Bounty on US Troops....

[amorphous_constellation]

Trump is quiet because he has business interests in Russia. It's all about Trump, the country gets the side burner.

While I appreciate the exposure of hypocrisy, it seems to me that the issue is whether or not Trump's inaction is due, in whole or in part, to his subservience to Putin.

I think what we need to get away from is the warhawk left. Taking the long view, a subservience to the concept of business is more likely to ossify peace. Retaliation and war, only industrializes and mobilizes a standard of conflict. Someone has to put the guns down first, it doesn't matter who. And I am of course, not a fan of recent of actions by Trump in the U.S. for example, but the general inclination toward business might not necessary be a trait to castigate

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I think what we need to get away from is the warhawk left. Taking the long view, a subservience to the concept of business is more likely to ossify peace. Retaliation and war, only industrializes and mobilizes a standard of conflict. Someone has to put the guns down first, it doesn't matter who. And I am of course, not a fan of recent of actions by Trump in the U.S. for example, but the general inclination toward business might not necessary be a trait to castigate

Subservience to business and warhawking are not two antithetical concepts. I've no doubt Trump would turn to warhawking if it made him money. We've seen this. It's not like Trump has ever been anti war, just the wars that would line his pockets and not **** off his business partners. The problem in both cases is, as it is in so many instances, is letting business be the us foreign policy. Be it Trump's private gains or the military industrial complex.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Subservience to business and warhawking are not two antithetical concepts.

Though I think you're correct here, I think that a prolonged standard of international business interactions without war, would eventually mollify the will toward war. What else could?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Though I think you're correct here, I think that a prolonged standard of international business interactions without war, would eventually mollify the will toward war. What else could?

Imo business where the bottom line is making money has no interest in peacekeeping. It will only have business interests without war so long as it serves the bottom line. I think we can do better than hoping unrestrained capitalism will turn peaceful.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Imo business where the bottom line is making money has no interest in peacekeeping. It will only have business interests without war so long as it serves the bottom line. I think we can do better than hoping unrestrained capitalism will turn peaceful.

Again I agree.. I would hope that at the foundation of peaceful trade, there is something that enriches the non-material qualities of the human experience. Sharing goods and ideas is something that hopefully is meant to speak to our potential of transcendence or non-material enrichment, in perhaps a counter intuitive sense

 

[Revoltingest]

Imo business where the bottom line is making money has no interest in peacekeeping. It will only have business interests without war so long as it serves the bottom line. I think we can do better than hoping unrestrained capitalism will turn peaceful.

To blame capitalism is to ignore political will.
We've gone to war because of political threats, religious fears, & vengeance.
Voters re-elect the leaders who start & continue the wars, eg, GW Bush,
Obama, Richard Nixon, Hillary Clinton, Truman, Johnson.
As long as the voters reward interminable war, leaders will deliver that to us.
It's a more useful explanation than some murky military industrial complex.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Again I agree.. I would hope that at the foundation of peaceful trade, there is something that enriches the non-material qualities of the human experience. Sharing goods and ideas is something that hopefully is meant to speak to our potential of transcendence or non-material enrichment, in perhaps a counter intuitive sense

I think it'll be the other way around, if anything. Enjoying the non-material enrichment of cultural exchange will bring peaceful trade. But right now neither the US or Russia has a desire for cultural exchange, just milking as much money as they can from each other while running vast misinformational campaigns and provoking conflict through ties in middle-eastern proxy wars to, you guessed it, make the most money.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

To blame capitalism is to ignore political will.
We've gone to war because of political threats, religious fears, & vengeance.
Voters re-elect the leaders who start & continue the wars, eg, GW Bush,
Obama, Richard Nixon, Hillary Clinton, Truman, Johnson.
As long as the voters reward interminable war, leaders will deliver that to us.

Capitalism includes any will to make the most money regardless of the human cost. It also includes the politician and voters who keep feeding into the bloated and diseased military industrial complex and paramilitary law enforcement. There is no separation.

 

[Revoltingest]

Capitalism includes any will to make the most money regardless of the human cost. It also includes the politician and voters who keep feeding into the bloated and diseased military industrial complex and paramilitary law enforcement. There is no separation.

And yet you demonstrate no connection.
Who in this military industrial complex directs politicians to make war?
How do they wield this control over generals & presidents?
What documented examples do you have?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

And yet you demonstrate no connection.
Who in this military industrial complex directs politicians to make war?
How do they wield this control over generals & presidents?
What documented examples do you have?

If you think the us investment in middle eastern resources wasn't the real reason Bush went to war then there's no point in talking. We go to war for money, fear and anger is just something to sooth the war fatigue, keep interest in the profit driven capitalists making war machines and securing resources for more.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I think what we need to get away from is the warhawk left. Taking the long view, a subservience to the concept of business is more likely to ossify peace.

I think we need to get away from incoherent statements.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you think the us investment in middle eastern resources wasn't the real reason Bush went to war then there's no point in talking. We go to war for money, fear and anger is just something to sooth the war fatigue, keep interest in the profit driven capitalists making war machines and securing resources for more.

No point in talking?. To be blunt, when you state unsupported
beliefs, you won't sway me. A cogent argument with evidence
can do the trick.

Now, back to the issue....
You've not shown that Bush profited financially from the wars.
But he was re-elected after starting both. So was Hillary.
Clearly, the voters (including Democrats who blame capitalism)
readily re-elect leaders who start & continue these wars.

Capitalists who profit from military spending needn't even go to war.
There's massive spending on the various cold wars we have.

 

[sun rise]

Tell me....do you really want Trump to take some decisive &
quick action to retaliate against a Russian threat which might
or might not have caused 1 or some Ameristanian deaths?

There is an alternative between starting a war and cowering in a corner like a puppy beaten too often. From a story I read, several decent alternatives were presented and ignored.

And to me there's a difference between paying a reward for every American killed which is an incentive to continue killing and providing weapons. There is a difference between slaughtering and winning.

 

[Revoltingest]

There is an alternative between starting a war and cowering in a corner like a puppy beaten too often.

Really?
But after seeing Trump launch a war against Iran,
& then call it off before it started. I'll take momentary
inaction over a hasty response any day.

Don't take this the wrong way.....but ya know, the kind of
rhetoric you just aired seems designed to goad him into
exactly the kind of response we don't want. Remember,
this is Trump....the President....the decider...the initiator.
All this over a big nothingburger? What damage resulted?
What should the Russians do to retaliate against our
arming their enemies, cause death & defeat?
Careful what you wish for.

 

[sun rise]

Really?
But after seeing Trump launch a war against Iran,
& then call it off before it started. I'll take momentary
inaction over a hasty response any day.

Don't take this the wrong way.....but ya know, the kind of
rhetoric you just aired seems designed to goad him into
exactly the kind of response we don't want. Remember,
this is Trump....the President....the decider...the initiator.
All this over a big nothingburger? What damage resulted?
What should the Russians do to retaliate against our
arming their enemies, cause death & defeat?
Careful what you wish for.

True. Trump is the epitome of untrustworthy. But a decent careful knowledgeable POTUS would know how to make a measured, carefully considered response without going to DEFCON 2.

 

[Revoltingest]

True. Trump is the epitome of untrustworthy. But a decent careful knowledgeable POTUS would know how to make a measured, carefully considered response without going to DEFCON 2.

Why make any response?
How many died as a result?

 

[fantome profane]

Why make any response?
How many died as a result?

We don’t actually know that. Maybe no one. Maybe some soldiers were killed to collect the bounty (no, I have no evidence of that, that is my point). Maybe some will be killed if this is allowed to go on. I don’t know.

 

[sun rise]

Why make any response?
How many died as a result?

So if someone shoves you, "why make any response"? You just take it when someone pushes you around. Or more to the point, punches you. I guess you're a pacifist.

 

[sun rise]

We don’t actually know that. Maybe no one. Maybe some soldiers were killed to collect the bounty (no, I have no evidence of that, that is my point). Maybe some will be killed if this is allowed to go on. I don’t know.

If it's OK for Russia to pay a bonus for every American killed, then Iran can do the same thing. Saudi Arabia can pay someone to assassinate Americans they don't like. And so forth.

 

[fantome profane]

If it's OK for Russia to pay a bonus for every American killed, then Iran can do the same thing. Saudi Arabia can pay someone to assassinate Americans they don't like. And so forth.

Can a Canadian do this? I would like to put a bounty on a few people.


(A joke, don’t anyone get yer tighty whities all bunched up)