Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: capt. apathy on December 19, 2003, 12:40:08 AM
-
War is a Racket
by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC, 1933
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.
It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.
I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.
During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.
that was the forward from his (short) book. the full text here (http://www.shtull-trauring.org/aron/Community/Articles/WAR_IS_A_RACKET.html) it's only about a half-hour read. and well worth the time.
interesting read from a guy who knows the bussiness better than any of us.
-
some things never change.
-
Interesting.
-
The truth.
In any nation, under any flag, and any political style.
-
wonder if the Major ate his words by 1943 .. just 10 years later ....
or should have America just stood by and let Hitler exterminate millions while he was conquering Europe (we'd fought Japan - per the Major's definition of why we should go to war= "If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight") Bet he felt like a tard around then...
-
Germany declared war on the US, not the other way around Eagler. The US waited until the war knocked at her door, as per the Major's idea.
-
wonder if the Major ate his words by 1943 .. just 10 years later ....
or should have America just stood by and let Hitler exterminate millions while he was conquering Europe (we'd fought Japan - per the Major's definition of why we should go to war= "If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight") Bet he felt like a tard around then...
I doubt it. by 43 we had proven him right again(would there have been an issue to go to war with japan over if not for policies in the pacific set up to protect the investments of the few?)
by 43 we had fallen for it again. ran up more debt for the american tax-payer, burried more of our family, all so we could protect the money of those who already have an ample supply, and generate bussiness for the next generation of war-mongers.
and as he stated is it really any of our bussines if other people in other lands want to be comunist, facist, live under a dictator(whatever)
I agree with his statement
There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights.
I also like his idea that if we can draft young men to go and fight and risk there lives in a 'just war' for an enlisted mans pay, then why shouldn't we draft the military contractors. not require them to risk there lives, but just put their careers and futures on hold while they work for enlisted mans pay. let the CEO of Haliburton work this whole year for an e-1 pay grade. surely he could give up his proffit, if this is such a just cause. it's not like your asking him to be in the line of fire.
BTW- thats Major General Smedley Butler, not Major
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Germany declared war on the US, not the other way around Eagler. The US waited until the war knocked at her door, as per the Major's idea.
they were not attacking our shores - I don't think it meet his description
and the world in 2003 is not the world in 1933 - just alittle more intergrated
-
So when someone formally declares war on you, what should the response be? Sounds to me like a declaration of war is the direct threat that the Major-General had in mind.
-
Yes Eagler, the world is quite different, but the mechanism remain the same.
I think that General took some point, maybe the entire concept, or the consequences (just war/unjust war), can be discussed, but the core of his reasoning remain adamantine.
If possible, just check the variation in balance that the war-connected companies will have as consequence of Desert War II.
Boeing, for example, those smart bombs cost a lot ;)
-
So when someone formally declares war on you, what should the response be? Sounds to me like a declaration of war is the direct threat that the Major-General had in mind.
I would think it would be obvious that, as you say, a declaration of war, while not an attack on our soil directly, is a declaration of intent of hostilities and would fall under his deffinition of valid reasons.
and again I wonder why is it 'ok' to ask young men to risk their lives in a war and yet it is not seen as reasonable to have companies supplying our troops 'at cost' or even just a reasonable profit.
the soldier doesn't proffit from war, the american citisen doesn't proffit from war. the battles we fight go to protect the bussines dollar, and the same companies we are protecting make extra profit off the war effort.
aparently it's patriotic for a man to give up his life but unamerican for a wealthy man to pass up a chance to gouge the american tax payer.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Germany declared war on the US, not the other way around Eagler. The US waited until the war knocked at her door, as per the Major's idea.
On September 11, 1941, the President of the United States publicly declared that he had ordered the American Navy and Air Force to shoot on sight at any German war vessel. In his speech of October 27, 1941, he once more expressly affirmed that this order was in force. Acting under this order, vessels of the American Navy, since early September 1941, had systematically attacked German naval forces. Undeclared war was in progress before Dec. 7th, 1941, and the Germans officially declared war on Dec. 11th, 1941.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
they were not attacking our shores - I don't think it meet his description
and the world in 2003 is not the world in 1933 - just alittle more intergrated
So being an allied of a country that did attack us (Japan @ Pearl) I think it more than means what the general said.
Do not get involved in protracted conflicts, it negates all the profibility of war.
Sun Tzu knew it 2000+ years ago ....
The Genreal knew it 70 years ago ..
what do you think has changed? not much....
-
Maybe that was in response to the American merchantmen sunk by the Kriegsmarine. Knock-knock!
-
Originally posted by Naso
Yes Eagler, the world is quite different, but the mechanism remain the same.
I think that General took some point, maybe the entire concept, or the consequences (just war/unjust war), can be discussed, but the core of his reasoning remain adamantine.
If possible, just check the variation in balance that the war-connected companies will have as consequence of Desert War II.
Boeing, for example, those smart bombs cost a lot ;)
aside from "War", please tell me one venture which one side does not gain and another lose?
war is business, big biz, nasty biz but more times than not necessary biz at our stage of enilightenment (or lack thereof)
sounds like the major gen was just pointing out the obvious and whining about it - is he related to Clark? :)
-
sounds like the major gen was just pointing out the obvious and whining about it - is he related to Clark?
I don't see him as whinning. he is pointing out what should be obvious and isn't to most. that while we are told we are fighting 'the war to end all wars', 'to make the world safe for democracy', and 'the war on terrorism'. what we are really fighting for is deffence contracts for boeing, oil deals for brown and root, and expanded markets for their rich buddys.
it's clearly aperent to anyone who reads this bbs that the facts of why we are fighting and who will gain what from it still isn't obvious to quite a few people. people who claim to 'know the facts' and are sure they're right.
-
Hmmm... I thought America had been considered "Isolationist" prior to WWI.
MiniD
-
Hmmm... I thought America had been considered "Isolationist" prior to WWI.
I've heard that claimed a lot. but it's hard to explain how the spanish/american war was sparked by the blowing up of the Maine in havana if we where so isolated.
-
I read and watched catch-22, I know all about it.
-
the thought of eagler calling a hornorably retired marine major general a "whiner" causes me a warm feeling inside.
another sunny day patriot.
support your troops!!! unless the stop goosesteping.
sad day for our country.
-
towd needs a hug. DEAR GOD SOMEBODY HUG THE POOR DESPOT!
-
the thought of eagler calling a hornorably retired marine major general a "whiner" causes me a warm feeling inside.
one more thing that I'm not sure was mentioned in his book. he has 2 CMH's.
-
what we are really fighting for is deffence contracts for boeing, oil deals for brown and root, and expanded markets for their rich buddys.
====
And you think that you few, you precious few who have somewhat above average intellect, should be congratualed for coming to your awesome conclusions about greed and power while we ignorant masses are being led around by the nose by the corporate muscle men, making wars for oil and personal greed. Always been that way eh! since the beginning of time they say. The war to end all wars just a corporate sneeze was it?.......
I say your just believing what you think makes you look smart to your buddies still living at moms while ignoring the far greater truths about the cosmos and your itty bitty nonconsequential fart of an existance.
-
so what do you believe?
we are in this war for honor? for the people of Iraq? and the fact that the money (our tax dollars) is going into the pockets of GW's friends is purely coincidental I'm sure, a fluke, no way in hell it could have been the point of this from the begining.
it doesn't take great intelect to figure it out, just follow the money. most people realise that the rich get richer and the poor get dead in times of war, that isn't rocket science it's a fact of life and has been for awhile.
what is interesting (if you bothered to read the book) is his ideas on what could be done to make a meaningful change to the situation. things like not allowing war to be a proffit enterprise. requiring companies to provide services the country needs in times of war without the insentive of outrageous profit (the same as the men who fight and die are asked to do.) let all in this country share equally in the cost of war and share equally in the profit.
General butler believes (and I believe he is right) that if these steps where taken war would become much less atractive as a money making operation and we could devote time, money and science, into directions that would benifit many more people.
what are your "greater truths" in your itty bitty nonconsequential fart of an existance.
the forward I quoted and the book I linked to where writen by major general in the usmc, over 33 years of service, 2 congressional medals of honor.
honestly I don't know (or even really care) what you do in your time away from the pc that makes you think you are tuned in to "the greater truths about the cosmos", but I'll go out on a limb and guess you wouldn't make a flea on the bellybutton of that man.
-
Smedley Butler was a great Marine, he earned both the Medals of Honor, he is one of only two Marines to ever get the Medal of Honor twice.
The other being Dan Daly.
I am not sure if any of the other services have guys who won it twice.
I would not doubt it though.
Regardless, this man earned every right to say what he believed, not that you need to serve to have that right. Clark is not even in the same ball part as this man.
Rank and organization: Major, U.S. Marine Corps. Born: 30 July 1881, West Chester, Pa. Appointed from: Pennsylvania. G.O. No.: 177, 4 December 1915. Other Navy awards: Second Medal of Honor, Distinguished Service Medal.
Citation:
For distinguished conduct in battle, engagement of Vera Cruz, 22 April 1914. Maj. Butler was eminent and conspicuous in command of his battalion. He exhibited courage and skill in leading his men through the action of the 22d and in the final occupation of the city.
Rank and organization: Major, U.S. Marine Corps. Born: 30 July 1881, West Chester, Pa. Appointed from: Pennsylvania. Other Navy awards: Second Medal of Honor, Distinguished Service Medal.
Citation:
As Commanding Officer of detachments from the 5th, 13th, 23d Companies and the marine and sailor detachment from the U.S.S. Connecticut, Maj. Butler led the attack on Fort Riviere, Haiti, 17 November 1915. Following a concentrated drive, several different detachments of marines gradually closed in on the old French bastion fort in an effort to cut off all avenues of retreat for the Caco bandits. Reaching the fort on the southern side where there was a small opening in the wall, Maj. Butler gave the signal to attack and marines from the 15th Company poured through the breach, engaged the Cacos in hand-to-hand combat, took the bastion and crushed the Caco resistance. Throughout this perilous action, Maj. Butler was conspicuous for his bravery and forceful leadership.
-
What is the name of the book? How old is it? I would love to read it.
-
the name of the book is "war is a racket".
it's very short and to the point, just 5 chapters, 15-30min read.
my origanal post has a link to the complete text, I also have it in .doc format if you'd like it e-mailed to you.
-
Capt.
Can you email it to gtora2@hotmail.com
Thanks
-
so..
during a war everyone should work for free?
I really don't see the point of ur argument nor the maj gen
-
the point is that if the rest of us (myself included) where required to make even a part of the sacrifice that soldiers in the field do (just the restriction on income, not time away from home, risk to life and limb, or any of the big sacrifices, just the money) that those who have the money (and therefore the power) would have as much incentive as the rest of us to find a different solution.
-
unless you were drafted, why did you join the service? for the gi bill? free school?
like a fireman complaining about having to put out a fire he did not agree with the cause of ..
-
Just a point here. Germany DID bring war to the shore of the US as did Japan. There are more than a couple U-boats lying just off shore on the Atlantic side of the US. They were very active in attacking US flagged shipping.
Japan also attemted to bomb the US mainland with their experimental baloon bombers via the jetstream. This is far after Pearl Harbor of course but they did try.
-
we are in this war for honor? for the people of Iraq? and the fact that the money (our tax dollars) is going into the pockets of GW's friends is purely coincidental I'm sure, a fluke, no way in hell it could have been the point of this from the begining.
====
same old crap.....you just blew your cover. your a tool
-
Originally posted by Yeager
same old crap.....you just blew your cover. your a tool
yeager, why are we there then???
-
Originally posted by kappa
yeager, why are we there then???
how about:
making the world a safer place
instill democracy & freedom into the arse backwards middle east
prevent/discourage another 9/11
to show the world we won't take it anymore
and if that helps our economy - I ain't gonna whine about it...
-
I've got no cover. I say whats on my mind and hide nothing.
you however aparently keep your thoughts secret or don't have an independent thought, as you don't really state any beliefs of your own. just say others are wrong without any real input as to how you see anything.
if you see things differently than me, great. speak your mind. I love to hear differing opinions, consider other points of view. for me it's a win-win situation, either I learn something new or reach some understanding with someone I didn't see eye-to-eye with before. either way I see the free exchange of opinions as a good thing.
but your petty little coments without any point are getting tired, and I'm done with you until you find a thought of your own.
-
how about :
making the world a safer place
instill democracy & freedom into the arse backwards middle east
prevent/discourage another 9/11
to show the world we won't take it anymore
safer for who? not for the hundreds we've lost over there this year.
it's there country let them instill the gov't they want, we should work on getting some control over our own.
how many iraqi's participated in the 9/11 attacks? and how many suadi 'allies'
and it doesn't help our economy, the gov't is in deficit spending, they are borrowing money from us to pay the contractors. we aren'tgaining we are paying for the war.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
how about:
making the world a safer place
instill democracy & freedom into the arse backwards middle east
prevent/discourage another 9/11
to show the world we won't take it anymore
and if that helps our economy - I ain't gonna whine about it...
lol very nobel indeed!
Making the would a safer place?? Think about that statment.. If possible, try to think outside your own world and place yourself in the shoes of 'mr. terrorist'. <----Mr. t
Mr. t thinks america is after all things non-american and is activly trying to destroy Islamic ideas around the world..
America declares war and invades Iraqi. In the process Islamic men, women, and children are killed. Lets say Mr. t's islamic woman was killed in a raid where american's are looking for Islamic supporters..
Is that going to make Mr. t, a) more happy b) less happy c)want to kill more americans?
Everything Mr. t beleives has come true for him....... If his life and experiences equal truth in his eyes, will he change?
Iraqi had no part in 9/11.....
Take what anymore? They thought before that we would take it?
If you were a dead soldier or dead soldier's family would the difference in the short term economy really mean that much to you?
Apathy apathy apathy.... O the horror
-
and I'm done with you until you find a thought of your own.
====
hehehe thats good :lol
-
Originally posted by Eagler
aside from "War", please tell me one venture which one side does not gain and another lose?
Just about every financial transaction. I exchange wealth for a product that a company makes more efficiently than I could. Company makes a profit, I get a product cheaper than if I made it myself.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Just about every financial transaction. I exchange wealth for a product that a company makes more efficiently than I could. Company makes a profit, I get a product cheaper than if I made it myself.
who makes the product for the company? always fair labor?
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
I've heard that claimed a lot. but it's hard to explain how the spanish/american war was sparked by the blowing up of the Maine in havana if we where so isolated.
How far is Havana from the US? How far is it from Spain? I think isolationist isn't necessarily what you're defining it to be.
MiniD
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
one more thing that I'm not sure was mentioned in his book. he has 2 CMH's.
ummm...it's NOT a CMH.....official name is Medal of Honor, not Congressional Medal of Honor
-
Originally posted by Dowding
So when someone formally declares war on you, what should the response be? Sounds to me like a declaration of war is the direct threat that the Major-General had in mind.
Prior to US involvement Japan made an attack on US shores Germany didn't. I'd call an attack on NYC and DC, with over 3000 dead, an attack on our shores. Wouldn't you?
-
Prior to US involvement Japan made an attack on US shores Germany didn't. I'd call an attack on NYC and DC, with over 3000 dead, an attack on our shores. Wouldn't you?
yes I would, an attack who's memebers where primarily saudis, so why are we wasing time and money on iraq and not dealing with the saudi contribution to 9/11?
could it be that we don't want to upset an already lucrative aliance with the saudis?
-
Capt., can you email me the .doc at xavi_mm@teleline.es (xavi_mm@teleline.es) please? Thanks!
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
yes I would, an attack who's memebers where primarily saudis, so why are we wasing time and money on iraq and not dealing with the saudi contribution to 9/11?
could it be that we don't want to upset an already lucrative aliance with the saudis?
I think we'll eventually get around to the Saudis, one way or another. I don't claim to be privy to all the info our government has and so am content to not second guess just yet.
-
but if this is about 9/11 then shouldn't we make those involved a priority.
this sort of logic would make about as much sense as if we'd attacked mexico in retaliation for pearl harbor
-
the wheels on the bus go round and round...
round and round.....
round and round....
the wheels on the......
:eek:
-
Originally posted by Eagler
who makes the product for the company? always fair labor?
No not necessarily in every case, but in some. And you asked for just one example.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
the wheels on the bus go round and round...
round and round.....
round and round....
the wheels on the......
:eek:
Nah Yeager, sometimes you get a flat, or the nuts get loose, then it all gets jacked up and someone finally decides to get the nuts in one place, blows some air at it and, just maybe, the wheel will go around again,..until the next flat.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
but if this is about 9/11 then shouldn't we make those involved a priority.
this sort of logic would make about as much sense as if we'd attacked mexico in retaliation for pearl harbor
Are you sayind the Saudi government was behind the attack on 9/11? If you have evidence please send it to the white house asap.
-
Are you sayind the Saudi government was behind the attack on 9/11? If you have evidence please send it to the white house asap.
Wait a minute... you were the one who was comparing the Germany war declaration with Sept 11th - i.e. the act of a State with that of a delocalised organisation. In light of your above remarks your previous comparison is left wanting.
BTW, didn't a few pages of some recent report get the marker pen treatment to spare our Saudi friend's blushes?
Face it, the Saudi Arabia is a corrupt despotic regime and breeding ground for the terrorism that planned and funded the Sept. 11th attacks, providing virtually all the man-power to do it. Tell me again, how many Iraqis were involved?
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Wait a minute... you were the one who was comparing the Germany war declaration with Sept 11th - i.e. the act of a State with that of a delocalised organisation. In light of your above remarks your previous comparison is left wanting.
BTW, didn't a few pages of some recent report get the marker pen treatment to spare our Saudi friend's blushes?
Face it, the Saudi Arabia is a corrupt despotic regime and breeding ground for the terrorism that planned and funded the Sept. 11th attacks, providing virtually all the man-power to do it. Tell me again, how many Iraqis were involved?
I compared Germany's war declaration with 9/11? No, I compared Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor with 9/11.
Look, I'll be plain spoken here. I think we need to root out terrorism in ALL of the middle east. Even if it means overturning every middle eastern government. Afghanistan was a great place to start and Iraq a good second. Syria will make a nice third.
-
I compared Germany's war declaration with 9/11? No, I compared Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor with 9/11.
Japan or Germany, both were national States.
Look, I'll be plain spoken here. I think we need to root out terrorism in ALL of the middle east. Even if it means overturning every middle eastern government. Afghanistan was a great place to start and Iraq a good second. Syria will make a nice third.
And you overlook Saudi Arabia in your analysis? Is that because Bush has done the same or do you have genuine reasons?
BTW, why isn't Yemen near the top of that list? It is the number one holiday destination for stressed out extremist nutcases.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Japan or Germany, both were national States.
And you overlook Saudi Arabia in your analysis? Is that because Bush has done the same or do you have genuine reasons?
BTW, why isn't Yemen near the top of that list? It is the number one holiday destination for stressed out extremist nutcases.
Dowding, I may seem like an important guy to you but I'm really not. I don't make US policy. Heck, I can't even get the AKs to stop porking your fuel. ;)
So long as we don't stop in the middle east 'till we're done I'll be satisfied.
-
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose
-
AK's are porking my fuel? No wonder I'm paying such high prices at the pumps. ;)
-
when we went after the taliban in afganistan you didn't hear many complain, we had been attacked and there where direct links, we responded and the overwelming majority did and still do suport bush's decision to respond.
the compaints are on the iraqi invasion, it's taking rescorses away from legitamate targets and is costing american and allied lives in something that will gain the average american nothing. the only americans to gain in this are those who are in the war racket.
as far as what Iraqis may gain. frankly I don't care, let them live under whatever kind of gov't the can tolorate. but my gov't has a responsability to me and the other americans who elected them. if it is looking out for the best interest of Iraqis and a few rich bussiness men at the cost of american soldiers and a national debt that will be resting on the shoulders of the american tax payer, it's not doing it's job, and has aperantly forgot who the gov't is suposed to work for.
-
Wow.
Some of you people are very adroit in the use of class warfare. I should have worn my galoshes.
The evil industrialists control the U.S. government and get it to declare war so they can make obscene profits. What a load of horsedung, replete with righteous posturing and moral indignation. If we follow this line of reasoning to its end, we would be led to believe that the Kennedy's are among the most evil of all Americans, manipulating the government through their diplomatic and governmental positions, buying presidential elections, and that sort of thing.
Get a grip willya!?
Shuckins
-
the marine major general directly and completly quoted clearly stated that is exactly the case.
and hell yea the kennedys were up to their necks in it. and lost severls ( necks ) in the process.
this is the point.
"evil industrialists control the U.S. government and get it to declare war so they can make obscene profits"
now how many young lives exactly making insanly rich people more rich worth to you personaly? since that is the real reason behind just about all war. dispersions dont count who cares if kennedys were evil also? its bigger than that our young die for bankers bottom line and always have. wrap your head around that one befor you dismiss it because it hurts like your trained to. free your mind and your bellybutton will follow.
-
Stalin's paranoia didn't die with him.
Shuckins
-
just follow the money. who gets richer? who gets dead?
the wealthy are the ONLY americans to gain anything from this war. not all wars, but this is one that fits the patern.
as general Butler stated there are 2 just wars, deffence of our shores and deffence of our Bill of Rights, all else are a racket to make the rich richer.
when we sent soldiers to afganistan, that was a direct response to the 9/11 attacks, and IMO just.
but you would only have to pay the slightest bit of attention to see the ties between those making policy and those profiting from it. haliburton, brown and root, I wonder if the president knows any of the guys on those companies?
who else gains? the soldiers who signed on to protect their country only to find that their lives are being spent for corperate profit?
or is it the general public who sees no profit, loses friends and families in the service, and shoulders a swelling national debt? how do we gain when our sons lives are being spent so that american comanies have a secure area to ship our jobs too?
not to mention the increased threat to national security. would 9/11 ever have occured had we not been getting involved in the politics of other countrys for the sake of protecting investments that would have served the american public better had they benn invested here?
for the sake of Bush and company we are spending the lives of our sons to prove the terrorists right. we make it that much easier for them to recuit the next suicide bomber.
we give that much more incentive for foriegn gov'ts to suport attacks, after all they can't beat us in a convetional war. we are proving that we will disregard the UN (while at the same time claiming we are here to suport the UN's directives that are being ignored. if we don't care what the UN says, why would we spend lives to suport their directives?).
We will take out leaders and even whole gov'ts we don't like. if we think they may be getting strong enough to have a chance at resisting us (through WMD's that we also have), well thats just another excuse to go to war. we have to beat them now, if we wait they may be strong enough to fight back effectively.
so why wouldn't these gov'ts and rulers suport terrorism, it's the only way they can fight us.
our gov't HAS lost it's sense of pupose. what is the purpose of our gov't? it's laid out fairly clearly in the pre-amble of the constitution.
1. astablish justice
2. insure DOMESTIC prosperity
3. provide for the common deffense
4. promote the general wealfare
5. ensure the blessings of liberty
for OURSELVES and OUR POSTERITY
I'm not a pacifist, their are good reasons to fight, this just isn't it.
we need to get out of the politics of other countries.
we need to create legislation that takes proffit out of war. we can draft soldiers when their country needs them, why not companies. if companies didn't proffit from war you'd find we would be called to get involved in a lot less of them. why should a company or wealth invester be allowed to make a fortune off of providing the tools to the man who's protecting him.
when we do have to go to war (as the general mentions, in response to a direct attack on our shores or bill of rights) do it whole hartedly, take out the enemy and invoke that age old favorite "the spoils of war", take out the enemy and hand any left a bill for the cost. charge them for every bullet we fired at them, the wages for our soldiers, death benifts to the familys. charge them the cost to feed, train and equip our soldiers. charge them for each vehicle lost, and the fuel to get us there. and take whatever assets they have to pay this off. when they have a zero ballance they can try to rebuild, if not it's not our problem. if we don't start or provoke the wars we can walk away with a clear conscience.
if we stay out of other counries politics, take away the cash incentive for the wealthy here to start wars, and react to attacks in a way leaves the survivers telling horror stories for generations about "the time when we screwed with America", then we would have alot less war and maybe we could use the effort and money we spend on it, for something that would make all of our lives better
-
"evil industrialists control the U.S. government and get it to declare war so they can make obscene profits"
====
This is a very plausible scenario. The facts do support this. However, these same facts support many other scenarios.
The problem in historical perspective is determining which scenario is the correct scenario and the fact remains that more than one scenario can occur simultaneously for different reasons.
In the end it all boils down to fate and the fact that humanity has a timer attached to it by the force of nature and will eventually end, sooner or later anyway.
Love is the answer.
-
This is a very plausible scenario. The facts do support this. However, these same facts support many other scenarios.
The problem in historical perspective is determining which scenario is the correct scenario and the fact remains that more than one scenario can occur simultaneously for different reasons.
In the end it all boils down to fate and the fact that humanity has a timer attached to it by the force of nature and will eventually end, sooner or later anyway.
Love is the answer
:aok
there you go, an opinion. and a well thought out one too. was that so hard. :D
-
Originally posted by Yeager
"evil industrialists control the U.S. government and get it to declare war so they can make obscene profits"
====
This is a very plausible scenario. The facts do support this. However, these same facts support many other scenarios.
The problem in historical perspective is determining which scenario is the correct scenario and the fact remains that more than one scenario can occur simultaneously for different reasons.
In the end it all boils down to fate and the fact that humanity has a timer attached to it by the force of nature and will eventually end, sooner or later anyway.
Love is the answer.
which Love?
the Love of Money? :)
-
my PERSONAL OPINION:
Anyone that has TWO (2) Medals of Honor can say or write whatever they want.
As far as this article being reletive today. I hold no opinion.
My $0.02