nuke iraq till they bleed american
- Thread starter Flag Pole Pear
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
MiniFly
War Child
STING2 said:
So apparently my post is totally invalid? How cute. ANYWAY if you had paid any attention, I was referring consistantly to third world countries. Also, we didn't exactly rebuild Japan. It was a "built" society to begin with. The US, icluding President Truman, of whom I have mixed feelings about, had a chance to redress the grievances of the Chinese, anti war Japanese, and other countries Japan had taken control of in the East Asian region. However, the US did not, foregoing human rights for a secure foothold of capitalism in East Asia. How lovely. Also, the United States, used the preexsisting government that remained after the removal of the Emporer. Many officers and government officials who had allowed for things like the Rape of Nanking were still in power after WWII. So much for rebuilding.
Post WWII Germany is not an appropriate example for this, and neither is Japan, really, even though I felt like pointing out your historical ignorance.
I'm certainly not ignorant of history and its rather presumtive and an unnecessary for you to make such a comment. The USA did rebuild both Japan and Germany and despite the fact that Iraq is a third world country, it does not make the comparison invalid, especially considering the condition that both Germany and Japan were in at the end of the war.
FizzingWhizzbees
ONE love, blood, life
I haven't even read this entire thread so sorry if some of this has already been said.
Firstly - nuclear weapons are illegal according to international law. Any weapon that can't distinguish between a combatant and non-combatant is illegal. Not that that's ever made a blind bit of difference to the country's that insist on developing them of course, but it's a point worth making.
Secondly - countries that have nuclear weapons have always maintained that it's a defensive position. They've always said they weren't for first-strike use, they were there to deter other countries with nuclear weapons from attacking. Personally I think they're an expensive and dangerous deterrent (?1 billion a year for Britain's trident nuclear submarines and I've seen protestors swim out and stand on top of them, just imagine if someone swam out with a bomb...) but nonetheless, they're supposed to be a deterrent.
Thirdly - I don't think it's a new decision for the US to use nuclear weapons. They've been trying to develop a missile shield for the last twenty years in order that they can use nuclear weapons without fear of retaliation. It was Reagan's project and Bush is continuing it at full-speed now.
And finally - how can anyone believe nuclear weapons are justified under any circumstance? I can understand believing conventional warfare is justified (even though I don't usually support it) but to justify using nuclear weapons is just beyond me. They obliterate entire cities. Just look at pictures from Nagasaki and Hiroshima. How could anyone think it would be okay for that to happen again?
Firstly - nuclear weapons are illegal according to international law. Any weapon that can't distinguish between a combatant and non-combatant is illegal. Not that that's ever made a blind bit of difference to the country's that insist on developing them of course, but it's a point worth making.
Secondly - countries that have nuclear weapons have always maintained that it's a defensive position. They've always said they weren't for first-strike use, they were there to deter other countries with nuclear weapons from attacking. Personally I think they're an expensive and dangerous deterrent (?1 billion a year for Britain's trident nuclear submarines and I've seen protestors swim out and stand on top of them, just imagine if someone swam out with a bomb...) but nonetheless, they're supposed to be a deterrent.
Thirdly - I don't think it's a new decision for the US to use nuclear weapons. They've been trying to develop a missile shield for the last twenty years in order that they can use nuclear weapons without fear of retaliation. It was Reagan's project and Bush is continuing it at full-speed now.
And finally - how can anyone believe nuclear weapons are justified under any circumstance? I can understand believing conventional warfare is justified (even though I don't usually support it) but to justify using nuclear weapons is just beyond me. They obliterate entire cities. Just look at pictures from Nagasaki and Hiroshima. How could anyone think it would be okay for that to happen again?
FizzingWhizzbees
ONE love, blood, life
Thanks, Dreadsox I'll read back a bit and see what you thought.
I'll read back a bit and see what you thought.
There's also something I don't think has been mentioned: as far as I know US have the strongest army in the world, right? Enough conventional weapons to defeat anyone, right?
So why would they need nuclear weapons anyway?
I don't think nuclear weapons should ever be a choice period.
(ever read any description how a survivor of nuclear attack looks like? VERY terrifying...)
So why would they need nuclear weapons anyway?
I don't think nuclear weapons should ever be a choice period.
(ever read any description how a survivor of nuclear attack looks like? VERY terrifying...)
pax
ONE love, blood, life
We cannot use nukes against Iraq--not now, and probably not ever. WWII had raged for several years before we used nuclear weapons against Japan, and millions of American soldiers had already died. Neither of those criterion have been met in this case. Nuclear warfare is devastating, and because Iraq is such a small country and the damage nuclear weapons can cause so wide-reaching, we would almost undoubtedly ending up hurting persons in other countries. There would certainly be civilian casualties numbering in the thousands. No nukes--not against Iraq, and hopefully not ever again.
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
MiniFly said:
Exactly.
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
STING2 said:
Yeah yeah it was cool and we still thank you for 1945
Mainly, though, it was not altruistic help, but credits, ok? Credits that were paid back.
OP
OP
Flag Pole Pear
Bordering Purgatory
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2001
- Messages
- 794
dont forget sting2, that america was on the verge of fanatical fascism in the earlier stages of the century too. thankfully they were smart enough not too incorporate it into the system.
so i guess that isnt much of a point, but really, in western society, the nazi's werent seen as anything that terrible because noone really had an idea as to what they were doing. which is stupid because had anyone read mein kampff hitler forecasted everything he was to do. except the end result ofcourse, which did not end in his favour.
so i guess that isnt much of a point, but really, in western society, the nazi's werent seen as anything that terrible because noone really had an idea as to what they were doing. which is stupid because had anyone read mein kampff hitler forecasted everything he was to do. except the end result ofcourse, which did not end in his favour.
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Plus, you asked me how you were betrayed, STING2?
Man, maybe you don?t feel betrayed, right. But the elite of your country makes so much money by suppressing the rest of the world (except for Europe), that you should have a bigger share. You should live like in the land of milk and honey! No American would have the need to ever pay any hospital! No American would ever have the need to pay for his childrens college! Every American could get one car for free per year with the money your investors make!
You could have it all for FREE! With 1400 billions of $ circulating EVERY SINGLE DAY around the world- and the U.S. investors play a big part in there (even if its all international, we agree).
No American has to live on the street! No American has to suffer from hunger! If the profits were shared, at least, in America.
For its people. For Americans, from Americans, lol, not considering the billion of poorest people.
Instead there are scandals and scandals. People like your president steal that money from the average American customer every day, every minute, every second. Not only Enron, Enron is a fly compared to whats happening. Look at the past scandals of General Electric! And not only the scandals. Just the pickpocketing. And the investors deals. With all their financial instruments.
This is how you are betrayed. Just like me in my country. But I won?t run around with a flag saying "Oh I?m a big fan of my President and of the great economic state we?re in, and I?m so proud of more and more ppl without a job, so lets get more nukes to show the rest of the world who is in charge and who?s got the right to defend himself and who?s got the right to use options".
I am a simple person, I just say "What? You betray me, Mr. Prime Minister? Fuck off. I won?t fight for you."
Man, maybe you don?t feel betrayed, right. But the elite of your country makes so much money by suppressing the rest of the world (except for Europe), that you should have a bigger share. You should live like in the land of milk and honey! No American would have the need to ever pay any hospital! No American would ever have the need to pay for his childrens college! Every American could get one car for free per year with the money your investors make!
You could have it all for FREE! With 1400 billions of $ circulating EVERY SINGLE DAY around the world- and the U.S. investors play a big part in there (even if its all international, we agree).
No American has to live on the street! No American has to suffer from hunger! If the profits were shared, at least, in America.
For its people. For Americans, from Americans, lol, not considering the billion of poorest people.
Instead there are scandals and scandals. People like your president steal that money from the average American customer every day, every minute, every second. Not only Enron, Enron is a fly compared to whats happening. Look at the past scandals of General Electric! And not only the scandals. Just the pickpocketing. And the investors deals. With all their financial instruments.
This is how you are betrayed. Just like me in my country. But I won?t run around with a flag saying "Oh I?m a big fan of my President and of the great economic state we?re in, and I?m so proud of more and more ppl without a job, so lets get more nukes to show the rest of the world who is in charge and who?s got the right to defend himself and who?s got the right to use options".
I am a simple person, I just say "What? You betray me, Mr. Prime Minister? Fuck off. I won?t fight for you."
Last edited:
Scarletwine
New Yorker
I don't know if this belongs here and I hope I'm not stealing by posting this but it was very clever on this boys part and I thought some of you may enjoy it.
HipHop, with the wealth in the US your absolutely right only they don't share. They just tax the shit out of use to give it the wealth 1%.
Anyway here is a poem
IRAQ a satirical poem by Cillian McSweeney, age 13
(to the tune of IF YOU'RE HAPPY
AND
YOU KNOW IT CLAP YOUR HANDS)
If you cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq.
If the markets are a drama, bomb Iraq.
If the terrorists are frisky,
Pakistan is looking shifty,
North Korea is too risky,
Bomb Iraq.
If allies are not with us, bomb Iraq.
If we think that someone's dissed us, bomb Iraq.
So to hell with more inspections,
Let's look tough for the elections,
Close your mind and take directions,
Bomb Iraq.
It's pre-emptive nonaggression, bomb Iraq.
To prevent the mass destruction, bomb Iraq.
They've got weapons we can't see,
And that's all the proof we need,
If they're not there, they must be,
Bomb Iraq.
If you never were elected, bomb Iraq.
If your mood is quite dejected, bomb Iraq.
If you think Sadam's gone mad,
With the weapons that he had,
And he tried to kill your Dad,
Bomb Iraq.
If corporate fraud is growin', bomb Iraq.
If your ties to it are showin', bomb Iraq.
If your politics are sleazy,
And hiding that aint easy,
And your manhood's getting queasy,
Bomb Iraq.
Fall in line and follow orders, bomb Iraq.
For our might knows not our borders, bomb Iraq.
Disagree? We'll call it treason,
Let's make war not love this season,
Even if we have no reason, bomb Iraq.
Clever!
HipHop, with the wealth in the US your absolutely right only they don't share. They just tax the shit out of use to give it the wealth 1%.
Anyway here is a poem
IRAQ a satirical poem by Cillian McSweeney, age 13
(to the tune of IF YOU'RE HAPPY
AND
YOU KNOW IT CLAP YOUR HANDS)
If you cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq.
If the markets are a drama, bomb Iraq.
If the terrorists are frisky,
Pakistan is looking shifty,
North Korea is too risky,
Bomb Iraq.
If allies are not with us, bomb Iraq.
If we think that someone's dissed us, bomb Iraq.
So to hell with more inspections,
Let's look tough for the elections,
Close your mind and take directions,
Bomb Iraq.
It's pre-emptive nonaggression, bomb Iraq.
To prevent the mass destruction, bomb Iraq.
They've got weapons we can't see,
And that's all the proof we need,
If they're not there, they must be,
Bomb Iraq.
If you never were elected, bomb Iraq.
If your mood is quite dejected, bomb Iraq.
If you think Sadam's gone mad,
With the weapons that he had,
And he tried to kill your Dad,
Bomb Iraq.
If corporate fraud is growin', bomb Iraq.
If your ties to it are showin', bomb Iraq.
If your politics are sleazy,
And hiding that aint easy,
And your manhood's getting queasy,
Bomb Iraq.
Fall in line and follow orders, bomb Iraq.
For our might knows not our borders, bomb Iraq.
Disagree? We'll call it treason,
Let's make war not love this season,
Even if we have no reason, bomb Iraq.
Clever!
Blacksword
Acrobat
To bring up the US rebuilding issue I'd like to add to Mini-Fly's comments. West Germany was only rebuilt to provide a bulwark against Soviet expansion. Plus it was all done through loans that had to be paid back. Japan was largely rebuilt so the US could have military bases in the East in order to have a military presence there. No doubt there was some humanitarian concern but I doubt any but the most blindly idealistic American would suppose even a third of the effort would have been spared had it not been for the Soviet and Chinese threat.
For proof that these were the motivations of the post war US Government, I suggest one looks at the US Government's involvenment in the overthrow of democratic governments and the shoring up of dictator in the name of stopping the red tide, in the Cold War. My favourite, due to its blatant illegality was the case of Guatamala.
The Guatamalan government (which had been domocratic since 1944) in the early 1950's was in the process of redistributing land from US companies (which had been paid in full, with the price based on the companies' own tax recipts) to the landless peasants, a Scoialist policy. In 1954 the Guatamalan government was overthown by a small army of US trained exiles equiped with American weapons, flown in by American planes with American pilots. I should mention that the Secretary of State, and othe high ranking government officials all had extensive ties with United Fruit and American company who lost big in in the land redistribution.
I can name a bunch of more recent examples like the Congo in 1961( the establishment of Mobutu), Chile in 1972 (the establishment of Pinochet), the early 1980's Nicaragua (the Contra War). The US has had no problem with supporting butchering Dictators in the past such as Papa Doc, the Samozas, the Shah of Iran. I find the US's present hippocracy to be disgusting when in a different era they would be holding Saddam up as a hero.
For proof that these were the motivations of the post war US Government, I suggest one looks at the US Government's involvenment in the overthrow of democratic governments and the shoring up of dictator in the name of stopping the red tide, in the Cold War. My favourite, due to its blatant illegality was the case of Guatamala.
The Guatamalan government (which had been domocratic since 1944) in the early 1950's was in the process of redistributing land from US companies (which had been paid in full, with the price based on the companies' own tax recipts) to the landless peasants, a Scoialist policy. In 1954 the Guatamalan government was overthown by a small army of US trained exiles equiped with American weapons, flown in by American planes with American pilots. I should mention that the Secretary of State, and othe high ranking government officials all had extensive ties with United Fruit and American company who lost big in in the land redistribution.
I can name a bunch of more recent examples like the Congo in 1961( the establishment of Mobutu), Chile in 1972 (the establishment of Pinochet), the early 1980's Nicaragua (the Contra War). The US has had no problem with supporting butchering Dictators in the past such as Papa Doc, the Samozas, the Shah of Iran. I find the US's present hippocracy to be disgusting when in a different era they would be holding Saddam up as a hero.
Last edited:
Blacksword,
I find peoples mis-representations of American policy to be disgusting. Honestly, you could say that the only reason anyone every does something nice for another person is because it benefits him/herself in some way. You could make that cynical arguement about anything.
The Marshall Plan was an enormous effort. But not only did the USA spend enormous amounts of treasure to rebuild the world after World War II, we also spent an enormous amount of blood to prevent it from being dominated by countries like Germany and Japan. After that the USA spent enormous amounts of money and sometimes blood to prevent Soviet backed Communism from taking over the planet.
Because of these efforts, there are more democracies today throughout the world than ever before in history.
HIPHOP,
I have family members in that top 1% or the "elite" and I'm sorry, but their not robbing me or anyone else!
If worried about the rich or the Elite, why don't you start with Bono who is currently worth 162 million dollars! He is apart of the largest record company on the planet, Universal.
I find peoples mis-representations of American policy to be disgusting. Honestly, you could say that the only reason anyone every does something nice for another person is because it benefits him/herself in some way. You could make that cynical arguement about anything.
The Marshall Plan was an enormous effort. But not only did the USA spend enormous amounts of treasure to rebuild the world after World War II, we also spent an enormous amount of blood to prevent it from being dominated by countries like Germany and Japan. After that the USA spent enormous amounts of money and sometimes blood to prevent Soviet backed Communism from taking over the planet.
Because of these efforts, there are more democracies today throughout the world than ever before in history.
HIPHOP,
I have family members in that top 1% or the "elite" and I'm sorry, but their not robbing me or anyone else!
If worried about the rich or the Elite, why don't you start with Bono who is currently worth 162 million dollars! He is apart of the largest record company on the planet, Universal.
OP
OP
Flag Pole Pear
Bordering Purgatory
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2001
- Messages
- 794
universal owns interscope?
Blacksword
Acrobat
So Sting2, do you deny that the US overtrew democracies or aided in their overthrow? Do you deny that the US has proped up over a dozen dictators who murdered their people? Do you seriously think much of the world hates the US and considers it an imperialist nation out of envy and self-delusion?
MiniFly
War Child
U2girl said:
France comes in second as far as defense spending goes, and we spend ten times what they do.
MiniFly
War Child
Blacksword said:
Apparently. America is the teflon nation, nothing sticks to us, and if it does leave a stain, we can wipe it off with some flags.
MiniFly
War Child
STING2 said:
Germany and Japan both had active middle classes or the remnants of active middle classes. Both of those nations were functional and developed, hardly third world.
The point is, Germany and Japan were not in the same situation as Iraq is now. When will you see that?
EDIT
Also, Japan and Germany were ACTIVELY engaging in imperial aggression on a multi-continental scale. Saddam won't even THINK of doing that, ever since he failed with Kuwait. Your comparison is fallacy-ridden and absurd!
Last edited:
MiniFly
War Child
whenhiphopdrovethebigcars said:
Thanks.
Unfortunately, many of the poorest decisions were made in response to the Cold War. Decisions were made, rotten governements were proppoed up, and the common man was trampled. This happened on both sides of the Iron Curtain.
I am confused now though, dealing with this situation. Are you saying the United Nations should do something to remove him or not?
Just because we have supported dictators in the past we should support him now? Some of these arguments, have lost me.
Peace
I am confused now though, dealing with this situation. Are you saying the United Nations should do something to remove him or not?
Just because we have supported dictators in the past we should support him now? Some of these arguments, have lost me.
Peace
Blacksword,
The USA engaged in a policy of containment and occasionally rollback of Soviet supported states for the sake of long term global security. I'm not going to justify every single tatical situation, but certainly the strategic goal was justified and saved much of the world from Global domination by the Soviets and or World War III.
The USA has certainly helped several dictators in the past that killed many of their own people, but there were more important priorities that demanded this course of action. Your not going tell me that the USA should not have sent Billions of tons of supplies to Stalins Soviet Union are you?
"Do you seriously think much of the world hates the US and considers it an imperialist nation out of envy and self-delusion?"
Yes I do. Much of this world you speak of live in countries that are dictatorships or in poverty without access to education. Certainly many in democratic countries may have this view, but from what I have studied and learned over the years, I strongly dispute such claims.
The USA engaged in a policy of containment and occasionally rollback of Soviet supported states for the sake of long term global security. I'm not going to justify every single tatical situation, but certainly the strategic goal was justified and saved much of the world from Global domination by the Soviets and or World War III.
The USA has certainly helped several dictators in the past that killed many of their own people, but there were more important priorities that demanded this course of action. Your not going tell me that the USA should not have sent Billions of tons of supplies to Stalins Soviet Union are you?
"Do you seriously think much of the world hates the US and considers it an imperialist nation out of envy and self-delusion?"
Yes I do. Much of this world you speak of live in countries that are dictatorships or in poverty without access to education. Certainly many in democratic countries may have this view, but from what I have studied and learned over the years, I strongly dispute such claims.
Minifly,
"Germany and Japan both had active middle classes or the remnants of active middle classes. Both of those nations were functional and developed, hardly third world.
The point is, Germany and Japan were not in the same situation as Iraq is now. When will you see that?"
I'm well aware of Germany's and Japans history prior to World War II. I'm not disputing the differences between Iraq's situation as a third world country that has yet to undergo certain types of political and economic development and the position Germany and Japan were in before the War started. I'm well aware of those facts. What is also a fact is the level of destruction and human loss of life in both Germany and Japan is far greater than anything Iraq is about to suffer, to the nature of modern warfare today. This is another difference that bodes well in Iraq's favor. In addition, Iraq with the exception of Saudi Arabia, has the world largest oil reserves on the planet. This level of natural resource wealth is not something Germany or Japan had to draw on themselves. Ever "economic potential" study that has been done on Iraq since the 1970s has found that Iraq should be the wealthiest country in the region do to its natural resources which include the energy that can be derived from its rivers as well as its oil.
Another factor though is the obvious effort that the USA can put into nation building that midigate the problems that Iraq faces in being a third world country. Iraq is unique, and there is not any example to point to that would be exactly the same as Iraq, but there are many countries that are part of the first world today, that used to be Third World countries back in the 1950s like South Korea and Tawain. Economic development and politcal development of Iraq will happen as long as the necessary resources are invested to achieve those goals. The difficulties of building a new Iraq are not as bad as the difficulties and possibilities of a Saddam controlled Iraq armed in the future with nuclear weapons.
"Also, Japan and Germany were ACTIVELY engaging in imperial aggression on a multi-continental scale. Saddam won't even THINK of doing that, ever since he failed with Kuwait. Your comparison is fallacy-ridden and absurd!"
Listen, I was talking about rebuilding Iraq after a potential war and the comparisons with Germany and Japan. I don't know where your pulling this up from. There are a lot of things Saddam is planning to do in the future, and he already has weapons that Germany and Japan never had. He is also in close proximity to most of the worlds energy supplies and does not need multi-continental aggression capability to threaten the world.
Here at Free Your Mind, we try to remain objective and respectful of other peoples points of view. Characterizing me or my arguements as fallacy-ridden or absurd does not make it so and does nothing to prove or advance your own view points. Just like making and unbased claim that I am "ignorant of history", it is unnecessary in not in the spirit of this forum.
"Germany and Japan both had active middle classes or the remnants of active middle classes. Both of those nations were functional and developed, hardly third world.
The point is, Germany and Japan were not in the same situation as Iraq is now. When will you see that?"
I'm well aware of Germany's and Japans history prior to World War II. I'm not disputing the differences between Iraq's situation as a third world country that has yet to undergo certain types of political and economic development and the position Germany and Japan were in before the War started. I'm well aware of those facts. What is also a fact is the level of destruction and human loss of life in both Germany and Japan is far greater than anything Iraq is about to suffer, to the nature of modern warfare today. This is another difference that bodes well in Iraq's favor. In addition, Iraq with the exception of Saudi Arabia, has the world largest oil reserves on the planet. This level of natural resource wealth is not something Germany or Japan had to draw on themselves. Ever "economic potential" study that has been done on Iraq since the 1970s has found that Iraq should be the wealthiest country in the region do to its natural resources which include the energy that can be derived from its rivers as well as its oil.
Another factor though is the obvious effort that the USA can put into nation building that midigate the problems that Iraq faces in being a third world country. Iraq is unique, and there is not any example to point to that would be exactly the same as Iraq, but there are many countries that are part of the first world today, that used to be Third World countries back in the 1950s like South Korea and Tawain. Economic development and politcal development of Iraq will happen as long as the necessary resources are invested to achieve those goals. The difficulties of building a new Iraq are not as bad as the difficulties and possibilities of a Saddam controlled Iraq armed in the future with nuclear weapons.
"Also, Japan and Germany were ACTIVELY engaging in imperial aggression on a multi-continental scale. Saddam won't even THINK of doing that, ever since he failed with Kuwait. Your comparison is fallacy-ridden and absurd!"
Listen, I was talking about rebuilding Iraq after a potential war and the comparisons with Germany and Japan. I don't know where your pulling this up from. There are a lot of things Saddam is planning to do in the future, and he already has weapons that Germany and Japan never had. He is also in close proximity to most of the worlds energy supplies and does not need multi-continental aggression capability to threaten the world.
Here at Free Your Mind, we try to remain objective and respectful of other peoples points of view. Characterizing me or my arguements as fallacy-ridden or absurd does not make it so and does nothing to prove or advance your own view points. Just like making and unbased claim that I am "ignorant of history", it is unnecessary in not in the spirit of this forum.
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
STING2 said:
First paragraph:
Good principle. You?re definitely following The Sermon on the Mount there, honestly. Not only Jesus benefitted himself, also MLK, Gandhi and Mother Teresa did. All the teachers and doctors and social workers and priests in this world do their job to benefit themselves (not for the students or ill or cracks or believers, noooo - they have their own deficit in their soul, man - they need to feel they?re doing something good for society, those psychos! After all they aren?t in Forbes for that).
To me you sound like an inexperienced colony official, who hasn?t learned how to deal with power yet
Second paragraph:
Fine by me. I didn?t say you or your family members robbed anyone. The ones that I define as financial elite, do, though. Sure, most are protected by law. Hmm, sometimes not - sometimes the methods to circulate stocks, puts, options are a little - shady? Sometimes robbing?s not dependent on one person, but on the decisions by supervisory board? You could ask the question: is Phil Knight responsible for the sweatshops of Nike? Are the Oppenheimers responsible for shameful labour practices in diamond mines? Lets take a look at their website!
"On 29 May 2001, De Beers and DB Investments (DBI) announced that all the preconditions required for the scheme of arrangement to implement DBI's offer for De Beers have been fulfilled.
The DB Investments consortium comprises: the Oppenheimer family interests via a subsidiary of Central Holdings Limited (45%), Anglo American plc (45%) and Debswana, a company jointly owned by the Government of the Republic of Botswana and De Beers (10%)."
Oh, you?re right, STING2. I don?t see any robbery there. www.macha.f9.co.uk must be some left wing propaganda.
But this won?t bother us, will it. As long as its legal. After all, laws are part of the free market. Supply and... demand.
Having made billions from free-flowing international capital, Soros has nevertheless become one of global capitalism's most perceptive critics. Since capital can easily escape countries with high taxes or strong regulations, a state's ability to take care of its citizens can, he says, be severely handicapped by globalization. "The development of a global society has lagged behind the growth of a global economy," he says. "Unless the gap is closed, the global capitalist system will not survive."
Third paragraph:
I?m not worried about Bono. Let him be worth 162 mil. The 15 bil he tries to beg out of your criminal president, make him worth it. He?s one of the few who shares. His art, his voice, his beliefs. Who gives by taking. And, to say the truth, 162 mil is much, but not that much, is it.
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Flag Pole Pear said:
Yes, the Universal Music Group owns Interscope, A&M, Geffen, Island/Def Jam, MCA, Motown and a few other important labels.
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
STING2 said:
There we go. So you say people who live under dictatorships or in poor countries are stupid?
People living in democratic countries are not that stupid, but from what you have studied and learned, you strongly dispute they are as intelligent as you. Or, if they are, they just envy you.
Right?
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
