So then - how do you define national security?
What is the difference to domestic security?
What is the difference between security and a need? You can?t argue a need for more profits as if it was a security matter.
Sure, in an extreme case it may come to that (if there?s no gas for tanks or F-16s, you risk national security) BUT homeland security (defense matter) is not the same like economic security!
And security is not the same like importance! I am heavily against using words for brainwashing. And don?t you see the dangers that arise when you define EVERY interest the US has as being vital to nat. sec.?
Sure things are connected in a way or another, and effect each other, but Sting2, you have to admit that if your definition of nat. sec. is right, just about everything that happens in the world might be defined as being crucial to national sec.! Like, if I go to McDonalds today or not, is a quest of nat. sec. because if I don?t, it might harm economy, people might loose their job because of dirty corporate politics (oh sorry it was my fault, because I didn?t consume enough, hehe), without job they get angry, do a revolution and kill the president. And all that because I didn?t buy the burger! You see, everything is connected.
I absolutely am aware of the world of MultiNat Corps who are not concerned about nat. borders. Exactly, this is one of the things we should change. It won?t be changed that easily, but please, am I allowed to have my own thoughts about how this world SHOULD be and how we COULD change it, and do I have the right to not give a damn about licking globalisations ass, because I think its BAD, you know, BAD, yeah, not every fucking piece of economic freedom benefits EVERYONE, it just benefits very very few persons
(...no, a job is not a great thing I am offered because Corps are sooo nice and keep economy healthy, thank you
, its a human right to work, not a creation of Corps that want to make the world a better place - I am talking about real profits, Silver and Gold, you know - - )
and, now, that is unjust, and you, Sting2, know that, just like me.
Xcuse the emotional rant when there?s no excuse in this western cruel society. I live in the EC. I am happy that we are taking over all the biz of the former east. I am happy our banks earn billions with interests for credits, ah you know, its just as beautiful as after the second world war! People believed West=Paradise. Until they realised that they are second class citizens in the EC, that they can be unemployed, or die of hunger, just like before. Anyway, we had a good cut, you know, they all needed TVs and real clothes... those poor apes.
Some people in my country make a lot of moola w buying and selling and dealing properties and "working power" aka human beings, and I am sooo happy, because you know, thats all MY PERSONAL national security interest.
PS: I left out the point you made about forseeing that the world was so interdependent, I am sure the US didn?t have any interest from WWI ?til today in suppressing other people, countries, governments so power could stay centralized in our oh-so-interdependent world.
Tell me, if its all built up on equal interdependence, and the suppression I am talking about doesn?t exist, why doesn?t every country have a WTC, Wall Street, Dow Jones, the priviledge to store mass destruction weaponry, the priviledge to support huge research and development programs (other nations are just too poor, but why should they ever get out of that trap, ha!)..., the priviledge to take over countries, to install and deinstall dictatorships (Pinochet), - - you will, just like me, come to the conclusion that some are more dependant than others in this mixed up world of interdependance, where everyone - except for a few - wonders how all those strange things are really connected (and gets the impression our "experts" will take care of that, so no need to act and change sth. for better).
Peace.