Do you think that a war must be started for the elite to prosper?
Certain people in our society uses war to boost their income during and after war. Some elite societies pull together to create wars to boost businesses, such as bombs, nuclear power plants and weapons. Depleted Uranium (DU) from nuclear reactors are placed in bombs, called bunker-busters, businesses prosper from rebuilding war stricken cities and businesses prosper from providing goods and services to the military forces.
I think that the warning received from President Eisehower over 50 years ago is spot on as it applies today. Once the iron curtain fell, we seem to be constantly putting bogey men before the people.
I am cynical, yes, I believe that creating and sustaining conflict is just one of the many ways that the aristocrat who has continues to have at the expense of those whose purses are not so weighty. In the current climate, I have a fundamental distrust of the wealthy and the extremely afflient. and believe that they will do anything to maintain a status quo that is to their advantage.
I think it is perfectly possible for the elite to prosper without wars but they lack the imagination, or perhaps the humanity, to think of any other way of doing things, and a large part of the elite make money from war.
Traditionally though a war has always been a good way to boost the economy, t least temporarily.
It is not too difficult to believe this statement to be true.
Very few wars were waged to actually protect our country form being overthrown. But many were started for no other reason than to make obscene profits from waging them.
It is easy for the wealthy to promote wars since we all know that those who actually wage those wars will never fight in them. So they have nothing to lose, and everything to gain. Along with the monetary gain comes the lustful satisfaction of being in control over others.
I don't think they NEED to start wars to boost business. I DO think that they think it's easier to go that route though. Not precisely start wars, but to have an "enemy" they can threaten people with if they don't do what they say.
It's a form of extortion. Normally, people won't stand for the government threatening them directly, but if the government creates an enemy and claims that it is the ENEMY who will do terrible things to them if they don't do something, then they neatly avoid any kind of outrage the people might direct at them. The Soviets were that enemy for a long time, but when the Soviet Union fell, we started casting about for a new enemy to keep everyone in line. Now it's a nebulous term called "Terrorism" Terrorism is better than the Soviets. It can survive any one nation falling apart. The terrorists will simply move to a new country and set up shop. If we don't like that country, we can use terrorism as an excuse to make them do what we want by threatening to go in and get the terrorists without their cooperation. If it's a nation we DO like, then we can play on their sympathies and get them to do what we want or "the terrorists win"
At home, we invade the personal lives of everyone, we wear down our citizens rights by using words like "security" and phrases like "The War on Terror" If we don't give up our rights, they say then we are irresponsibly vulnerable to an attack. The number of deaths from the Trade Tower attacks is inconsequential in the big picture when you put it up against deaths caused by almost any other single source. However, put those deaths on the same day and in the same place and suddenly it becomes the biggest threat to anyone..... EVER.
I have to ask the question, because no one else seems willing to ask it: When do we get our rights back now that we've given them away? It is perhaps the most important question right now, and NO ONE is asking it. If we go by history, the answer is emphatically: Never.... and that is (at least for me) simply unacceptable.
I read a while ago that when "terrorism" ceases to cow the masses there will be a fake extra terrestrial alien threat. And Sparkster has noted a lot more apparent UFO disclosure this year. I have also seen a lot on my facebook news feed. Hmm......
Funny, I was considering something the same just weeks ago. I wonder if something in the news got us both thinking about the same thing? Supposedly modern economics takes into account solutions of the past and presents answers to our modern day depression that don't include the bloodshed, but essentially everything else of the past. Keep up a good attitude. Sooner or later all are going to catch on President Obama is only out to make a buck for himself and party rich style and someone else will present the proper solutions to our problems that don't have to involve bloodshed like the past where maybe a king decides its time to start up the economy again and thin out the herd so lets start a war.
by cooldad 5 years ago
Now that we all have had time to reflect, was the United States war on terrorism valid?Or, did our instant gratification culutre, react to quickly based on emotion and fear?I think American people are easily led by fear and were easily sold on the war on terror like a good beer commercial. ...
by Sushmita 3 years ago
I was checking out this Hub on Whoopi Goldberg and 'The View' and came upon Whoopi and Baver walking out of the show, on the remark of Bill O'Reilly that 'Muslims killed us on 9/11'. I then went looking and found another clip on Utube a talk radio program clip of David Pakman...
by shinujohn2008 9 years ago
India is on the verge of starting a war with Pakistan. The Indian Air forces are now moving towards the borders and waiting to get commands from Officials to attack Pakistan occupied kashmir and smash Terrorist camps. CNN, Times Now and Headlines have reported such moves by Indian Army.
by cooldad 7 years ago
There is a new story out about a supposed jihad terrorist who wants Letterman's head because of jokes he made about a Bin Laden associate. Well, I think it's safe to say that we have officially won the war on terror. If terrorists are worried that much about Letterman, I think we are...
by Susan Reid 5 years ago
I hate that term, but didn't quite know how to phrase it better.Obviously, there have been a LOT of incidents and investigations in the last fewmonths that have raised terrorists and US security to new levels of scrutiny.So my questions: Using 9/11 as baseline, how have "terrorism" and/or...
by accofranco 9 years ago
I have an opinion...to share, let's hear from you?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|