This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ron Paul On The Real Meaning Of The 1914 Christmas Truce
Submitted by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity,
One hundred years ago last week, on Christmas Eve, 1914, German and British soldiers emerged from the horrors of World War One trench warfare to greet each other, exchange food and gifts, and to wish each other a Merry Christmas. What we remember now as the “Christmas Truce” began with soldiers singing Christmas carols together from in the trenches. Eventually the two sides climbed out of the trenches and met in person. In the course of this two day truce, which lasted until December 26, 1914, the two sides also exchanged prisoners, buried their dead, and even played soccer with each other.
How amazing to think that the celebration of the birth of the Prince of Peace could bring a brief pause in one of the most destructive wars in history. How sad that it was not to last.
The Christmas Truce showed that given the choice, people do not want to be out fighting and killing each other. It is incredibly damaging to most participants in war to face the task of killing their fellow man. That is one reason we see today an epidemic of PTSD and suicides among US soldiers sent overseas on multiple deployments.
The Christmas Truce in 1914 was joyous for the soldiers, but it was dangerous for the political leadership on both sides. Such fraternization with the “enemy” could not be tolerated by the war-makers. Never again was the Christmas Truce repeated on such a scale, as the governments of both sides explicitly prohibited any repeat of such a meeting. Those who had been greeting each other had to go back to killing each other on orders from those well out of harm’s way.
As much as governments would like to stamp out such humanization of the “enemy,” it is still the case today that soldiers on the ground will meet and share thoughts with those they are meant to be killing. Earlier this month, soldiers from opposing sides of the Ukraine civil war met in eastern Ukraine to facilitate the transfer of supplies and the rotation of troops. They shook hands and wished that the war would be over. One army battalion commander was quoted as saying at the meeting, “I think it's a war between brothers that nobody wants. The top brass should sort things out. And us? We are soldiers, we do what we're told.”
I am sure these same sentiments exist in many of the ongoing conflicts that are pushed by the governments involved -- and in many cases by third party governments seeking to benefit from the conflict.
The encouraging message we should take from the Christmas Truce of 100 years ago is that given the opportunity, most humans do not wish to kill each other. As Nazi leader Hermann Goring said during the Nuremberg war crimes trials, “naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany.” But, as he added, “the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
This is where our efforts must be focused. To oppose all war propaganda perpetrated by governments against the will of the people.
»
- 16616 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Fuck a truce Ron Paul, drag them behind a Chevy Volt or Prius. A Nissian leaf will also do.
Well we did get World War II so I guess Orthodox Christians don't count either.
I mean seriously...North and South talked across the line everyday. This is such a canard.
What was the point of the truce if the war didn't end? Andwhy not talk about World War II while we're at it?
The point is that the soldiers established a truce on the front lines which the officers were forced to quash with threats of death. It's a clear example of how government operates in the starkest possible terms. Hence the value of the allusion.
+1, spot on. And nothing but a down vote for you. It's saying things like this that turn most republicans and 'conservatives' off from ron paul, and there are more and more of them prowling around these days. Nothing can be allowed to distract from our glorious wars overseas, and nothing can be said that could possibly imply our soldiers are wasting their time and sacrificing their lives and well being for nothing but bullshit. Stuff like that sounds unpatriotic to them. See his treatment during debates for confirmation. If these 'support our troops' people really gave a shit about then they'd be joining RP in calling for them to come home. And they sure as hell wouldn't let their children join.
The officer corps' reaction to the Christmas truce is a fine example of the hypocrisy implicit in the "support the troops" line. And then there was the time Ron Paul was booed by the "Values Voters" for mentioning the Prince of Peace.
Ya, that's the danger with religion. You can call Jesus the prince of peace, and you can call Christianity (and Islam, for that matter) a peaceful religion all you want, but just look what people do to each other in their names. Same deal with govt. For people who claim to want peace and use war 'only as a last resort' we sure do fight a lot of them. Religion and govt are the two most dangerous ideas ever created by man. About the only 'good' thing about religion is that I can, and do, opt out of it entirely. Can't do that with govt. Ron gets it with govt, too bad he doesn't with religion. It still fascinates me that so many otherwise intelligent people still fall for the second biggest scam ever foisted on mankind
I'm an atheist but it's obvious to me that religion works well for lots of people. No more reason for religious folks to toss out Jesus over the misuse of his name than for me to toss away the ideals of freedom and justice simply because millions have been murdered by those who twist those words as well.
All Wars are Bankers Wars
All cops are cop suckers.
Greenie for you, Billy; that's the most thoughtful post on religion that I've read from a self-proclaimed athiest in a very long time.
For a little context, here's a Hindu commenting on Christianity:
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” - Mahatma Gandhi
The problem is not necessarily the 'religion' or its teachings; it's the followers...
Nothing like a philosophy and theology discussion on ZH to get the laff tracks warmed up. All you barking seals make sure to clap your flippers off when the Omega part of the Prince of Peace is revealed. A more smug, self-assured (and self-aggrandized) lot is hard to find, but then again, I didn't create myself so why should I understand your puffery? Here is a quick question... what makes you so sure you have ever met an actual saint? I'd ask Gandhi how it is he supposedly learned so much about the Christ yet persisted in worshipping walking hamburgers and their excrement.
Yeah, you run with that, pal. RP won that 2011 VV Summit with a then record 37%. A few neocons does not a narrative make. But I'm sure it comforts you in your bed at night.
They booed him during 2008 campaign. It was disappointing but yes, having the ability to remember history and accurately allude to it does comfort me.
"the time during the last campaign when the Repcon Christian Values Voters Summit booed Ron for saying he worshiped the Prince of Peace."
http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/ben-stein-vs-ron-paul/
I have come to the conclusion that short of an emergency we should have to take a popular vote to go to war. Our representatives represent their own interests first and it is "the people" who have to do all the sacrificing and dieing.
In my right wing libertarian ideology I believe most people would rather trade and coexist peacefully that actually face bullets or swords, even if they are not too fond of the group next door.
I also believe that at times people would vote for war. I suspect some anti-ISIS action could get passed and I bet even if it was volunteer based you get enough people.
War always sounds great until you actually have to do it...yourself.
Hell, they haven't even managed to put together a constitutionally mandated declaration of war since 1941. Time to leave behind the bad idea of government entirely. Imagine a world where you have security and adjudication secured by the right to fire those who provide it if they fail to satisfy your wishes.
this phrase "Time to leave behind the bad idea of government entirely." sounds good. but then you spoil it with this phrase
"Imagine a world where you have security and adjudication secured by the right to fire those who provide it if they fail to satisfy your wishes."
which is nothing else then actually how government should be
I repeat: you acknowledge that security and adjudications are necessary. and that would be the role of government in a republic, the very essence of the "public thing", the res publica
and then you ask for the right to fire those who provide it if they fail to satisfy, which is the very essence of democracy
so what you are asking for is a republic based on democratic principles. which leads back to a proper constitution, which is not only a paper, but a constant act
You misunderstand me. I don't want to fire those who fail to satisfy me through a process of convincing a majority of others that a vendor should lose his contract in some future election cycle. I want my natural right to disassociate myself from those who dissatisfy me at will.
If I buy your pizza and I don't like the taste or the price I simple don't order from you again. I don't have to convince a hundred million people that maybe we should get burgers instead four years down the line.
The 'leaders' and their progeny rarely put THEIR lives on the line these days. THAT is one of the problems. Ike and JFK were the last US Presidents who really seemed to have a sense of what war was. Neither were keen on war and actively warned against the growing military industrial complex.
Nixon and LBJ had carefully constructed and staged 'service'. George HW had a more direct role BUT seemed to be serving in part to offset his family's abysmal record (trading with the enemy Union Bank et al) and to build a background for a poitical career. Eve then Bush seemed to be all too willing to sacrifice others (bailing out on his gunner for example). His son's ANG 'service' (strings pulled and NO attempt to volunteer for active service as many did) and the multiple draft exemptions you see in many of that era were far more common. Most of our politicians contemptiously view the masses as cannon fodder - props to pose with. If they really cared they wouldn't be so keen to put them at risk and would take far better care of those that did (you wouldn't have the many VA scandals that have occurred). Use of mercenaries ('outsourcing' to Blackwater et al since Iraq) has made it easier - THOSE casualties aren't counted and remain invisible - with many being foreign nationals - mercenaries in the very real sense of the word.
Was a very different thing when a king was at the head of his army on the battlefield. Even in the British Empire, the first son inherited and the second bought a commission in the military. Now in the US you rarely have ANY of those making decisions to go to war actually facing - or having faced - the consequences.
I'm from a family of 'citizen soldiers' going back to the Revolution - followed by 1812, the Civil War, WWI and WWII - as well as the 'smaller' wars - Spanish American, Korea, Vietnam... more than enough died in the process and some came out pretty badly wounded (one was a member of the Lost battalion in the Meuse Argonne). My father had enough sense to turn down OCS when drafted for Korea (after being turned down trying to volunteer for WWII - he was married when drafted and saw the meatgrinder Korea was). I started West Point while Vietnam was still hot - but resigned when I saw how screwed up thigns were (they took pride in turning out officers who were prime candidates for fragging while punishing the real leaders they needed). My class set a record resignation rate (but then our firsties - seniors - entered in '69 - they couldn't even fill all the appointment slots... Tet left a bad impression). Got a lottery number in the high 300's AFTER resigning- felt vindicated. I would have gone if drafted but decided I didn't want to be responsible for a platoon in a system that was SO screwed up. Pretty much everyone felt it was FUBAR at that point too... especially the NCO's in charge of field training (one was 'You VOLUNTEERED for all this?!?! Do you boys KNOW what you're getting in to?). Spent another 6 years working and going to school to get a degree - the first in my lineage. Yeah, I KNEW what I was giving up. But then a lot of our upperclassmen were there only to try and put 'Nam off for 4 more years - with a side bet that they could do well enough to pull an assignment that would be better than a draftee footslogger.
Our military is one which thinks it's not a bad idea to test nuclear bombs with troops nearby in open trenches, that spraying Ogent Orange (WITH DIOXIN IN IT) is fine and ... well dont get me started on the Gulf Wars.....
I wouldn't let my sons near the military - and thankfully have done well enough that they will not have to even think about it.
War - on teh level that gets you killed - is now for the poor, desperate and stupidly, naively idealistic. I hate to say that and wwould like to still 'believe' in greater goods and such but I simply don't believe it.
Sorry, but with the massive manipulation of media, TPTB would stir up some propoganda and the sheeple would just line up and vote just the way the manipulators want and, tadaa! another wasted war. As an example, look at the wally world wars every black friday the last few years. Shop! Shop! Shop! Hoe Hoe Hoe! Merry Shopmas!
"What was the point of the truce if the war didn't end?"
Purely Symbolic ... For the remainder, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties
I was able to collect 21 liberals. Lets break down my statement in two steps. No negativity against Ron Paul who is the focal point. But I struck the right cord, point number two.
Thank you for participating in this experiment. :)
Looks like you just collected three more. They sure do got a hot nut for that man-made climate shibboleth. Me, i didn't vote either way, as i'm somewhat familiar with SID exercises.
Well duh!
A couple of guys get into a pissing contest and millions die for it...
What could possibly go wrong?
Banksters and money. Lots of money. Always has been. Go look at David Cameron's wiki. His non-english non-goy side raised money for the Red Shield's wars for over 200+ years.
Ron Paul, tell everyone why we build Ford, GM outside US. To trickle in P**r***l**a*. Can you solve the puzzle? Imagine being at a party. You dip the cracker into to bowl. Crunch. Then you double dip into the bowl with the remaining cracker bite.
I thought a was close with "petrodollar". Still trying ...
Thank you for participating in experiment with post #2. No one disputed the question with any constructive defensive facts, but one did answer the puzzle question.
Life doesn't revolve around up thumbs or down thumbs. If any of you GED students would know, we participated in debate meetings. All thru College and life. When you upvote or down vote for the next dancing with the stars, you follow the herd of lemmings.
I ask again: tell everyone why we build Ford, GM outside US. BTW, Cadillac in China 2016-2018ish.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-05/cadillac-to-build-95-cars-locally-by-2018-for-china-push.html
Continue the lemming votes or join the ZH fight club to engage in debate.. Now answer my fucking question!
Provide stimuli to a system's input vector, allow its internal dynamic states to process these, and its response appears at the observable outputs. Cadillac, for example, is a firm: it's a microeconomic system. Hence, its outputs, i.e. its local Chinese production volume, is in response to what (local perhaps?) economic input(s)? Concealed higher order states may of course conspire with sufficient influence to overcome the simpler, readily apparent first order variables, but that would be atypical. If any, the reader is left to explicitly answer the question.
The soldiers and citizens didnt know what they were fighting for. The root of WWI was over Serbia.
If they all just took a step back and think, they're just fighting over a country nobody even heard of or knew where it was. It was all the spiraling effect of alliances stepping in.
Bullshit. The Triple Entente was greedy and they thought they had an easy mark in Austria. As Joe Frazier famously said "you thought wrong."
And it's not the New Year yet so I can still swear.
Good luck with that new years resolution. I give you 6 hours before you crumble into potty mouth again.
/sarc
Better he should resolve to stop thinking like a statist.
You should say "motherfucker" as many times as possible before you can't swear.
Or cunt until you can't.
Kuntz - Butthole Surfers Start practicing before January 1, 2015.
WW1 was planned in the 1890's to take down four Empires, consolidate the money supply, and reconfigure the various European nations and cultures along socialist lines. Serbia was just the trigger. They all fell like dominoes as planned by the Rothschilds. The different countries/Empires were tied in by treaties and in a matter of weeks were all at each other's throats before they knew what was happening. As planned.
I dont know a great deal about the specifics, but once the orders for mobilization were given the war was on. Once Russia began mobilization the war was on in earnest. Much of this was due to poor communicaton technology. And as usual the plans were designed to fight the last war, no provisions were made (nor could have been made) for newer war technology.
Those European royal families had been going at it for centuries. Every few decades, they would engage in a near genocidal massacre of an entire generation of their own young men in a war based on a small number of greedy men's ambitions. Until WWI, the US had the good sense to stay the fuck out of it. Before US involvement, peace was achieved once one side had exhausted itself. There was no punishing treaty forced on them like Versailles. This time, once they were at a stalemate, here comes America with fresh troops and munitions to restart it again. That crushing peace treaty brought about by American involvement and insistence on reparations and sole blame being placed on Germany made WWII inevitable. Had these soldiers merely laid down their arms, or better yet, marched back to their home country and thrown those sociopaths who put them up to this out on their asses, this past century would have looked a lot different. Same deal with American involvement. The war would have ended mutually years before. This means no treaty of Versailles, which means no nazism or WWII. American involvement prolonging the war also gave the Bolsheviks the window of turmoil they needed to overthrow the romanovs. This means without us, no USSR, no Stalin, etc. no worldwide showdown, Cold War, Vietnam, or Korean War. Also, no arbitrarily redrawing all maps in the Middle East, or taking land and giving it to isreal, which means no decades of slaughter in the Middle East.
Why does this matter? We know were they live by GPS and have drones. Great write up, but another OWS failure. You cannot change past history, only future. Stop dwelling on the past. Create future history.
GOT IT!
@Greenskeeper_Carl
“American involvement prolonging the war” ???
Don’t exaggerate the impact of US involvement :
While France was fighting since August 1914, the United States entered in the war only in April 1917 (more than 2 years and 8 months later), not to rescue the French or the English (who by the way were not at all defeated), but because, President Wilson judged it was the US national interest to do it in response to the declaration by Germany of a total submarine war against US ships.
The United States came significantly in action (1 division) at the battle of Seicheprey in April 1918 (only 7 months before the end of the war)
In fact the American involvement contributed to SHORTEN the war !
well, I could make the speculative argument that the American involvement in the war and in the peace treaty process of WWI caused WWII
France and Britain would, imho, not have had the gall to impose too harsh terms on Germany without the proof that a one million army can't be added to the fray from the other side of the pond
I could go even further back and ask where Britain (and in part France) would have been without the massive arm deliveries from America
or ask why "Total War" and "unconditional surrender" concepts which originated in the US Civil War would have made it on european shores without that initial arms delivery
but my point here is a completely different one: (major) war does not pay, increasingly so. WWI was "funded" by the sheer ponzi scheme of scheming to have the losers paying for it. did not work, could not work. in many ways, we are all still paying for WWII, and have a look at the bill for the Iraq War, which was not even a major one
one ray of hope: war is becoming so damn expensive to become impossible beyond increasingly small interventions. and even those, I expect soon a cheap Toyota-Jeep-sized machine-gun equipped "Land Drone" to take up the main load from the current Air Drone
America has a mercenary military force (all volunteers)..not much different then the germans fighting for england in our revolutionary war. .gov can afford to print debt to pay them..all out war is in the age of nukes is suicide for our kings and elite. so limited war is the now.
like post history, post war is here..funny only heads of state are murdered in lthe ME.. that is a trend that elites want limited to mid east..oil and gold for the taking. with our volunteers keeping all in line.
US MILITARY motto: Point em out & pay up.. we take em out. funny how the police forces here understand that as well.
That sounds like something right out of a govt approved history lesson, or maybe a Wilson biographer, and it's bullshit. Why did the Germans declare total war on American shipping? We had been committing acts against the Germans that were considered acts of war for years before they did that. Wilson had been trying for years to goad the Germans into sinking ships. A prudent president would also have warned American passengers not to travel on ships of belligerent countries like Britain, which were fair targets under the rules of naval warfare. The sinking of the Lusitania was the big one. By declaring war, Wilson basically declared that Americans have to right to travel unmolested of ships of belligerent powers that are also carrying war munitions (often illegally, I might add). While American involvement did lengthen the war, since even before the first soldier arrived there, we were sending them supplies, food, munitions they couldn't have fought without, let's say you are right, it shortened the war. SO FUCKING WHAT. that is still an absurd reason to enter a conflict that was none of our business. Half assed justifications like yours are the reason so many people were killed last century.
What about the Balfour declaration ?
Love you RP, but you're missing the most important point. The soldiers started fighting each other again after Dec 26. This is made all the worse by the fact that they knew their enemy were just other guys. Humans are tribal, and they tend to follow leaders. That is why we are all fucked, and why your great idea is just a great idea and not workable.
I don't really get your point. After this happened, the british brass realized it was a problem and sent groups of british soldiers on suicide missions, knowing that they would take serious casualties, so that that the brits would hate the germans and want to fight them. The point is that humans are not particularly inclined to kill other humans. It requires dehumanization through conditioning and propaganda. All wars have this feature. And while humans are tribal, they're not naturally violent as most people believe. There have been long periods of egalitarianism and peace in human history. But in those times, resources were much less of a problem.
I'm no student of WWII, but what you say makes sense, and unfortunately it proves my point. It worked. A few sociopath leaders undid the humanity of the soldiers. That is the problem, and talking about free markets and wishing away the sociopaths who inevitably turn humans against humans doesn't make them go away.
In case you're wondering what I think the answer is, I don't know.
Informing other individuals that they are being scammed with a message of self sacrifice which benefits no one other than the elites is a necessary first step in obtaining peace and individual freedom. Don't get caught up in a "bad things always happen so there's no point in even thinking about it," mentality. That way lies slavery and pointless death. This is not an exaggeration.
And now I'll do you the favor of quoting someone other than you know who:
"When I, the People, learn to remember, when I, the People, use thelessons of yesterday and no longer forget who robbed me last year,
who played me for a fool—then there will be no speaker in all the
world say the name: “The People," with any fleck of a sneer in his
voice or any far-off smile of derision.
The mob—the crowd—the mass—will arrive then." -- Carl Sandburg
My understanding is that they replaced a bunch of the soldiers who had participated in the truce with green soldiers who weren't there, so the troops on the front lines were fresh out of propaganda farms and willing to kill and die for their govts because there was a genuine fear on both sides they wouldn't fight. If you are really interested in this stuff, WWI and II, go to lewrockwell.com and read everything written by Ralph raico.
One of the most intelligent comments ever seen on ZH.
So it's "intelligent" to simply accept that we are lorded over by sociopaths? What would Spartacus or Jesus or Wat Tyler or Benjamin Franklin or Frederick Douglass say about that?
Since you -- an Ayn Rand disciple -- brought up Jesus.... What would Jesus say about Ayn Rand? And what would Ayn say about Jesus? Well, we know the answer to the latter question at least. Funny you would use Jesus to make your point, though.
Lots of different individuals with divergent world views have made valuable contributions to humanity. Being able to understand that simple fact is not a flaw but a virtue. But for you such an understanding is reason to attack. So sad.
Talk about double talk. Maybe that bullshit works in the coffee house where you sell your poems, Billy, but it's just bullshit to me.
Good luck with your plan to only associate with perfect individuals but how do you intend to avoid your own imperfect self?
Yes, that's my plan, poet. I intend only to associate with perfect individuals, which is clear because criticizing any self-righteous Ayn Rand drone means that is my goal.
I find some good and some bad in Rand just as Ron Paul does. You voted for Ron Paul, a Rand "drone" by your definition. That makes you a drone supporter which has to be the lowest step on the ladder. Maybe if you saw yourself as a useful individual in your own right rather than as a self defined opponent of all things Rand you'd feel better about yourself.
I'm done boring the other posters with this line of discussion. We can work on your regeneration and restoration to humanity at another time. Nighty-night.
I voted for RP despite his affection for Rand. Most notably, he diverges from Rand in his lack of support for Isreal and the MIC. As for your other point, I'll change my user name when mainstream politicians and business leaders stop repeating and trying to implement Rand philosophy. I believe that Rand is very much part of the NeoCon agenda, and the NWO.
Say what you will about rand, but it has always fascinated me how prescient she was in a lot of way. The names of so many laws, departments, and acts our govt has passed lately sound like some absurdly named govt edicts out of one of her books, like the 'fair share act'. Don't tell me you couldn't see this govt passing something similar. In atlas shrugged, the country is run by a bunch of whining, thieving, murderous criminals. How different are the ones we have running our country today? I don't agree with everything she says, but I do agree with her on a lot.
.
double talk.
" The soldiers started fighting each other again after Dec 26. This is made all the worse by the fact that they knew their enemy were just other guys. Humans are tribal, and they tend to follow leaders."
They were PAID to fight.
No pay no fighting.
Which means that the real problem is...
Many people who sign up stay because they are forced to. That pay thing does not fly. Once they sign that contract they can go to prison for noncompliance. This is coercion.
Bore down on that and tell me what comes next?
It is propaganda and flat out LIES about the "enemy" that keep soldiers fighting, and the public supportive of war. soldiers are paid to fight and that commits them somewhat, but a war driven without good cause leads to poor morale and oftentimes, defeat.
Resuming active fire, under threat of being executed by a commanding officer, who absolutely means it, isn't the same thing as blindly following one's tribal leaders.
That said, I appreciate your sentiment.
But - which idea isn't 'workable' - promoting the radical notion that the reasons for which the ruling classes/superstructure of global governments launch wars have nothing to do with the average denizen of those states?
My goodness, if that isn't workable, what is? Telling people to give up? Or trying to gather enough like minded people to seize power by violence and use the same to deal with those who might disagree with your utopia?
If anything, the criticism I'd tender is that the governments themselves are the creatures of various powerful interests - the MIC, banks, Zionist lobby, oil and gas concerns, large corporations, et cetera. Identifying the government with war, as distinct from "the people" seems better facilitated by exposition of just who, exactly, the warmongers are.
I also love RP, full of old school integrity, his message always seems to be one of faith, and hope that somehow America can turn itself around.
His politics were doomed to the fact he was to gentle a soul. Ron..unfortunately we need assassins in these dark days, not true statesmen such as yourself.
That story was told in the movie The War Horse.
By the way If they didn't fight they would have been executed..
Thanks AGAIN RP..
Do you think you'll succeed by following in the footsteps of Robespierre rather than Ron Paul?
Everyone arguing with you on here has integrity. I know you know this, you have been very respectful. I agree whole heartedly with you, just thought I'd say as much. Peace Billy.
The operator of America's largest electric utility grid frets that an overly ambitious schedule to close coal fired plants could leave its customers in the dark.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-12-24/largest-u-dot-s-dot-grid-see...
Bloomberg reports: “PJM is concerned about having sufficient resources during the winter of 2015/2016, given planned environmental-related retirements and the record of generator unavailability last winter,” Ray Dotter, spokesman for PJM Interconnection LLC in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, said in a Dec. 22 e-mail. “PJM is checking with generation owners to see if any retirements can be delayed.”
The Obama administration and its EPA have been hell-bent on making it harder for coal plants to operate. Even tighter restrictions come into play in 2015. Meanwhile, construction of gas-fired replacement plants lags well behind the coal closures, and in some regions, there is insufficient pipeline infrastructure to sufficiently fuel gas-fired plants during peak winter demands. Perhaps a touch of irony here, but it appears that progressive Democrat controlled "Blue States" will be hit first and hardest if/when the grid collapses from insufficient electric generation capacity.
http://www.showmegreencoal.com/
It won't fly unless Santa puts it into your stocking next year. This is an unaffordable transition to occur. Too much debt, not enough hosts to suck up funding.
Edit: Its a cat & mouse game, you switch to gas and watch them bleed to greencoal mantra. Sorta like Obamacare panic mode screaming heard from White House.
WTF, how do you expect the American economy to recover?? We have to build bombs and kill people. besides wew must support the troops no matter what they do. WAR WAR WAR it's the Amerikan way. We are soooo awesome. USA USA USA!! RAH RAH RAH KILL KILL KILL
Did these soldiers have a choice to resume fighting after meeting 'the enemy'?
Yes, they did.
Is the truth that the average person kill women and children in cold blood for a bowl of soup, a pat on the head, and a bit of enamel on their chest?
A standing army is a paid army.
The choice was resume or be executed.
A brave man might be able to face the firing squad, but that's surely less than 1 in 100.
How much less brave would one need to be to criticize unequivocal, and ongoing, US (or Israeli) war crimes - yet the politician, or news anchor, or journalist, or Hollywood actor who will do so is exceedingly rare.
So I wouldn't judge those fellows quite so cavalierly.
"The choice was resume or be executed. "
Then the entire point of this article is bullshit.
Apparently Mr. Paul has never looked down the barrel of a gun and is talking shit.
No, your level of comprehension is bullshit.
This incident happened 100 years ago- a completely different time. Information was not as plentiful and state propaganda was most likely the extent of what they were privy to. In addition WWI was completely different in terms of weaponry and the proximaty one needed to be to fight. With that being said I cannot imagine the psychological trauma involved. Today's PTSD in my opinion is due to the fact soldiers have more information available to them and fighting against others who are severely disadvantaged with out of date weapons and communications. It's one thing to take on an equal but to fight against people who just happen to have oil or poppy fields for CIA to profit from another. The trauma is from realizing you've been had.
Well said Dr. Paul!
There was a similar case in the Alsace region between Germany and France in 1944 between Americans and Germans. It was much smaller in scale, and occurred as the Battle of the Bulge was raging farther to the north.
On Christmas 1941, tens of thousands of Russians, who had been denied the right to express their faiths by the Bolsheviks, went to churches in Ukraine, White Russia and the Baltics to celebrate Christmas mass for the first time in twenty years. I am not sure how they felt about the Wehrmacht, who had made this possible.
The commemmoration of the birth of Christ has an irresistible effect on mankind to seek and to feel peace and goodwill among them. May it aleays be so.
Amen to that. And I'm an atheist.
Stalin eased previous prohibitions on many things in an effort to tap sentiment for 'The Motherland' - this included allowing the Russian Orthodox Church more 'latitude'. Anything to get the populace fighting.
Going to war is like having a gun battle with a guy on behalf of the guys selling you and him the bullets on credit.
The banksters need to repay us.
If the banksters, profiteers, pols, and crats advocating war had to fight and kill the relatives of the children they wished to send there would be a lot less war.
"The encouraging message we should take from the Christmas Truce of 100 years ago is that given the opportunity, most humans do not wish to kill each other."...
Ron meet the Zombie that hasn't won a war and occupation in 69 years and is now bankrupt never to pay off his debts that still keeps telling himself he's a winner even when he knows he's a loser who wants to pick the ugliest fight with someone who will put him in a "coma" or worse!
I dare say that the dough boy of 100 years ago wouldn't recognize any of us including you, and would be more than appalled at his great grandchildren for what they've done and become!!!
Whew. Say what you want but WW2 was a picnic compared to WW1.
"How amazing to think that the celebration of the birth of the Prince of Peace could bring a brief pause..." --Ron Paul
The "Prince of Peace"? We were trying to have an intelligent discussion here.
I am not religious. I do find your position inflexible.
Some follow the religious rituals rotely. So they will seek peace because they are told to. Good enough for me.
Some follow the religion because they have examined the ideas and found them to be worthy, regardless of the mythology that accompanies it. They seek peace because it is the right thing to do, and their religion has helped them come to that conclusion. I deeply respect this group and even though I have no religion, will ardently defend their right to their beliefs.
Some are in the middle of the two places I just described.
Some claim to follow the religion because it suits some purpose, they have something to gain. They can turn on you in a second if it stops suiting their purpose. These folks alone, I have contempt for. I think you are putting all folks who have religion into this category and it is unfair to do so.
Excellently put MsCreant
World Serf Obligation Calculator
As a combat vet I agree with Dr Paul. It's absolutely exhilarating to be in combat, an unbelievable high. I loved it! While in the combat zone your brain switches to primal instincts and you see/hear/feel things with a filter you haven't ever used. It's hard to explain the change.
The afterwards, is another story... It makes me sick just to remember.
Statements like that one constitute a service for which I can genuinely thank you.
It made you high to fight for bankers? You loved it? How is this consistent with RP's message? I must be missing something.
I would imagine that battlefield behavior has more to do with adrenaline and fear of imminent death or dismemberment rather than a deliberative examination of the political, historical and sociological events which caused the enemy to pour massive fire onto one's position.
Probably true, but I never signed up to fight for bankers so I don't know. I was born in the 1960's, and no war since I have been alive has been about our freedom or anything other than enriching bankers. Are you going to tell me now that signing up and fighting for bankers and being paid by the state you hate to do said fighting is honorable?
What the fuck is your anti-statist shit about? Are you just a fashionista poet?
Why do you expect every individual to be perfect at each and every moment of their lives? People make mistakes. You seem to have the ability to be a very cold person at times. That's a strange attitude for someone who believes in the efficacy of government and the need for a safety net. One would think that you would be interested in informing and converting wayward individuals rather than stoning them. But that's what's really at the core of the statist mentality, isn't it -- the desire to chop others off at the knees supposedly for their own good.
Taking issue with, "killing people for bankers made me high," does not equate to "LetThemEatRand expect[s] every individual to be perfect." But go ahead and avoid my question and attack me, as it makes you what you are. Preach on pro-military anti-statist.
But he never said killing people, let alone doing so for bankers made him high - you said that.
I believe he simply referred to the adrenaline rush which, I'll suggest, is something many LEOs crave after their tours. Which partly explains why so many routine traffic stops end with chokeholds, tasers, and gunfire.
You chose to be a moralizing cunt about it, "as it makes you what you are."
If I'm a moralizing cunt for calling out some banker employed military guy for saying he got a rush from combat (which by the way means aiming guns and other weapons at people and killing them if you are successful), then I'm a moralizing cunt. And you can quote me on that with your small text.
Agreed.
How's that working out for you?
It would be working out great, but it's hard to see. Fortunately, though I have a hard time reading my small text, it makes my point more cogent. I use what I've got. You understand.
The animal that is you, me, Billy, and Counterpunch (and sheikrubootie), all have the capacity to feel this way in battle. He ain't feeling it for bankers. He felt it because he was shot at, then shot, or avoided a mortar round or any of a number of other life and death situations that they get into out there.
In his place you would feel the same. It is biology, the animals that we are. Not everyone gets it that they are fighting banker wars when they sign up. Once they are in battle, it is not about the larger political landscape, it is about you and your fellow soldiers, surviving the suck assed situations they find themselves in.
No offense intended, but he also said he was sick about it when he reflected on it later. Both things are true, contained in that one person.
I think you are reactive because you are afraid you could feel those ways too. And you would. And it would not make you evil, it would make you human. Like me, and Billy, and counterpunch, and the sheik, who told the truth.
This.
The reason why you seem to so often miss the point, or allege arguments not actually made, is because you're more interested in appearing clever than appearing to understand someone else's point of view.
I thought that was clear.
The world can't not want to be a cunt for you, Bub.
Do try to understand at least that much.
But go ahead and avoid my question and attack me
You asked why I thought killing for bankers is honorable but I didn't say that. So I will never be able to answer to your satisfaction.
Questions are better employed as a means for gaining understanding but you simply set up straw men in an attempt to inspire anger. However, your misanthropic tendencies are no more infectious than your belief that people can only be happy when they are not free.
Billy, the point he most wanted to make was showing us all how enlightened he is, and hath always been.
Anyone who thinks wars are engendered solely, or even mainly, by bankers, has excluded from evidence, by the way, the other power structures that openly and ostentatiously advocate for war, defense spending, etc. etc.
If you think it's all eeevil corporations and banks - why bother looking elsewhere for more suspects?
Bitchez we has to be fightin an ice age rather than each other. Halfway out on my jog today and I realized I should have been wearing heavier underware. It's really cold out there this year and supposed to be getting colder for the next 80 years.
Are you referring to the weather on your home planet. Here on Earth we are supposed to be getting a lot hotter - 1 whole degree warmer. At least according to the "scientific consensus."
Yeah, and healthcare is now affordable too.
I have reached the point I do not believe anything the government says. Nothing, not any branch or department. I refuse to even consider that some of the information might be accurate. I have been lied to enough.
The sad part is that you are free to disassociate yourself from other individuals whom you believe seek to do you wrong. But government just won't let go. It insists on befriending you in its oh so helpful way.
suteibu- "Consensus" or coercion. Scientists need funding and what better way to assure funding then to have a predisposed idea of what you will find. You find it in every discipline- it must fit the accepted doctrine and today more than ever the doctrine is determined by who funds the research. UC Davis, once a fine school, has become Monsanto's bitch. It is amazing to me that the TPP and TTIP trade treaties are both demanding acceptance of GMOs. I thought we were a free market society- what happened to people making the decisions through purchases as to what succeeded and what failed. When riders can be submitted anonymously to legislation to protect Monsanto in case something comes down the pike you know the game is rigged. Our country just keeps getting stranger and stranger.
The Christmas story is an example of how individuals will behave if left to make their own decisions. The Government of any nation will act according to their financier's desires. It's unfortunate that wars always seem to occur at times of economic distress- I suppose young men and women with few opportunities choose the military services. I don't know what is worse- being paid to kill someone who is probably not much different than you or being killed by the enemy combatant. Many would argue life is better but I just can't get over the idea of thou shalt not kill. For those Christians out there- Jesus said he did not come to replace the laws- the big ten still stand.
Happy New Year Zero Hedgers
P.S.- if the older gentleman who lost his wife recently is out there don't drink too much. You sounded pretty down on Christmas Eve. She is watching out for you and waiting- in the mean time take care of yourself- she would want you to.
You are exactly correct.
Interesting that you brought up the TPP as an example. I have deep ties to Asia and see this trade pact as 21st century corporate colonization. I believe most of the public there holds this same views, however, in the end their concerns will probably be discarded. Yes, the game is rigged.
Thanks for the comment.
interesting lecture, believe little or none of it as you will, for the more mystical amongst ye:
242 What Is The ChristWe live in stereotypes and for many of us they are inescapable. Just mention the word, Capitalist or Communist, Hitler or Stalin, WWI or Vietnam, we all have preconceived notions when hearing those words, these stereotypes are built, constructed and are developed within the herd for the herd. If we continue to tell ourselves bullshit I will guarantee you that you will believe the bullshit, the notion that peace is impossible, it is a logic box, a stereotype for which many can not think their way out of because you/we have never tried. These fucking stereotypes are psychological states that are built to minimize thinking, we are taught to accept authority, teachers, clergy, corporations, politicians tell us what to think and it is not long until we find ourselves following orders and not even recognizing it. If you have a brain use it and the default position is doubt and be critical of everything including your own "answers", because it is all bullshit until you do something about it, until you make the change and if your passive the change will make you, your going to be predictable, malleable and due to minor familiarity of a (any) [war] subject your going to claim expertise where you have none and you will get called on your bullshit or taken advantage of and peace will never have a chance because you/we will have become sheep, you will be sheared and slaughtered at the convenience of those who understand that we all live within stereotypes. Peace is the only answer.
Getting the US into wars always involves some kind of Balfour Declaration or another these days.
In his Memoirs, published in 1939, Lloyd George further elucidated his position:[21]
Of course, that was once the war had got going. Why the war started likely did not have a single reason, and don't believe anyone who says otherwise, but it had little to do with an Archduke or the goings on in Serbia, and much more to do with the City of London and the British Crown's disdain for German industrial power - at least as I understand it.
It's notable that during the Versailles negotiations, you had the Warburg brothers, bankers, sitting on opposite sides of the negotiating table, one for the US, one for the Germans. This tends to suggest the strong role of bankers in the war as well as the peace, and the strong role of another clan as well.
The bankers are left mostly out of the history books, and the ethnoreligious affiliation and Zionism of a large number of said bankers is left out entirely. Perhaps its not truly relevant.
Perhaps it is.
God bless their souls.
While it sounds good you may want to reconsider using that phrase once you learn the original meaning. As it will have you wondering which god would prefer the actions associated with that type of request
I wonder if any of those soldiers survived the war and lived to tell about it. Not sure if its true but when the HQ heard about it they ordered the artillerry to break up the party.
I'm not one hundred percent sure on what you think I meant but I am sure on what I think I meant
Ron Paul is 100% correct.
War is murder. That is all it is.
Anyone who promotes war, glorifies it or starts it has blood on their hands.
Ron Paul is 100% correct.
War is murder. That is all it is.
Anyone who promotes war, glorifies it or starts it has blood on their hands.
'give peace a chance'.
bullshit. if the germans who had opposed the rise of hitler had had more balls , perhaps they would have dethroned him and avoided a war. then again, if you are a revisitionist like myself, it seems there are distinctly powerful families outside germany and russia that WANTED war and were going to get it regardless of which set of dictators they had to back in order to get a real war. and no, there is no shortages of wanna be powerful kings willing to take the stage of leadership for the price of instigating war.
so i'm not saying hitler wasn't bad. but there are more people out there willing to engage in wars than one might think. and there aren't really ever enough badass righteous dudes to overthrow them when throngs of morons will always accept a salary, spy, and persistently undermine those who would oppose the forces of war.
there are NO grass roots movements. there are only organized powerful forces , and the quaint (disorganized) powerless forces.
You give little credit the foreign and domestic opposition forces to Hitler and other war mongers. Many Germans and others met the firing squad for non-compliance and acts of resistance.
So-called quaint (disorganized) powerless forces become much more powerful when the shit becomes real, and shit really goes down.
American revolutionaries, WWII Serbian and Polish insurgents, and the Viet Cong extracted a huge toll and inflicted *game changing losses* on their respective and more powerful opponents.
Man is destined to fight. If not on the battle field, then with the wife, the kids, the in laws, the next door neighbour, the business partner, his tenant, his landlord and so on and so forth.
If man could identify evil as being the instigator of all such "wars" that would be the first step in the right direction. But evil never dare show its face even though it is lurking in every corner of the universe. It simply whispers into men's (and mother in laws' ears) and things develop from there.
If the dead, the maimed, the destroyed cities and the barren landscapes are the ugly result of evil then imagine how much more ugly evil must be if we could see it.
You can't have Red & Blue gloom and doom 24/7/365 you need that 3rd pillar of harmony to brighten up your day. So why not offer the hope and change people want with a controlled opposition message offered by one of their own. I hope you all didn't ignore the satanic gang signs that RP would flash at various times throughout his tenure. Nonetheless, the message is a good one. Even satan tells the truth. She just does it in a way to advance the big lie (i.e. SSDSDP)
This event was a dangerous example to the sacrificial slaves goaded into murdering each other for king and country that if everyone would ignore the hierarchy and follow the path of peace and love, as did Christ, the whole puppet show would collapse upon itself in a heartbeat. We couldn't have that in satan's domain now could we. It would be satan's fall part deux
Global peace and love bitches
Oh shit, now RP is the devil now too? Fuck it. I'm putting on some metal tunes and I'm going to just forget for a moment that Judas Priest is gay. You thought Kim was a girl?
The United States of America is not benevolent and the Russian Federation, China, and India all know it. When shtf Americans will launch nukes just as the Russian federation and China will. The days of diplomacy are long gone.
It's amazing how the dirty filhty jew can manipulate everyone to turn on their own people and start wars amonst themselves. Does anyone have a brain large enough to fathom how peaceful and wonderful this world would be if there wasn't the filthy dirty jew? Just look what all they are responsible for throughout history.
#trollfail
"...................... Just look what all they are responsible for throughout history."
Right! Science, art, music, entertainment, medicine, and more. Damn Jews.
It is amazing what can happen when people do not steal from each other and just want to be friendly and honest. You don't need war or nationalism then.
That will never happen. That is view of how society is supposed to be when everyone are good angels. Well, everyone aren't good angels.
And that is the conundrum. People for government say government is necessary to regulate society so that those with bad intentions don't wreak havoc. And those of us that want smaller government say that government causes just as much havoc or more to society.
An answer is yet to be found because man is not perfect or without sin.
Government itself is war against its own people (serfs)
If you have never sworn the oath and worn a military uniform, you probably don't know the meaning of cannon fodder, and certainly not the feeling of actually being cannon fodder. Once you understand the feeling, you have firsthand knowledge that *all things government* are pure coercion and force.
I've been out of uniform over 20 years and others here on ZH have been out for over 30 or 40.
It's true, I saw it on an overpass AND on a blimp!
ALL politicians are corrupt folks!
Ron Paul’s Endorsement For Pay Campaign Scheme
Liberal Doves Run As War Hawks
Tom Coburn: Let’s Change Constitution
Hillary Clinton Gets New Book Promo at CFR
Hillary Fired For “Lying, Unethical Behavior” on Watergate Committee
Rhodes Scolar Bobby Jindal Signs Bill Blocking Lawsuits Against Oil and Gas Companies
The Christmas Truce was not a complete cessation across the entire front. The fear was the truce would spread and it would be very hard to restart the war if the entire thing ground to a halt. The fear of the banking cabal that started the war that is.
The soldiers were tired of the war, tired of making no progress, and tired of fighting people that weren't much different from them. The reasons for going to war were not clear and they were manufactured. The soldiers only needed the smallest thing to change in order to call the whole thing off and go home.
The Christmas Truce happened before the war really got going. Before the killing was truly horrific. The British started the war back up and ended the truce because the Brits needed the spoils that would come from victory. The British empire was crumbling, so not only were orders given to shoot their own men, but to shoot unarmed Germans sitting aroind campfires.
My WWI rant:
WWI was a complete farce and showed the government industrial war complex just how much the citizenry are fucking sheeps. They put their armies in trenches and just had them sit there dying and using military supplies. No one thought to just go around the fucking trenches. The trenches didn't cross all of Europe yet NO ONE WENT AROUND! Total and complete farce. Yet the soldiers just did what they were told and got in the fucking trenches and then when they were told they climbed out and headed directly towards the opposing trenches. How fucking stupid was this entire war???
On the Eastern Front the Russian peasant army was the only anti german force to lay down their arms, shoot their officers and march backward to overthrow the feudal monarchy for whom they fought. They have been soundly villified ever since.
Revolutions are almost always not continued by the same people that won it. After the revolution enter the politicians. Soon after the revolution in Russia there was democracy in many places. Lenin did not want to have any of that of course and centralized power. The rest is history.
Anyway, if in 1914 these soldiers on the Western front had decided to go home and kill every officer in their way that tried to stop them then WWI would have ended there and then.
Next year the opposing parties treated each other on artillery shelling on x-mas. Cause this sort of fraternizing could not be tolerated by the general commands. Jee, what would be next, world peace? Cannot have any of that.
War is not between countries, rather between the governers and the governed.
Patriotism just has got too damn expensive.
ONLY those who promote war and their families and those who gain from war and their families should be participants in wars.
Once that happens, numbers of warmakers will dwindle and possibly die out.