Aggressors in Today’s World

I suppose that Conquerors in past eras thought nothing of conquering in terms of ‘rights’. In fact, it is reasonable to ask the question: “How did Julius Caesar justify invading territories and taking over possession of everything which could not be carried away?” I can only imagine that, when Caesar invaded a territory, he drove out the incumbent Kings and took their place. In other words, he had no intention of hurting ordinary people – he just wanted the riches which the former Kings had access to. Even if the former Kings fled with all the gold and jewels, there were more gold and jewels to be extricated form the territory which had been conquered. The truth of that idea is supported by the practice of Rome of displaying the wealth which conquests had produced, along with the Kings who had been captured, in processions through Rome. The City’s population rejoiced and felt wonderful, even though they had no personal benefit from the goods and conquest. There was a ‘feelgood’ factors, not unlike your football team winning. “We won the cup! We won the cup!” Erm… No dears…. THEY won the cup.

I remember very well when Leigh Rugby League team (an obscure town in the North West some 12 miles from Manchester) went to Wembley and beat Leeds and won the Cup. I went to watch that game. The memory of the decisive ‘try’ (touchdown) is seared into my mind. There was much rejoicing in the town that night, and, to crown the occasion, the team carried the Cup around the town’s pubs and we all had a sip of beer from it. A glorious occasion.

I can imagine a conquest celebration in Rome being somewhat similar. Those people who were rejoicing gained nothing except ‘a sip of beer from the cup’. Caesar and his pals gained vast wealth and the prospect of even more wealth in the future.

But the important thing is that the wars were waged between Kings and Caesars. Very few of the ‘plebs’ suffered any ill effects. I suspect also that very few soldiers were killed in battles. An overwhelming force, applied in the right place, would cause the enemy to scatter. That was how it worked.

The slaughter of WW1 came from the invention of the machine gun. 10 soldier could kill 1000. And that fact changed everything. War was no longer between Kings and Caesars with very little loss of life among the Plebs. It became MASSIVE loss of life among the Plebs.

From Wikipedia:

1. The bloodiest day. The first day of the Battle of the Somme, in northern France, was the bloodiest day in the history of the British Army and one of the most infamous days of World War One. On 1 July 1916, the British forces suffered 57,470 casualties, including 19,240 fatalities.

Without distracting from the horrors of that massacre, I wish to draw attention to the similar affect of ‘machine gun’ propaganda from ‘Would be Caesars’. Only today I read some vile propaganda from some ‘professor’ saying that the lungs, brains, kidneys, stomachs, veins, toes, fingers, hair, etc, etc of children were being destroyed by a smidgen of SHS in the womb.

It is about time that Politicians stopped being terrified of Academics in general and Health Academics in particular. Did Churchill rely upon Academics to conduct WW2? Of course not! He relied upon Generals who knew what the armed forces could do and not do. Academics applied only in a tiny way – just one (or perhaps a few) created the first computer which could analyse each coded message and compute the likely translation of that message.

We seem to have the reverse situation. The propaganda is now the mystery message which needs to be tracked down to its source – the equivalent of Nazi Germany.

There is no ‘War on Tobacco’. There is a war on Tobcoms and People who Enjoy Tobacco. It is blatantly obvious. It has nothing to do with children. Children do not smoke and never have done, in the main.

I hate above all any ‘supra-national’ organisation, such as the WHO. Such organisations are like drug gangs. They regard themselves as responsible to no one.

Why is it that WE can see the horrific damage created by the WHO, FCTC, IPCC, etc but politicians cannot? I fear that the problem is that politician are terrified of the UN falling apart. They might be right.


%d bloggers like this: