You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Terror Networks
Buchanan: Too Many Wars. Too Many Enemies.
2018-01-30
BLUF:
[Townhall] Like the Romans, we have become an empire, committed to fight for scores of nations, with troops on every continent, and forces in combat operations of which the American people are only vaguely aware.
"I didn't know there were 1,000 troops in Niger," said Sen. Lindsey Graham when four Green Berets were killed there. "We don't know exactly where we're at in the world, militarily, and what we're doing."

No, we don't, Senator.

As in all empires, power is passing to the generals.

And what causes the greatest angst today in the imperial city?

Fear that a four-page memo worked up in the House Judiciary Committee may discredit Robert Mueller's investigation of Russia-gate.
Posted by:Besoeker

#8  Snomose Grating7526 if you think anybody becomes a USA (or Israeli) general without being a politician...

P2K, point but Italian farmers weren't a single son families: eldest inherits, another joins the legions, etc... It's just that family farms can't compete with agribusinesses, whether the later use slaves or machinery - look at today's USA agriculture.

Spain & Franco in USA? Leaving all other considerations aside - what about service rivalry?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2018-01-30 13:38  

#7  How many enemies you have is not for you to decide. What you do about them is.
Posted by: Grunter   2018-01-30 10:14  

#6  The only institution that retains the confidence of the the largest section of the people is the military.

And sadly, the left is dedicated to the destruction of the institution that holds the confidence of the American people.

Posted by: Besoeker   2018-01-30 06:49  

#5  Point g(r)om, but why didn't the legionaries have land back in Rome? Back in the republic the citizen soldiers farmers were deployed outside of Roman territory. No one to work the farm or pay the land tax. Those with money [1 percenters], bought them up and staffed them with slave/foreign labor leaving the soldiers destitute when they returned. They never worked it out. Something about money and politics.

The danger is not Rome, the danger is Spain and Franco. The only institution that retains the confidence of the the largest section of the people is the military. The other institutions are rife with the Leftest crap and heading ever downward. It appeals to the urbanists but not the anyone but. When you are stuck with the only institution that shows a modicum of integrity, competency, abhorrence to corruption, and loyal to the concept of the nation state (ie tribe) compared to all others, consent of the governed will gravitate to it.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2018-01-30 06:42  

#4  Grom__ Perhaps more of a factor was the fact that almost all (late) Roman generals were politicians first - putting in their Legion time to build their power base.
Posted by: Snomose Grating7526   2018-01-30 05:15  

#3  Try this one Patty, Buchanan: Too Many Wars. Too Many Enemies terrorists.
Posted by: Woodrow   2018-01-30 04:09  

#2  Wow, an entire article by Patrick that doesn't mention/censors Israel!

p.s. Patrick, generals came to rule Rome because they were the ones getting their troops land grants and thus gaining their loyalty at the expense of loyalty to the state. Absent such mechanisms of gaining troops loyalty, generals can;t take over empires - cf. British empire
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2018-01-30 02:58  

#1  As in all empires, power is passing to the generals.

Incorrect statement. The 'generals' only go where they are sent by the state.
Posted by: Besoeker   2018-01-30 02:38  

00:00