Jump to content

how to make money

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Have to agree with you there storchy - Merkel said Europe (Germany) can't rely on anyone to look after it - it will have to look after itself!


I don't agree too much with trump but his policy will mean Europe has to become a real force to be reckoned with, which over time will dilute US supremacy... Maybe an unintended consequence but most of what he does has unintended consequence s



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe an unintended consequence but most of what he does has unintended consequence s


just maybe them so called consequences are well what some persons cant see EU brought on its own demise with mass migration to me trump told em to fix their problem in a round about way neil



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald doesn't seem to impress anyone, but Then again what did all the previous presidents do that was so good for the rest of the world?


Obama didn't do much of anything worldwise.


George W just about stuffed up the whole middle east and dragged the rest into the war.


Clinton. Well he gave us Hilary and a few scandals.


G Bush senior didn't go as far as he should have in Iraque.


The rest, forget em.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall the US being appointed defender of the free world or morally having any such obligation. The US are a member of NATO, which is supposed to be something like the 3 musketeers - one for all and all for one. This wasn't done just out of goodness of the US heart as despite the % of GDP contribution to NATO, if all countries maintained their obligations, the US would still be paying disproportionately more - very much so.


The US president, at the end of the day has to appease or appeal to US voters - not those of the free world. In the case of NATO and other agreements the US enter into, the argument is two-fold. The cost is small compared to the tactical benefit of being able to site US military bases closer to their real or perceived foes, to be able to launch a counter-offensive before they are anywhere near US soil (do you really think the US are only wanting to protect South Korea?). Also, it buys them access to the markets - even in the absence of a formal trade treaty, large contracts seem to go disproportionately (based on competition - not military spend in the area) to US firms . At the end of the second Iraq war, there was a cry of foul from the UK as it, too had spent considerable military resources, that the restoration, reparation and operational contracts were excessively being awarded to US companies..... by the interim administration who were led by..... you guessed it... the US military. I was getting calls from GE, Bechtel and other US firms of opportunities to enjoy the sites from the Baghdad Sheraton; none were coming from other countries' engineering firms.


In my mind, there was no question George doorbell-ya was wanting to get Saddam for taking a crack at his father (hence the questionable means of sealing his death sentence - most war criminals go to the Hague for their justice - unless of course there is a good chance the outcome won't be what the president wanted, in which case set a local lynching mob to him - by the way I am in no way defending Saddam - nor any other deluded leader we couldn't be @rsed going for because there was no economic benefit). Weapons of Mass Destruction was probably code for Oil, of which Iraq had enough to allow them to become an economic power and the US wanted to get at least short term control of.


Think I am cynical - look at IAI Lavi - Wikipedia. This article understates the US' hand in the cancellation of the Lavi jet program being economically competitively threatening the US military jet export industry. Yet Israel is a great ally of the US - why should it worry - where do you think a large proportion of its 24% of GDP military spend was going? On which country's dependence do you think Israel was able to maintain its sovereignty over the years? Israel was (is?) more dependent on the US that it was of those fighters. Say the US as happy to let the program proceed, but the EU put pressure on Israel to cancel the program - I think it wouldn't take long to work out what Israel would have said to that.


I don't begrudge the US at all in this respect. They have had a strong hand in me being able to have the freedoms to make many choices, including express these opinions and take to the skies with great freedom (OK Aus is not so free at the moment in that respect - ASIC, unable to land at most military bases, etc). They have, as has the UK (e.g. Libya) ballsed things up, but they are not the world defenders of democracy and peace. The US president is accountable to only US voters. They are going to do enough to preserve what they think is important and a benefit to the US and, a Doorbell-Ya said, "you're either with us or your against us". Like it or lump it, it is the way of the world whether it is the US or there is some other super-dooper power.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...