Iraq spokesman: Ex-Blackwater employees not wanted in Iraq

Skybird · 01-05-10, 07:10 AM

We have been there, Lance. What you say is not something new, it is old-fashioned classical economy theory, that's how it is called over here, "klassische Wirtschafts-Theorie". It is part of history courses in any economical studying at university - with the accent on "history". And not only do I think this theory is wrong, but it has been demonstrated to be wrong and dysfunctional since decades, causing plenty of havocs where it was brought to life, and creating welath for the few at the cost of the many facing the dirty side of it. Many of the goals you aim at I find not desirable at all, and the way you want to acchieve them I find unrealistic, and I see myself being confirmed by realities in that assessement. You always criticise the evil political caste and the state, but you are totally ignoring that this political caste especially in the Anglosaxon world, namely America, is that way you label it due to massive influence by that economical system having had many of the freedoms your demand for it. The policies you complain about - are to quite some degree the exact result of the theory you defend. Nevertheless you see no reason to question the economic side of things. And when you imply, in the above, that business that makes it's income with the business of war, nevertheless has an interest in peace and when you totally ignore how business influences political decisions and that the war 2003 last but not least was launched massively by lobbying of major parts of the economic system in the US and close relations between a dumb president and his business buddies to whom he owed (going much beyond Haliburton and Carlyle Group) and you seriously assume that the policy-making remains unimpressed by huge mercenary-companies and this thing that is called the industrial-military complex (Eisenhower) that is a major pillar of the american economy and has never been driven back since WWII, in fact seems to increase - well, then i am simply so stunned that I cannot imagine any argument any more that would have use here. Because in my perception you are too much, too totally off the reality that I live in.

If positions are too far apart, discussion not only makes no sense, but is not even possible. Your description of the sky does not match the colours and clouds that I see when looking up there. We have had long, good and friendly talks in the past, and we certainly can speak again on profane things or do some chess etc etc, but another debate on these things will only see you having a monologue i cannot connect to, and me wondering how two so extremely different planets can exist in just one place. Not to mention that it would be repetitive and very time-consuming.

Again, no offence meant, but we could not be any more apart on many things. That's why I have stopped replying to your posts.

01-05-10, 07:10 AM	#11
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,687 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	We have been there, Lance. What you say is not something new, it is old-fashioned classical economy theory, that's how it is called over here, "klassische Wirtschafts-Theorie". It is part of history courses in any economical studying at university - with the accent on "history". And not only do I think this theory is wrong, but it has been demonstrated to be wrong and dysfunctional since decades, causing plenty of havocs where it was brought to life, and creating welath for the few at the cost of the many facing the dirty side of it. Many of the goals you aim at I find not desirable at all, and the way you want to acchieve them I find unrealistic, and I see myself being confirmed by realities in that assessement. You always criticise the evil political caste and the state, but you are totally ignoring that this political caste especially in the Anglosaxon world, namely America, is that way you label it due to massive influence by that economical system having had many of the freedoms your demand for it. The policies you complain about - are to quite some degree the exact result of the theory you defend. Nevertheless you see no reason to question the economic side of things. And when you imply, in the above, that business that makes it's income with the business of war, nevertheless has an interest in peace and when you totally ignore how business influences political decisions and that the war 2003 last but not least was launched massively by lobbying of major parts of the economic system in the US and close relations between a dumb president and his business buddies to whom he owed (going much beyond Haliburton and Carlyle Group) and you seriously assume that the policy-making remains unimpressed by huge mercenary-companies and this thing that is called the industrial-military complex (Eisenhower) that is a major pillar of the american economy and has never been driven back since WWII, in fact seems to increase - well, then i am simply so stunned that I cannot imagine any argument any more that would have use here. Because in my perception you are too much, too totally off the reality that I live in. If positions are too far apart, discussion not only makes no sense, but is not even possible. Your description of the sky does not match the colours and clouds that I see when looking up there. We have had long, good and friendly talks in the past, and we certainly can speak again on profane things or do some chess etc etc, but another debate on these things will only see you having a monologue i cannot connect to, and me wondering how two so extremely different planets can exist in just one place. Not to mention that it would be repetitive and very time-consuming. Again, no offence meant, but we could not be any more apart on many things. That's why I have stopped replying to your posts. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.