Do You Remember the ‘Domino Theory’?

Of course you do not if you are younger than 40.

For those too young to remember a controlling policy of the US foreign policy then I shall explain it to you.

The Domino Theory was a prevailing belief that communism was an internationalist movement that would spread from one country to the next until it dominated the world, much as a row of dominos collapses one after the other. The Domino Theory was accepted by a succession of United States presidents and Western policymakers. As a result, it shaped the foreign policy of the US and its allies during the Cold War.

Western leaders believed that once communism gained a foothold in a nation, its neighbors would quickly be infiltrated, overrun and seized by communists – much like a row of standing dominos topples, one knocking over the next until all have fallen.

Take Southeast Asia….if Vietnam fell then all countries around it would as well….Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Burma, etc on and on until it consumed the world….it being Communism.

The first public mention of it was made by US president Eisenhower in a speech in 1954, where he explained why America would aid the French in their struggle against communists in Indochina (Vietnam).

“[There are] broader considerations that might follow what you would call the ‘falling domino’ principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly… But when we come to the possible sequence of events, the loss of Indochina, of Burma, of Thailand, of the Peninsula (Malaysia and Singapore) and Indonesia following, now you begin to talk about … millions and millions and millions of people.”

Apparently the theory is making a resurgence…..the tale is the Russia will not be happy with Ukraine….thoughts from a post by Ted Galen Carpenter

The notion that a country with an economy just modestly larger than Spain’s and a military budget less than one-tenth the size of the US military budget could pose a threat of that magnitude should seem absurd on its face. Even without Washington’s involvement, Russian forces would have difficulty conquering even one major European power, much less NATO Europe as a whole.

Moreover, the assumption ignores extensive evidence that Ukraine is uniquely important to Russia for both cultural and security reasons. In particular, Russian leaders were not about to allow the United States to turn Ukraine into a NATO military asset directed against their country. It does not follow at all that they would make a similar effort or incur comparable risks to conduct a geo-strategic offensive against other portions of Europe. Even if Ukraine falls to the Kremlin’s current military operation, there is no credible reason to assume that Poland, the Baltic republics, or Slovakia – much less such major powers as Germany, France, or Italy – would be next on an expansionist agenda.

A similar simplistic formulation is beginning to influence thinking in the United States regarding policy toward China, especially among the growing roster of anti-PRC hawks. The underlying assumption is that if Beijing successfully uses coercion to gain control of Taiwan, the PRC will then pose an expansionist threat to all of East Asia and become a candidate for global hegemony. Just as analysts who embrace a refurbished domino theory with regard to Russia ignore Ukraine’s exceptional importance to Moscow, people who contend that Beijing’s acquisition of Taiwan would trigger an expansionist binge ignore the island’s unique status for PRC leaders and China’s population. For many Chinese, Taiwan is the last unresolved territorial issue from the civil war that ended on the mainland with a communist victory in 1949. The island also is seen as territory that a foreign power (Japan) stole during China’s “long century of humiliation.”

The domino theory was simplistic nonsense when Eisenhower presented it in the 1950s. The current zombie version is equally detached from reality. It needs to be rejected emphatically, lest it entangle the United States in even larger unnecessary, disastrous conflicts than the original version did.


The US and its War Department will clutch at old straws to keep the cash flowing and the people in fear.

STOP! believing the hype!

Especially if it comes for the War Department and its civilian agents.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”


The Long Peace

The war ended in1945 with the defeat of the axis powers…..and Europe entered into an age of reconstruction and a long peace(?).

Then there is Asia.

Japan surrendered after the US dropped 2 nukes on their homeland….unfortunately Asia did not have the same reaction to the end of the war.

Violence erupted everywhere….China, Vietnam, Indonesia so on and so on….But why was there little peace in the Far East?

And yes this is one of those historical perspectives that I have become famous for throwing at my readers.

Decolonisation is one reason for the eruption of violence across the Asian continent. The outbreak of civil wars from the ruins of the Second World War was another historical phenomenon that contributed to the instability of the region, as local actors sought to take advantage of the changes in the balance of power on the ground to build new postcolonial states to their liking. Ho Chi Minh and his Communist Party may have defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu, but they also attacked non-communist nationalists who had rejected their right to rule an independent – communist – Vietnam. If the communists dominated their Vietnamese adversaries during the First Indochina War, in Indonesia a series of violent civil clashes saw the non-communist Republicans led by Sukarno vanquish their communist competitors. The Chinese civil war is another example that Spector analyses: civil and national wars of liberation continued across Asia beyond 1945, something that Europe did not encounter (with the important exception of Greece).

The Cold War did much to spread violence across the Asian continent. The key moment was the victory of the Chinese communists over the nationalists in 1949, prompting American efforts to contain the potential Sino-Soviet threat to the region. Contesting ideologies were part of the problem. So were security concerns. The spectre of the Japanese march across the Pacific in 1941-42 was never far from American minds. But the same was true for Mao, who feared the possibility of another hostile invasion coming from the sea. Spector deftly shows how, between 1950 and 1954, the Americans and the Chinese clashed directly in Korea and indirectly in Vietnam, entangling their struggles for ideological influence and national security with the civil and colonial wars that had been brewing across the continent for years.

Some of the problems the US is having in Asia these days can be traced back to the end of World War 2…..

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

World War Two Behind The Scenes

I like history but most people deplore the thought of remembering anything they do not understand.

There are many things about this war that few know anything about….basically because because they do not want to know they had rather believe the lopsided stories they have been told.

About the only thing anyone can recall is that ill-fated statement by Chamberlain (a post for another day)

Me? I like to look beyond the popular crap and do a deeper dive.

So were there any efforts to avoid World War 2….beyond that famous statement by Chamberlain…..( I know there will be inevitable condemnation of Chamberlain’s efforts…please don’t)

There are many military historians who are familiar with the battlefield history of World War Two but few know much about the diplomatic history of the war when it comes to peace initiatives, long suppressed by liberal establishment historians, to terminate the war, in many cases years before it ended in actual history, or even prevent it from happening at all. Americans have been indoctrinated to believe since grade school that the war could not have been averted and that our only mistake was not invading and crushing Nazi Germany in its cradle when it was still military inferior and in the process of rebuilding its armed forces following the crushing disarmament constraints of the Treaty of Versailles.

According to the dominant historical narrative, Hitler could not be trusted to keep any of his agreements so any negotiated peace settlement would only delay the inevitable. The only problem with this accepted historical narrative of the war is that none of it is true. These peace offers, which have been largely covered up and/or erased from the annals of history, serve to convincingly rebut the myth that Hitler, an evil dictator who mass murdered five to six million Jews, was undeterrable and unappeasable. They provide convincing evidence that World War Two was, in fact, neither a necessary nor inevitable war to stop a dictator who was bent on nothing less than world conquest as Americans have been taught to believe.

However, the most glaring historical misconception of the war by far, which has since been used to justify numerous wars including an indefinite, unnecessary, destabilizing and incredibly dangerous prolongation of America’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, was that it was Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of Hitler with the Munich Agreement that caused the outbreak of World War Two and therefore the chief lesson of the war is that we must never accommodate our adversaries or else they will be emboldened to invade other countries and perhaps start another world war. In fact, it was not the British policy of accommodating Nazi Germany that caused the outbreak of World War Two but rather it was Chamberlain’s decision to abruptly abandon it and issue an ill-considered British military guarantee against a German invasion that Hitler had never previously considered, in view of the fact that Hitler had spent the previous five years trying to cultivate Poland as an ally against the USSR, that resulted in the outbreak of the war.

There is always more to any war than what lopsided history has taught…..this includes all wars….including the most recent one that all have very strong opinions about as a bit deluded that they are)

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

GOP–Where It All Began

There are many opinions running around the internet on the GOP….most of it is all about the party for the last 15 or so years…..but how many have nay damn idea where it all began and why?

That’s right….you are in for some knowledge….I know that is a bad word these days of idiots….there is no such things as bad knowledge just morons that cannot find the time to pull their heads of of their asses to learn something.

The year is 1854…..the place was Ripon, Wisconsin…..

Trying times spawn new forces. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 divided the country at the 36° 30′ parallel between the pro-slavery, agrarian South and anti-slavery, industrial North, creating an uneasy peace which lasted for three decades. This peace was shattered in 1854 by the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Settlers would decide if their state would be free or slave. Northern leaders such as Horace Greeley, Salmon Chase and Charles Sumner could not sit back and watch the flood of pro-slavery settlers cross the parallel. A new party was needed.

Where was the party born? Following the publication of the “Appeal of Independent Democrats” in major newspapers, spontaneous demonstrations occurred. In early 1854, the first proto-Republican Party meeting took place in Ripon, Wisconsin. On July 6, 1854 on the outskirts of Jackson, Michigan upwards of 10,000 people turned out for a mass meeting “Under the Oaks.” This led to the first organizing convention in Pittsburgh on February 22, 1856.

The gavel fell to open the party’s first nominating convention, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on June 17, 1856, announcing the birth of the Republican Party as a unified political force.

The Republican Party name was christened in an editorial written by New York newspaper magnate Horace Greeley. Greeley printed in June 1854: “We should not care much whether those thus united (against slavery) were designated ‘Whig,’ ‘Free Democrat’ or something else; though we think some simple name like ‘Republican’ would more fitly designate those who had united to restore the Union to its true mission of champion and promulgator of Liberty rather than propagandist of slavery.”

In the beginning the GOP was not all that bad….as late as 1956 their platform was something that even a hard Leftist like me could have supported.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

History’s Evil Women

Women’s History #6

It is women’s history month and most posts are about the accomplishments of women like Rosa Parks, Susan B. Anthony, Gertrude Bell, etc…..but who has ever mentioned those women that were just plain damn evil?

Let me one of the first to bring you the 10 most evil women in history….

Number 10…Mary Queen of Scotland

Mary was the only child of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon to live past infancy. Crowned after the death of Edward VI and the removal of The Nine Days Queen-Lady Jane Grey, Mary is chiefly remembered for temporarily and violently returning England to Catholicism. Many prominent Protestants were executed for their beliefs leading to the moniker “Bloody Mary.” Fearing the gallows a further 800 Protestants left the country, unable to return until her death. It should be noted that Elizabeth I shares position 10 on this list for her equally bad behavior.

Number 9….Myra Hindley, a murderer….

Myra Hindley and Ian Brady were responsible for the “Moors murders” occurring in the Manchester area of Britain from 1963 to 1965. Together these two monsters were responsible for the kidnapping, sexual abuse, torture, and murder of three children under the age of 12 and two teenagers, aged 16 and 17. A key found in Myra’s possession led to incriminating evidence stored at a left-luggage depot at Manchester Central Station. The evidence included a tape recording of one of the murder victims screaming as Hindley and Brady raped and tortured her. In the final days before incarceration, she developed a swagger and arrogant attitude that became her trademark. Police secretary Sandra Wilkinson has never forgotten seeing Hindley and her mother Nellie, leaning against the courthouse eating sweets. While the mother was obviously and understandably upset, Hindley seemed indifferent and uncaring of her situation.

There are more waiting for you to learn about their lives.

This ends my women’s history series….hopefully my readers learned something and will retain what they learned.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Women’s History #4

If you are a fan of foreign films then I bet you have watched the Japanese classics about the samurai….all the main characters were male but during the upheavals on the island there were so much more than dudes running around sword fighting and cutting off heads.

The year is 1868 and the Onna-Bugeisha are participants in the great Meiji restoration.

Her formerly snow-white clothes were stained red. She had cropped her long hair and tied it into a knot above her head. Her hands held a heavy halberd. Kawahara Asako had just killed her mother-in-law and young daughter to prevent them from falling into the enemy’s hands. Drenched in their blood, she marched onto the battlefield, ready to die defending her home.

Kawahara fought in the Battle of Aizu, named for a region in the northern part of Japan. It was one of the deadliest conflicts of the Boshin War, the civil conflict that shook Japan from 1868 to 1869. It saw the Imperial forces of Emperor Meiji face the Tokugawa shogunate, the military regime that had governed Japan since 1603. The shogunate, to which the Aizu were allied, wanted to preserve Japan’s insularity, its traditional way of life, and curtail Western influences. The emperor, on the other hand, was spearheading the country’s transformation into a modern nation-state in a revolution from above.

The Meiji Restoration ended Japan’s seclusion policy and opened the country up to foreign powers, hastening change in almost all areas of life. But fundamental societal transformations rarely go smoothly. At stake was nothing less than the very soul and future of Japan.

When the imperial forces invaded the Aizu region in 1868, they did so to cement their control of Japan. That October, the emperor’s troops, outnumbering the shogunate soldiers and in possession of better supplies, made quick progress in taking settlements. After sustaining heavy losses, the Aizu population was ordered to barricade themselves in nearby Tsuruga Castle.

Onna-Bugeisha, the Female Samurai Warriors of Feudal Japan

I have always been amazed at the samurai dedication to Bushido, the code of the warrior, where honor and duty are paramount something we Americans should learn and hold dear.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Ukraine: How It All Began

I wrote this before and it was not popular basically because the MSM has not given this information to the gullible public… few bothered to see what lead to this situation in Ukraine.

How It All Began

So once again I will try to help people see what happened to make Russia make the move to invade….there is more to the events than just Putin wanting to re-invigorate the old USSR.

It all basically began in 1998 with Pres. Clinton…..

1. 1998 – Beginning of NATO expansion – Bill Clinton

Many prominent former US government officials, members of Congress, diplomats, and foreign policy experts have objected to this expansion. “We’ll be back on a hair-trigger,” said Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a New York Democrat, during the debates in the Senate. Moynihan continued: “We’re talking about nuclear war. It is a curiously ironic outcome that at the end of the Cold War we might face a nuclear Armageddon.”

Senator Joseph Biden (D-Delaware), while calling Moynihan “the single most erudite and informed person in the Senate,” said he disagreed with him, and pushed for NATO’s expansion.

2.  2004 – Abrogation of ABM treaty – George W. Bush

This is what Bush said in November 2001 following Putin’s support for the Afghan operation a month earlier:

“A lot of people never really dreamt that an American President and a Russian President could have established the friendship …. to establish a new spirit of cooperation and trust so that we can work together to make the world more peaceful….I brought him to my ranch because, as the good people in this part of the world know, that you only usually invite your friends into your house…. a new style of leader, a reformer, a man who loves his country as much as I love mine…. a man who is going to make a huge difference in making the world more peaceful, by working closely with the United States.”

What a spirit of sanity from a man who would oversee a disastrous two terms in office which included the war in Iraq and an abrogation of one of the most strategic anti-nuclear war treaties.

3.  2008 – Push to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO – George W. Bush again

As Professor John Mearshimer stated in New Yorker “I think all the trouble in this case really started in April, 2008, at the NATO Summit in Bucharest, where afterward NATO issued a statement that said Ukraine and Georgia would become part of NATO. The Russians made it unequivocally clear at the time that they viewed this as an existential threat, and they drew a line in the sand.”

4.  2014 – Western backed and US coordinated Coup in Ukraine sets up the cornerstone of the current crisis – overseen by the duo of Joe Biden and Victoria Nuland

After two decades of eastward NATO expansion, this crisis was triggered by the West’s attempt to replace the democratically-elected President Yanukovich and his administration who were against Ukraine joining NATO with the new anti-Russia team that will be for it.

5.  2015 – Minsk Peace Accords are supported by the UN Security Council but sabotaged by the US, EU, and Ukraine – Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and the EU leadership.

As was discovered years later, the premise of the accords was designed as a dishonest fraud to buy time to arm Ukraine and prepare for the future war with Russia.


Now that it has begun is support waning?  (According to my comments I say no it is not waning)

Recent public opinion surveys regarding the extent of domestic backing for Washington’s Ukraine policy provide a decidedly mixed picture. A majority of Americans still support the Biden administration’s efforts to assist Kyiv’s war effort through financial and military aid and the sharing of military intelligence information.

However, the levels are down even from polls taken in late 2022, and they are down substantially from the extremely high support levels that existed immediately following Russia’s February 2022 invasion.

American public opinion appears to be following the downward trajectory that marked previous U.S. war campaigns since World War II. However, this time the decline in support is taking place even though no US forces are directly involved in the fighting, much less have incurred casualties. The growth of war weariness barely one year into the Ukraine conflict should be a warning signal to the administration that public support for Washington’s policy may be very fragile.

Is Weakening Support for Ukraine War Following a Historical Pattern?

There is always more to a story than the MSM allows to go forth…..and the sad part is no one wants to know the ‘rest of the story’ then prefer to hold into some convoluted tale of woe.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

What’s Better Than Sliced Bread?

Did you remember to ‘spring forward’?

A worthless social exercise that serves NO purpose….and the people think as I do….

A 2021 poll found that most people in the United States want to avoid switching between daylight saving and standard time, though there is no consensus behind which should be used all year. The poll from the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found only 25% of those questioned said they preferred to switch back and forth between standard and daylight saving time. Forty-three percent said they would like to see standard time used during the entire year, while 32% preferred that daylight saving time be used all year

Another indication how no one in DC listens to what us mere mortals have to say.

Let’s move on shall we?

It is a Sunday and what better day to throw some history your way?

I have become interested in baking especially bread….so I have been reading about the art and of course the history.

Sliced bread has become something we do not even think about these days….but did you know there was a time in our history when the loaf of sliced bread was banned?

The year was 1943, and Americans were in crisis. Across the Atlantic, war with Germany was raging. On the home front, homemakers were facing a very different sort of challenge: a nationwide ban on sliced bread.

“To U.S. housewives it was almost as bad as gas rationing—and a whale of a lot more trouble,” announced Time magazine on February 1, 1943. The article goes on to describe women fumbling with their grandmothers’ antiquated serrated knives. “Then came grief, cussing, lopsided slices which even the toaster refused, often a mad dash to the corner bakery for rolls. But most housewives sawed, grimly on—this war was getting pretty awful.”

The ban on sliced bread was just one of many resource-conserving campaigns during World War II. In May 1942, Americans received their first ration booklets and, within the year, commodities ranging from rubber tires to sugar were in short supply. Housewives, many of whom were also holding down demanding jobs to keep the labor force from collapsing, had to get creative. When the government rationed nylon, women resorted to drawing faux-nylon stockings using eyebrow pencils and when sugar and butter became scarce, they baked “victory cakes” sweetened with boiled raisins or whatever else was available.

So by January 18, 1943, when Claude R. Wickard, the secretary of agriculture and head of the War Foods Administration, declared the selling of sliced bread illegal, patience was already running thin. Since sliced bread required thicker wrapping to stay fresh, Wickard reasoned that the move would save wax paper, not to mention tons of alloyed steel used to make bread-slicing machines.

There are many of these little historical tidbits……and they will be forthcoming. (Be warned, LOL)

Have a good Sunday.

Be well and be safe

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Women’s History–#2

If it is Friday then it must be time for some history.

We here on Word Press like to think of ourselves as authors….and some have succeeded in that endeavor….but do you know who the first named author was in history?

Yep another of my famous history lessons.

So with all that written….who was the first named author in history?

History’s first recorded author was a woman named Enheduanna. Born sometime in the latter half of the 23rd century BC, Enheduanna was the high priestess of the ancient Mesopotamian city of Ur. It was a political role as well as a religious one; as the daughter of a powerful king, Enheduanna was no stranger to affairs of the state. In her writing, she wielded her pen for peace, working to unite a fractured kingdom.

Her father was King Sargon, ruler of the Akkadians. He conquered an area in southern Iraq, Sumer, and she was put into power as a priestess of the moon god, Nanna. In her writings, she took a Sumerian goddess, Inanna, and fused her with an Akkadian goddess, Ishtar. She tried to unite these two different cultures, these two different people under her father’s reign. So she was a key political entity.

Sometimes we have these people where we know them by name and we know what their position was. But then there’s this other aspect of what was their everyday normal life, and it’s hard to grasp.

We have a representation of her on a disk where she is facilitating a ritual where a libation is being poured for the god. There’s a set of temple hymns that she wrote. And so her role has something to do with ritual and libations honoring the gods and facilitating that.

There’s something called the King’s List. It’s a list of all the kings that ruled and beside them is the list of the priestesses who were in power during their reigns. So I think that tells us a lot about the importance of the priestesses’ role within society, but also within the political atmosphere of the times.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Let’s Invade Mexico (Again)

Another trigger happy politician.

The US has invaded Mexico a couple of times….once in 1846 and again in 1916…the last time was 1916…..

During the Mexican Revolution (1910-1917), the United States government ordered two military incursions into Mexico. The first entailed an invasion and occupation of the city of Veracruz in 1914, and the second was the “Punitive Expedition” of 1916-1917, commanded by General John J. Pershing. President Woodrow Wilson was reluctant to send U.S. troops to Mexico in 1914, but “yielded to pressure from American business interests, cabinet members, newspapers, and representatives of the Southwest.” Reluctant or not, Wilson desired to depose the government of General Victoriano Huerta by seizing the port of Veracruz, through which flowed most of the armaments and supplies imported for the Mexican army. Wilson’s quarrel with Huerta was twofold: first, Huerta “could not maintain order and protect U.S. private and public interests” in Mexico; and second, Huerta was “a dictator who imposed himself on the Mexican republic after murdering his democratically elected predecessor.” American warships arrived on the scene in April, 1914 and shelled the city, taking “a terrible toll” on the civilian population, which had decided to resist the invasion. At the same time, the U.S. Navy and Marines seized the opportunity to experiment with amphibious landing techniques, with “an almost comic opera” effect. Between the landing and the occupation (which lasted through November) U.S. troops did help oversee the removal of Huerta from office mainly by supplying the revolutionary forces of Venustiano Carranza with arms and other critical materials.

Research: United States Interventions in Mexico

I present this little slice of history because of what that idiot from South Carolina proposed….

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Monday that he was prepared to introduce legislation to “set the stage” for US military intervention in Mexico.

Graham’s comments came after four Americans were kidnapped in the Mexican border city of Matamoros, an area said to be dominated by cartels, and two were found dead. He was asked how he would deal with kidnappings or the cartels in general, and said he would get “tough.”

“I would put Mexico on notice,” the hawkish senator told Fox News host Jesse Waters. “If you continue to give safe haven to drug dealers, then you are an enemy of the United States.”

Graham said he agreed with former Attorney General Bill Barr, who wants to declare the cartels “foreign terrorist organizations.” Barr wrote in The Wall Street Journallast week that the US should take military action against cartels.

Barr expressed support for a joint resolution proposed by Reps. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) and Michael Waltz (R-FL) that would authorize the president to use military force against “those responsible for trafficking fentanyl or a fentanyl-related substance into the United States or carrying out other related activities that cause regional destabilization in the Western Hemisphere.” So far, the resolution has 16 Republican cosponsors.

Graham said he wants to put forward a bill that would designate cartels as terror organizations. “I’m going to introduce legislation, Jesse, to make certain Mexican drug cartels foreign terrorist organizations under US law and set the stage to use military force if necessary to protect America from being poisoned by things coming out of Mexico,” he said.

Other Republicans have called for military intervention in Mexico, which would be a dramatic escalation of America’s decades-old war on drugs. “We should strategically strike and take out the Mexican Cartels, not the Mexican government or their people, but the Mexican Cartels which control them all,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) wrote on Twitter on Monday.

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador on Tuesday warned the US against military intervention in his country. He said his government was “working and cooperating” with US authorities against cartels but wouldn’t allow “foreign countries” to intervene.



These idiots in DC just want to force war on this country at ever turn.

Hopefully clearer heads will prevail on this issue….but I have NO confidence that they will.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”