War Profiteering And Empire
July 2nd, 2011
It's the 4th of July weekend. Monday is the holiday in the USA. We forget sometimes that the rest of the world has its own independence days, although from what may vary from place to place. We celebrate independence from the British Empire, by force, we fought as a nation, well about one third of us supported the fighters, another third opposed and a final third tried to stay out of the ruckus. It was ultimately the efforts of people like Ben Franklin lobbying the French King that got the Americans the aid they needed to gain independence. The issue was about as murky say that of the former Spanish Sahara trying to gain independence from Morocco. That may be a bit obscure. How about the Taliban attempting to get the USA out of Afghanistan? These plucky freedom fighters, with god on their side, are taking on the biggest empire in the world. Hmm. that is familiar. Where are the French, on the side of the Americans. Who are the equivalent to them, perhaps it is secret Saudi aid to the Taliban, or the Pakistani aid from the Madrassas and their intelligence services. The waters are muddied a bit because Afghanistan is nominally independent, with a puppet regime in place, one that is likely to collapse as soon as the US pulls out. But then perhaps not, look at Iraq. The regime we put in place seems to be able to hold its own, granted with a beefed up military supported by the USA. If the regime in Afghanistan is to last it will need constant infusions of cash to keep itself from collapsing. The military envisioned there cannot be supported by the domestic economy.
US nation building has been a success, more or less, at a cost. Hundreds of billions of dollars, thousands of American lives and a crippled domestic infrastructure and economy, that is the price we pay for world dominance. On the balance sheet is it worth it. Evidence from the British Empire of the 19th century would seem to imply that other than India, much of the empire was a loss for the nation and the entire empire was a dead loss for the British tax payer although there were business interests that came out ahead.
================================================
The British Empire, 1870-1914: a waste of money?
By Avner Offer
(See link, pay or academic access).
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2598015
Mammon and the pursuit of empire: the economics of British imperialism
Lance Edwin Davis, Susan G. Davis, Robert A. Huttenback
(See link below. I think you will have to buy this or find it in a library).
http://books.google.com/books/about/Mammon_and_the_pursuit_of_empire.html?id=RcaVb4hc6xMC
==================================================
The defense industry is booming, and I understand the tech market is back. But with the level of debt the US faces, it will have to fund the next war from war bonds, or increased taxes, or by outright hiring of the US military by wealthy sheiks attempting to repress the forces of the people in their countries. Something similar to the first Iraq war, when the Saudi and Kuwaiti princes paid for US intervention to kick the Iraqi's out. Now there was a fine example of military for hire. George Jr. got himself entangled in wars that he paid for by borrowing. Sort of like the British used to do, but instead of borrowing from the domestic market, he borrowed from the international market. This puts American debt in the hands of the Chinese, Japanese, British, Oil Exporters, Brazil, Taiwan, Caribbean banking centers, Russia, Hong Kong, and Switzerland among the top holders of US debt in descending order with China and Japan by far above all the others.
==================================================
US Treasury Stats
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt
==================================================
So it's the Fourth of July. Americans are setting off fire crackers around my neighborhood. I am wishing the US would pull out of some of its international entanglements and let a more multinational force deal with international problems like piracy, disasters, genocides, and peace keeping. Other than that the rest of our commitments are mostly for the sake of promoting American business interests abroad and the so called war on terror, which is just an excuse to maintain and extend US influence in the furthest corners of the world.
There are legitimate uses of force; usually the case of defeating Hitler is used as the primary example. The problem is that after the war the USA became engaged in the cold war against the Soviets, and then the war on drugs which was our excuse to be in places like Panama and Columbia. Now it is the war on terror combined with the war on drugs which has taken a back seat temporarily. These hyped up wars, have been used as excuses or cover for imperialism and promoting business interests, at least that is what it seems. I would like to do some more factual research at some point. Here are a few links to further info.
============================================
International Business and National War Interests: Unilever between Reich and Empire 1939-1945. (see link below).
http://books.google.com/books?id=MlW2w1fYlfQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=War+as+cover
+for+business+interests&hl=en&ei=WoMPTtPTIYq2sAPs69GdDg&sa=X&oi
=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=War%20as%20cover%20for%20business%20interests&f=false
================================================
Published on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 in the Madison Capital Times
Corporations Cash in on War on Terror
by Dave Zweifel
When "Fighting Bob" La Follette was in the U.S. Senate he crusaded against what he called war profiteers.
It was the main reason he was so opposed to the U.S. entry into World War I. The only interest we had in that war, he said, was for our big corporations to make obscene profits on the backs of our military.
Our interests in today's war on terror, of course, are much broader and personal. But La Follette would have a field day pointing out who is enjoying the spoils of that war.
(For more of this article see link below).
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0521-05.htm
===========================================
From Huffington Post
Bill Quigley.
Legal Director for the Center for Constitutional Rights; Professor, Loyola New Orleans
Posted: May 24, 2010 08:25 AM
Corporations Profit from Permanent War: Memorial Day 2010
US law officially proclaims Memorial Day "as a day of prayer for permanent peace."
However, the US is much closer to permanent war than permanent peace. Corporations are profiting from wars and lobbying politicians for more. The US, and the rest of the world, cannot afford the rising personal and financial costs of permanent war.
Number One in War
No doubt, the USA is number one in war. This coming year the US will spend 708 billion dollars on war and another $125 billion for Veterans Affairs — over $830 billion. In a distant second place is China which spent about $84 billion on its military in 2008.
The US also leads the world in the sale of lethal weapons to others, selling about one of every three weapons worldwide. The USA's major clients? South Korea, Israel and United Arab Emirates.
Our country has 5 percent of the world's population but accounts for more than 40% of the military spending for the whole world.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-quigley/corporations-profit-from_b_586896.html
========================================
http://www.lysistrataproject.org/corporationsandwar.htm
========================================
Outline of War Profit Taxes and Capital Levies in Liberated Euopean Countries
Mitchell B. Carroll in Tax Law Review.
(See link below, pay or have access to academic library).
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/taxlr1&div=33&id=&page=
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment