This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Is War Necessary?

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by mickeyman of World Complex blog,

Autoritärerdammerung!

 

A recent article discusses an old document (the "Report from Iron Mountain") supposedly written by a committee of academics, explaining why war was necessary as an organizing principle of society. Supposedly these academics decided that if warfare didn't exist it would either have to be invented, or some replacement found. Numerous suggestions are made (the report can be found here).

The report finds difficulties in worldwide disarmament. The problem reiterates an old economic fallacy, which I am certain has been exploded by Bastiat previously. The pamphlet assumes that if there is no longer demand for weapons, missile systems, and the like, then all the poor employees of the companies that make such products will have to be retrained and put to work in some other (centrally planned enterprise) - suggestions included (but were not restricted to): 1) a worldwide program to improve human welfare; 2) endless space exploration; 3) a minutely detailed program of disarmament with forced inspections; 4) the creation of an omniscient, omnipotent global police force; 5) a desperate program to reverse global environmental catastrophe. Other options were offered as well.

I can see why this document is viewed as a hoax. Why replace our economic model of endless warfare with these alternates when we can have the endless war and the alternates?

The real problem with this document (and what gives it the whiff of truth in my opinion) is that it assumes an authoritarian framework. This premise is never stated, but it permeates the entire work. The document never considers that people might be able to make decisions on their own. Instead, the document would have us believe that war is a force gives us meaning.

Is it natural that war be a central organizing force, or is this a conclusion that has been forced upon us by our "betters"?

The trouble with authoritarians is that they believe that they can make any part of our human or cultural systems reflect the "reality" that they create. For instance--as covered in this blog before--Keynesian economics suggests that low interest rates automatically lower the unemployment rate. Empirical observations indicate that such is not the case, yet the Keynesians continue to set economic policy in accordance with their flawed assumptions. Such pig-headedness is akin to a physicist claiming that gravity could be made to fall off with the cube of the distance, given sufficient funding, and that the benefits of the new result would more than justify the costs.

In a free society, capital which was no longer being used to build complex weapon systems would be used for other purposes, as directed and desired by customers. I don't know, and probably can't imagine how the capital would be used, but that isn't actually necessary as it is better for the economy if I don't try to direct it. That is the key point missed by the authors. The capital would be used. It isn't necessary to direct it.

I frequently get a sense of frustration from the writings of some of these economists when they fret about the suboptimal strategy of, say, handmaking furniture as opposed to churning out by the container load out of some factory. The argument is about efficiency, and survival of the fittest. However, one of the things that we observe from nature is that all sorts of critters pursue what appear to our eyes to be suboptimal strategies--but here they are. They have persisted to the present day because their survival strategies are optimal when the environment is different than it is today.

Nature thrives from diversity. Diversity is what gives nature strength and ecosystems their resilience. Despite numerous attempts, we have not succeeded in creating a stable biosphere. Our limited understanding suggests that a functioning biosphere needs a lot of different types of plants and animals, and the more different types, the more stable it is likely to be.

Part of the stability is due to the presence of the suboptimal organisms, some of which really shine when climate suddenly changes, or lots of volcanoes erupt and make the sea acidic.

If autonomous political systems were organized along the same lines as natural systems, there would be a range of sizes from very small to very large. The organization on a global scale is not natural--it is shaped by a historical reality that large political entities have a military advantage over smaller ones--France and Spain vs Italian city-states, for example. The authoritarian vision appears to be to create a larger political union still.

But the end is coming for them. We have entered the twilight of their vision. It is the same fear that motivates the Report from Iron Mountain. The system is too complex to be controlled. Back then the authorities said they feared chaos breaking out over the necessary changes to the economy that would follow from a transition to perpetual peace. In reality they feared the loss of control.

The potential for the loss of control is magnified by the aspirations of billions of people, who can now contact one another directly free of authoritarian oversight. The authoritarians cannot control the future.

Instead they must accept there is nothing to do but watch it unfold.

Like this . . .

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:05 | 2740897 Black Markets
Black Markets's picture

Yes

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:13 | 2740907 i-dog
i-dog's picture

Bullshit! War is not necessary...just desired (by TPTB).

It's an excellent essay!

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:36 | 2740917 strannick
strannick's picture

"The real problem with this document (and what gives it the whiff of truth in my opinion) is that it assumes an authoritarian framework. This premise is never stated, but it permeates the entire work".

-That was my impression also. They assumed that the existing power paradigm was ideal must be maintained at any cost, and so war was their cost.

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 02:04 | 2742840 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

War is needed to fund research into new weapons and systems.  There is usually some kind of spin off of the technology which then is expected to create a new economic expansion.  In the meantime, a lot of people who need to be killed off (as well as those who do not need to be killed off), are killed.  War also redistributes wealth and power.

 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:19 | 2740918 MillionDollarBonus_
MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

War IS necessary. Along with statism, entral planning and redistribution of wealth. All these things are part of HUMAN NATURE, so there is no point in trying to argue against them. Libertarians need to simply deal with it and stop trying to change how the world works. Ok?

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:38 | 2740965 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Absolutely. And do not forget, people who do not suscribe to this point of view are not human beings. Because this is the 'American' point of view and therefore the point of view of REAL human beings.

Signed: an American.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:06 | 2741034 n8dawg84
n8dawg84's picture

How appropriate that you share this in response to MDB.  Ya know, I bet he would come as close as anyone to truly representing your idea of US Citizenism.  It's quite funny, actually.  Make me laugh!

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:19 | 2741065 Cortez the Killer
Cortez the Killer's picture

Not only is war necessary, it is preferable to peace

Search your feelings, real Men, you know it to be true

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:31 | 2741112 otto skorzeny
otto skorzeny's picture

when I don't pay a dime in taxes from my labors to support war-then I will fully support it-as long as it is not myself or my kids doing the fighting

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:38 | 2741138 strannick
strannick's picture

And no one else gets killed. Then Im also all for war.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:46 | 2741327 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

An old saying seems apropros:

"It's a rich man's war but a poor man's fight."


 
Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:48 | 2741491 WhiteNight123129
WhiteNight123129's picture

The question is not if war is necessary because it is never. It is always a non pareto result where the sum of gain from the winner and loss from the loser is negative. It is a nash equilbrium where the rulers role dice. If they do not go to war they can lose power, but that might be good for the people under their rule (but they do not care about that). If they go to war two outcomes possible (either they lose everything, or they stay in power), the outcome might be utter destruction for the people they rule, or partial destruction, in hte last case the ruler stays in power. So net net, if faced with internal problems the rulers have a tendency to try to throw dice with war to try to find an escape, even if this dice throwing has net probablity weighted value which is negative for their people, for hte rulers it has a positive one. It is a bit like a CEO with tons of out of the money stock options, if he levers like crazy, the company can go bust or can double, in one case the stock options are worthless in the other they are worth something, but if the CEO is prudent, his stock options will stay out of hte money anyway.... I think we should send rulers like in the old days in front of the army on a horse, this way they might have the downside of being reckless as well, and the CEOs should be granted stock with 0 strike prices, this way they would not gamble.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:25 | 2741090 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

I bet he would come as close as anyone to truly representing your idea of US Citizenism.

_________________

Plenty of fine specimens of 'Americanism' on this site.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:53 | 2741308 akak
akak's picture

And one utterly perfect example of dishonest, autistic, retarded, roadside-shitting, puppy-munching Chinese Citizenism, whose trolling nature is apparently eternal.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:00 | 2741363 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

akak, you and TheFourthStooge-ing always make my day just a little bit brighter.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 16:56 | 2741935 MillionDollarBoner_
MillionDollarBoner_'s picture

Ah...but - you presume MDB and AnAnon are not one and the same...;o)

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:10 | 2741042 Vince Clortho
Vince Clortho's picture

Therapy is your friend.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:26 | 2741096 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

.

Therapy is your friend.

Ah, but our narcissistic little Chinese citizenism citizen friend will never seek therapy. It is not he who has the problem, it is the rest of the world.

His brilliance is beyond comprehension, after all.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:40 | 2741143 Dixie Rect
Dixie Rect's picture

MDB, Is "entral" planning the same as entrail planning?

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 07:47 | 2743055 Ar-Pharazôn
Ar-Pharazôn's picture

i really hope you was sarcastic in this comment.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:12 | 2741043 XitSam
XitSam's picture

See? MDB_ is not a troll, he writes satire. He's had to become a bit, to be honest, quite a bit more blatant about it lately.

AnAnon doesn't get it yet though.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:17 | 2741058 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

And signing: an American is what?

'Americans' are funny people in their duplicity.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:30 | 2741111 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

AnAnonymous said:

And signing: an American is what?

'Americans' are funny people in their duplicity.

Yes, yes, your duplicity is certainly amusing. Ever consider a career as a stand-up comedian?

That is a show I would not want to miss.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:43 | 2741317 akak
akak's picture

 

Ever consider a career as a stand-up comedian?

In Chinese Citizenism, comedianism is more of the squat-down variety.

And after the comedy, the wiping, oh, the wiping ...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:24 | 2741626 Oldrepublic
Oldrepublic's picture

good opportunities for stand up comedians in Dubai

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19376964

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 16:41 | 2741901 monad
monad's picture

Send Achmed, they'll like him.

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 01:30 | 2742822 forexskin
forexskin's picture

And after the comedy, the wiping, oh, the wiping ...

and the idiot probably considers that a left handed complement - knowing of course what that left hand is full of...

true ananonymous nature!

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:00 | 2741354 Disenchanted
Disenchanted's picture

 

 

 

"entral planning"

 

Did you mean entrail planning(aka extispicy or haruspicy) MDB?

That would fit in with a Babylonian/Caananite influenced govt..

 

No (hot)Wars? TPTB Plan B:

Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars (also employed in conjunction with hot wars)

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 18:41 | 2742139 Liberty2012
Liberty2012's picture

MDB

I think you have that backwards.

Do you really think people work together because they are forced to? That free will does not exist?

Who or what prevents choice? Who or what is controlling you?

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 07:44 | 2743054 Ar-Pharazôn
Ar-Pharazôn's picture

looooool

 

i bet you're an american brainwashed product of the system

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 16:07 | 2741801 Treeplanter
Treeplanter's picture

Exp;ain that to the jihadis.  Submit or die. 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:15 | 2740913 Race Car Driver
Race Car Driver's picture

> Yes

Magic 8 Ball agrees.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:14 | 2741048 daz
daz's picture

No

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:26 | 2741260 Gringo Viejo
Gringo Viejo's picture

"War is the health of the State".....Randolph Bourne, 1918

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 07:51 | 2743058 Ar-Pharazôn
Ar-Pharazôn's picture

in a TRUE democracy, the State are the citizien, so NO war IS NOT the wealth of the state

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:06 | 2740899 Money By Trading
Money By Trading's picture

My weekly review of gold and the dollar here:

http://wp.me/p2CT0a-4l

War is necessary for the state, not for you.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:32 | 2741279 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Precisely

 

"Whether the mask is labelled Fascism, Democracy, or Dictatorship of the Proletariat, our great adversary remains the Apparatus—the bureaucracy, the police, the military. Not the one facing us across the frontier or the battlelines, which is not so much our enemy as our brother's enemy, but the one that calls itself our protector and makes us its slaves. No matter what the circumstances, the worst betrayal will always be to subordinate ourselves to this Apparatus, and to trample underfoot, in its service, all human values in ourselves and in others."
— Simone Weil, Politics, Spring 1945

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:11 | 2740906 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

Largely silliness.

Wars recent (including WW II in the Pacific) have been about oil (Japan was desperate for it after the 1945 US oil embargo of Japan).

This isn't going to change.  It's going to get worse.  Hand waving about complex systems and who makes arms doesn't mean a whole lot if planes can't get fuel.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:18 | 2741055 XitSam
XitSam's picture

I believe it was July 1941 US oil embargo of Japan. WWII ended in 1945.

But let's take two major US actions since WWII, Korea and Vietnam, were they about oil?

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:08 | 2741384 Disenchanted
Disenchanted's picture

 

 

How about both Iraq wars...if those were about oil how much of that oil is hitting the markets?

 

Maybe the PNAC agenda had more influence than oil in our current and very recent past 'kinetic actions.' I know heretical to some.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:15 | 2741402 XitSam
XitSam's picture

I didn't say the Gulf wars weren't about oil.

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 07:53 | 2743062 Ar-Pharazôn
Ar-Pharazôn's picture

and tell me if not for economic reasons, what were these 2 wars for?

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:13 | 2740908 LostWages
LostWages's picture

war is needed in order to find a scapegoat to blame and direct the anger away from those seeking to retain their power.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:37 | 2740964 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Monkey War.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:16 | 2740912 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

There will always be a group of people who try to exercise control over another group of people. It has been that way since the dawn of time and it will not change now or ever, it will only grow worse as resources grow scarce.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:37 | 2740948 LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

Dr. Engali :There will always be a group of people who try to exercise control over another group of people. It has been that way since the dawn of time and it will not change now or ever, it will only grow worse as resources grow scarce"

 

If that is the case then war is sometimes necessary unless you want to be ruled by Dictators correct?  Look at the history of gun control and the toll it has taken on those who gave up their weapons for example.

 

Innocents Betrayed - Gun Control History - Genocide Disarming Populations

 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:40 | 2740972 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Agreed. You will never hear me argue for any compromise on gun freedom for that very same reason.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:15 | 2740914 Robot Traders Mom
Robot Traders Mom's picture

Is War Necessary?

 

Well, if you enjoy the same group that funds them-banks, then yes.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:54 | 2741006 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

I laugh my ass off everytime some fucking idiot [usually driving a Prius & looking like Max Fisher] cuts me off in traffic, so then I see their "WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER" bumper sticker... It pretty much synthesizes the whole conundrum into one microsecond of time...

WTF ever...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:29 | 2741106 otto skorzeny
otto skorzeny's picture

great generalization- so someone that drives a fuel-efficient car is usually a more aggressive driver? actually i find this type of car/driver combo the more courteous on the road and it is usually the lil' blonde soccer mom in her hulking Escalade/Tahoe/Denali/ SUV/substitute dick  tailgating me and cutting me off

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:58 | 2741197 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

The lil blonde soccer mom in the Denali doesn't have the "WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER" bumper sticker...

She has the little decals that show what sport her little future indoctrinated shit is currently playing (along with the one that says that, in fact, the same little shit, is an horor roll student at the local elementary school [which, these days, means that they're probably destined to end with a government job])...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:04 | 2741375 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

Starting to sound like the Democrat vs. Republican debate here.

Do either of you think it's possible that BOTH of them are part of the problem..?

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:54 | 2741756 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

It wasn't blue vs. red until you brought it up (still isn't ~ for that matter)...

~~~

From my perch, it was... IDIOT FOS people, who haven't a clue, vs. ones that do... (so for that matter ~ I guess it actually WAS blue vs. red ~ as in PILL)... If you want to drag donkeys & elephants into it, be my guest...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:19 | 2740919 MrBoompi
MrBoompi's picture

Although I don't believe war, in and of itself, is necessary, it seems to be a trait of human beings that has been with us since the dawn mankind.  Our ancestors probably fought over territory and food.

I think war is the logical outcome of several human traits and instincts, namely greed and the desire to own more stuff than your neighbor (capitalism), as well as our fear of strangers.

While sharing and helping each other would bring peace, we are told this is not freedom.  It is a socialism, and a cancer on society.

 

 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:23 | 2740927 i_call_you_my_base
i_call_you_my_base's picture

Many cultures are egalitarian and do not covet neighbors' possessions. In order to understand instrinsic human nature one must look back to how humans organized through evolution, because that's what has got us here. Viewing human nature through the lens of the last 2k years is not the view that's worth exploring.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:11 | 2741221 lightning
lightning's picture

No offense, but human nature is human nature.  Humans since the beginning of time have developed societies that like you point out are "egalitarian" BUT I disagree with the assertion that they "do not covet neighbors' possessions.  Please, identify this group because after several years and an advanced degree in this subject, I am not aware of them.  Humans will form cohesive groups that can be egalitarian, but when a need within the group arises that cannot be met within the group, the group targets folks outside that group.  Humans do not need fancy or intricate weapons, financial systems, or philosophies to covet, rob, dominate, or otherwise make other people miserable.  This thought process is no different than an old person believing, "Them were the good 'ol days.  Folks were polite, moral, and cared about each other".  The only difference is time (50 years vs. 2K years).  As a famous comedian once said, you can fix a bad ticker, you can make a fat chick thin, but you can't fix stupid".  I would add that you can't "fix" human nature.  The only true solution is to acknowledge it in both its beauty and its horror and prepare for both. 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:37 | 2741664 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

"The only true solution is to acknowledge it in both its beauty and its horror and prepare for both. "

 

Best comment on here.

And I would add, "government" must be broken down in size dramatically.

Small concentrations of power:
N55 ABOUT ideologies - http://bit.ly/PnkjAi

"Concentrations of power do not always respect the rights of persons. If one denies this fact one gets: concentrations of power always respect the rights of persons. This does not correspond with our experiences. Concentrations of power characterize our society. Concentrations of power force persons to concentrate on participating in competition and power games, in order to create a social position for themselves. Concurrently with the concentrations of power dominating our conscious mind and being decisive to our situations, the significance of our fellow humans diminishes. And our own significance becomes the significance we have for concentrations of power, the growth of concentrations of power, and the conflicts of concentrations of power.
It is clear that persons should be consciously aware of the rights of persons and therefore must seek to organize the smallest concentrations of power possible."

 

The minute you allow the state (or other entity) to gain anything but basic power, horror ensues.
Either by banality of evil...or by outright warmongering.
The state must be totally restrained and limited.

 

First things first though:

"It is clear that persons should be consciously aware of the rights of persons and therefore must seek to organize the smallest concentrations of power possible."

Who is not aware of the rights of persons? True psychopaths maybe?
The law and ruling "system" must be designed so that persons who don't respect (the rights of other) humans cannot hijack the system. 

The "founding fathers" missed that memo. They failed.

Canadian Robert Hare designed a physical test to spot psychopaths. It works.
We only lack the desire to submit *every* applicant to *every* public office (and the military!) to it.

Fail the test? Banned from consideration permanently. In under 10 years you could have this mess cleaned up.

 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:50 | 2740995 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Sharing and helping each other is fine.There isn't much stopping you from doing that. Government mandating it is socialism and that's where the problems lie.

"Everything government touches turns to crap."  Ringo Starr

 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:06 | 2741033 JR
JR's picture

Put another way by William E. von Ketteler: "Slavery comes to life again: the state an assemblage of slaves without personal liberty -- that is Socialism."

It is wise to remember that the "iron curtain" death strip that divided freedom in the West from slavery in the East -- manned by guns and search lights, watchdogs and rolled barbed wire and cement  -- was put there to keep people in, not out. 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:34 | 2741128 robobbob
robobbob's picture

Reaching into your pockets, or better yet, getting your hands dirty to help someone in need is an admirable trait, and completely within the confines of free market, and libertarian ideas.

Socialism is just the softer, velvetier glove over the iron fist of oppression. At the end of the day, regardless of their flowery rhetoric, someone runs the socialist system. And those someones always make sure that their friends get first pick of the spoils. And they will do whatever is necessary to keep it that way.

Having the government stick a gun in your face to take what you have to distribute it as they deem fit is robbery. Do not think for a moment that that gun is not there. You may not see it, buts its there. Try not paying your taxes and see what happens. When the lies start getting exposed or the coffers run dry, the socialists start oppressing people and creating wars just as quick as any other power structure.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:16 | 2741230 lightning
lightning's picture

You hit the nail on the head!  I would also add, that in the esoteric mind unconstrained by reality communism and socialism are beautiful ideas.  Living in peace, sharing resources, etc. sounds great.  Unfortunately, it all goes to hell because human nature is such that there will always be those who don't contribute, who steal, and who attempt to dominate the others.  The refusal of many to accept that human nature is prone to theiving, domination, and sloth are why the world is such a mess.  BTW, please note that I also believe humans are capable of great kindness.  Unfortunately, this capacity for goodness does not eradicate the other more problematic behaviors.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:14 | 2741397 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

FYI, voluntary socialism (e.g. Mondragon corp.) works great.  Key point there is VOLUNTARY.

I gave you an upvote anyway, though.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:40 | 2741704 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

Keep psychopaths out with the physical test designed by Robert Hare and you have an answer for world peace.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:19 | 2740921 InconvenientCou...
InconvenientCounterParty's picture

Conflict isn't necessary, but it's inevitable in this particular closed system. Primates will operate in a similar, albeit scaled down pattern if resources are constrained.

It's the memes that are capable of superhuman and planetary action. Like a hurricane on open, warm water.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:36 | 2740959 CH1
CH1's picture

Crime may come from individuals, but Wars come from states.

Always has been; always will be so long as stupid humans obey "leaders" and allow states to rule the world.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:45 | 2741725 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

"always will be so long as stupid humans obey "leaders"

 

Mentally defective leaders. Lacking natural empathy.
We need to stick them on their own Escape From NY island.

Robert Hare designed the test. We lack the will to use it.

The Voight-Kampff test situation from Blade Runner could be made real.
It would take the worst elements out of our society. Would have to be applied with the utmost integrity.

 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:21 | 2740923 Alcoholic Nativ...
Alcoholic Native American's picture

My portfolio says yes.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:22 | 2740925 q99x2
q99x2's picture

Arrest the elite and throw them into prisons until hung. FSB Central Banks bullshit.

Open Source the monetary system. Make it a closed system. Redistribute the stolen wealth into the new system and laws only by referendum. No need for war, politicians, banks, or to have life wasted by greed.

Fuckin stupid inbred degenerate animal elite m'fers.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:24 | 2740929 machineh
machineh's picture

Report from Iron Mountain offers a thesis that was common in the Sixties: namely, that a relentless economic surplus must be 'bled off' in nonproductive activities in order to keep the system stable.

Like the 1960s notion that we would all be leading lives of leisure by now, flitting round in our hovercraft, the thesis is ridiculous.

The serious part of Iron Mountain is the insight that we always need an external bogeyman. Communism, environmental degradation and alien attacks are all discussed. But that was before our overlords hit the jackpot with TERRORISM, the threat that never goes away (especially when you keep funding it).

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:25 | 2740932 Chupacabra-322
Chupacabra-322's picture

Is War Necessary?  For the Criminal Elite Banksters it is.  Their goal.  Total Complete Full Spectrum World Domination.  Slave.

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 01:41 | 2742829 forexskin
forexskin's picture

guess no one will point out that war in defence against those who would enslave us is in some measure a just war?

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:25 | 2740933 mrktwtch2
mrktwtch2's picture

someday..but as long as the defense companies can buy the government..its here to stay..why do you think that in 1947 we could have ruled the world because we were the only one with the a bomb..but there is no money to be made that way..lol

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:30 | 2740942 Curt W
Curt W's picture

I thought war was population control.

In fact I think alot of the random shootings are because the shooters are feeling the pressure of overpopulation.

A group has more people than it can feed so they say war is for more territory, but it in fact reduces the population on both sides of the fight. 

In nature many species  have a higher incidence of homosexuality when there are population pressures, and this is currently happening in our species.

We need a good war for the sake of the species.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:52 | 2741744 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

No, laws created by men..either psychopaths themselves...or willingly duped to join them, are the reason for ALL pressures.

There is plenty of land and plenty of water.

Who in their right mind makes laws that criminalize lemonade stands?
Goes after farmers selling raw milk?
Kids growing pot plants?

A psychopath. Or groups influenced by them. That's who.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:45 | 2740945 falak pema
falak pema's picture

War is the expression of an expansionist strategy. Do empires or corporates have to keep expanding?

Based on historical observation one can say it is in the nature of human aspirations. So its recurrent trend.

Is it also an expression of forces stronger than ourselves which feed our inner core impulses hidden to our cognitive senses; aka the hidden faustian face of man? 

I wouldn't know that, to assume that the big bang universal principle feeds incessantly our own individual and thus collective value systems, inspite of our inner cognitive rational thoughts and outer societal brakes of checks and balances. We will always have the urge to press on the accelerator, as its beyond our control, this primal urge. 

Is man preprogrammed to thus be his own nemesis by falling always into hubris? To be thus chastised of his own irrepressible primal urge recurrently by his own peers?

Your guess as good as mine!

Sisyphus would think so ! He never leaves his hill; like a football player his pitch. 

Having said that this is our understanding of western civilization since Mesopotamian times. There have been peaceful, autarcic, eco-friendly, alternative cultured, tribal civilzations in forest and remote regions, aka amerindians, but they did not withstand the corruptive urge of what we call "our civilization's" heavy footed imprint. 

Maybe we will have to revert to their mode of civilization; but after the next deluge! 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:33 | 2740951 lolmao500
lolmao500's picture

The only war needed should be against statists, warmongerers, corrupt politicians/businessmen and government/corporations propagandists.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:34 | 2740953 hootowl
hootowl's picture

The state must have a boogyman, a promoted threat to the welfare of the citizens, in order to convince them to tolerate the repression and criminality of the leadership.  If there is no real natural enemy or threat, the state must create one through surreptitious economic misbehavior against a targeted entity, thus eliciting a justified angry response from the abused entity, or failing an adequate response from the targeted entiry, the state can secretly institute a false flag, murderous attack upon the citizens of the state using its own resources, laying a fictive trail to the targeted entity.  Thus presenting the citizens with an existential threat created by the state itself to grow its deception and control of the citizens.

Re: Oklahoma City, 9/11, Gulf of Tonkin, etc.

hootowl

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:45 | 2740980 Fix It Again Timmy
Fix It Again Timmy's picture

Well, if I dislike my neighbors and have a house full of armaments, can I, with impunity, raze his home and kill his family even though they have not physically harmed me nor are capable of doing so?  Well, what gives the cretins in Washington, D.C. the right to?  If you don't like your neighbors, be patient - either you will die or they will die - thus, problem solved...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:22 | 2741079 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

If your neighbour is not an 'American', is not a human being, yes, you can.

Our 'American' ancestors to We the People performed that profusely. Yes, we can.

Choose your neighbour wisely. Good neighbour is a scarce commodity these days though...

Signed: an American.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:35 | 2741130 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

AnAnonymous said:

Choose your neighbour wisely. Good neighbour is a scarce commodity these days though...

Especially if one is a Chinese citizenism citizen that has blobbed up into France and yet is still crapping on the roadside and wokking the neighborhood dogs.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:59 | 2741202 Intoxicologist
Intoxicologist's picture

LOL, beat me to it.

OnAndOnymous neighbors: long pooper scoopers and short dogs.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:45 | 2740983 Cardinal Fang
Cardinal Fang's picture

My 85 pound, purebred, all black, German Shepherd pup believes that aggression reduces uncertainty.

I think Chimpanzees have the same set of beliefs.

Complexity leads to uncertainty, which, in turn, leads to aggression.

So, if complexity is relative to sophistication, then so is aggression.

seems pretty straightforward to me.

We are just a bunch of thug monkeys.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:31 | 2741116 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

Arrogant thug monkeys who think they have conquered the world.

A REAL challenge (such as a global natural disaster) would prove just how pathetically fragile we really are.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:19 | 2741412 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

My 85 pound, INbred, all black, German Shepherd pup believes that aggression reduces uncertainty.

Fixed it, and it should now be self-explanatory.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:49 | 2740989 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

War "Is"... Period(s)...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:50 | 2740998 Whoa Dammit
Whoa Dammit's picture

War is only necessary for those who think like General Jack D. Ripper.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:56 | 2741009 marcusfenix
marcusfenix's picture

"War Ensemble"

[Hanneman/Araya]

Propaganda death ensemble
Burial to be
Corpses rotting through the night
In blood laced misery
Scorched earth the policy
The reason for the siege
The pendulum it shaves the blade
The strafing air blood raid

Infiltration push reserves
Encircle the front lines
Supreme art of strategy
Playing on the minds
Bombard till submission
Take all to their graves
Indication of triumph
The number that are dead

[CHORUS]
Sport the war, war support
The sport is war, total war
When victory's a massacre
The final swing is not a drill
It's how many people I can kill

[CHORUS]

Be dead friend from above
When darkness falls
Descend into my sights
Your fallen walls
Spearhead break through the lines
Flanked all around
Soldiers of attriction
Forward their ground
Regime prophetic age
Old in its time
Flowing veins run on through
Deep in the Rhine
Center of the web
All battles scored
What is our war crimes
(Era forever more...war)

Propaganda war ensemble
Burial to be
Bones shining in the night
In blood laced misery
Campaign of elimination
Twisted psychology
When victory is to survive
And death is defeat

[CHORUS]
Sport the war, war support
The sport is war, total war
When the end is a slaughter
The final swing is not a drill
It's how many people I can kill

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 16:51 | 2741916 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

"Let's Have a War!"

by Fear [1982]

 

[Chorus:]
There's so many of us
There's so many of us
There's so many [x2]
There's so many of us
There's so many of us
There's so many

Let's have a war
So you can go and die!
Let's have a war!
We could all use the money!
Let's have a war!
We need the space!
Let's have a war!
Clean out this place!

It already started in the city!
Suburbia will be just as easy!

[Chorus]

Let's have a war!
Jack up the Dow Jones!
Let's have a war!
It can start in New Jersey!
Let's have a war!
Blame it on the middle-class!
Let's have a war!
We're like rats in a cage!

It already started in the city!
Suburbia will be just as easy!

[Chorus]

Let's have a war!
Sell the rights to the networks!
Let's have a war!
Let our wallets get fat like last time!
Let's have a war!
Give guns to the queers!
Let's have a war!
The enemy's within!

It already started in the city!
Suburbia will be just as easy!

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:57 | 2741016 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

'Americanism' pervades everything and has destroyed any thinking process.

So 'Americans' have kept selling the idea of their perpetual growth.

To them, humanity is divided into two categories:
-people who can overcome their environment: 'Americans' for whom more consumption only begets even more consumption in the future.
-people who fail to overcome their environment and are doomed in living in a scarcer and scarcer environment.

This paradigm leads to the ecological conclusion of the document, which is false.
In 'American' economics, war can be seen as a way to balance a population and the resources.

War is a way to speed up toward resources depletion.

'American' wars have allowed the change of property from people who could consume their resources slowly to people who could consume the resources very fast.

Cornered. There cant be balancing of population vs resources.

No matter how they turn it, 'Americanism' forces 'Americans' to consider that in an overconsumption situation, the non consumer, the low consumer is the issue, not the ever more consuming big consumer. As by definition, this big consumer knows how to overcome the environment, consumption issues can not exist for him.

Due to 'Americanism', wars are indeed necessary. In order to chase the ever decreasing return of a successful theft.

At first, you've got the Indians who owned entire continents, while slowly consuming it.
Those populations were ousted by 'Americans' who have been consuming the continents much, much faster.
'Americans' are doomed to seek new targets to rob from to maintain their momentum and as the 'american' consumption is ever increasing.

No balancing of population here: on the contrary, an ever increasing disequilibrium.

'Americans', having thieved so much environment, have troubles with the natural environment.

Ecologically, balancing populations out does not happen by wars. It happens through starvation.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:38 | 2741137 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

AnAnonymous, raving and drooling again, said:

'Americanism' pervades everything and has destroyed any thinking process.

It certainly has in your case.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:46 | 2741329 akak
akak's picture

Damn, that was one fecally-contaminated stream of consciousness.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:06 | 2741379 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

akak said:

Damn, that was one fecally-contaminated stream of consciousness.

It was an extreme blobbing up, followed by a gut blowout. Forget the roadside, the entire damned road has been buried with his insanitation.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 16:03 | 2741785 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

"At first, you've got the Indians who owned entire continents, while slowly consuming it.
Those populations were ousted by 'Americans' who have been consuming the continents much, much faster.
'Americans' are doomed to seek new targets to rob from to maintain their momentum and as the 'american' consumption is ever increasing."

Yes. But it was THE ENGLISH (so called Puritans) that came to take over the continent.

Disbelievers....ask Francis Bacon about it when you get to see him. Possibly in hell.

The New Atlantis indeed.

Blame them. They are still running the show (aka monetary system).

 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 11:58 | 2741019 JR
JR's picture

Peace, say the tyrants, cannot be sustained.

“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class…involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and ‘convenience’ foods, ownership of motor-vehicles, numerous electric household appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning…expansive suburban housing…are not sustainable.” -- Maurice Strong, opening speech at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit (one of the wealthiest men in the world with great personal wealth derived from the oil industry cashing in on Chicago Climate Exchange)

The Report From Iron Mountain should now be considered…not a dark hoax, conspiracy theory or paranoid suspicious plot…but as nothing less than the grand curtain opening for the merger of the United States into world government on the basis of equality with the lowest economic commom denominator.

The Report, released in 1966 and produced by the Hudson Institute, founded and directed by CFR member Herman Kahn formerly of the Rand Corporation, was a fitting prelude for the climate change conference in Copenhagen.

That secret report, confirmed by Harvard professor John Kenneth Galbraith at the time who said he knew first hand of the report’s authenticity, stipulated that in order to create a world government disciplined by a world army and a disarmed people, a credible global threat must be found--one that threatens the entire world. And if one was not found, one must be invented.

In the Report’s own words: “Allegiance requires a cause, a cause requires an enemy.  This much is obvious; the critical point is the enemy that defines the cause must seem genuinely formidable.”

G. Edward Griffin who reviewed the Report in 1994 said, “The final candidate for a useful global threat was pollution of the environment.  This was viewed as the most likely to succeed because it could be related to observable conditions such as smog and water pollution—in other words, it would be based partly on fact and, therefore, credible…

“Their purpose would be to frighten, not to inform.  It might even be necessary to deliberately poison the environment…. The masses would more willingly accept a falling standard of living, tax increases, and bureaucratic intervention in their lives as simply ‘the price we must pay to save Mother Earth.’”

According to Griffin, the Report was commissioned by then Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. It reads:  “It may be that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species…[W]e must emphasize that one must be found of credible quality and magnitude, if a transition to peace is ever to come about without social disintegration.  It is more probable, in our judgment, that such a threat will have to be invented.”

When the report was publicly leaked, then Special Assistant for National Security Affairs and CFR member Walt Rostow was quick to denounce it as a spurious work.  But on November 26, 1967, the report was reviewed in the book section of the Washington Post in News of War and Peace You’re Not Ready For by Herschel McLandress, the pen name for Galbraith, who said he had been invited to  participate in it.

As Griffin said then, and as verified now by ClimateGate,The Report From Iron Mountain has already created our present.  It is now shaping our future.”

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:51 | 2741035 Element
Element's picture

War is not a philosophical question, it is a practical reality.

Monkey troop A meets monkey troop B.

Mortal combat over territory and resources ensues.

If monkey troop A is smart, and it notices that the rocks on the side of their volcano, if banged together just right, can produce a sharp hard edge that can cut flesh and wood.

So Monkey troop A, being smart, more adept and more inclined to observe and test stuff, defeats all other monkey troops.

We know something like this happened with humanity over 2 million years ago because we actually have the stone axes, daggers type stone implements, and spear tips, etc.

This is what we really did.

This process raised our genes to a point where we go really good at this, and soon enough we got to now.

There's nothing philosophical about war, it is practical.

So more mortal combat over territory and resources ensues.

Which implies racism, for we presume the monkey that can't win and hold the territory and resources, must be inferior and weaker, so should be wiped out.

So the real answer is, not peace, for there will be none, but it is DETERRENCE.

And this is what "monkey troop-A" (let's call it FUKUS) fears the most of all.

That it will encounter a troop that is equally able to wipe the FUKUS troop out.

In which case, you must impose farcical legalities, sanctions, NPTs and CTBTs, with ad-hoc inspection regimes, and no-fly-zones and false-flag outrages, to try and destabilise other uppity monkey troops, to maintain the FUKUS monopoly on territorial and resource raids, pillaging, mass-murder, theft, torture, lack of Justice, rewriting of history, redrawing of territories, destruction of cultures, and general assorted utter wonton remorseless bastardry.

In which case, if actually DETERRED by equitable mutual destruction, they would be forced to behave, and to not exceed themselves in violence with the other troops.

Or else ... get mutually wiped-out.

And pretty soon all the lesser troops would support the DETERRER of monkey troop-A, and they would cooperate to make sure they could always wipe out monkey troop-A, at any moment, if they ever go on a colonial butchery spree again.

"... and they all lived happily ever after."

 

 
(well ... not so much)

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:16 | 2741407 Urban Roman
Urban Roman's picture

Now it's a nerd in a trailer with a joystick and computer screen, controlling a robot killer plane.

What does monkey troop-A think of them apples?

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:14 | 2741049 “Rebellion to t...
“Rebellion to tyranny is obedience to God.”-ThomasJefferson's picture

War is a game subscribed to by neanderthal maniacs who have a deep appreciation for the finer things in life; i.e...cheap energy, fearful work force, plentiful food supply, fine wine, world class art, etc. ALL FOR THEMSELVES! This ages old mentality of war at any cost helps the war architects immensely because they simply arrange for the bumpkins to simply kill each other off; hence  the poor dumb militants forfeit their generational opportunity to live their own lives and raise their own families.

The USA is the arms dealer to the world.    This great nation provides the credit, transportation, munitions, weapons, to rob you of your future.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:17 | 2741059 blueRidgeBoy
blueRidgeBoy's picture

surrender is always an alternative to war.  You first, pussies.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:37 | 2741136 JR
JR's picture

Steve Horton’s Radio Shows:

Central Banking and War: The state is evil, explains Lew Rockwell

Lew Rockwell, chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, discusses the government “gang of thieves writ large;” why “monetary policy” is just a fancy term for counterfeiting; the DHS’s new arsenal of hollow point rounds and bullet proof checkpoint booths; using laughter and ridicule to challenge unlawful authority; central banking and world wars; how government meddling increased costs in health care and education; and why Ron Paul’s epic speaking tour on liberty won’t end when he retires from Congress.

http://scotthorton.org/2012/08/20/82012-lew-rockwell/

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:48 | 2741164 Barack Obama
Barack Obama's picture

Give war a chance.

 

Obama\Stupid 2012 !

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 12:58 | 2741195 Fix It Again Timmy
Fix It Again Timmy's picture

Yah, here it is:

"Nazi leader Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18, quoted in Gilbert's book 'Nuremberg Diary.' Goering: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars. Goering: Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:18 | 2741235 UGrev
UGrev's picture

Whether it's necessary or not is irrelavant. War will exist for the forseeable future because we are human. You simply cannot argue against that point, so don't even try. 

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 01:16 | 2742808 UGrev
UGrev's picture

3 people are fucking clueless about humanity. 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:26 | 2741256 onebir
onebir's picture

'Nature thrives from [sic] diversity.'
So why does it produce species, which are relatively homogeneous?

Rhetoric, it appears, thrives on generalisation...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:30 | 2741275 bugs_
bugs_'s picture

World history - not just the history of Europe, not just the history of white men, not just the history of the United States - is written war to war.  When we go far enough back that the records aren't good we may only find information about war with approximate locations and approximate times.  The history of all mankind is war.  Death & Taxes....& War.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:44 | 2741320 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

".....supposedly written by a committee of academics"

GROAN!!!!  Come on please don't insult your readers!!!!!

The Report from Iron Mountain was written by Lewis who claimed in 1972 that it was a satirical hoax.  He later went on to successfully sue to gain copyright control over the report.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 13:46 | 2741330 Fix It Again Timmy
Fix It Again Timmy's picture

The central issue is who gets to create war and why and how they go about it?  If a small group of individuals consistently have the power and means to create war, then it will seem like a perpetual state of mankind - that is part of the message THEY want you to believe because it makes their work so much easier...

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 17:39 | 2741954 Oldrepublic
Oldrepublic's picture

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32503

Orwell's 1984 Solution to Criminalize War: “If There was Hope, it must Lie in the Proles”

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 14:27 | 2741439 DaveA
DaveA's picture

Conflict is a continuum from single murders to riots to regional war to world war. It's natural and inevitable because humans will always compete for mates and resources. I'm not against peace, but peace is the aberration.

Judicial institutions exist to resolve conflicts without violence. The Powers That Be prefer this, for they have the most to lose if the lead starts flying. But when the facts on the ground change faster than these institutions can adapt, the institutions break down.

Right now the event most likely to break the system is a total loss of confidence in fiat currency. The world will ultimately be better off with honest money, but the transition will be horrific.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:05 | 2741560 BarryG
BarryG's picture

Part of the problem, is who gets there first. Its pure empire stuff.

Germany is winning by the way.

http://www.germanywatch.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/europa-germanica-1940.html

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:41 | 2741708 bubbleburster
bubbleburster's picture

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/04/the-secret-history-of-secret-societies/256392/

Secret societies are as old as the human urge to keep secrets from the larger groups.  Was the great late Neil Armstrong a member of a secret society?  Many would say that he was and it is called NASA ('never a straight answer').  Why a secret society amongst the propeller heads?  Non-members (you and me) have created a reason and it goes like this: If any astronaut goes public with a full report on UFO / ET sightings / contact then they are    1) booted out of the society; 2) cut off from any new information about that contact; 3) maybe their lives will be shortened.  I've read this crap.  Anyway, was he a member of a secret group that conspires to lie to the public?  A sort of Cosmic Iron Mountain that might have included the late Carl Sagan?  Could be, maybe and more than probably "yes".  Buzz Aldrin has most recently come forward to reveal more and more details about what the astronauts always knew but were intimidated into remaining silent about. 

Other secret societies exist and we know the famous ones like the Builderburgers, etc.  The point of this post: this is human nature in action and is not in my view an abberation.  Those closest to certain facts look to maximize that information, knowing that it leads to power.  Bankers all the way back to the brilliant Rothchild's (especially the London maven) have known this.  So what?  Those who howl at groups who supposedly have secret knowledge do so out of fear and jealousy.  Were they in the opposite chair they would not waste a nano-second without putting safeguards around their knowledge and power.  This is the way we are. 

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 15:53 | 2741751 midtowng
midtowng's picture

There is no economic imperative for war, only political.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 16:03 | 2741793 bubbleburster
bubbleburster's picture

Not that I admire or like war, but I would disagree with your words.  I would say that it is entirely dependant on how close you are to the manufacturers that supply the war machine.  For example, during the Civil War, manufacturers in both the north and south grew vastly wealthy on supplying the means of death and you can multiply this by many factors for the WW2 period.  It might not benefit the nation economically; that much is known.  But, it is the life blood of industrialists who align themselves with war in a self serving way.  I.G. Farben was no different than Bell Labs and General Motors during the war.  They both benefitted for a time; Farben was then busted up much like ITT and ATT were at one point.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 17:06 | 2741759 Oldrepublic
Oldrepublic's picture

Sun Tzu on War

Governments, you see, must continually lie to prosecute war: deceive the enemy for advantage, yes; but also lie to its own people about the need for war in the first place. They will lie about the cost of the war, the bloodiness of the war, the long-term plans for war, and the extent of war.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 18:04 | 2742066 Debugas
Debugas's picture

capital which was no longer being used to build complex weapon systems would be used for other purposes

 

Oh yeah sure - things like playing stock market casino, prostitution etc

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 10:29 | 2743466 mickeyman
mickeyman's picture

A lot of the capital would be in the form of physical resources (steel, coal, petroleum, etc.). It might even encourage wealth creation through building real things again.

Mon, 08/27/2012 - 21:40 | 2742501 ClassicCommodity
ClassicCommodity's picture

It's probably necessary this time round. But i can see light at the end of the tunnel. We're getting closer to the day where war isw no longer a component of humanity. Most likely as they say here, when teh space age is upon us.

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 01:49 | 2742834 el-greco
el-greco's picture

I fear the twilight of maladjusted leadership may last a lifetime.

Tue, 08/28/2012 - 02:05 | 2742841 malek
malek's picture

 Nature thrives from diversity.

Yes, but not from over-complexity.
If else fails, unfortunately war becomes the quickest simplifier.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!