex shield of the World Revolutionary movement of centuries past. Yes, they own major shares in central banks worldwide, centered in London, start most wars & have for centuries. Germans knew this in 30's, as did most Euro's & Americans.


UK was broke & failing fast in WW1, French army mutineed, Germany knocked out Russia & moved armies west. Roth's cut a deal to give UK $$$ & push US into war on UK side (Lusitania nonsense in MSM), in exchange for Palestine (Israel). It worked, UK won & took Palestine from dead Ottoman Empire, gave to Lord Rothschild. Same fam still owns most Israeli land in a trust, Israeli Jews are serfs.


Roth's wanted a colony of Jews in Palestine, but Euro Jews would not go, they liked Europe's climate, culture & wealth. So, Roth's searched for anti-Semitic politicians to light a fire under Euro Jews & push them to Palestine. They found the NSDAP & its leader Hitler, & funded them in 1930's. They got the World Jewish Congress to declare war on Germany in 1933, BEFORE Nazi's formed gov't or Hitler was chancellor. Predictably, Hitler responded with Krystallnacht & Nurnberg Race Laws. UK, USSR, USA & France said little.

Until....Hitler printed debt-free notes, secured by German labor, & the German economy boomed, ending their Depression. Same way the US economy boomed when Lincoln printed debt-free notes in 1860's during Civil War. Debt-free notes kill debt-notes from central banks, & so Roth's responded to this mortal threat to their Empire of Debt & Fiat $$$ with war, or assassination in Lincoln's case. All 4 assasinated US presidents were in favor of debt-free $$$. 2 others that were shot, but lived, also favored it, Jackson & Reagan.


& yeah, with gold claims to FED, anti-FED marches & leaning to Russia, Germans appear to be reawakening. Good for them. Let freedom ring.

JoeSexPack's picture

Attached is link to Rothschild family crest.


That fam funded & started Zionism in 1800's, to give ideology for Euro Jews to return to Isreal, which Roth's wanted as their private colony.


Zionists took 6-pointed star from Roth crest, also blue & white colors for Israel's flag. Lord Rothschild is on Israeli bank notes.

TahoeBilly2012's picture

Excellent JSP. Thanks for the conscise history.

Manthong's picture

Stare at that crest long enough..

It is one crazy-ass piece of work.

JoeSexPack's picture

6-pointed star has 6 points, around 6 triangles, around a 6-sided hexagon. 666.


Colors of Chase are blue & white.


With a weird shape in logo.




You decide.

LetThemEatRand's picture

The crest reads (in English), "unity, integrity, entrepreneurship."  Sounds kind of Randian, which is not surprising given that she fucked a Rothschild heir (look it up).  And then there's this:

"The Rothschilds are a remarkable pan-European Jewish family. Taking their name from the house of their 16th century ancestors, “zum roten Schild” (at the sign of the red shield) in Frankfurt’s Jewish ghetto, they became one of the wealthiest and most powerful 19th century dynasties; bankers to monarchs and governments, builders of great houses and collectors of the finest art. Mayer Amschel (1744-1812), who founded the banking business, came from a modest merchant family who set up as a dealer in antique coins before becoming Court Agent to William, the future Elector of Hesse."

They like their wealth, and they are not ashamed of their greed.  All four centuries of it because, you know, the Productive Class likes to inherit shit.  This is what Rand celebrates, and what it begets, all of you fuckholes who worship her.  

A Nanny Moose's picture

So Rand is now a Rothchild agent?

Got it.

Please step away from your ad-hom crack pipe.

Flakmeister's picture

Reading comprehension ain't your strong suit, is it?

nmewn's picture

LTER"s conclusion was:

"They like their wealth, and they are not ashamed of their greed.  All four centuries of it because, you know, the Productive Class likes to inherit shit.  This is what Rand celebrates, and what it begets, all of you fuckholes who worship her."

And here I thought Rand's writings (as it applies to individuals and in the context LTER has the greatest problem with) had to do with ownership, that is, what you have worked for (the benefts of your own personal labor) or will ever work for in the future...belongs to the one who toiled away for it.

Not some interloper who comes in after the hard part is done (the work part, the long hours part, the sacrificing of immediate pleasure for self sufficiency & security later part) and reapportions the benefits of the aforementioned labor to those who have done absolutely nothing to merit it.

So who has more greed now, the thief who steals what is not theirs or those who would hire a thief (or governments) to take what is not theirs by force?

FeralSerf's picture

Or to phrase it slightly differently and more accurately:

"Rand's writings . . . had to do with ownership, . . . what you have STOLEN (the benefts of your own personal labor) or will ever STEAL in the future...belongs to the one who STOLE it, NOT TO THE ONES IT WAS STOLEN FROM."

The Rothschild family STOLE THEIR FAMILY WEALTH. They acquired and kept their wealth by fraud and by lying, stealing, cheating and killing. By loaning money to and bribing politicians and other government officials, they KEPT THEIR BOOTY and AVOIDED PAYING TAXES ON IT.

"So who has more greed now, the thief who steals what is not theirs or those who would hire a thief (or governments) to take what is not theirs by force?"

The Rothschilds used both methods to acquire and keep their wealth. They are a criminal family enterprise that spans many generations. This has been well documented over the years even though the Rothschilds' media empires have worked tirelessly to prevent the truth hidden.

nmewn's picture

I have stolen nothing.

LTER''s tiresome diatribes are usually directed at making people feel guilty of their own accomplishments.

Because of the Rothschilds use of the states apparatus to aquire their wealth somehow means we should not protect our own from the greed of the states machinations...errr, ahhh...the benevolence of the states roving bands of re-apportioners?

Which is (by the way) the very thing that allowed the Rothschilds to become wealthy in the first place ;-)

FeralSerf's picture

To clarify, for the sake of argument, assume your parents stole something valuable. The theft has not been recovered by the victims. They die and you are their heir. Do you believe that, since YOU STOLE NOTHING, the stolen property is and should be yours without any claims thereon from the victims?

According to your "logic", why should Swiss banks return any stolen property to heirs of victims if they stole nothing? Why should any stolen property ever be returned to the victims if the thief no longer possesses the stolen property?

And what about land that was, contrary to valid, legal treaties, stolen from American Indians? A cloud on the title or no?

Miffed Microbiologist's picture

If anyone approached me with proof of ownership of something in my possession I would give it to them. This is simply the right thing to do. However if an heir of Chief Joseph came to me and claimed a legitimate ownership of my property, I would not relinquish it. Not from the legalistic ploy that Native Americans had no concept of European land ownership and therefore the claim could not be valid, but that the land was "owned" by someone who died more than 100 years ago. All of us live on land stolen from someone if one looks back far enough historically.

Many atrocities were committed against the Native Americans. I acknowledge, sympathize and wish it didn't occur but these sins were not committed by me. Those who did bear the guilt of their crimes and hopefully will have some Devine retribution heaped on their souls.

Unfortunately life is not fair and debts are not paid. Having experienced this myself I understand the anger and frustration.


FeralSerf's picture

So it's a matter of how much time has expired since the theft occurred? What about property that has been stolen by unlawful foreclosures by banks within the last few years?

How much time does the victim have to reclaim his property from you?

Some paintings are reclaimed by their original after many years. It's been over 70 years now in the case of the Nazi thefts.

Miffed Microbiologist's picture

You have a point about time. It is tenuous at best. However, I believe returning property to the original owner seems valid. I remember gazing at the Luxor obelisk in Paris and realizing I was staring at a blatant theft. How many examples of this are throughout the world? Reparations for global misdeads should be required if possible but can never be fully realized in all cases. Having been stolen from myself a considerable amount of money, I can synpathize.


AnAnonymous's picture

If anyone approached me with proof of ownership of something in my possession I would give it to them. This is simply the right thing to do. However if an heir of Chief Joseph came to me and claimed a legitimate ownership of my property, I would not relinquish it. Not from the legalistic ploy that Native Americans had no concept of European land ownership and therefore the claim could not be valid, but that the land was "owned" by someone who died more than 100 years ago. All of us live on land stolen from someone if one looks back far enough historically.

That is such an 'american' answer.

For 'americans', the group is all.

No one else, in all human history, has spent as much resources as 'americans' to try to paint oneself as one is not.

An 'american' world is a world of fantasy.

Indians were guilty of not being condoned by an 'american' state apparatus. Therefore their natural rights could not exist.

And this is how things are in an 'american' world.

Now compared this fact to the number of 'americans' on this site claiming that they owe nothing to their state, that the state gives them nothing?

'Americans' are statists at heart. The State is core to their society.

But they cant paint themselves as they are so 'americans' enjoy claiming they are not statists.

AnAnonymous's picture

To clarify, for the sake of argument, assume your parents stole something valuable. The theft has not been recovered by the victims. They die and you are their heir. Do you believe that, since YOU STOLE NOTHING, the stolen property is and should be yours without any claims thereon from the victims?

To clarify? But 'americans' clarified that point long ago. Only people who wish not to see do not see.

The US is a colonial country that is based on recet.

'Americans' look at point of no return, it is their way of doing.

They steal, deny they've stolen and once recourse against theft is no longer available, 'americans' drop the issue.

That is why 'americanism' contains that germ for large scale slaughters, genocides.

'Americans' strive to reach that point when no original owner is possible to trace back.

When this point is reached, 'americans' can go out and tell they feel sorry, that they would gladly return what they have stolen but there is no fitting candidate.

It is no surprise that in the context of a world population boom, the population of Indians in the US has been decreasing.

Indians in the US are less numerous than they were at the start of the 20th century.

The_Dude's picture

Try this on for a conscise history....40 minutes...worth every one....

A warning for all of us....know your enemy!

Blazed's picture

The Kosher collective and their MSM were pushing the "6 million Jews" holocau$t figure long before WWII as well! 

SIX MILLION JEWS 1915-1938: 10 Major Newspapers

The First Holocaust

Jewish Fund Raising Campaigns

with Holocaust Claims

During and After World War One

Darth Sidious's picture

wow, unbelievable . . . there were someonewhere between 6 and 8 million jews in europe during that period, mostly in poland, russian and the ukraine . . . so when referring to those areas the newspapers rounded to 6 million several times and then the actual number exterminated was rounded to 6 million.  What a shocking revelation.

That guy is a regular sherlock holmes uncovering the great international zionist conspiracy

Monty Burns's picture

Excellent, Joe.  All I could add is that Churchill had become bankrupt in th early thirties and had been rescued by YKW.  After he got power he resisted every chance to shorten the war, thereby being responsible for millions of unnecessay deaths.

Anusocracy's picture

"That being said, America was founded on stealing lands, plunder and slavery."

That's the M. O. for all governments.

jwoop66's picture

Yup, and what were the govts of europe, asia, africa and south america formed on?   What were the "govts" of the "native americans" founded on?  


I would venture to say- "stealing lands, plunder and slavery".  


Your point?

jwoop66's picture


That comment was meant as a reply to oz.





JoeSexPack's picture

WW1 was disaster for US, & gave rise to Isolationist Movement & America First idea to keep US out of future foreign wars.


That is reason MSM tries so hard to disparage both ideas.


Don't be fooled.

AnAnonymous's picture

In some point of history, as men did not appear from nowhere, it happened that human beings entered lands that were empty.

Not empty as 'americans' thought theirs were empty, that is filled with human beings that 'americans' would tag as sub humans or non humans in order to claim the lands were empty, but empty.

At this point, well, it might be hard to maintain the 'american' fantasy of that stealing lands, plunder and slavery etc

viahj's picture

I'm pretty sure that Tibet wasn't empty.

AnAnonymous's picture

It is also pretty sure that 'America' was not empty and that the guys who performed the thieving act claimed that right to property is a human right.

Free Tibet!

Free the United States of America.

0z's picture

America was an interesting case if only for the sheer size and expediency of the massacre. The natives were caught unprepared in every aspect, and the plunder of gold/silver, which resulted in runaway inflation, was sending population-moving price feedbacks into Europe, where high costs of living were forcing colonists over to America, reinforcing the cycle. Quite the story actually. The ciminal Lords, in the end, only enjoyed a life of plenty in the wake of their Blood Empires, but everyone else lost, and is still losing to this day. The Great Irony is; they are fucking themselves up in the end. We all inherit the ruins. Where is the Nile Delta? We might get it back in... 1000 ... 2000 years?
Here's a good book about the conquest of America:

Marco's picture

The native Americans didn't even need any real government to do it ...

For laws which are supposed to be natural Rothbard's natural laws sure lack historical precedent.

Caviar Emptor's picture

Great American expansion after 1870 consisted of decimating the plains and western native Indian tribes and confiscation of their lands. There was not one but two great depressions following giant bubbles :1873-9 known as the Great Depression and 1893-7 during which unemployment in New York was 35%. Despite great wealth and technological advances there was extreme inequality and wealth disparity. Crony capitalists formed legal cartels to put everyone else out of business using under the table rebates and kickbacks. There were strikes, marches on Washington, bombs on Wall Street and civil unrest in the cities prompting the construction of the armory system in New York City to put down unrest with guns. There was child labor, sweat shops, company stores, and 16 hour workdays. Alcoholism was huge.

Yes it was a glorious time

max2205's picture

No Kardashians. ..bush..barry....drugs....corp fraud....income taxes....unions.....ect


Dream on

MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

No surveillance grid.  Nice.

FeralSerf's picture

No juvenile delinquents on the streets either. They were too busy working in the coal mines where they belonged. That taught them the value of long hours of hard work. And it saved a lot of money teaching them useless skills like reading and writing.

goldsansstandard's picture

The National Banking Oligopoly centered in Mew York fed the booms and thus the busts. It was created by Lincoln, and destroyed the free banking system that prospered from 1837 till the civil war.
Fractional reserve fraud was the problem, It is built into the bank charter granted by the politicians.

Despite all of the predations of the banksters, progress out of the Middle Ages proceded.

and the concentration of wealth given to the benefactors of fractional reserve credit started to crumble.

The elite would have none of that, the country banks and small banks had to be brought to heel.

Thus the Progressives gave us the Fed.

The politicians give the bankers this power because the banks buy .gov paper.

Lefties like the free stuff that fractional reserve fraud buys.

Lefties, Useful idiots for the Banksters, romancing the state, and it's bastard creation , the banking system.

LibertarianMenace's picture

Funny how competition is recommended for every market except the most important, that of the note issue. The irony betrays how the world really works. Progs and plutocrats were made for each other.

robobbob's picture

at least in past history, when a depression came, aggregate prices actually fell, helping the suffering masses by lowering the cost of living and giving a net near zero inflation rate averaged over time.

since the great innovation of the Fed,  prices generally only head in one direction, and so does the average citizens wealth.

an 1830's dollar was similar to an 1880's one. a 2014 one is only worth 2% of the 1914 version.

viva central planned stability.


Nels's picture

America was founded on stealing lands, plunder and slavery ...  I call it the 500 year War.

You might as well call it the 50,000 year war.  This is true of all cutlures, all governments, with the exception of a very few, very small groups like the shakers.  The Aztecs and Mayas weren't so nice, neither were the Norh American natives free of war.

It's the human condition.  The best you get is a few civilizations were the idea erupts that maybe it isn't the best way to do things.  You know, like Western Civ thinks now.  Unfortunately, that thought tends to note the later years of said civilization, just before folks who enjoy stealing and plunder come in.

AnAnonymous's picture

It is the human condition? Western civilization? It is hoped western civilization does mean 'american' civilization because since their inception, 'americans' have engaged in the largest theft spree ever, all disguised under the natural rights theory.

It is only 'american' nature to do so, to claim that 'american' nature is human nature.


Thats a simplified and leftist view of history and Im personally sick of this lefist prism. 

I won't refute each of your charges in detail because I think Dinesh Dsouza has done that in his film. I would make similar points.  

Conquest is as old as time. Native americans conquered and fought for and over lands hundreds of years before the first settlers arrived. Indians murdered and enslaved each others (as did native Africans)The United States is not unique in that a more advanced group of individuals have subdued a culture that could not match its numbers or technological superiority.  

Slavery existed thousands of years before the US was founded and the US was the only country that pitted brother against brother and family against family and in the end delivered freedom to the slaves. Also, as noted above, Africans delivered Africans to western slave brokers and at the time of the original settlements there were more White slaves (indentured servants) than African. Having said that, this will always be a dark chapter in American history but the fact that the US elected the first African American (his competency is a seperate argument) speaks volumes that as Churchill once said, "the US makes the right decision only after it exhausts all others")

The US has had hegemonic power since WWII buts also the only true superpower(though failing fast now) that not freed millions from fascist tyranny. What other country invades Jap and Germany and Italy, spends billions to help rebuild those same countries (The Marshall Plan) and provides a protective umbrella of security to those nations ( who by the way don't mind the US guaranteeing their security but suddenly get squeamish when they have to increase monies for their own defense but don't want Pershing 2 or Tomahawk cruise missiles to counteract the Soviet SS20'.s Sure its ok that the missiles fly between Russia and the US but suddenly when the Europeans have to have skin in the game they get weak kneed)

The United States has lost its way over the last 25 Years.  We changed after successive progressives took control of the whitehouse (1990 to now).  Bush 41 screwed this country over by aligning his 1000 points of light with the globalists furthering the demise of the US economy.  Clinton spent more time chasing tail and take crediting over Reagan's piece dividend with a last gasp robust economy that was actually FED smoke and mirrors.  Just imagine if that POS had doe his job and took Osama Bin Laden out on the 3 seperate times he had the chance? Bush 43 put this country onto the road of bankcruptcy with his misguided military actions and atempts at nation building, expanded welfare ( No Child, Medicare Prescription D,) and arrogance to think you can bring people from the 12th century into the 21st.   He also let the orwellian genie out of the bottle using 911 as an excuse to sacrifice liberty for security and as B Franklin said, "Those who are willing to sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither". The US has brought its current situation onto itself. Now the demise is almost complete with this Alynskyite Marxist in the white house doing everything he can to reduce the US to a third world country and complete its collapse through the cloward piven strategy. Its these 1960's hate america crowd that will elliminate the last chance some measure of protection of freedom. 

For those that revel in the fall of the once great United States.  We were the last bastion of hope to many. See what life will be like when China and Russia rule. Ask the Hungarians, Czecks, Chechens, The Ukrainains from the 1930s, The Finns, the 60 million that China purged, the 5 million starving in N Korea.  Who's name will be printed on the humanitarian bags of food dropped from helicopters to starving people after war, or natural disaster? 




FeralSerf's picture

". . . simplified and leftist view of history and Im personally sick of this lefist prism. "

I take it that you believe The Enlightenment was a leftist conspiracy?