Printable View
[FON
Why does anyone bother debating the question of evidence, Bush and his crowd, playing Cowboys and Indians, and claiming anybody hit is a baddy, are only trying to justify themselves and their barbarity. There is more to read between the lines than in the reports.
When the US and GB talk about Freedom and Democracy they are talking about freedom to exploit and plunder, By them of course.
[B]The reason for this war, and the next is to expand MARKETS..Lefty
if only life were that simple. But if you think you can persuasively argue that the only reason the US invaded Iraq was to expand markets, you'd have to come up with some evidence, addressing i would think at least the following:Quote:
Originally posted by lefty@17 April 2003 - 01:34
The reason for this war, and the next is to expand MARKETS..Lefty
1. Why Iraq? It only has something like 22 million people, its not a very large market. Theres lots of other countries out there. What untapped market in Iraq is better than the other 150+ countries in the world? What would the US export the most of to Iraq? Which corporations/industries are posed to benefit the most (aside from the obvious reconstruction contracts). Where are the business opportunities? How much American merchandise is already sold in the Middle East, and how much more business would it earn?
2. I think I read today that war has cost $20 billion up to now. So how long will it take the US to begin earning profits on a $20 billion investment? And how exactly would this work? Are you saying that the American government will foot the bill on behalf of corporate America? Or would the government want to earn some or all of the money back? Is there a particular tax scheme you had in mind for this?
3. Have you factored in the decrease in business that the war has caused? There have been boycott movements of American goods since the war began.
4. Are you confident that the act itself of invading Iraq might preclude future business that would otherwise have been possible? For example, now its probably less likely that a muslim country would hire an american firm for major public works projects, like building bridges, airports, water treatment, telecommunications, etc.
This myopic view would render a short debate.Quote:
Originally posted by lefty@16 April 2003 - 19:34
[b] [FON
Why does anyone bother debating the question of evidence, Bush and his crowd, playing Cowboys and Indians, and claiming anybody hit is a baddy, are only trying to justify themselves and their barbarity. There is more to read between the lines than in the reports.
When the US and GB talk about Freedom and Democracy they are talking about freedom to exploit and plunder, By them of course.
The reason for this war, and the next is to expand MARKETS..Lefty
You need LOTS more than that, Lefty.
I suggest you read every post in the top ten threads in this forum and then re-post; your vision shall have cleared considerably.
You cannot increase markets by killing the shoppers, or totally pissing off millions of people. What CAN you do, though?
1. Justify new laws. "Freedom is way outdated, and overrated."
2. Keep people on their toes...or...nervous. "What was that? Pull the trigger!"
3. Alienate many, many, many people, who in turn, become pissed.
4. These people will find new and creative ways, (or use old and standard ways), to take the war to Americans, thus justifying the need for...MORE MONEY FOR WAR!
5. Close off America, much like one of the 3 "superpowers" in 1984, and keep the internal population well distracted...not necessarily well informed.
6. Kiss the dream of space exploration goodbye. "We are not gonna waste $ on friggin' spaceships while there is a war to be fought!"
Remember to ask yourselves: "WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS ACTION? WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS DECISION?"
When you do this, the scales fall from your eyes, and watching the FOX Network becomes like watching MADTV, or some other insane parody.
Myfiles3000-Quote:
Originally posted by longterm@17 April 2003 - 02:06
You cannot increase markets by killing the shoppers, or totally pissing off millions of people. What CAN you do, though?
1. Justify new laws. "Freedom is way outdated, and overrated."
2. Keep people on their toes...or...nervous. "What was that? Pull the trigger!"
3. Alienate many, many, many people, who in turn, become pissed.
4. These people will find new and creative ways, (or use old and standard ways), to take the war to Americans, thus justifying the need for...MORE MONEY FOR WAR!
5. Close off America, much like one of the 3 "superpowers" in 1984, and keep the internal population well distracted...not necessarily well informed.
6. Kiss the dream of space exploration goodbye. "We are not gonna waste $ on friggin' spaceships while there is a war to be fought!"
Remember to ask yourselves: "WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS ACTION? WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS DECISION?"
When you do this, the scales fall from your eyes, and watching the FOX Network becomes like watching MADTV, or some other insane parody.
Guess what? By universal accord, you no longer wear the "conspiracy theorist" label; longterm has shown you up! :lol: :lol:
I regret not being able to visit the forum the next several days-I shall endeavor to find an alternative PC so as to check in-this could get interesting. :ph34r:
LongTerm I'm going to kick your rhetorical ass later today.Quote:
Originally posted by longterm@17 April 2003 - 08:06
You cannot increase markets by killing the shoppers, or totally pissing off millions of people. What CAN you do, though?
1. Justify new laws. "Freedom is way outdated, and overrated."
2. Keep people on their toes...or...nervous. "What was that? Pull the trigger!"
3. Alienate many, many, many people, who in turn, become pissed.
4. These people will find new and creative ways, (or use old and standard ways), to take the war to Americans, thus justifying the need for...MORE MONEY FOR WAR!
5. Close off America, much like one of the 3 "superpowers" in 1984, and keep the internal population well distracted...not necessarily well informed.
6. Kiss the dream of space exploration goodbye. "We are not gonna waste $ on friggin' spaceships while there is a war to be fought!"
Remember to ask yourselves: "WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS ACTION? WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS DECISION?"
When you do this, the scales fall from your eyes, and watching the FOX Network becomes like watching MADTV, or some other insane parody.
You cannot increase markets by killing the shoppers, or totally pissing off millions of people. What CAN you do, though?Quote:
Originally posted by longterm@17 April 2003 - 08:06
You cannot increase markets by killing the shoppers, or totally pissing off millions of people. What CAN you do, though?
1. Justify new laws. "Freedom is way outdated, and overrated."
2. Keep people on their toes...or...nervous. "What was that? Pull the trigger!"
3. Alienate many, many, many people, who in turn, become pissed.
4. These people will find new and creative ways, (or use old and standard ways), to take the war to Americans, thus justifying the need for...MORE MONEY FOR WAR!
5. Close off America, much like one of the 3 "superpowers" in 1984, and keep the internal population well distracted...not necessarily well informed.
6. Kiss the dream of space exploration goodbye. "We are not gonna waste $ on friggin' spaceships while there is a war to be fought!"
Remember to ask yourselves: "WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS ACTION? WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS DECISION?"
When you do this, the scales fall from your eyes, and watching the FOX Network becomes like watching MADTV, or some other insane parody.
1. Justify new laws. "Freedom is way outdated, and overrated."
-- Are you referring to American laws, or international law? There is nothing more central to US rhetoric/philosophy than freedom, no US official would ever say such a thing. I realize you're being facetious, but its hard to know what you mean here. Presumably you're referring to expanded state powers, but its not clear to me, following your logic, how these laws fit into your theory.
2. Keep people on their toes...or...nervous. "What was that? Pull the trigger!"
--?
3. Alienate many, many, many people, who in turn, become pissed.
-- Which people? How is this different from "totally pissing off" people, above, which you said wouldn't work?
4. These people will find new and creative ways, (or use old and standard ways), to take the war to Americans, thus justifying the need for...MORE MONEY FOR WAR!
-- Okay, so you're saying the US needs to provoke conflict every so often, to justify defence spending? Its hard to know.
5. Close off America, much like one of the 3 "superpowers" in 1984, and keep the internal population well distracted...not necessarily well informed.
--I'm sympathetic to you on this point, but I still don't know what you mean by "close off" america. Do you mean restricting outsiders from entering? or that the media intentionally takes an isolationist view of the world? Or what?
6. Kiss the dream of space exploration goodbye. "We are not gonna waste $ on friggin' spaceships while there is a war to be fought!"
--Let me guess, you watch a lot of star trek, have posters of the solar system in your room, read science fiction. Thats cool. But what is your point here? First of all, a lot of the defence contractors that profit from defence spending also get business through "space exploration" spending. space exploration and war are not mutually exclusive -- satellite communication has become ubiquitous, and missile defence, which Bush was advocating at the start of his term, is another example. And I'm sure they're cooking up weapons systems that operate outside the atmosphere of Earth -- military domination is rooted in technology, so its only fair to assume that the world's only superpower will be working on technology for use decades in the future.
Remember to ask yourselves: "WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS ACTION? WHO BENEFITS FROM THIS DECISION?"
When you do this, the scales fall from your eyes, and watching the FOX Network becomes like watching MADTV, or some other insane parody.1.
--maybe you'd like to answer your own question. I just read aloud the words in CAPS and i didn't notice any change, or scales. You're saying that Fox News is behind this whole Iraq thing?
If this is your style, so be it. but this kind of commentary doesn't really add anything to dialogue, it either preaches to the converted, or is ignored by the opposition. If you want people to consider your views (which appear to me to have some merit), you have to have a conversation, not a rant.
The target of global capitalism is not just Iraq but the middle east and on, America are already in there now on the excuse of rebuiulding what they have destroyed and establishing their control, and investment in the country. The $40m is cheep for that, and it is paid by the taxpayer anyway.
And its our blood that was spilt.
The aim of capitalism is to comtrol and use the world to work for them and it can only survive by expanding continually and relentlessly. Overcoming every other ideology and religion to impose its own and the Middle East has scope for that. Control of the economy, the ideology and the propaganda. Not just to sell them Mc Donalds but to control the Hearts and Minds as the have ours. Get all those millions consumer conscious and working for them, including the power of the worlds oil too.
Try reading the 'The Iron Heel' by Jack London Its very old but still relevent.
Lefty
The target of global capitalism is not just Iraq but the middle east and on, America are already in there now on the excuse of rebuiulding what they have destroyed and establishing their control, and investment in the country. The $40m is cheep for that, and it is paid by the taxpayer anyway. And its our blood that was spilt.Quote:
Originally posted by lefty@19 April 2003 - 02:27
The target of global capitalism is not just Iraq but the middle east and on, America are already in there now on the excuse of rebuiulding what they have destroyed and establishing their control, and investment in the country. The $40m is cheep for that, and it is paid by the taxpayer anyway.
And its our blood that was spilt.
The aim of capitalism is to comtrol and use the world to work for them and it can only survive by expanding continually and relentlessly. Overcoming every other ideology and religion to impose its own and the Middle East has scope for that. Control of the economy, the ideology and the propaganda. Not just to sell them Mc Donalds but to control the Hearts and Minds as the have ours. Get all those millions consumer conscious and working for them, including the power of the worlds oil too.
Try reading the 'The Iron Heel' by Jack London Its very old but still relevent.
Lefty
-- if the taxpayer isn't in on it, and neither are you, who is? the military industrial complex? the number is closer to $40b.
The aim of capitalism is to comtrol and use the world to work for them and it can only survive by expanding continually and relentlessly.
-- who is them? and why must capitalism grow to survive? You're suggesting capitalism couldn't exist in a closed system with zero population growth. I've never heard that before. I thought the reason capitalism is growing is because the world's population is growing, and a rising tide floats all boats.
Overcoming every other ideology and religion to impose its own and the Middle East has scope for that.
-- how would you define the USA's ideology (democratic capitalist racist megacorporist hyperpower?) and religion (revival Baptist Moderate Reformist Fundamentalist?). Seriously, what ideology are you referring to?
Control of the economy, the ideology and the propaganda. Not just to sell them Mc Donalds but to control the Hearts and Minds as the have ours. Get all those millions consumer conscious and working for them, including the power of the worlds oil too.
--There's 30 million people in Canada. That's a 30% bigger market than Iraq. The people have much more money to spend. They have lots of untapped oil. Its closer. Why Iraq?
Is their a system under which you'd prefer being controlled? I can only think of ones I wouldn't prefer.
Try reading the 'The Iron Heel' by Jack London Its very old but still relevent.
Lefty
I Will try this summer.
Having said all that, I should say I don't believe there's a moral justification for invading Iraq. The problem has more to do with shrub, cheney, rumsfeld and wolfowitz than global capitalism.