The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
matherto said:
Money.

Nothing makes rich people richer than war.
Click to expand...
Too simplistic, imo. Obviously the arms manufacturers like Raytheon, Lockheed and General Dynamics would benefit, but I'm not sure Boeing would net benefit (arms sales vs lower airplane sales from a now fecked world). They're not the largest businesses out there in this day anyways. Boeing is 20-25% the mkt cap of Alphabet/Google, and the defense-focused even smaller.

It would be absolutely ruinous for the US govt's finances, and therefore for the country's because the two things never diverge for any long period of time. For most rich people, it would actually be terrible.
 
Feck me, John Bolton. That’s a surefire stel to a global nuclear winter right there.

Didnt Trump turn him down initially because he disliked his ‘’stache? Or is that more Twitter nonsensemy naive brain decided to believe? :p
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
It would have to be NSA as that's a direct appointment by the President that doesn't require Congressional approval. He would never make it through the Senate for the State job. Rand Paul has already lined up to oppose Pompeo, so whoever it is will be in for a rough ride.
Click to expand...

Still, imagining Trump, Bolton and that new CIA chick plotting for a new war...the world would immediately become a scary(er) place.
 
3fd23fcde5fbe987d83ea581933e499c62aa0027c576cef96eda44e416a2bb12.png
 
Carolina Red said:
Bolton was part of the Project for a New American Century.

Those are the folks who brought us the 2003 Iraq War.
Click to expand...
Like the scene in Young Frankenstein, with the book titled...

Lab0.jpg
 
MTF said:
They're not the largest businesses out there in this day anyways. Boeing is 20-25% the mkt cap of Alphabet/Google, and the defense-focused even smaller.
Click to expand...

Their political influence goes beyond that.
1. I'm very sure they are among the most organised lobbies, even compared to larger richer sectors.
2. Arms manufacturing and export is a vital producer of high-paying blue collar and white collar jobs. These jobs are strategically placed in vulnerable districts so that fence-sitters will support them (see: Bernie voting for the F-35 after they started making windows or something stupid like that in Vermont).
3. DARPA money and general military R&D has contributed *hugely* to American technical superiority (see: the internet!), not just in weapons, and with the fall of NASA it is even more crucial. Chomsky introduced me to this point (text or video, the content is similar)

Of course, there are non-financial reasons for politicians to want war - nationalism is very powerful electorally, and the US seems to be a country totally in love with its military.

MTF said:
Too simplistic, imo. Obviously the arms manufacturers like Raytheon, Lockheed and General Dynamics would benefit, but I'm not sure Boeing would net benefit (arms sales vs lower airplane sales from a now fecked world).
Click to expand...

TBF given the current climate in Boeing v Airbus, Boeing might endorse this just to screw Airbus out of their Iran orders :lol:
 
berbatrick said:
Their political influence goes beyond that.
1. I'm very sure they are among the most organised lobbies, even compared to larger richer sectors.
2. Arms manufacturing and export is a vital producer of high-paying blue collar and white collar jobs. These jobs are strategically placed in vulnerable districts so that fence-sitters will support them (see: Bernie voting for the F-35 after they started making windows or something stupid like that in Vermont).
3. DARPA money and general military R&D has contributed *hugely* to American technical superiority (see: the internet!), not just in weapons, and with the fall of NASA it is even more crucial. Chomsky introduced me to this point (text or video, the content is similar)

Of course, there are non-financial reasons for politicians to want war - nationalism is very powerful electorally, and the US seems to be a country totally in love with its military.

TBF given the current climate in Boeing v Airbus, Boeing might endorse this just to screw Airbus out of their Iran orders :lol:
Click to expand...

Good point on Boeing :lol:.

I agree with your point that the arms industry "punches above its weight" in terms of political influence. But enough to solely propel the country into conflicts larger than Iraq? When presumably other parts of the country start pushing back? I accept if people disagree. I just mostly look to dispel the notion that "rich people would get richer". Yes, some. And others, not irrelevant ones, would lose significantly.
 
MTF said:
Good point on Boeing :lol:.

I agree with your point that the arms industry "punches above its weight" in terms of political influence. But enough to solely propel the country into conflicts larger than Iraq? When presumably other parts of the country start pushing back? I accept if people disagree. I just mostly look to dispel the notion that "rich people would get richer". Yes, some. And others, not irrelevant ones, would lose significantly.
Click to expand...

Thinking about it a little more, there are industries other than defence that benefit from war. But this is specifically war with countries outside the main international trading system. So, who is on that list? Iraq, Iran, NK, Libya... And no significant business will suffer if trade there is disrupted.
I think the biggest beneficiaries are the companies that take over the newly-opened resources of the invaded country. In Iraq: oil. In Afghanistan: minerals. But it goes beyond that. I've not read it but Naomi Klein gets into how this worked in Iraq in her book Shock Doctrine. The US deliberately looked the other way while the Iraqi state was literally plundered and loted, so that the state sector could be rebuilt, but under private (foreign) ownership this time. (Summarised here, no idea if it's a good summary). And of course there is Blackwater.
 
Wednesday at Stoke said:
Oh boy if he hires John Bolton, the North Korea meeting might be fireworks. :lol:
Click to expand...

Not so soon...



Rand Paul is a no on both, so if both can't win some Dem support they may not go through. (He opposed Pompeo for FBI.) If Paul sticks to his guns, it could get interesting with Trump growing frustrated about not being able to get his people in place. If Pompeo can't be confirmed, being forced to find a capable Secretary of State nominee after the way he treated Tillerson could be a challenge.
 
sglowrider said:
Not so soon...



Rand Paul is a no on both, so if both can't win some Dem support they may not go through. (He opposed Pompeo for FBI.) If Paul sticks to his guns, it could get interesting with Trump growing frustrated about not being able to get his people in place. If Pompeo can't be confirmed, being forced to find a capable Secretary of State nominee after the way he treated Tillerson could be a challenge.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately Feinstein hasn't said no yet.
 
sglowrider said:
Not so soon...



Rand Paul is a no on both, so if both can't win some Dem support they may not go through. (He opposed Pompeo for FBI.) If Paul sticks to his guns, it could get interesting with Trump growing frustrated about not being able to get his people in place. If Pompeo can't be confirmed, being forced to find a capable Secretary of State nominee after the way he treated Tillerson could be a challenge.
Click to expand...


That would be a big IF. I don't think Rand Paul will stick to this though.
 
sglowrider said:
Not so soon...



Rand Paul is a no on both, so if both can't win some Dem support they may not go through. (He opposed Pompeo for FBI.) If Paul sticks to his guns, it could get interesting with Trump growing frustrated about not being able to get his people in place. If Pompeo can't be confirmed, being forced to find a capable Secretary of State nominee after the way he treated Tillerson could be a challenge.
Click to expand...


they will win plenty of democrats support though
 
MTF said:
Too simplistic, imo. Obviously the arms manufacturers like Raytheon, Lockheed and General Dynamics would benefit, but I'm not sure Boeing would net benefit (arms sales vs lower airplane sales from a now fecked world). They're not the largest businesses out there in this day anyways. Boeing is 20-25% the mkt cap of Alphabet/Google, and the defense-focused even smaller.

It would be absolutely ruinous for the US govt's finances, and therefore for the country's because the two things never diverge for any long period of time. For most rich people, it would actually be terrible.
Click to expand...

Problem is most other rich corp don't usually spends a lot on lobbying for war, neither they're "donating" for not going to war.
 


Sigh, y'all are paying for this cnut to regain his spot in the rich list. Fml. How can people not see this? More why don't some that can actually care?
 
langster said:


Sigh, y'all are paying for this cnut to regain his spot in the rich list. Fml. How can people not see this? More why don't some that can actually care?
Click to expand...

I truly believe that he saw the money that Putin was making and wanted a piece of the pie. His whole reason for running was to enrich himself and his family.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.