War. Who really benefits?
callen
Posts: 6,388
Defense stocks up.
Republicans want to repeal defense cuts.
Surprise surprise. In Gomer Pile voice.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/09/22/investing/defense-stocks-isis-bounce/index.html
War is good for the us economy.
Sure leaders manipulate market as well with their actions. Rattle a saber, make millions.
Republicans want to repeal defense cuts.
Surprise surprise. In Gomer Pile voice.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/09/22/investing/defense-stocks-isis-bounce/index.html
War is good for the us economy.
Sure leaders manipulate market as well with their actions. Rattle a saber, make millions.
10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
0
Comments
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Does anyone consider it Obama's main intention is to profit from the unstability in the middle east?
Godfather.
http://billmoyers.com/2014/02/21/anatomy-of-the-deep-state/
If you're short on time, updated reader's digest version here:
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/20/obama_the_slide_back_to_iraq_and_the_power_of_the_deep_state/
Or if your attention span is really short, I would just boil it down to this excerpt here:
"Writing many months before the rise of ISIS became headline news and the prospect of an American reentry into Iraq emerged, Lofgren notes that “the Deep State is populated with those whose instinctive reaction to the failure of their policies is to double down on those policies in the future.” Stalemate in Iraq (or worse) led to stalemate in Afghanistan (or worse), which led to the chaos in Libya that produced Benghazi and the confused effort to overthrow Assad in Syria. That whole concatenation of events – all of which, arguably, flow from the American invasion of Iraq in the first place.... It’s really the definition of “perseveration,” meaning the pathological repetition of an act that is meant to solve problems but is likely to leave the sufferer frustrated and unsatisfied. America’s foreign policy brain trust — supposedly the most grown-up and hard-headed of all Deep State denizens — has been stuck in a pattern of perseveration since at least 9/11, if not since Vietnam. That would be bad enough on its own even without the fact that it has killed innocent people in enormous numbers and shredded what remained of our constitutional liberties."
"Freedom" really means.
People's freedom had been the biggest casualty of the War on Drugs/Terror/Communism/threat du jour.
The notion that war is a tool of liberty, rather than a tool of oppression/suppression is scary at best, naive at it's worst.
The people talking about profits are the same people who said we should NOT do anything about ISIS. You're cherry picking arguments.
Why do you think the US should never cut any part of it's military budget? Just 'cause?
You admitted the other day that you don't know anything about pipelines etc....your complaints about people going into a tizzy over profits are baseless if you don't even understand how those profits are gained. A pretty good hint that you are taking your cues from TV news is your use of the words 'freedom' and 'terrorism'. I may sound 'belittling', but it's pretty fucking tiresome to see someone support a war agenda while simultaneously admitting they don't know wtf they're talking about. Pretty much supporting murder without knowing why.
If our goal is 'freedom', why do we insist on control of rebuilding efforts? Why do we insist on using US contractors to build, manage, and maintain the rebuilt infrastructure? Why do we insist on privatizing vital industries as a condition of rebuilding? Wouldn't all of these things help the economic 'freedom' of the state we destroyed?
Now....explain which peoples have received 'freedom' from West-waged war? Give me some examples. You can bring up WW2 if you'd like, but if that's all you've got, your stance is pretty much antiquated. I do. Profit, dominate, and maintain the current world economic model. Partisan debate is even more disingenuous when discussing geopolitics than it is when discussing domestic policy.
If you watch an average of more than an hour of television per day you have a problem!
Godfather.
And everyone in the US and most of the world benefits from this military action. Yet we tell ourselves it's freedom, well guess it is, freedom of $5 a gallon.
Having to listen to cnn in lunch room. Want to strangle Wolf.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Now that we've got the personal attacks out of the way...care to answer any of the questions I asked you in my previous post?
....shocked.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Godfather.
Now...I'll try again. You answered my military budget question....Care to answer any of the others I asked? I'll post them for you again:
1. If our goal is 'freedom', why do we insist on control of rebuilding efforts?
2. Why do we insist on using US contractors to build, manage, and maintain the rebuilt infrastructure?
3. Why do we insist on privatizing vital industries as a condition of rebuilding?
4. Wouldn't all of these things help the economic 'freedom' of the state we destroyed?
5. Now....explain which peoples have received 'freedom' from West-waged war? Give me some examples. You can bring up WW2 if you'd like, but if that's all you've got, your stance is pretty much antiquated.
6. How am I an example of a spoiled nation?
1. Because Americans are always doing the right thing.
2. Because Americans are always doing the right thing.
3. Because the privatization will be managed by American companies, and Americans are always doing the right thing.
4. No, because they're not Americans, and thus their initiatives will be mismanaged. Letting Americans take over, however, will ensure that things go smoothly, because Americans are always doing the right thing.
In spite of a tremendous amount of evidence suggesting otherwise, this seems to be the 'popular opinion'. I wish people would start questioning premises instead of conclusions; the lack of understanding of basic causality (which any 'event' can be boiled down to, albeit with much variability stemming from a number of different involved parties) within media consumers (including myself, but I'm working hard to try and systemize my logic and encourage others to do the same) is somewhat astonishing.
But who are we to question? Apparently linking to articles with facts or statistical information should be seen as 'laughable' here, and opinions should be revered as though they were factual. But only if they agree with your own viewpoint, of course - otherwise they should be unequivocally condemned.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
6. if I have to explain I doubt you would understand,if you're looking for someone to tell you what you want to hear... I'm not that guy.
Godfather.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I assume this means you're going to let Ben's answer's on the other five stand for you, right? That would be pretty funny (and fitting), considering it's pure sarcasm, aimed at the typical uninformed, blinded-by-nationalism-and-corporate-news, idiot American/westerner.