Taking on the Military Industrial Complex

More at http://therealnews.com/c.php?c=081101YT
The Real News Network needs your support now

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• military
• industrial
• complex
• therealnews
• real
• news
• support

[impartial1]

Personally, I have no problem with Iran. I do not fear them. If they do develope nukes, I think it would be for one reason only. To keep bullies like the US from invading them. It is the reason so many nations want nukes. Not to use them, but to prevent invation. These days nukes sadly are the only way to be sure your sovereignty is honnored by the rest of the world. That said, I don't like nukes, or nuclear power. I also know Iran is more interested in Mid East peace than US.

[JeffHilliard]

can you report on the people who own the federal reserve

[mightymissk]

Bravo to the Real News! My youngest son found you guys. Now I watch it all the time. I am getting to the point where I don't watch mainstream news anymore. You guys remind me of the CBC when it was a trustworthy news outlet, years ago. I stopped watching the CBC after I saw two dreadful interviews--one in which Peter Mansbridge was sarcastic and rude to Stephan Dion, and another interview, where Evan Solomon was combative and disrespectful towards Noam Chomsky. That was enough.

[2004carlt]

Hidden hand (illuminati). Moving to DC (Devil's Cauldron). Good luck.

[cheekymonkey0089]

sorry man i'm broke

[ferrozm]

Thanks, I meant to insert *not before because in the first sentence. Call it what you will. I don't like any government intervention in the economic exchanges of free individuals rich or poor. The third sentence may have sounded like a Rand-ish rant, for this I apologize since I don't really like Rand. What I was trying to get at was democratic regulation would be just as tyrannical as bureaucratic regulation. ex: What is to stop tyrannous majorities from banning porn or strip clubs?

[ctvwr]

First sentence is incoherent. Second sentence straw-mans all opposition to capitalism as state-socialism. Third sentence reveals the Ayn-Rand-ish/Social Darwinist logic inherent in all "free market" fantasies.

[ctvwr]

Gee, a time when wealthy interest and government were the same thing? Did it start with an f and rhyme with fuedalism?

[Rundstedt1]

By the way it is called The Gilded Age not "era"; and it was a historically recognized period of Laissez Faire capitalism. It was not regulations that built Rockefellers wealth, but the lack of them that saw him get kick backs, manipulate the market and force out any attempt to organize labor. Later, he did everything he could to fight them and eventually manipulate them as well.

[Rundstedt1]

(3/3)

or by the business interests in general, although not exclusively, through the gov't, as is happening now; or it can be regulated by the large capitalists directly as the libertarian "free-marketers" wish. So by directly taking over that function of gov't the large capitalists then by default become the gov't, and an unanswerable one at that. That is real the form of gov't that Libertarianism leads to, a marriage of the capitalist interests and gov't, there's a name for it too you know.

[Rundstedt1]

(2/3)

Your "free-market" is a myth. Markets are created, they are artificial constructs, and naturally will seek regulation. A black market starts as a "free-market" but it is quickly taken over by the mafia or it is legitimized and regulated by the gov't. So, it is not a case of IF a market is regulated, but by and for whom. It can either be regulated by the people for their benefit as in socialism;

[Rundstedt1]

(1/3)

Three months to come back with a generalized line of BS? Ha... Wake up; it's a bad time to be deregulatory. It's the wonderful deregulated financial markets that helped put us where we are today.