tony de wonderful

I don't see such an argument on this thread from you only a link to a video. I can't really be bothered watching the whole thing or countering it because a) you should do the work of presenting said arguments and b) if I spend all day battling every 'truther' nonsense or other anti-american propoganda/demogougery on the interweb I would not get much sleep.

It's quite clear from looking at the sums of the US in Iraq that it has lost money and nothing has been stolen of any value. Contrast that to say when the REd Army rolled through Eastern Europe taking everything and you will see a looting army behaves quite differently.

I believe the administration thought that oil production would offset the cost of the war but not the way you may thing; Iraqi oil production would have meant securing a cheap source of oil the US market but the Iraqi government would still have got substantial royalties, thing how Saudi works for example. The US empire has always been a empire of commerce not subjugation.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Two things.

1) I have not posted a link to any video on this thread so get your facts right before spouting.

2) I am not the one criticising others for not presenting reasoned argument, that was your moral high ground and I was just pointing out your hypocrisy.

I have made my views clear on this subject, Turkey is not in Europe so should not be inthe EU. I can't be clearer or more reasoned than that.

tony de wonderful

It's not hypocrisy because the said poster in question posted a link in lieu of an actual argument. It's lazy, like C&P'ing opinion pieces.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Lazy like not checking back to see if the person you are having a dig at did actually post a video?

Luan Pra bang

There is not the space here to explain how the disaster capitalism system works but even the most pro american person in the world admits that Iraq represented a massive cash windfall for corporate America. This was blatant robbery and by destroying as many aspects as possible of Iraqs own infrastructure they are trying to ensure that Iraq remains dependent on US companies for a long time to come. The USA has a history for enforcing economic policies on other nations that benefit the USA. In south America they have helped depose democratically elected leaders and supported murderous dictators who agreed to their economic policies. This is a common theme for American intervention around the world. There can not be any separation between enforced economic policy and political control as the main function of a government is to tax it citizens and spend their money. America sent troops to south america alone 32 times up to the great depression and almost all of their interventions have been to protect the interests of American corporations and to enforce a political and economic model that is beneficial to the USA.

In reality the 70 plus serious interventions by the USA sinc 1945 have been exclusivley about furthering the reach and power of capitalism and specifically how it benefits corporate America.

tony de wonderful

America is loosing money with Iraq and getting more and more into debt. It's actually been a failure in that regard. As to it being a conspiracy to destroy infrastructure? Well I can't refute that being as it is an unfalsifiable statement, but I see no evidence for that. As far as infrastructure destruction goes what happend in Iraq in 2003 was a fraction as bad as say Germany in 1945 where destruction was Carthaginian in places. I don't doubt that US companies are preferentially winning some contracts but why would the US government go to war to furnish them with power station to build? Can't they build powerstations back in the US?

There will always be a hegamon and you need one to secure global peace and thus trade, w/out that we are in the dark ages. That is reality not idealism.

Capitalism is not perfect but it is the best wealth producing system we have had to date. Old cultures and systems facing the sea changes of Capitalism find the process painful and your ideas are a reaction to that. So far no anti-capitalist ideology has been successful.

As for the US being that hegamon, there have been worse hegamons. At least the US is about trade and Capitalism which is the most inclusive system yet. It doesn't promise utopia but then only liars do. Thank God the US emerged as victor over the ***** and Soviets is I can say...the alternatives were much worse.

JTaylor

Have you grasped this yet, Martin?

Martin2005

Trouble is I suspect some of your own 'Enlightened thinking' just isn't very enlightened. I fear you just adopt this 'position' in order to attack Islam.


btw I'm a fully signed up member of the 'Rational thinking' team

JTaylor

Well, you've had occasion to articulate these suspicions and as yet have been unable to do so with sufficient substance and the required dexterity to carry your point.

No need to fear my position is "adopted", Martin, my free enquiry and expression is inherent. Referencing Enlightenment thinking and employing the faculty of reason as a device to attack Islamism is exactly what I am doing. Your polemic is hardly revelatory, is it?

Welcome aboard.

Leslie

Well I never did!

Les

Luan Pra bang

The fundamental goal of the American foreign policy is to secure the profitability an wealth of American corporations and Iraq has been good for this. If you are unaware of the links between the Bush administration and the likes of Halliburton etc then take a look.

The difference being that after 1945 a lot of effort was made to secure local jobs and industry in order to stop a social and economic collpase. In Iraq the local industry has been shut down and closed in order to create money for multi nationals one of the major reasons for social unrest in current Iraq.

I don't think you can call large companies being given free reign to bill what ever they like on a cost plus basis the same as a few contracts. The whole system was set up in a way that was blatant robbery and if you had any real interest in the subject you would have looked into the criminal activity that abounds over there in regard to companies billing billions and failing to complete any rebuilding to an acceptable standard.

[/quote=tony]There will always be a hegamon and you need one to secure global peace and thus trade, w/out that we are in the dark ages. That is reality not idealism.[/quote]

A cultural hegamon is natural a political one nothing of the sort and completely unnecesary. Why you think otherwise baffles me.

Unrestricted capitalism does nothing but create a vast divide between rich and poor, a good example being modern day Russia. There is no way for true Capitalism to work without socailist aspects like minimum wages, free healthcare free schooling, legal aid etc.
Its Ironic that America was happy to pressurize and force other countries to committ to free market capitalism in a more Extreme way thatn americans have ever had themselves. This is because in developing countries true capitalism enables large corporations to ensalve people. You also make the massive error in presuming that the whole world worships money, there are more important things for a society than to just create wealth.


.
So by your phrasing you assume every Ideology that is not capitalism is in fact ant-capitalist. As a matter of interest can you same a country that exists with Friedman esque pure free market capitalism ?

THere have been worse serial killers than fred west but that does not make him good does it ? Where on earth do you get the idea that Capitalism is inclusive ? The reason it works in some places is due to some very important socialist policies staying in place without that social protection pure capitalism is a disaster.

tony de wonderful

Drivers of American foreign policy are complex and to draw that singular conclusion is silly. I love the red herring you put in there. You are aware that just because of Bush's links to Halliburton, this does not prove your conclusion?

Why could the US government not just have employed said corporations to do jobs in America?

Can you provide any evidence for that?

I'd argue that the security situation is/was the reason for retarding the economy. It's was Iraqi and foreign insurgents causing that problem.

Sure corporations become corrupt if not constrained by the law same as anything. Were not the Soviets corrupt or any given Socialist elite?

Robbery how? If you are taking about Capitalism being exploitative then I'll give you a pass if you can explain Marx's suplus value theory but otherwise what are you talking about? Capitalism puts food on the table and creates wealth like no other system of economic organisation before it.


A cultural hegamon is natural a political one nothing of the sort and completely unnecesary. Why you think otherwise baffles me.[/QUOTE]

Sure how can you have an advanced economy, international trade etc without some sort of hegamon to provide security?

I'd point to the Romans, British empires as times of fantastic wealth creation and culture advances. Contrast that with the dark ages when rule of law and security collapsed in Europe.

How do you provide security, law etc without a hegamon?

Sounds like a moral manifesto from you. Good luck with your idealism.

3rd world people like western capitalism when it comes. They like shopping in malls and buying nice cars, clothes etc. Their choice, not yours.

Capitalism tears up old orders, it's a churning, dynamic force and you can't stop it w/out socialist tyranny. It does away with old elites and economic arrangements. At least Capital is open to all regardless of sex, race, religion etc. It's the most open economic system going, everyone can participate.
.

Sure yep anything with springs up as a reaction to the painful changes of Capitalism is by definition anti-capitalist. Islamism isn't new in this regard, it's been tried before (and failed) with movements in the 20th century like National-Socialism and Communism, they made people into serfs to that state....so much for your idea that Capitalism enslaves?

No. So? Capitalism didn't come about because some academic or ideologue dreamed it up.

Capital is open to all, it's not perfect but is the most inclusive economic system we have. It does not matter if you are Jewish, Christian, black, white, male, female etc, you can participate and make money. Even your beloved Islamist utopia is not so open.

Luan Pra bang

There is a hell of a lot more than a few 'links' the wide spread corruption with the Bush administration and certain corprations is vast and well known. Dick cheny was a former CEO of halliburton, the Energy Policy comitte was staffed by Cheny and other Energy company execs and Condoleeza rice was a Chevron employeee. Lots of Republicans were caught out over owning shares in comapnies that benefitted from the Bush administration.
There is very little room for expansion in the American market, and no option there to bill billions over the odds for a countries failed reconstruction. Re building a country from the ground up on a cost plus basis is a very good opportunity for USA corporations. There were no links between Iraq and Al Queda and Cheny was told this by his own intelligence chiefs yet he maintained the terror threat was a reason for war, why ? He went to war for the money disaster capitalism generates.





[/quote] I'd argue that the security situation is/was the reason for retarding the economy. It's was Iraqi and foreign insurgents causing that problem.[/quote]

When the Americans first arrived the Iraqis were happy. The mood changed when they were denied the chance to vote for thier own representatives and the Americans destroyed their industry and employment prospects and outsourced vast amounts of industy and employment to foreign people and companies at 1000's of times the cost would have been to let locals do it. Your ignorance on the subljct you are talking about is shocking.





That is complete rubbish, an enforced conversion to capitalism in Chile destryoed the growing middle class, left people starving and concentrated wealth in the hands of the few as it has done all over the world. Capitalism does not work with out a healthy dose of socialism to keep fairness and parity. YOu are also missing the point about peoples right to choose, a political view point is a personal one that people in a nation should have the right to choose, you are saying that because you think capitalism is best its ok for the Yanks to force it on the rest of the world ?
A simple question to you, do you think people have the right to vote and choose their own political and economic system ? If the answer is yes then you cannot be a supporter of the USA.






You have failed to provide a single reason why this is necesary ? YOu have just stated that it is without and justification apart from security which is frankly a clear sign of clutching at straws.

I would point to those eras being frought with violence, subjugation human rights abuses on a hige scale and wealth stolen and plundered from other nations. If you are trying to state that American invasions and attemps at empire building are justifed becasue it makes Americans rich then good on ya but your complete lack of morals is shocking. It aligns directly with murder fro profit being OK.


Countries can provide security with their allies and own armies with out America telling them what to do as Hugo chaves is proving in South America





I am sure those who starved Chile, the living in penury in Russia and the millions in Venezuala who watched their natural resources make a tiny minority wealthy beyond imagination while the rest went hungry, will disagree.

Capitalism without a strong socialist element does the opposite of all those things.
.






Really so the Friedman economic model was not draw up by an academic ? The passionate commitment to a free market embraced by Cheny even though the free market medicine was too painfull for the USA but not too painful for south Africa Chile Russia or any other country that it was forced upon ?



No capitalism is open to those who have money already. Socialism is what means we have free education and free health care, its what enables people to have a chance to use their own skills to make it rather than having to be wealthy to start with. Capitalists believe in trickle down econimics and that is why they are so keen for American companies to make money around the world, they believe that the robbery in Iraq will bring enough cash back to America to create more jobs and a larger economy but personally I think the Iraqi's need jobs more.

Your argument seems to be based on America are capitalists and capitalism is the best so its OK to force people to accept it.
Even with out the lack of law and order and corruption, which Americans encourage to get away with their theft of whole industries, pure freemarket Capitalism is so dangerous Americans won't even have it in thier own nation.

max137

Hello, i think you guys are missing a few important points. Firstly it was Britain who went abroad and robbed other countries leaving nothing but mayhem....nothings changed now and they are still doing the same. Muslims veil their women out of respect and honour for their women rather than de-base them and send them out wearing nothing but a g-string...i wonder if you guys would prefer to see you girlfriends/wive's walking down the street naked as apposed to with clothes on.

max137

Sounds like Lua Pra Bang is the only 1 with a brain on this forum. I BET ALOT OF YOU GUYS READ THE SUN NEWSPAPER!!! RIGHT, what a great read. Very stimulating for the brain

GlesgaKiss

You do realise that just saying something doesn't necessarily make it true? Free market capitalism is absolute economic and personal freedom, at least the ideology is - it's never been tried. You have no argument. America is nothing like the free market it was in the 19th century.

Capitalism IS open to everyone... your argument falls down in the assumption that equal material wealth - and being given it through any means necessary - is a natural right (in your opinion), and that you have some kind of power to make that decision for others. You and people like you are socialistic thinkers, and you stand completely in the way of freedom and what you call "equal rights". Infact the very suggestion of equal rights under socialist rule is laughable.

GlesgaKiss

People in the west generally let their girlfriends/wives make that decision for themselves. Of course social development in the west has not reached the dizzy heights of Islamist perfection just quite yet.

Mus

iTrader: (2)

just cause a lot of pedos come from western society I CANT PAINT EVERY WESTERNER WITH THE SAME BRUSH. a lot muslim women wear the head cover cause they want to. yes maybe one or two are forced to but ultimately its there decision

max137

High Crime rates, rate of rape has gone through the roof, one of the highest rate of robbery, rape and crime in the world.....guess who...England and Wales check the stats for yourslves...no wonder why Muslim women decide to cover up....they are protecting themselves from you sick-minded, sun reading, peado minded people like yourselves

max137

No not dizzy mate...real...christians lived with muslims for over 1400 years but i bet you havn't read history. They were given the same rights as the muslims under the Khilafah system look it up. They were allowed to worship freely. But i bet you not read that far in!!! selective reading

GlesgaKiss

No, you're quite right, I'm a Sun reading ignoramus and have not read 'that far in!!!'.

The fact is that we're not talking about history here, we're talking about what's real, as you have just pointed out. I don't have a problem with people believing what they like, but your comment about Muslims veiling their women struck me as ridiculous. As did your obvious objection to people being naked or wearing very little, which suggests to me that your mind is actually at a more primitive stage of closed-mindedness than the bottom rung of Sun readers.

And of course rates of rape are irrelevant in societies where rape isn't even considered a possible occurence inside marriage. I wonder how many go unreported. Same goes for paedophillia.

EH52WRX

iTrader: (16)

LMFHO :-) put that in your pipe and smoke it tw$t

JTaylor

ETA and , aswell as and

max137

So is History not real? Its because of history we are here mate. So history matters an awful lot. History suggests that if your mum and dad did not meet you would be history too. So i reckon history is pretty important, and the veiling comments you did not like! Its everyone to their own mate. If muslim women decide to cover i think they got a right to. And 1 more thing rates of rape are not irrelevant you plum, its a reflection of the society you and i live in, f**ked to put in a nutshell.

max137

I do apologise there was no need for me to call you a plum

EH52WRX

iTrader: (16)

They cant do that in Ireland, they have the right idea across there.

max137

They can't do what there?

JTaylor

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Guys, come on, this is pretty dumb. It is just an Internet fourm and not worth getting worked up over. There are far more important things in all our lives than threatening a punch up over a few over the top comments on a net forum. This is exactly the sort of thing certain people on here revel in, don't give them the pleasure.

JTaylor

f1_ fan: the George Galloway of Snet.