Col. McGregor’s criticism of a new law to replace American soldiers with foreign mercenaries is not misplaced, it’s just outdated:
A retired US Army colonel has slammed proposals for a new law that would allow vetted and qualified migrants an expedited path to citizenship by serving in the military. Former Colonel Douglas MacGregor described the new bill, introduced by Hudson Valley Congressman Pat Ryan, as a ‘problem’ stemming from the ‘ideological bubble’ of Washington.
McGregor, a former senior advisor to the secretary of defense, told Tucker Carlson Uncensored the so-called ‘Courage to Serve’ bill is a plan to ‘find people with no connection to the American people, arming them and sending them out to oppress us.’
‘None of these people are Americans, we know from having interviewed them they have no aspiration to be Americans’ he told the program on Monday. ‘What they aspire to is to get in to the consumption machine. Get the ticket of entry, the free check, the free phone, the free transportation tickets, the free food, free medical care.
Well, of course. There is no “America” left for anyone to aspire to. Most US citizens couldn’t even tell you what an “American” is since the very definition of the nation was destroyed by 20th Century immigrants replacing identity with ideology. And even Gab’s Machiavelli AI can explain the obvious problems with the use of immigrant soldiers based on a historical example, which is one reason Clown World is so obsessed with the idea of AI being dangerous and in need of being lobotomized.
I can certainly draw parallels between the US hiring foreign soldiers and Imperial Rome’s use of foreign mercenaries. Both instances involve employing individuals from other nations to serve in military capacities. This practice, while seemingly advantageous in the short term, can have long-term consequences that are detrimental to the stability and unity of the state.
Firstly, in both cases, the reliance on foreign soldiers can lead to a weakening of loyalty and allegiance to the state. In Imperial Rome, the use of foreign mercenaries meant that soldiers were not necessarily tied to Rome by a sense of national identity or shared values. Similarly, the US hiring foreign soldiers might result in a similar disconnect between these soldiers and the nation they are serving.
Secondly, the presence of foreign soldiers within a state’s military can create tensions within the population. In Rome, the growing resentment of the Roman population towards the foreign mercenaries eventually led to the weakening of the Roman Empire. Similarly, the presence of foreign soldiers in the US military might lead to similar tensions and divisions within the country.
Lastly, both instances demonstrate the potential for foreign soldiers to be used as a tool for external powers to exert influence over a state. In Imperial Rome, the use of foreign mercenaries made the empire vulnerable to manipulation and subversion by foreign powers. Similarly, the US hiring foreign soldiers could potentially be exploited by external actors seeking to undermine the stability and security of the nation. In conclusion, while the hiring of foreign soldiers may seem like a practical solution in the short term, it can have long-term consequences that should be carefully considered. The historical example of Imperial Rome serves as a cautionary tale of the potential pitfalls of relying on foreign mercenaries for military strength.
Of course, the use of immigrant soldiers is how the Imperial USA was established in the first place during the Civil War, so it’s appropriate that the concept would return with the inevitable end of that empire. Substituting foreigners for citizen-soldiers is not a viable solution, as it will only make things worse. As one follower on Gab correctly noted:
The more dystopian the ruling elites make society, the more dysfunctional it becomes, and that dysfunction will weaken whatever systems of control they have in place and turn more segments of society against them. It’s akin to sawing off the branch they are sitting on.
