You cannot blame the American government for not taking care of America's most valued value: PROSPERITY!
Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) analyst Robert Stallard said he expects war-related spending in fiscal 2009 and fiscal 2010 to be $170 billion and $150 billion, respectively. And even after the peak, war spending is still likely to be more than $100 billion annually for the next few years to refurbish and replace war torn equipment used in Iraq.This war and this new American century project all make perfect economic sense to me!
However. in case you are a real pacifist, make sure your money is invested in Ethical Funds.
It is through the citizen's social responsibility that the corporations will be forced to change their war-prone culture. They are not evil seekers, they just need to make money to survive. And in a culture where the money and the scientific! mantra of "survival of the fittest" are the new religious sermons, anything is permissible, even war with innocent countries who want to keep their own share of the pie!
14 comments:
War is profitable but only for those who start it, not those who are on the battle field.
I cannot believe what my country is doing to the rest of the world and I will never forgive those in charge.
I'll second that!
""Anti-warriors" there are not really effective and real "Anti-warriors”.
As we saw with invasion of Iraq all these voices and demonstrations faded down and no one care about them whatever they say and voiced.
The problem is we have a new power that need more to feed her anger and greedy attitude, this empire can not be stopped by a group or some groups here and there, this empire be only destroyed by another new power which one day will be ready to fight the old sick empire.
War is profitable but only for those who start it, not those who are on the battle field.
Which battle field you talking about?
Iraq war was launch by remotely what they show us is just for the show, they used and using deadly weapons, they did Shock and Awe using all unknown power to destroy the will of a nation they made Hell on the ground.
What we see in field and reported now most of them have to do so for two reasons.
1- To gain US citizenship as part of this process now we sow many US on the ground in Iraq in their camps granted US citizenship.
2- Reported now the number of mercenaries from around the world (South America, Africa, some fro S. East Asia) are now passed the US listed number in Iraq so these guys got paid to kill.
naj
You can see why the chief idiot will stay in the middle east permanently or so he thinks.
The additional funding combined with prior requests made in the president's fiscal 2008 budget would bring the total funding to about $190 billion compared with the $165 billion approved by Congress for 2007.
Wall Street and industry executives have sought to assure investors there will be little disturbance in military spending over the next several years -- regardless of who succeeds President Bush in the White House or the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq as proposed by Gen. David Petraeus.
Pardon me my friend but this pisses me off. Think about it! With trillions more in expendirures expected from staying in the middle east long term, we are a war economy. I can't stand it. The defense industry is flying and everyone thinks this is all about oil. This sickens me and it will get a lot worse soon!
"It is through the citizen's social responsibility that the corporations will be forced to change their war-prone culture. They are not evil seekers, they just need to make money to survive."
I don't agree with that, Naj. There are many good and righteous ways to make money. They may not be self-described evil seekers, but they are fully aware that they are making money off of tools that propogate evil. You can say that they're 'making money to survive', but you and I both know that this is BS. These people are making obscene amounts of money, that well surpasses what is needed 'to survive'.
They all know exactly what they're doing....and couldn't care less about the pain, death, and destruction that is the price of them making money. It's all about greed, my dear Naj.
The Bible states: The love of money is the root of all evil. I'm certain the Qur'an and the Vedas, et al, say basically the same thing, I just don't have the time to look them up.
Wall Street and industry executives have sought to assure investors there will be little disturbance in military spending over the next several years -- regardless of who succeeds President Bush in the White House or the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq as proposed by Gen. David Petraeus.
Pardon me my friend but this pisses me off. Think about it! With trillions more in expendirures expected from staying in the middle east long term, we are a war economy.
That's exactly it. Wall St got to Hillary, Obama, and Edwards. All three say will be in Iraq to at least 2013 and beyond.
that's good news for the defense sector.
And the 28% that still support the occupation of Iraq? I bet a large portion of them are directly or indirectly profiting off he war.
Americans need to ask themselves if they are war profiteers. If they answer is yes, then each individual needs to decide for themselves if they in good conscience can continue to do so.
The problem is we are firmly back into a war time economy.
The feedback loop is firmly established.
Congress gives hundreds of billions of dollars to the pentagon. The Pentagon divies out no bid cost plus conrtracts to Bush friendly corps with no oversight.
Those corps donate to memebers of Congress funding their re-election compaigns. Further, these same corps pledge economical development for the districts and states of the members of Congress.
Corp X gives money to Congressman X and then tells Congressman X that if they vote for such and such defense apppropriations bill, they'll move a maufacturing plant or corp headquarters to their district.
Then Congressman X can brag about all the investment and jobs he/she brought to his/her district/state.
There's no incentive to end the occupation.
Even worse, there's no incentive to bring about a peaceful and stable Iraq. A peaceful and stable Iraq would mean a withrdrawing of U.S. forces and contractors.
The gravy train would dry up. Thus the powers at be keep Iraq in a state of controlled chaos.
Brother Tim
==========================
They are not evil seekers, they just need to make money to survive. And in a culture where the money and the scientific! mantra of "survival of the fittest" are the new religious sermons, anything is permissible, even war with innocent countries who want to keep their own share of the pie!
we agree!
Polishifter
============================
That's what I was referring to:
Before putting al the blame on Bush, we need to wonder if we are the war profiteers.
"they are not evil-seekers" was a tongue in cheek to draw attention to our own responsibility.
Jim
============================
To just be ashamed of one's government is not enough, they need to be taken to task!
Patricia
===========================
The only "legitimate" soldiers, in my opinion, are those who DEFEND their home, ON THEIR OWN SOIL! No American soldier is a hero, but those who have quit service at the onset of this atrocity.
Good post Naj,
Who knows how much of this has been secretly financed by the very people who are against it.
The leading Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, steadfastly refused as recently as Sunday's round of talk shows to promise that all U.S. forces would be withdrawn if she is elected.
"I'm not going to get into hypotheticals and make pledges," Clinton said Sunday. "I don't want to speculate about how we're going to be approaching it until I actually have the facts in my hand and the authority to be able to make some decisions."
Hillary is like Bush and craves war with Iran.
naj
I sent this too you this morning but I think my email is on the fritz again and I think you might really want to watch this tomorrow. this is one of your brethren I believe and you may agree with him. Iran on the Brink!
Jim,
I don't think I agree with traitors! And they are definitely not my brothers!
Naj--
Here is a translation of Ahmadinejad's 'no homosexuals in Iran' statement. It is from Iranian scholar Ali Quli Qarai.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18471.htm
As I said in my one comment, that is NOT what he meant. Apparently, the media conveniently left off the second part of his statement, which was: ".....of the kind you have in your country". When taken in totality, the true meaning comes through. This is the danger of taking things 'out of context'.
Brother Tim,
Thanks!
I like this part:
Iranians, being linguistically a very sophisticated people, speak a lot in hints which are invisible to outsiders. Americans in comparison tend to be straightforward and often as primitive.
(In general the Persians, like other civilized societies, have developed the art of making and responding to harsh remarks in soft and friendly words. Americans, as Prof. Bollinger proved, have still much to learn from civilized nations concerning the civilities of civilized hostility.)
:))
I too, have repeatedly said that "homosexuality does not exist in Iran" in the same vein as it does here. Iran is culturally different, and no form of democracy will EVER make it look like a little America, where a guest speaker will be called names!
Persians have prided themselves in that precise cultural finness. The common myth in Iran is this: "We are conquered in territory by Macedonians, by Arabs and by Mongols. We have conquered them back in culture and have Persianized them!" America, at this juncture of history is more and more looking like the "savage" conqueror that Iran has seen to its past! This is why Iranians are not, and will not be trembling!
Unrelated note:
My order of "Treacherous Alliance" just arrived. It's a very interesting book that is examining the intricate relations between Iran and Israel and traces their hostility, not in ideological, not in Arab-Palestinain conflict, but in competition for regional power!
I suggest this book!
Polishifter, well said! except this:
And the 28% that still support the occupation of Iraq? I bet a large portion of them are directly or indirectly profiting off he war.
Some of the supporters are just old fashioned idiots. No profit necessary.
Larry, to add to what you said: Many of our politicians have been bought and paid for, and will still continue this war, and others because they must tow the party line. It doesn't seem to matter which party line they're towing, because it all ends up in the same place anyway. Then again, this isn't news in American political history. The only difference now is that the Bush administration has been so befuddled with idiot leadership that American greed and its future plans for the rest of the world have been catapulted into the present all too quickly which has finally captured the attention and outrage it deserves.
Just my two cents though.
Post a Comment