 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
So, having said that, we have dark days in front of us. We have impending climate and economic disaster and on top of that a political military issue, the so-called Shield. There isn't hardly a person in the world who believes it is against Iran. It is a part of a policy started in 1996, counter-posing against each other, on the one hand NATO and AMPO (the US-JAPAN arrangement), and on the other hand the SCO countries, the biggest alliance in human history: the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, with 6 full members and 3 observers. The 6 members are China, Russia and four of the former Central Asian republics, excluding Turkmenistan. The three observers are India, Pakistan and Iran. Together, it's about 50% of humanity, confronting a relatively small country called the United States of America, with only 300'000'000, not a very impressive size these days.
Those bases are for the coming war with SCO, that's why they are there. Have a look at the analysis of the length of the runways and you will see the purpose behind them.
Let me come back for a second to the idea of pulling out, which in my mind is such a bad idea that we could expect it from the US. What it means is that you pull out so that you don't suffer any humiliating defeat. You make yourself unavailable for defeat. I can understand the reason, it is not difficult. The 30th April 1975, the humiliating defeat in Vietnam became a major trauma. To avoid that situation is the priority of course, pulling out better than to continue killing, but, I just think one should call a spade a spade, and no way I see cut and run as peaceful action. We shouldn't, I would say, contaminate the concept of peace with cowardice, trying to "save face" after having killed 750'000 so far. Multiply that by 10 for the bereaved--the persons who feel the loss of a friend, a spouse, a brother, a sister, a child, a parent, a colleague, a neighbor--multiply 750'000 by 10 and you have an estimate of the hatred that has been created. Add to that the 4 million who are displaced, some of them among the 7,5 million I just mentioned; and add to that the psychosis induced in the high number of US military who have been to Iraq; and add to that the about 25'000 wounded who have come back to the US and you may probably add 10% of them dying. The definition of a person of the US army personnel killed in the war is that he dies in Iraq, that means "Put them on the plane get them to Walter Ried as quickly as possible, don't let them die in Iraq". I am not saying that to get somewhere closer to realism when discussing this enormity.
From global capitalism as it is operating today, we can expect no solution to these problems. So let me then add the kind of approach that I, as one person, would advocate; taming capitalism, by introducing at the same time about 14 other types of economies. In other words, it is a little bit like the thinking about energy: we don't say an unconditional no to hydrocarbons, but we introduce 6, 7, 8 other methods. The energy profile becomes complex. Time does not permit me to get into all 14, I'll not do it, some of you have the manuscript and the book A Life-Sustaining Economy is close to completion. The point I am arguing is a pluralistic economy. There is no single formula that covers all the alternatives, and the pluralistic profile must be adjusted to the preconditions in space and time.
From the plans that have emerged it looks as if the 100'000 targets have been identified in Iran. These targets include not only some nuclear arrangements, but the total military infrastructure of the country, that means any kind of center of command, naval points, air bases, anything that has to do with missiles. But that would only amount to one half of the 100'000 targets, the other targets would be anything that has to do with civilian infrastructure in the sense of railroads, airports, roads of course, sewerage, bridges, canals or watering, electric power plants, anything that keeps the civilian population going. Starting at 5 am some morning, 100'000 targets, in association with Israel. As far as I understand the Iranian counterattack will be considerable. I don't know, but I could guess there could be dirty bombs inside the US, ignited by remote control. Only an idiot will use missiles. They will of course use totally different methods. So I mention it as an example of what we may be facing.
But leaving that point aside, I think China is one of the least likely successor candidates. On my list, candidate number one is the European Union. You need a sense of universalism, China has nothing of that. They are still convinced that it is surrounded by barbarians. They are willing to buy quite a lot. The annual global income is 54 trillion dollars, and China's reserves are more than one trillion. The US currency reserves right now amount to 47 billion, which is nothing. That means when you want 100 billion for more fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, you have to take more loans. That they get those loans is something still a little bit strange, but they do pay something in return, namely access to the US markets. So, having said that, a likely successor is the European Union, very universalist, with the 11 major colonial powers all members, and all concerned about their part of the world. And they are willing to say "I'll not protest if you do something in your part if you'll not protest when I do something in my part". It is European political common market. There is much more to the European Union, but this is one important aspect.
In a regional world we do not have any guarantee for peace. As a matter of fact, the country that will benefit most from the decline and fall of the US Empire will be the US Republic. They may start sleeping well at night, and they might use their enormous natural and human resources for innovative projects and their capacity for cooperation, all of that, for better purposes, and make a decent country out of the USA.
http://kucinich.us/node/2719#comment-10812
I sent the following to Mary and Kucinich:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18047.htm
Mary,
Peace has to be won; wrestled from our own criminal tendencies.
The link above may be difficult to digest. My strong suggestion is to read it.
After that one, then, read this one:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18048.htm
If our world will turn the corner, so to speak, it will need new blood. I mean this in a literal sense. Our species depends upon interconnectivity; like a circulatory system. Our currency is our blood.
Clearly, without any question, our current currency (the fed dollar) is a disease upon our society, where, our livelihood is drained from us; leaving us anemic.
When our species does turn the corner, again, it will need new blood; a transfusion.
This is almost too simple.
A new currency produced by a universal law (that doesn’t even need enforcement) can transform a dying social structure into a thriving one.
Step one:
The new currency can be used to pay taxes
Step two:
The new currency can be borrowed interest free to pay off primary residence mortgages.
Step three:
The new currency can be borrowed at 1% interest (financing the production and maintenance of the new currency) for home energy production loans (Solar, Wind, hydrogen, etc.).
Step four:
The new currency can be borrowed at 2% interest (more revenue to maintain the new currency) for vehicle purchases other than petroleum dependent vehicles.
Step five:
Defaults on loans increase personal currency costs i.e. Just like current credit ratings where interest rates increase for people with a history of failure to pay back loans.
If you have read the first two links and you find my comments to be somewhat less important, then, please reconsider the analogy between a human being and human society; both need blood.
Currency in society is necessary for society to incorporate three things:
1.
Specialization
2.
Division of Labor
3.
Economies of scale
Without those three things working in any social structure (even a simple family) there can be no survival of that social structure. Without those three things we are all ‘on our own’, where, everything we need, everything under the sun, we alone, individually, must produce our selves.
Currency is required (even a very inefficient barter currency) to create and maintain those three things. Currency is society’s blood.
No matter who is in charge of society, the law makers, the executers of law, the judges, no matter who, there must be a currency flowing through society. Without a currency flowing through society, just like the human body, parts will die.
When the dollar crashes (the infectious dollar) there must be something ready to replace it.
If the ‘leadership’ doesn’t know this, and isn’t prepared for this, then, it isn’t leadership.
We are digging our own graves with the current currency, and yet, if that current currency drains out of our society – we die – unless a transfusion of new blood is ready for immediate transfusion.
Individually, if you look at this, we can begin to get our transfusions flowing, just as described above, by paying off our mortgages, producing our own power at home, and investing in alternate energy consumption.
Peace must be won; it isn’t given.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=A+Life+Sustaining+Economy+Johan+Galtung+&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Andreas+Zumach
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Bernard+Lewis
Last edited on Sat Jul 21st, 2007 10:09 am by Joe Kelley