Hi y'all - I know of only two - hence the public bailouts.
On Dec 28, 2:05 pm, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Dec 27, 8:55 pm, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi y'all - my hypothesis is based on financial investments from 2000
> > to the present. I
>
> I would imagine that some of the neocons and their cronies sold most
> of their stock months before the crash and are now buying in at the
> bottom.
>
> On Dec 27, 8:55 pm, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi y'all - my hypothesis is based on financial investments from 2000
> > to the present. If we go back far enough, of course there will be few,
> > if any, who haven't shown a profit or a prophet whichever you prefer.
>
> > On Dec 27, 8:36 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Besides the obvious share holders in the military industrial complex
> > > (Cheney – Halliburton, Blackwater, etc. see:http://iraqforsale.org/
> > > ), it is obvious to me that neo-conservatism has been quite successful
> > > in its goals starting in the 1960s. For those who haven’t studied it
> > > or lived through it, a simple overview of this can be found at:
>
> > >http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Neo-conservative
>
> > > And, if one goes to more recent public pronouncements, I would say
> > > that their goals have been well met. See:
>
> > >http://www.newamericancentury.org/
>
> > > At least, if one judges the goals of this particular ideology by the
> > > words of those who follow it, not much could have turned out better!
>
> > > On Dec 27, 2:04 pm, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Hi y'all - quote "The neocons probably benefited overall in the Iraq
> > > > war."
>
> > > > I'm sure they expected to, but hindsight would suggest differently
> > > > overall.
>
> > > > On Dec 27, 11:34 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > The point was that I don't believe for a second that people will avoid
> > > > > war for the noble reasons you originally described (reduce oppression,
> > > > > etc.). Tribes of people (government officials, nations, religious
> > > > > organizations, etc) will war if the cost to that specific organization
> > > > > is not that great and the payoff far outweighs the cost. The neocons
> > > > > probably benefited overall in the Iraq war.
>
> > > > > A draft or conscription would probably help deter war because wealthy
> > > > > and powerful people's children would also be put in harms way to
> > > > > protect resources. For example, the neoconservatives would be put at
> > > > > risk of death (or their children) instead of just having other people
> > > > > die to protect their resources. It is quite amazing how a group of
> > > > > old men and a few old women can convince young people to readily died
> > > > > for a cause while those old people sit well out of harms way and don't
> > > > > incur the financial sacrifices.
>
> > > > > Jason
>
> > > > > On Dec 26, 11:23 pm, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Dec 26, 7:24 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > hmmmm....I wonder if an informed citizenry wouldn't just continue
> > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > the military to increase wealth but not talk about it so openly.
>
> > > > > > I don't think Americans would do this at this time. The United
> > > > > > Nations, nuclear weapons and breakdown of international trade would
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > additional deterrents for the USA as well as other nations. I also
> > > > > > believe that Americans as a whole don't like war. However, if an
> > > > > > informed citizenry
> > > > > > increased the wealth of all, or at least most, and sacrificed human
> > > > > > lives to do it, it might be crazy and cruel, but at least it would
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > more equitible than what we have now. Presently a few thousand have
> > > > > > lost lives of friends or family members, more have been seriously
> > > > > > wounded, nearly all have lost money, by way of the national debt,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > a few have made billions. Or nation as a whole has been severly
> > > > > > weakened. This is not even counting the horrendous situation on the
> > > > > > other side (the Iraqis and Afghanis). It is time to bring the war
> > > > > > profiteers, and their puppets in our goverment, to trial.
>
> > > > > > By the way, I forgot to mention General Butler's solution. He
> > > > > > suggested conscripting suppilies as well as soldiers, thereby taking
> > > > > > the profit out of war for arms dealers.
>
> > > > > > On Dec 26, 7:24 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "[The military] of an informed citizenry...will be used for self-
> > > > > > > defense and when feasible to help fight tyranny and oppression."
>
> > > > > > > hmmmm....I wonder if an informed citizenry wouldn't just continue
> > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > the military to increase wealth but not talk about it so openly.
> > > > > > > That
> > > > > > > seems to be the trend and tendency. I don't think that tendency
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > trend will stop until the bloodlines amongst countries and
> > > > > > > economic
> > > > > > > ties are so strong that too many informed citizens would be upset
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > the killing of their relatives from the opposing country and
> > > > > > > wouldn't
> > > > > > > want to risk damaging the economic gains from that opposing
> > > > > > > country.
>
> > > > > > > Jason
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 26, 10:18 am, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I don't know what Obama plans to do with the military as far as
> > > > > > > > base
> > > > > > > > closures and the size of the standing army. As I see it he has
> > > > > > > > one of
> > > > > > > > two reasonable routes.
>
> > > > > > > > 1. He can accept that America has taken the role of worldwide
> > > > > > > > enforcer
> > > > > > > > and do the job right. The first most important step here is to
> > > > > > > > take
> > > > > > > > the army back from control of the international corporations. I
> > > > > > > > believe that war for profit has been the primary force running
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > American army for well over 100 years. As evidence, here is a
> > > > > > > > link to
> > > > > > > > the book "War Is A Racket," by Major General Smedley
> > > > > > > > Butler.http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
> > > > > > > > Once the army is following the will of an informed citizenry,
> > > > > > > > then it
> > > > > > > > will be used for self-defense and when feasible to help fight
> > > > > > > > tyranny
> > > > > > > > and oppression. Notice that I said when feasible. Helping
> > > > > > > > others, when
> > > > > > > > possible, does help us, or so I believe. But not when it leaves
> > > > > > > > us
> > > > > > > > overextended. Then it helps no one. Life Guards, for example,
> > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > taught not to attempt a rescue that they think is not possible.
> > > > > > > > Why
> > > > > > > > risk two lives. Why run down our military, lose American lives
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > ruin our economy for nothing. The army must not be dominated by
> > > > > > > > mercenaries. This is one of the things that led to the downfall
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > Rome. When our sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, cousins and
> > > > > > > > friends
> > > > > > > > are in the army, we will not go to war so easily. When we do,
> > > > > > > > we will
> > > > > > > > have a plan to win with the fewest possible casualties, like
> > > > > > > > Clinton's
> > > > > > > > war in Yugoslavia. If the Commander in chief is failing, he
> > > > > > > > should be
> > > > > > > > recalled. Much of the killing of non participating civilians
> > > > > > > > occurs
> > > > > > > > when the mission is not clear and it stalls, like in Vietnam
> > > > > > > > and in
> > > > > > > > Iraq.
>
> > > > > > > > 2. The second approach would be to give up being the world's
> > > > > > > > policeman. Neither the Iraq or Afghanistan wars would have been
> > > > > > > > necessary. The Afghanis were willing to turn Bin Laden and his
> > > > > > > > crew
> > > > > > > > over to a neutral world court. Now they are roaming free. The
> > > > > > > > pressure
> > > > > > > > was working on Saddam Hussein. Inspectors were being allowed to
> > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > their jobs. Of course if these wars had been run properly then
> > > > > > > > things
> > > > > > > > wouldn't have turned out so badly and as much as I hate war, I
> > > > > > > > might
> > > > > > > > believe that we did the right thing.
>
> > > > > > > > As I see it these are two reasonable options. Both of them are
> > > > > > > > far
> > > > > > > > from ideal, but necessary in the world that we live in
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 25, 10:01 pm, CrossBow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > No, I did not say anti-military, but any generic reference to
> > > > > > > > > faceless
> > > > > > > > > people as child killers is not exactly positive either. We
> > > > > > > > > risk dehumanize
> > > > > > > > > them like we accuse them of dehumanizing their target enemy
> > > > > > > > > if we drop the
> > > > > > > > > casual killer labels. I believe we agree on most as I said
> > > > > > > > > before, how we
> > > > > > > > > say it is just as important. Curious enough, the old GI
> > > > > > > > > benefits you
> > > > > > > > > mention are in place, and for some, particularly those
> > > > > > > > > diagnosed with
> > > > > > > > > traumatic stress disorder, reprieve has finally come, it is
> > > > > > > > > now
> > > > > > > > > formally recognized as an actual medical condition....
>
> > > > > > > > > read more »
>
> > > > > > > > > Education benefits are working if you use them. Active Duty
> > > > > > > > > military offers
> > > > > > > > > a GI bill of $50,000 - while not Ivy League, can get you a
> > > > > > > > > degree that will
> > > > > > > > > keep you from re-enlisting if you are done with active duty.
> > > > > > > > > The rest is up
> > > > > > > > > to the individual's drive. I'm not sure that the National
> > > > > > > > > Guard has
> > > > > > > > > decreased or increased, do not have the stats on that, but
> > > > > > > > > surely the border
> > > > > > > > > duty and over seas tours have. National Guard and Reserve
> > > > > > > > > have been on the
> > > > > > > > > rise for years since the decrease of combat troop count, and
> > > > > > > > > base closures,
> > > > > > > > > but more attention has spotlighted them since Bush and 9/11.
> > > > > > > > > What Obama's
> > > > > > > > > appointees do will be interesting. Any suppositions on that?
>
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Isparklaria
> > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Crossbow,
>
> > > > > > > > > > While I enjoyed your reply,
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Memphis Freethought Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
