Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. "Listen.

"Listen.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
22 Posts 16 Posters 2 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • diffractie@glitterkitten.co.ukD diffractie@glitterkitten.co.uk

    @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@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
    futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
    futurebird@sauropods.win
    wrote last edited by
    #12

    @diffractie

    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."

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
    0
    • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

      @Tamtam

      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"

      lily_and_frog@mastodon.artL This user is from outside of this forum
      lily_and_frog@mastodon.artL This user is from outside of this forum
      lily_and_frog@mastodon.art
      wrote last edited by
      #13

      @futurebird @Tamtam

      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.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
      • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

        @Tamtam

        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"

        alper@sfba.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
        alper@sfba.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
        alper@sfba.social
        wrote last edited by
        #14

        @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.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

          "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?

          spacemagick@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          spacemagick@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          spacemagick@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #15

          @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.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
          • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

            "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?

            kevinrns@mstdn.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
            kevinrns@mstdn.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
            kevinrns@mstdn.social
            wrote last edited by
            #16

            @futurebird

            People are saying maybe the Saudis hired trump personally, to direct the US military to hit Saudis long-term enemy Iran.

            energisch_@troet.cafeE 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • kevinrns@mstdn.socialK kevinrns@mstdn.social

              @futurebird

              People are saying maybe the Saudis hired trump personally, to direct the US military to hit Saudis long-term enemy Iran.

              energisch_@troet.cafeE This user is from outside of this forum
              energisch_@troet.cafeE This user is from outside of this forum
              energisch_@troet.cafe
              wrote last edited by
              #17

              @kevinrns @futurebird He might get another aeroplane for it, who knows.

              fondoffawns@nerdculture.deF 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • energisch_@troet.cafeE energisch_@troet.cafe

                @kevinrns @futurebird He might get another aeroplane for it, who knows.

                fondoffawns@nerdculture.deF This user is from outside of this forum
                fondoffawns@nerdculture.deF This user is from outside of this forum
                fondoffawns@nerdculture.de
                wrote last edited by
                #18

                @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.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                  @Tamtam

                  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"

                  laukidh@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
                  laukidh@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
                  laukidh@infosec.exchange
                  wrote last edited by
                  #19

                  @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.

                  tamtam@mastodon.deT 1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  0
                  • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                    "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?

                    guillotine_jones@beige.partyG This user is from outside of this forum
                    guillotine_jones@beige.partyG This user is from outside of this forum
                    guillotine_jones@beige.party
                    wrote last edited by
                    #20

                    @futurebird
                    Won't you think of the Trump family finances, myrmepropagandist?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                      @Tamtam

                      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"

                      tamtam@mastodon.deT This user is from outside of this forum
                      tamtam@mastodon.deT This user is from outside of this forum
                      tamtam@mastodon.de
                      wrote last edited by
                      #21

                      @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.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • laukidh@infosec.exchangeL laukidh@infosec.exchange

                        @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.

                        tamtam@mastodon.deT This user is from outside of this forum
                        tamtam@mastodon.deT This user is from outside of this forum
                        tamtam@mastodon.de
                        wrote last edited by
                        #22

                        @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?

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups