Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (6764)	5/31/2004 8:17:23 AM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

There is some truth that the U.S. has been engaged in some sort of World War 3 with the Middle Eastern muslim world for the past decade or so. Starting with the first Gulf War, and the Attack against Iraq being the culmination of this effort. But, I doubt that it has some sort of overarching religious conotation or motivation as you suggest, despite some people's efforts to package it that way. It has more to do with ecnomic necessity, maintaining economic hemogeny over the world, and ensuring that the U.S. war machine is running at full tilt and gets all the funding it desires. The U.S. wouldn't give a rats ass about the muslim world if they didn't control so much oil. Yes, it does come down to oil. Fortunes are made on the oil trade, and there are powerful economic interests that seek to control and protect that lucrative trade. Oil is the lifeblood of the U.S. economy, and has been for decades. It has been American policy for decades to control the oil trade as best we can. In years past that meant sponsering coups and other covert measures. Now, with the Soviet Union gone, we're more willing to use our military in this effort. If it was just a religous war, then the U.S. would be attacking African muslim countries that also could potentially threaten Juedo/Christain interests. But, we don't, in fact, we don't give a rats ass about Africa. There's a bloody civil war raging in central Africa, one of the largest wars since WW2 and we harldy ever hear about it in western media, and certainly aren't getting ourselves involved. Even in Asia, we certainly haven't started any full blown wars with muslim countries like Indonesia, if anything we've often supported them in one way or another. So, I don't really buy your take that it's some religous conspiracy that's being directed by someone with regligous interests. Like most things in life, it all comes down to money. Religion is a powerful force, but money is vastly more powerful. An examination of U.S. military intervention over the past century certainly points towards an economic motivation, rather than a religious one. I agree with LP55, the U.S. has probably been more militarily involved in Latin America over the past century than any other region in the world, and they're for the most part Christain like the U.S. It's a need to keep countries within our sphere of influence under our control, so we can exploit their resources.

To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (6764)	5/31/2004 1:15:55 PM
From: LPS5	Respond to of 20039

I've skimmed through your links and found it doesn't invalidate my point: we just can't equate the rountine [sic] black ops carried out by special forces or the CIA in Latin America, Africa,... with full-scale interventions in the Balkans, Central Asia or the Filipinos (vs Abu Sayyaf). You're conveniently skating past others: I mentioned U.S. actions in Panama, Grenada, the Dominican Republic, and - though halted while underway - Haiti. There's four, plus Korea. How don't those invalidate your laughable assertion? I'm merely endorsing the viewpoint of one of America's luminaries: Samuel Huntington[.] How is he an "America[n] luminar[y]"? I'm sure that well over 95% of Americans couldn't pick him out of a line-up or name the institution he's based at. LPS5