Why The Neutralist? The term Isolationist implies a narrow Fortress America outlook and is used as an epithet. The term Neutralist does not indicate someone hiding out from the world. No one calls the Swiss isolationists. The Wilsonian world view is old, tired and wrong. Our interventions have been less and less successful and now the failure can no longer be covered up.
Tuesday, July 09, 2013
Margolis vs. Lang on Egypt plus a better analysis
Not sure how Col. Lang view the deep state biz, but he does not find the MBs to be completely savory.
Now these are two men who do not buy the official interpretation of events, but they differ in analysis. Of course we come to the conclusion that the unfathomable aspect of events is even more reason to be a Neutralist.
Another article we are linking to is Egypt's Possible Civil War by 28 Sherman. Opens up by observing the hunger aspect, which is not mentioned enough. Egypt does not produce enough food for its population that vastly exceeds carrying capacity. Thanks to all the unrest, the money is not being made to buy food. Of course, guess who supplies a lot of the food?
Food and civil war, hmmm. I vaguely remember reading that Rwanda was the most densely populated region on the continent and had hunger problems.
Maybe giving all that food on the cheap did not help the Egyptians plan for population control.
28 Sherman touches on the regional political situation regarding Egypt, Sudan and Ethipia. As to managing it he writes, "The British did this so much better than us." Yeah, well HMG don't have too many colonies these days. There empire was a waste of time. More reason for a neutralist FP.