To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 10422
10421  |  10423
Subject: 
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 11 May 2001 20:06:33 GMT
Viewed: 
695 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:

The bottom line of your statement is being in favor of a space based missle
defense system for whatever reasons you argued. Those weren't of any
particular interest to me since I'm obviously on a different tanget. It is
clear to me that you believe America will always have an enemy at some point
in time. So what I'm saying is that we WILL always have enemies because we
help make them. America needs an enemy to justify the trillions spent on the
military. Face it, war makes money and you even alluded positively to the
business venture of this defense system.

With regard to Iraq, there's no doubt that we made Saddam into our enemy. He
had always been a dirty thug but we were fine with that for decades. The
Iran-Iraq War raged on throughout the 80's and we "helped" BOTH sides,
despite the fact that Iran was our foe after ousting the Shah (another
American puppet). We helped instigate the invasion of Kuwait by supporting
Kuwaiti slant drilling, supporting Kuwaiti oil overproducing that
deliberately undercut Iraq's ability to help pay off their war debt and
repeatedly rejecting Iraq's pleas in the U.N. for Kuwait to ease off so Iraq
could stabilize it's infrastructure.

To top it off, our ambassador gave Iraq the green light to invade Kuwait and
the fools took the bait and we all know what happened next. The Persian Gulf
War cut Iraq down and President Bush publicly called for Iraq's people to
rise up and overthrow Saddam. The CIA got involved and promised support and
when the Iraqi people in the north and south started the revolt, we pulled
out and left them to be slaughtered. The "no-fly" zones remain as a defacto
partitioning of Iraq since that's where the oil fields are and Saddam
remains in power so that Americans can talk about "Scuds" and so on to
justify outer space missle defense platforms.

We make our enemies and keep it that way as long as we can because there's
lots of money to be made. To think otherwise is just plain naive in my
opinion. Look at the political map of the world and figure out who we're at
odds with and consider how we reflect that in our films and TV shows. That's
paranoia.

Rather than even consider such stupid weapons and take the warmonger
approach, we should consider our foreign policy of economic imperialism and
exploitation. Look at the dreadful environmental consequences of a century
of greedy industrialization. Are we really better off? Each time we spend
billions to send up a shuttle or rocket, we also punch another hole in the
atmosphere. What are the far reaching environmental consequences of stepping
up our space program? What sort of mess will our children have to clean up
because of us? Are we going to revert to the idiotic rhetoric of "It's all
about saving jobs"? That's the short term, fast buck approach for the greedy
morons that got us into this big mess. The ONLY reason I would support such
space weapons is to protect our planet from comets and meteors that will
eventually come our way. That's reality.

As men, we are easily facinated with our ability to inflict death and
destruction with our big toys. We pride ourselves on how many
rounds-per-second our machine guns fire or the gross yield of a bomb, like
these were sports statistics. We've made warfare into a science and we
pretend that it's for the greater good. Yet it never fails that people
suffer, lose their homes and culture or killed for the "greater good" of
another people. How arrogant.

Dan

Well said on all points!

james



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: The bottom line of your statement is being in favor of a space based missle defense system for whatever reasons you argued. Those weren't of any particular interest to me since I'm obviously on a (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR