Discussion in 'Economics' started by bearice, Apr 24, 2011.
Is this statement true?
All Wars have economics as the reason for War.
Mostly true throughout history. Hard to know whether the "religious" wars were solely that or economically based as well.
Historically the aggressor, presuming victorious, either confiscated the resources of the vanquished and/or enslaved (or extracted tribute/taxes from) their people.
Americans have mostly been STUPID about warring. We come to the aid of another at OUR expense.. and losing OUR lives... then leave "empty handed" when the fighting is finished. This policy has aided significantly the decline of America.
Many Leftists regard America as "predatory"... conquering and taking things/resources from weaker foes... our "Imperialism", if you will. And that America is (was) rich because we took so much from other people. TOTAL HOGWASH! (Some would argue "Americans took the land of the United States" from the native Americans. That wasn't a war, but rather a migratory flood of Western Europeans. The Indians were basically "crowded out" by superior numbers. Besides, it's likely the Indidans also "crowded out" peoples who'd earlier settled North American shores.)
America has been the most generous country in the history of the planet... generous to a fault.... and greatly to our disadvantage.
2) The necessary psychology to be in place before the breakout of war is derived from economic recession/depression. :eek:
3) The desire to take "something" from someone else is there too.
I always think why should USA and its allies share technology, education, money and military machines with other countries when USA and its allies can rule/dominate this world?
Actually we purchased the land from the native americans. They dont really teach you much about that in the history books, but it went something like this....
Europeans came to the US and saw native americans on land they wanted. Native americans had no concept of land ownership, so when europeans offered them something for their land, the greedy native american chiefs thought they were pulling a fast one over on the europeans so accepted money/goods for the land. They were then surprised later on when they found out that the europeans cut them off from the land they sold them. Here is how the conversation might have gone.
European: We will give you $500 for your land.
(european rides off on his horse)
(Chief turns to his buddies)
Cheif: Stupid white man. What he gonna do? Put land in his pocket and ride off? Hahaha. We take stupid white mans money because he so stupid and we so smart.
(6 months later when the cheif and his tribe are trying to pass though)
Chief: Wtf is this fence doing here. Hey white man....you cant do that!
European: Yeah we can, you sold this land to us you stupid indian.
This is when the native americans decided they wanted the land back but now it was not for sale so they started attacking white settlers and they got their asses kicked.
So thats how the real story goes. We didnt just invade and start killing native americans for the land. They attacked first.
That's where the expression, "Indian giving", comes from too.
5% of global population using +20% of global oil suply.
I think this is the same story all over the world. The chiefs/leaders create all the world problems and sufferings.
Indians are people of India. Native Americans are Red Indians.
Wars happen b/c world leaders are bored. Plus, a restless bored civilian population is very dangerous to whoever is in charge. Bored people are more capable of overthrowing a political regime, thsu the constant need to keep the "sheep's" minds pre-occupied with silly things, such as needless wars. (Hollywood should have fulfilled this job, but people need something more real and tagible -- they need to blame some other country for their own faults and problems).
Separate names with a comma.