Quote:
Originally posted by Ustwo
There are many examples where the bottom line had nothing to do with our policy. Lybia, Cuba, and Kosovo come to mind right away.
|
but those examples were ALL about money. it is always about money, or more accurately assets.
war is a means to deprive a state of its physical and human assets by destroying them or it is waged to conquer those assets for the use and benefit of the aggressor state.
without resorting to armed conflict, states use embargoes, sanctions and other economic and trade policies to try to influence other states that are not in line with their own principles. it is a form of aggressive political tactics. we ransom nations, outspend them, or bribe them in some form or another to get them to bend to our will.
our oil embargo to japan is cited as the main reason for the attack on pearl harbor. many have suggested that the oil ties in the bush family (munitions too) are seen as threatening to the middle east, and therefore motivated pre-emptive terrorist action. this is a perfectly rational hypothesis that merits further testing. states have defended their physical resources with force throughout history. it makes much more sense than "they hate us because we are free." there are always economic bases for even religious wars.
the cold war is famously referred to as a spending war or poker game where the US simply out spent the USSR. nations like north korea deprive their citizens of basic lifestuffs in order to channel their resources into arms building. these are examples of economic policy war that are always quickly drawn from the conservative bandolier.
your arguments are conflicting more frequently as this thread continues. your position is weakening, you must realize that such hypocracy cannot stand up to the scrutiny of even your own standards.