Curt Doolittle

Theme: Sovereignty

  • RE: –“Aquinas told the Duchess of Brabant that the sovereign had the right to c

    RE: –“Aquinas told the Duchess of Brabant that the sovereign had the right to confiscate all usurious gains. The same right applies today. Usurers have no right to keep money they have gained through immoral means.”– E. Michael Jones @EMichaelJones1
    Yes, Sovereigns, as insurers of last resort (the king, the monarch, the state, the court) have the obligation and therefore the right in law, to confiscate all usurious gains.
    Usury consists of baiting into hazard. That which is obtained by baiting into hazard violates the demand for sovereignty in demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed. No aggression and non retaliation require the duty of reciprocal insurance of sovereignty and reciprocity .
    Reciprocity requires productive (non-parasitic), fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests (free of coercion including free of baiting in to hazard), and of imposition of costs upon demonstrated interests of others, within the limits of warranty and liability.
    Ergo, Sovereigns, as insurers of last resort, have the OBLIGATION and therefore the RIGHT to confiscate all usurious gains, and provide restitution where possible or contribution to the commons where not.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural law Institute

    Reply addressees: @orion_pulse

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-26 17:17:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861459369650794496

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861456203768795610

  • via @orion_pulse RE: “Instead of 200ish nations, we’ll become 10,000 city states

    via @orion_pulse

    RE: “Instead of 200ish nations, we’ll become 10,000 city states”

    Yes. Our organization’s tag line is “let a thousand nations bloom”.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-25 05:53:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860924723498217493

    Reply addressees: @orion_pulse @bowtiedcrake @FischerKing64 @NatLawInstitute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860919305262551265

  • The opposite. They flew with impunity, —“Israel’s recent military operations h

    The opposite. They flew with impunity,

    —“Israel’s recent military operations have demonstrated an ability to navigate or neutralize Iranian air defense systems effectively. Reports and analyses suggest that during an attack on April 19, 2024, Israel managed to strike targets in Iran without significant resistance from Iran’s air defense systems, including the Russian-made S-300 systems. This operation was part of a series of retaliatory strikes following Iranian attacks on Israel. The effectiveness of Israel’s approach was shown by the precision and limited scope of the strikes, which managed to bypass or disable air defenses around critical sites like Isfahan, home to nuclear and military facilities. Posts on X also mention that Israel successfully defeated Iranian air defenses,”—

    Reply addressees: @YorkshlreHiker @LeSkipperse

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-24 08:49:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860606743648280576

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860604330845331691

  • UK is sixth on the Global Power Index. Meaning it punches above its weight. Howe

    UK is sixth on the Global Power Index. Meaning it punches above its weight. However, the UK like the USA is a naval, air, and expeditionary force. The UK has sacrificed expeditionary (land) forces like most of europe, but still maintains the capacity to project modern power.

    The USA’s military population is largely logistical and technical, so it’s fighting force is overstated as there are only 200K fighting soldiers in it and that group is highly dependent upon the Special Forces from the different groups, whose numbers are on the order of 70,000.

    DATA:
    US Army Ground Combat Personnel: Estimated between 138,300 and 184,400.
    US Marine Corps Ground Combat Personnel: Estimated between 50,750 and 71,050.
    (Total: Approximately 200,000.)
    Special Operations Forces: Estimated 70,000 across all branches.

    Reply addressees: @BTC_i_Hodl @Richard_0292

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-24 00:26:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860480090083328000

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860474082615017584

  • RUSSIAN USE OF NUKES? (Not gonna happen) Russia cannot win a war against little

    RUSSIAN USE OF NUKES? (Not gonna happen)
    Russia cannot win a war against little Ukraine. It’s not going to win a war against NATO. It wouldn’t win a war against just France or the UK. The only thing it can do is commit suicide. They know we will never use nukes first. We don’t have to. We can just use conventional weapons to decapitate the leadership (which we know how to do) and to destroy what remains of the army, navy, and air force.
    The only reason the USA isn’t keen on using conventional weapons is that we used the peace dividend to shrink our forces, draw down the supply of ammunition and missiles and archive the supply chain. Trump will fix that. But it will take two or three years.
    People always act rationally. And people in power do not make silly petty moralizing decisions like common people do.

    CD

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-23 19:14:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860401473642987520

  • RUSSIA-UKRAINE DEAL? Russia (RU) perceives a need for the two eastern provinces

    RUSSIA-UKRAINE DEAL?
    Russia (RU) perceives a need for the two eastern provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk where they have control – and they don’t need what they limited control over in the southern of Zaporizhia and Kherson which are Ukraine’s (UA) coastal ports and some of their best growing regions. And of course RU will fight hard for Crimea because it’s their only warm water port, and it gives them access to the oil regions in the black sea, preventing Ukraine from accessing them. Strategically UA can’t give up the southern provinces and allow RU to seize a future opportunity to take the Odessa region, and attempt to seize moldova – making Ukraine geologically bound and prohibited from shipping lanes.
    I would offer Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea and return Zaporizhia and Kherson. This would maintain RU dependence on the bridge to Crimea, but it would maintain UA access to the seas which it needs to export it’s agricultural and manufacturing products (the food that feeds a lot of people).
    IMO Trump is just trying to get Europe to pay their way. And in particular, to force germany to follow France and England, and now Poland into full armament including nuclear armament and nuclear power.
    I have a vague idea of what Trump will offer to RU, and it could include very different and more expansive strategy than is not stated in the media. He might even offer them full integration, which is what they require for their survival.

    CD

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-23 19:04:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860399043450667011

  • Weak men are one thing, but they’re another when the state is sufficiently large

    Weak men are one thing, but they’re another when the state is sufficiently large and powerful, AND women are enfranchised and vote against men, and the financial sector, media, entertainment, universities and education benefit from conspiring against men in order to profit from women. So I mean, you know, second amendment matters but only when you reach an extreme condition. Otherwise systematically the enemy wins. So weak men might be true but they’re also facing overwhelming opposition unless they vote in large enough numbers or fight in large enough numbers to make a difference.

    Reply addressees: @BillHess78

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-17 01:17:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857956240036605954

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857954211175997903

  • Youre redefining a nation state to suit a want rather than simply stating that a

    Youre redefining a nation state to suit a want rather than simply stating that a nation is a population of shared culture and ethnicity and a state is an insurer of last resort capable of exercising a monopoly of violence.

    That says nothing about whether the nation state can survive internal conflict or external conflict. As I keep explaining to you, y ou’re playing the libertarian game of thinking your wants have any impact on external conditions – they don’t. You can’t have an anarcho capitalist state, you can’t have an internal libertarian state, and you can’t have an external-libertarian state. The world determines the constraints on you. You have only the choice of what to do with them. And again, I don’t really see how, given your thorough defeat of libertarians how you can make the same mistake as a country as they do as a citizen.

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @partymember55 @gspeth @RichardDawkins

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-17 01:15:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857955641006108675

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857951387734147525

  • Not sure I understand. You can be an empire, a core state (dominant in your civ

    Not sure I understand. You can be an empire, a core state (dominant in your civ or region), or a nation state i a federation, or an independent state that for some reason no one wants to rule because it has no strategic value (switzerland). Your independence is determined by…

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-17 00:55:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857950710777917890

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857936222301331556

  • Because the states in the region want their sovereignty and Iran wants an empire

    Because the states in the region want their sovereignty and Iran wants an empire by conquering them (especially the saudis) so that they control the oil. Iran is a belligerent.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-16 15:12:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857803993994698962

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @partymember55 @gspeth @RichardDawkins

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857798407324131626