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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lou Weed who wrote (184244)	3/29/2006 9:42:46 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Fascism is the opposite i.e. where private industry harnesses the Govt. for it's own good over the rights of the people. I believe Mussolini would disagree with you. From his own words: worldfuturefund.org Fascism desires the State to be strong and organic, based on broad foundations of popular support. The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporative, social, and educational institutions, and all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organized in their respective associations, circulate within the State. A State based on millions of individuals who recognize its authority, feel its action, and are ready to serve its ends is not the tyrannical state of a mediaeval lordling. It has nothing in common with the despotic States existing prior to or subsequent to 1789. Far from crushing the individual, the Fascist State multiplies his energies, just as in a regiment a soldier is not diminished but multiplied by the number of his fellow soldiers. The Fascist State organizes the nation, but it leaves the individual adequate elbow room. It has curtailed useless or harmful liberties while preserving those which are essential. In such matters the individual cannot be the judge, but the State only. I would say that pretty closely resembles present day China.. No true liberalism in the classical sense, but sufficient economic and social freedoms to create the impression that they are free. But everything is ultimately harnessed to the benefit and control of the Communist Party. ************************* The point of my previous reply to you is how WE support dictators when it is in OUR best interests. Our best interests change over time. Why is this difficult for you to grasp?? You do agree that we supported Saddam in the 80s, right??? I believe we attempted to prevent either side from dominating the other. We certainly had no interest in seeing the Iranians conquering Iraq, or even the Shi'a portion of Iraq. But we were restricted from selling any military equipment directly to either side. So that's why Ollie North had the Israelis sell the TOW missiles and other spare parts to the Iranians during Iran-Contra.. They acted as a "cut-out" so technically the law against military sales was not broken (but it was broken in spirit). The assistance that was provided to Iraq was primarily agricultural and financial credits. This permitted Saddam's regime to divert oil revenue to buying his weapons from the French, Soviets, and Chinese.. (and S. Africans). So was this support for Saddam comparable to maybe, support for the Shah? Hardly. Somoza? Not really.. And was it comparable to support for Pinochet, where an American "nod and wink" motivated the Chilean military to launch a coup? Hardly the case.. Otherwise, we would never have put Iraq on the terrorist state list. We've also "played" corrupt regimes for OUR best interest....there's 2 sides to the coin. Depending on what our "interests" where at the time, certainly this is the case. We wouldn't expend any political capital or energy to the matter if there weren't some interest involved. After all, isn't that how the genocide in Ruwanda occurred.. because they were "off the radar" and no one had an interest in expending resources there to prevent the killings. Hawk