Combat is to War what Cash is to Commerce

[TruthSeeker56]

The United States has a LONG history of RELUCTANTLY entering into armed conflicts against other countries, after all other options have been exhausted.

There are a few exceptions, in which the United States sought to PROTECT freedom-loving people from the threat of tyranny, or sought to LIBERATE freedom-loving people from tyrannical rule.

Georgie prefers to either IGNORE history or inject his own brand of REVISIONIST history into the conversation.

 

[westwall]

In fact, war hasn't been going on "since human first inhabited the earth."
It's a fairly recent development that arrived about the same time as the first private fortunes.

Bullshit. Wars are fought by Chimpanzees too. Ants fight wars...it's called human nature, the only modern facet is the disgusting group of people who profit from the weapons they create.

It is the profit motive that seems to separate humans from chimps and ants.
Maybe a 100% death tax on all war profits after the first innocent civilian dies would solve that problem?

Chimps profit too. They just get to keep a particular bush or tree that puts out fruit they like, etc. Conflict occurs because one group has something that the other group wants, be it land, mineral wealth, water, food or geographically important areas.

All wars and all conflict is about profit. And how predictable, a 100% tax, imposed by whom? How would they collect? The only thing the tax man would get is a bullet between the eyes. Really, try and THINK sometime.

 

[georgephillip]

People like George believes that there isn't people wanting to kill Americans? That we shouldn't fight back...

Like we shouldn't invest in our military!

He probably believes we shouldn't even invest in our own fucking country....Likely another losertrian!

Since 1945 the US has killed and maimed and displaced millions of human beings from Korea to Kosovo; how many of those millions posed any threat to the US homeland?

 

[georgephillip]

The United States has a LONG history of RELUCTANTLY entering into armed conflicts against other countries, after all other options have been exhausted.

There are a few exceptions, in which the United States sought to PROTECT freedom-loving people from the threat of tyranny, or sought to LIBERATE freedom-loving people from tyrannical rule.

Georgie prefers to either IGNORE history or inject his own brand of REVISIONIST history into the conversation.

I'm sure the millions of Indians murdered for their lands and water would be happy to testify to the RELUCTANCE of the US to enter into armed conflicts after all other options had been exhausted.

 

[georgephillip]

Bullshit. Wars are fought by Chimpanzees too. Ants fight wars...it's called human nature, the only modern facet is the disgusting group of people who profit from the weapons they create.

It is the profit motive that seems to separate humans from chimps and ants.
Maybe a 100% death tax on all war profits after the first innocent civilian dies would solve that problem?

Chimps profit too. They just get to keep a particular bush or tree that puts out fruit they like, etc. Conflict occurs because one group has something that the other group wants, be it land, mineral wealth, water, food or geographically important areas.

All wars and all conflict is about profit. And how predictable, a 100% tax, imposed by whom? How would they collect? The only thing the tax man would get is a bullet between the eyes. Really, try and THINK sometime.

"The accounting of the financial cost of the nearly decade-long Iraq War will go on for years, but a recent analysis has shed light on the companies that made money off the war by providing support services as the privatization of what were former U.S. military operations rose to unprecedented levels.

"Private or publicly listed firms received at least $138 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for government contracts for services that included providing private security, building infrastructure and feeding the troops.

"Ten contractors received 52 percent of the funds, according to an analysis by the Financial Times that was published Tuesday.

"The No. 1 recipient?

"Houston-based energy-focused engineering and construction firm KBR, Inc. (NYSE:KBR), which was spun off from its parent, oilfield services provider Halliburton Co. (NYSE:HAL), in 2007.

"The company was given $39.5 billion in Iraq-related contracts over the past decade, with many of the deals given without any bidding from competing firms, such as a $568-million contract renewal in 2010 to provide housing, meals, water and bathroom services to soldiers, a deal that led to a Justice Department lawsuit over alleged kickbacks, as reported by Bloomberg."

Hopefully, Dick Cheney is at the front of that bullet-between-the-eyes line.

ZCommunications » Cheney?s Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion on Iraq War

 

[westwall]

It is the profit motive that seems to separate humans from chimps and ants.
Maybe a 100% death tax on all war profits after the first innocent civilian dies would solve that problem?

Chimps profit too. They just get to keep a particular bush or tree that puts out fruit they like, etc. Conflict occurs because one group has something that the other group wants, be it land, mineral wealth, water, food or geographically important areas.

All wars and all conflict is about profit. And how predictable, a 100% tax, imposed by whom? How would they collect? The only thing the tax man would get is a bullet between the eyes. Really, try and THINK sometime.

"The accounting of the financial cost of the nearly decade-long Iraq War will go on for years, but a recent analysis has shed light on the companies that made money off the war by providing support services as the privatization of what were former U.S. military operations rose to unprecedented levels.

"Private or publicly listed firms received at least $138 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for government contracts for services that included providing private security, building infrastructure and feeding the troops.

"Ten contractors received 52 percent of the funds, according to an analysis by the Financial Times that was published Tuesday.

"The No. 1 recipient?

"Houston-based energy-focused engineering and construction firm KBR, Inc. (NYSE:KBR), which was spun off from its parent, oilfield services provider Halliburton Co. (NYSE:HAL), in 2007.

"The company was given $39.5 billion in Iraq-related contracts over the past decade, with many of the deals given without any bidding from competing firms, such as a $568-million contract renewal in 2010 to provide housing, meals, water and bathroom services to soldiers, a deal that led to a Justice Department lawsuit over alleged kickbacks, as reported by Bloomberg."

Hopefully, Dick Cheney is at the front of that bullet-between-the-eyes line.

ZCommunications » Cheney?s Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion on Iraq War

None of which refutes a single thing I stated now does it.

 

[1776]

Uh yeah, Russia invaded their weaker neighbor under the lies of "liberating oppressed Russians" when the entire invasion is a Wag the Dog event by Putin to distract the masses from his weak economy and growing debt.

He figures stealing land and resources from Ukraine will save the Russian economy....just like Hitler did back in 1938.

 

[Kondor3]

The trick here is to find a balanced perspective...

Yes, a hungry Military-Industrial Complex exists...

Yes, we feed it from time to time...

Yes, the casus belli for going into Iraq was bullshit from the onset...

No, the casus belli for going into Afghanistan was not bullshit, but as close to righteous as one can get, when killing one's fellow Man...

We simply and stupidly allowed Iraq to take our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, and ended-up staying in Afghanistan years longer than we should have...

As to a new generation of Radicalized Muslims...

Fuck 'em...

The United States will not allow such pissants to dictate our foreign policy to us, nor whom we may befriend or be allies with, and whom we may not...

We have exacted a horrific price from the Muslim world, for its attack upon us...

If they attack again, they are going to get much worse, and they understand that now...

Don't mess with us, and we won't mess with you...

Get in our faces again and kill more of our people and you will think Iraq and Afghanistan were picnics by comparison...

The choice is entirely yours...

 

[georgephillip]

Chimps profit too. They just get to keep a particular bush or tree that puts out fruit they like, etc. Conflict occurs because one group has something that the other group wants, be it land, mineral wealth, water, food or geographically important areas.

All wars and all conflict is about profit. And how predictable, a 100% tax, imposed by whom? How would they collect? The only thing the tax man would get is a bullet between the eyes. Really, try and THINK sometime.

"The accounting of the financial cost of the nearly decade-long Iraq War will go on for years, but a recent analysis has shed light on the companies that made money off the war by providing support services as the privatization of what were former U.S. military operations rose to unprecedented levels.

"Private or publicly listed firms received at least $138 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for government contracts for services that included providing private security, building infrastructure and feeding the troops.

"Ten contractors received 52 percent of the funds, according to an analysis by the Financial Times that was published Tuesday.

"The No. 1 recipient?

"Houston-based energy-focused engineering and construction firm KBR, Inc. (NYSE:KBR), which was spun off from its parent, oilfield services provider Halliburton Co. (NYSE:HAL), in 2007.

"The company was given $39.5 billion in Iraq-related contracts over the past decade, with many of the deals given without any bidding from competing firms, such as a $568-million contract renewal in 2010 to provide housing, meals, water and bathroom services to soldiers, a deal that led to a Justice Department lawsuit over alleged kickbacks, as reported by Bloomberg."

Hopefully, Dick Cheney is at the front of that bullet-between-the-eyes line.

ZCommunications » Cheney?s Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion on Iraq War

None of which refutes a single thing I stated now does it.

I suppose that depends on how many "Chimp Corporations" you can point to
Rival collectives of chimps may or may not choose to share scarce resources vital to their survival, but individual chimps seldom amass large private surpluses by convincing "patriotic" simians to slaughter and displace millions of their fellow creatures.

Individual humans on the other hand have a psychopathic fringe, from the ancient monarchs to today's global investment bankers, politicians, and generals, who are perfectly willing to murder, maim, and displace millions of their fellow creatures in order to control land, minerals, wealth, water, and food that are in no way vital to their physical survival.

Chimps don't seem capable of the same level of institutionalized corruption as humans

"As private enterprise entered the war zone at unprecedented levels, the amount of corruption ballooned, even if most contractors performed their duties as expected.

According to the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the level of corruption by defense contractors may be as high as $60 billion.

"Disciplined soldiers that would traditionally do many of the tasks are commissioned by private and publicly listed companies.

Even without the graft, the costs of paying for these services are higher than paying governement employees or soldiers to do them because of the profit motive involved.

"No-bid contracting – when companies get to name their price with no competing bid – didn't lower legitimate expenses. (Despite promises by President Barack Obama to reel in this habit, the trend toward granting favored companies federal contracts without considering competing bids continued to grow, by 9 percent last year, according to the Washington Post.)

"Even though the military has largely pulled out of Iraq, private contractors remain on the ground and continue to reap U.S. government contracts.

For example, the U.S. State Department estimates that taxpayers will dole out $3 billion to private guards for the government's sprawling embassy in Baghdad."

ZCommunications » Cheney?s Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion on Iraq War

 

[georgephillip]

Uh yeah, Russia invaded their weaker neighbor under the lies of "liberating oppressed Russians" when the entire invasion is a Wag the Dog event by Putin to distract the masses from his weak economy and growing debt.

He figures stealing land and resources from Ukraine will save the Russian economy....just like Hitler did back in 1938.

"Wag the Dog" in Ukraine began with the US and EU supporting Neo-Nazis in the streets of Kiev.

Right now, it's far more likely some of those same Neo-Nazis will steal Russian gas being transported through western Ukrainian pipelines

All the violence that's currently wracking Ukraine stems from pushing NATO's borders to the very edge of the Russian Federation. Putin can't allow that anymore than the Pentagon could permit Russia to garrison Mexico.

 

[georgephillip]

The trick here is to find a balanced perspective...

Yes, a hungry Military-Industrial Complex exists...

Yes, we feed it from time to time...

Yes, the casus belli for going into Iraq was bullshit from the onset...

No, the casus belli for going into Afghanistan was not bullshit, but as close to righteous as one can get, when killing one's fellow Man...

We simply and stupidly allowed Iraq to take our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, and ended-up staying in Afghanistan years longer than we should have...

As to a new generation of Radicalized Muslims...

Fuck 'em...

The United States will not allow such pissants to dictate our foreign policy to us, nor whom we may befriend or be allies with, and whom we may not...

We have exacted a horrific price from the Muslim world, for its attack upon us...

If they attack again, they are going to get much worse, and they understand that now...

Don't mess with us, and we won't mess with you...

Get in our faces again and kill more of our people and you will think Iraq and Afghanistan were picnics by comparison...

The choice is entirely yours...

What's your choice if the next 911 on US soil is carried out by white skinned Muslims raised in the US, UK, or Canada?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Uh yeah, Russia invaded their weaker neighbor under the lies of "liberating oppressed Russians" when the entire invasion is a Wag the Dog event by Putin to distract the masses from his weak economy and growing debt.

He figures stealing land and resources from Ukraine will save the Russian economy....just like Hitler did back in 1938.

"Wag the Dog" in Ukraine began with the US and EU supporting Neo-Nazis in the streets of Kiev.

Right now, it's far more likely some of those same Neo-Nazis will steal Russian gas being transported through western Ukrainian pipelines

All the violence that's currently wracking Ukraine stems from pushing NATO's borders to the very edge of the Russian Federation. Putin can't allow that anymore than the Pentagon could permit Russia to garrison Mexico.

It began after Clinton signed a treaty with russia, britain, and ukraine. In return for ukraine's disarmament of its nuclear weapon they were supposed to receive protection from the US if they were invaded.

 

[georgephillip]

Uh yeah, Russia invaded their weaker neighbor under the lies of "liberating oppressed Russians" when the entire invasion is a Wag the Dog event by Putin to distract the masses from his weak economy and growing debt.

He figures stealing land and resources from Ukraine will save the Russian economy....just like Hitler did back in 1938.

"Wag the Dog" in Ukraine began with the US and EU supporting Neo-Nazis in the streets of Kiev.

Right now, it's far more likely some of those same Neo-Nazis will steal Russian gas being transported through western Ukrainian pipelines

All the violence that's currently wracking Ukraine stems from pushing NATO's borders to the very edge of the Russian Federation. Putin can't allow that anymore than the Pentagon could permit Russia to garrison Mexico.

It began after Clinton signed a treaty with russia, britain, and ukraine. In return for ukraine's disarmament of its nuclear weapon they were supposed to receive protection from the US if they were invaded.

"According to the memorandum, Russia, the U.S., and the UK confirmed, in recognition of Ukraine becoming party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in effect abandoning its nuclear arsenal to Russia, that they would:

"Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders.
Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.
Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine in order to influence its politics.
Seek United Nations Security Council action if nuclear weapons are used against Ukraine.
Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments."

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It seems both sides are using economic pressure against Ukraine, and both sides accuse the other of staging illegal coups.

A solution may require a referendum that requires all Ukrainians to choose which bloc they want to align with.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

"Wag the Dog" in Ukraine began with the US and EU supporting Neo-Nazis in the streets of Kiev.

Right now, it's far more likely some of those same Neo-Nazis will steal Russian gas being transported through western Ukrainian pipelines

All the violence that's currently wracking Ukraine stems from pushing NATO's borders to the very edge of the Russian Federation. Putin can't allow that anymore than the Pentagon could permit Russia to garrison Mexico.

It began after Clinton signed a treaty with russia, britain, and ukraine. In return for ukraine's disarmament of its nuclear weapon they were supposed to receive protection from the US if they were invaded.

"According to the memorandum, Russia, the U.S., and the UK confirmed, in recognition of Ukraine becoming party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in effect abandoning its nuclear arsenal to Russia, that they would:

"Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders.
Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.
Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine in order to influence its politics.
Seek United Nations Security Council action if nuclear weapons are used against Ukraine.
Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments."

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It seems both sides are using economic pressure against Ukraine, and both sides accuse the other of staging illegal coups.

A solution may require a referendum that requires all Ukrainians to choose which bloc they want to align with.

So in essence, violations being committed by all parties. I don't disagree with that.

 

[georgephillip]

It began after Clinton signed a treaty with russia, britain, and ukraine. In return for ukraine's disarmament of its nuclear weapon they were supposed to receive protection from the US if they were invaded.

"According to the memorandum, Russia, the U.S., and the UK confirmed, in recognition of Ukraine becoming party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in effect abandoning its nuclear arsenal to Russia, that they would:

"Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders.
Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.
Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine in order to influence its politics.
Seek United Nations Security Council action if nuclear weapons are used against Ukraine.
Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments."

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It seems both sides are using economic pressure against Ukraine, and both sides accuse the other of staging illegal coups.

A solution may require a referendum that requires all Ukrainians to choose which bloc they want to align with.

So in essence, violations being committed by all parties. I don't disagree with that.

I think future violations should be a primary concern.
Middle class Ukrainians seem to be between Russia and a Hard Place.

The following is part of an interview on The Real News Network:

"DESVARIEUX: Alright. Michael, I want to ask you who aims to benefit from this IMF deal.

"MICHEAL HUDSON, PROF. ECONOMICS, UMKC: Well, there are a number of--all of the money that has been given by the IMF and the West in the past has been given to the kleptocrats that run Ukraine.

"The UN and the World Bank have Ukraine right next to Nigeria for the GINI coefficient of concentrated income.

"So, basically, the Europeans have told the kleptocrats, the ten or 12 billionaires that run the country, we will make you very, very rich if you join us.

"We will give you a lot of IMF money, you can transfer it into your banks and your bank accounts, you can then send it abroad to your offshore banking centers, and the Ukrainian people will own it.

"So you can do the Ukraine what the Irish government did to the Irish: you can take the public money, you can give it all to the private bankers, and then you can tax your people and make them pay."

Who In Ukraine Will Benefit From An IMF Bailout?