Scott So you are saying Russian, Chinese and Iranian imperialism( arms, loans, training, banking, intel and capitalist ventures and in the case of Iran boots on the ground with Quds Force, Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Hezbollah and 4 Shiite groups from Iraq)) does not also profit from the Syrian conflict. And I am not a supporting of any of the imperialist and sub imperialist groupings. I am a Marxist.
Not some Stalinist, right wing or fascist and liberal or a so called progressive who supports the Assad regime thinking they are anti imperialist. Cort On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 1:17 PM, <scotpe...@cruzio.com> wrote: > Sorry Cort, but you make this sound like the USA benefits from our wars > abroad. > > Yes, US/England's interference, well actually bloody warfare and > practicing genocide on the indigenous populations is more accurate, goes > back to the 1970's it goes back to when all other sources of portable > energy were wiped out in the early 1900's and Oil was the only method to > be used, the West has been in and trying to control those who have the > black gold. But you insist there is not a profit motive? > > The Corporations that help fund political campaigns, whose advertising > controls what is actually in our newspapers to the point we have to to to > N Korean news to find something worse, are the beneficiaries. Those who > profit from the major user of Oil, the Military Industrial Complex uses > 40% of the world supply of Oil. > > As Arhata stated, follow the money. Who profits. > > When the worlds economies and the countries themselves are controlled by > those who control the worlds economies, they are the beneficiaries. A lull > in the oil supply, a lull in the food supply, the foreign nationals that > now own 40% of the NATURAL WATER SUPPLIES in the USA can state scarcity > and jack prices. > > The only real money makers left in the USA has to do with GMO's and > chemicals, destroying food production around the world, making scarcities > while controlling the only viable food supplies left, as well as Weapons > Manufacturing. 12 years ago 40% of US jobs centered around the Military > Industrial Complex. > > Damn, war is just good business, you don't want to see a massive > depression instead of this little one we're living in now do ya? After > all, what other jobs would we have to support our economy? > > So why rule out profit by Oil, as you insist on doing in every instance of > the Middle East? The Oil Corporations based in the US and the UK profit > immensely, the players that are religiously polarized in this region are > the other players, and duh, they have immense amounts of oil too. > > Syria blocks natural gas lines form Saudi Arabia to European supply > depots. Syria blocks sending water from Iraq and Turkey to Israel. > > Syria's majority of the population is that of Iran's population too, and > those against them have committed the greatest crimes against humanity, > using Chemical warfare (Iraq using US supplied WMD's on Iranian's and > Kurds, Israel on Palestinians). > > Empowering all factions that are pro invading Syria, by fighting anyone > who mentions profit motive, or anything about the major chemical warfare > known criminals and their parts in Syria, seems to be a constant theme > coming out of your Marxist group. Stating your for the people is > consistent, but empowering the Imperialists to invade seems to be the end > result that these actions will achieve. > > Any discussion, or will I get another personal post instead of sticking to > the subject of, who profits. > > Scott > > > Before the start of the revolution and now war within many wars, Syria > > ranked 32nd in oil production and has now dropped many places since. This > > sound like those who said at the start of the US intervention in Iraq and > > Afghanistan ( real US intervention their began in 1978) that it was over > > oil.> In Iraq the big oil contacts are with China and Afghanistan not > much > > is coming out. > > > > No, the Syrian revolution began for other reasons and the US, Qatar, the > > Saudis, Turkey, Iranian, Chinese, French and Russian imperialists and sub > > imperialist actors on both sides, all have other reasons to co-opt or > stop > > it other than oil. > > > > Cort > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Arhata Osho < > > arhataworldfreespe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > >> Less than 1% of people died from 'gassing' out of over 100,000 killed! > >> Is > >> this about gassing of innocent citizens? > >> [image: *=)) rolling on the floor] Wanta buy a bridge from Brooklyn? > >> Follow the Money! Is it 'green oil' too > >> How's Iraq doing now? Afghanistan? About 'oil'? [image: *8-| rolling > >> eyes]The > >> American citizens finance these wars.[image: *8-} silly] > >> Could that be YOU or people you know? > >> ------------------------------ > >> *From:* Cort Greene <cort.gre...@gmail.com> > >> > >> > >> A US attack on Syria will Prolong the > >> War<http://www.juancole.com/2013/09/attack-syria-prolong.html> > >> Posted on 09/04/2013 by Juan Cole > >> The struggle in Syria began peacefully in spring of 2011, but after > >> about > >> half a year it turned violent when the regime deployed tanks and other > >> heavy munitions against the protesters. Some of the latter took up > >> weapons > >> and turned to violence in revenge. Thereafter the struggle spiraled into > >> a > >> civil war, in which the regime showed itself perfectly willing to attack > >> civilian city quarters and kill indiscriminately. The struggle has > >> killed > >> over 100,000 persons. As the regime became ever more brutal, the rebel > >> fighters were increasingly radicalized. Now, among the more important > >> groups is Jabhat al-Nusra or the Succor Front, a radical al-Qaeda > >> affiliate. > >> President Obama’s plan to bomb Syria with cruise missiles will do > >> nothing > >> to hasten the end of the conflict. Instead, it will likely prolong it. > >> *It should be remembered that the US couldn’t end the Iraqi civil war > >> despite having over 100,000 boots on the ground in that country. It is > >> highly unlikely that Washington can end this one from 30,000 feet.* > >> The hope for avoiding another decade of killing is that the governmental > >> elite and the rebels get tired of fighting and prove willing to make a > >> deal. It is probably too late for Syria to succeed at the kind of > >> transition achieved in Yemen. There, the president stepped down and his > >> vice president ran for his seat. At the same time, members of the > >> opposition were given seats in the cabinet. That kind of cohabitation > >> with > >> the former enemy is easier if too much blood hasn’t bee shed. > >> The best solution for Syria would be if President Bashar al-Assad steps > >> down and the Baath Party gave up its dictatorial tactics. At the same > >> time, > >> the rebels would have to forewswear al-Qaeda-type extremism. > >> Probably each side would have to feel that they could not gain any > >> substantial benefit from further fighting, for negotiations to have > >> prayer > >> of success. > >> The prospect of a US missile strike is emboldening the rebels. They > >> increasingly hope that the US will come in militarily with them. > >> the rebels don’t look at the proposed US missile strikes as a limited > >> affair or as solely related to chemical weapons use. Aside from > >> al-Qaeda, > >> they see the US as an ally. Thus, they are complaining that Obama’s > >> indecisiveness is emboldening Syrian President > >> al-Assad<http://www.elaph.com/Web/news/2013/9/833955.html?entry=Syria>. > >> The US is now part of their strategic calculations and they see decisive > >> American action as an asset. > >> Obviously, such euphoria at the prospect of US military intervention on > >> the rebel side is incompatible with the kind of “pacted” transition > >> political scientists favor. The rebels will have every incentive to hold > >> out for ever more forceful outside Syria intervention in the coming > >> years. > >> By striking Syria, Obama has all but guaranteed that a negotiated > >> solution > >> becomes impossible for years to come. In the absence of serious > >> negotiations, the civil war will continue and likely get worse. The US > >> should give serious thought to what the likely actual (as opposed to > >> ideal) > >> reaction in Syria will be to the landing of a few cruise missiles. The > >> anti-regime elements will celebrate, convinced that it will all be over > >> quickly if the US gets involved. The last thing they will want will be > >> to > >> negotiate with the regime. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >
