"Listen.
-
And I think some of the American public goes along with the nonsense because they believe that these military actions are protecting big US companies, big US interests, and don't we all work for those guys and depend on them to buy our fried chicken sandwiches and algebra lessons?
But, the US ruling class isn't wise even in promoting their own interests. They would rather grind other people of their class down than participate in some homosexual "tide that lifts all boats" --
@futurebird I think theres an strange hope that "at least someone is benefiting from this", kinda like the impulse to find someone to blame, because the reality of it being bad for everyone is horrifying.
-
@futurebird I think theres an strange hope that "at least someone is benefiting from this", kinda like the impulse to find someone to blame, because the reality of it being bad for everyone is horrifying.
This is exactly the point I'm trying to stress. There isn't anyone who is doing better because of any of this.
Not even the worst people you know.
These are the actions of people who would look at these two choices:
You have $5 and a BB gun and everyone else is starving near death and has no guns.
vs.
You have $100 and a nice shot gun, but everyone else has $80 and a BB gun.
And they are like "Give the first one please."
-
For years I thought that was the driving idea behind many US military actions. If not oil then some other form of economic profiteering.
I have come to *reject* this. The notion it is "if not moral at least it is profitable" gives them too much credit.
War profiteering is a fleeting, inefficient way to build wealth. Objectively? They destroy wealth.
They don't care about having "more" but rather "more than the other guy"
US foreign policy is based on two things:
1. US power is based on US buying power and *overconsumption*.
2. Even right wing hawks know, despite denials, that Earth's resources are finite.So the aim of US foreign policy is to stop any potential rival to match US's (and key allies') levels of consumption. Even more so if they have an economic model other than capitalism.
Doesn't matter if wars are "won" or "lost", all what matters is hindering development.
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
For years I thought that was the driving idea behind many US military actions. If not oil then some other form of economic profiteering.
I have come to *reject* this. The notion it is "if not moral at least it is profitable" gives them too much credit.
War profiteering is a fleeting, inefficient way to build wealth. Objectively? They destroy wealth.
They don't care about having "more" but rather "more than the other guy"
@futurebird @Tamtam
Spite is as powerful as it is subtle as a human drive. It hides behind others in many cases. It's the deadliest 8th sin never even mentioned. -
"Listen. I know that no one has explained how dropping these bombs makes any sense but somehow if they didn't do it the US would be weaker or something might happen and you'd get attacked by a terrorist in the Ohio carpark or suddenly there would be no jobs and you'd be poor. Trust us bro."
At least a third of this country falls for this over and over and over.
I have another theory.
What if it's not important and it's just some wealthy people settling scores that have nothing to do with us?
@futurebird
It's difficult to imagine how the US could possibly appear any weaker than it already does, given that it's crass clueless infinitely blackmailable gangster boss puppet leader is obviously being run by the country's traditional enemy. -
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
-
"Listen. I know that no one has explained how dropping these bombs makes any sense but somehow if they didn't do it the US would be weaker or something might happen and you'd get attacked by a terrorist in the Ohio carpark or suddenly there would be no jobs and you'd be poor. Trust us bro."
At least a third of this country falls for this over and over and over.
I have another theory.
What if it's not important and it's just some wealthy people settling scores that have nothing to do with us?
People are saying maybe the Saudis hired trump personally, to direct the US military to hit Saudis long-term enemy Iran.
-
People are saying maybe the Saudis hired trump personally, to direct the US military to hit Saudis long-term enemy Iran.
@kevinrns @futurebird He might get another aeroplane for it, who knows.
-
@kevinrns @futurebird He might get another aeroplane for it, who knows.
@energisch_ @kevinrns @futurebird Qatar with the plane, UAE with the billions in crypto, bought the use of the US military from tRump, to strike their enemy.
-
For years I thought that was the driving idea behind many US military actions. If not oil then some other form of economic profiteering.
I have come to *reject* this. The notion it is "if not moral at least it is profitable" gives them too much credit.
War profiteering is a fleeting, inefficient way to build wealth. Objectively? They destroy wealth.
They don't care about having "more" but rather "more than the other guy"
@futurebird @Tamtam also, we recognized our dependence on foreign oil and have become a net exporter.
We don’t need anyone else’s oil. A couple seized tankers doesn’t come close to what we’ve spent on this.
-
"Listen. I know that no one has explained how dropping these bombs makes any sense but somehow if they didn't do it the US would be weaker or something might happen and you'd get attacked by a terrorist in the Ohio carpark or suddenly there would be no jobs and you'd be poor. Trust us bro."
At least a third of this country falls for this over and over and over.
I have another theory.
What if it's not important and it's just some wealthy people settling scores that have nothing to do with us?
@futurebird
Won't you think of the Trump family finances, myrmepropagandist? -
For years I thought that was the driving idea behind many US military actions. If not oil then some other form of economic profiteering.
I have come to *reject* this. The notion it is "if not moral at least it is profitable" gives them too much credit.
War profiteering is a fleeting, inefficient way to build wealth. Objectively? They destroy wealth.
They don't care about having "more" but rather "more than the other guy"
@futurebird ohh you are absolutely right in that it does not make sense and the destruction is far greater that the profit. But the profit is theirs. The destruction is everybody elses. But still, you are absolutely right. There is no sense to it. Capitalism, oligarchy, feudalism, patriarchy... it is madness. It is a disease. What sense did it make to send a ship over the Atlantic under conditions that made 90 % percent of its human cargo die a painful death? No sense. Not to a normal person. Even if you accept the buying and selling of human beings it doesn't make any sense.What sense does the destruction of the german economy make, the destruction of any new technology like solar, batteries, e. mobility? It keeps the profits of the shareholders of powerful established cartels flowing for a little longer. And after that? What sense does the destruction of knowledge, the destruction of universities and independent thinking make? If we don't have democracy, we have kings. And they get madder and madder by the minute as the boundaries disappear. There is nothing new to see here. If you have ever seen a mad drunk violent narcissistic husband beat his wife and children to a pulp, you know everything there is to know about this. Look for sense elsewhere. This is madness. We agree on that.
-
@futurebird @Tamtam also, we recognized our dependence on foreign oil and have become a net exporter.
We don’t need anyone else’s oil. A couple seized tankers doesn’t come close to what we’ve spent on this.
@Laukidh @futurebird the " we" beign the US I suppose? But what about Venezuela and the Venezuelan crude and gulf coast refineries that were supposed to have been built exclusively for it?
