The Virtuous Cycle of War
... or how to line the pockets of your big business friends with loot from taxpayers (re: sheep) and foreign nations (re: lambs).
I was having a conversation last week with a friend from work, and he was the one that coined the catchphrase, The Virtuous Cycle of War. [Thanks DM.] War is actually not a bad thing economically, if you're looking for short term gains, and don't mind if lots of people die in the process. When executed well, it's also a great study of the manipulation of truth, change management, the cult of personality, sheer balls and incredible stupidity.
If you're a nation with a great stockpile of arms, a well greased military force (and I mean that in the most un-gayest of ways), you're looking at tremendous capacity to wage wars, but a complete lack of demand. It is expensive to maintain a ready capacity to wage war. Old munitions need to replaced to maintain their efficacy; vehicles need to be serviced; soldiers need to practice. It all costs money. Ask the Russians about this. The cold war was won because the Russians couldn't maintain their capacity. America out spent the Russians because they could spend to maintain capacity -- and the maintenance of capacity is lucrative business.
After 9/11, an opportunity presented itself that left the military industrial complex salivating. The government's response though, was disappointing. Invade Afghanistan, depose the Taliban regime, oust al Qaeda and hopefully, give Osama bin Laden a machine-gun enema. Along with the Taliban however, the truth and intent also became casualties in Afghanistan -- collateral damage if you will, from the most unfriendliest of fire. Instead of entering the country as heroes, as Americans were, an opportunity to do right was lost. America helped to create the Taliban that was so successful in getting the Russians out, so there was credibility there that could have been capitalized on. Unfortunately, a cowboy came riding into dusty Kabul, and no one was entirely sure who's side he was actually on.
War is an expensive endeavour for a nation. Every bullet, every shell, every bomb -- every piece of equipment needs to be serviced or replaced. As well, blowing up buildings along with people, necessitates some post-war spending to rebuild. The hearts and minds aren't won by leaving a disaster behind, but leaving a sustainable nation that can thrive without foreign-aid intervention. The military industrial complex love wars. It's more lucrative than just maintaining a steady-state capacity. Getting a piece of the rebuilding action isn't too bad either, especially when there's so much noise going on (bombs and bullets tend to do that). With so much noise, no one really notices if the rebuilding gets a little too expensive.
Invading Afghanistan and the Afghanistan mission was all justifiable and warranted. It was the right thing to do. Problem is, other than opium, there isn't much of anything worthwhile there. America was burning through cash at a steady clip and wasn't even getting a buzz. Only the military industrial complex was flying, and taxpayers were suffering from a compounding bad trip. Those in power realized that they couldn't sustain the Afghanistan mission. Bin Laden was nowhere to be found, and eventually, the military would have to be pulled out, with a huge bill and not much to show for it. Let's face it, who gives a rats ass about a free Afghanistan. If there really was an interest in a free Afghanistan, 9/11 wouldn't have needed to happen to provide the impetus.
So, huge spending bill + no sustainable war to keep the cash flowing to the military industrial complex = big problem. Enter Iraq. A wealthy nation with lots of natural resources to be bilked. A population that wouldn't protest too much if the Saddam regime was suddenly replaced. Neighbours that didn't really like Iraq. Even the bad guys, al Qaeda and Iran, wouldn't protest too much if Saddam got replaced. The only people that would really get pissed are the French. Bonus! Solution, invade Iraq, tie it to the Afghanistan mission and remind everyone that 9/11 happened. The truth was already dead anyway.
The result has been nothing but a roaring success. Saddam was toppled in no time. The couch potatoes got to see the ultimate reality show -- no one got off the island and there were no survivors. The military industrial complex suddenly had demand flowing like oil from an Arabian pipeline. Business was again good -- and more importantly, sustainable. And Afghani-who? Get the other nations in world to waste their money on cleaning up that disaster. Hell, maybe even the French could be convinced to pitch in -- genius!
Meanwhile in Iraq, send American made missiles into villages and towns. Blow stuff up. All casualties are insurgents, anyway. The result: munitions to be replaced; towns and villages to be rebuilt -- all funded by Iraq's own oil money -- with the cash routed back to American companies providing materials and services. The virtuous cycle of war -- sound business practice for the military industrial complex and the new world colonialism. All that's needed are some friends in the right places, and a docile and scared shitless population back home.
Updated: October 15, 2006
I was having a conversation last week with a friend from work, and he was the one that coined the catchphrase, The Virtuous Cycle of War. [Thanks DM.] War is actually not a bad thing economically, if you're looking for short term gains, and don't mind if lots of people die in the process. When executed well, it's also a great study of the manipulation of truth, change management, the cult of personality, sheer balls and incredible stupidity.
If you're a nation with a great stockpile of arms, a well greased military force (and I mean that in the most un-gayest of ways), you're looking at tremendous capacity to wage wars, but a complete lack of demand. It is expensive to maintain a ready capacity to wage war. Old munitions need to replaced to maintain their efficacy; vehicles need to be serviced; soldiers need to practice. It all costs money. Ask the Russians about this. The cold war was won because the Russians couldn't maintain their capacity. America out spent the Russians because they could spend to maintain capacity -- and the maintenance of capacity is lucrative business.
After 9/11, an opportunity presented itself that left the military industrial complex salivating. The government's response though, was disappointing. Invade Afghanistan, depose the Taliban regime, oust al Qaeda and hopefully, give Osama bin Laden a machine-gun enema. Along with the Taliban however, the truth and intent also became casualties in Afghanistan -- collateral damage if you will, from the most unfriendliest of fire. Instead of entering the country as heroes, as Americans were, an opportunity to do right was lost. America helped to create the Taliban that was so successful in getting the Russians out, so there was credibility there that could have been capitalized on. Unfortunately, a cowboy came riding into dusty Kabul, and no one was entirely sure who's side he was actually on.
War is an expensive endeavour for a nation. Every bullet, every shell, every bomb -- every piece of equipment needs to be serviced or replaced. As well, blowing up buildings along with people, necessitates some post-war spending to rebuild. The hearts and minds aren't won by leaving a disaster behind, but leaving a sustainable nation that can thrive without foreign-aid intervention. The military industrial complex love wars. It's more lucrative than just maintaining a steady-state capacity. Getting a piece of the rebuilding action isn't too bad either, especially when there's so much noise going on (bombs and bullets tend to do that). With so much noise, no one really notices if the rebuilding gets a little too expensive.
Invading Afghanistan and the Afghanistan mission was all justifiable and warranted. It was the right thing to do. Problem is, other than opium, there isn't much of anything worthwhile there. America was burning through cash at a steady clip and wasn't even getting a buzz. Only the military industrial complex was flying, and taxpayers were suffering from a compounding bad trip. Those in power realized that they couldn't sustain the Afghanistan mission. Bin Laden was nowhere to be found, and eventually, the military would have to be pulled out, with a huge bill and not much to show for it. Let's face it, who gives a rats ass about a free Afghanistan. If there really was an interest in a free Afghanistan, 9/11 wouldn't have needed to happen to provide the impetus.
So, huge spending bill + no sustainable war to keep the cash flowing to the military industrial complex = big problem. Enter Iraq. A wealthy nation with lots of natural resources to be bilked. A population that wouldn't protest too much if the Saddam regime was suddenly replaced. Neighbours that didn't really like Iraq. Even the bad guys, al Qaeda and Iran, wouldn't protest too much if Saddam got replaced. The only people that would really get pissed are the French. Bonus! Solution, invade Iraq, tie it to the Afghanistan mission and remind everyone that 9/11 happened. The truth was already dead anyway.
The result has been nothing but a roaring success. Saddam was toppled in no time. The couch potatoes got to see the ultimate reality show -- no one got off the island and there were no survivors. The military industrial complex suddenly had demand flowing like oil from an Arabian pipeline. Business was again good -- and more importantly, sustainable. And Afghani-who? Get the other nations in world to waste their money on cleaning up that disaster. Hell, maybe even the French could be convinced to pitch in -- genius!
Meanwhile in Iraq, send American made missiles into villages and towns. Blow stuff up. All casualties are insurgents, anyway. The result: munitions to be replaced; towns and villages to be rebuilt -- all funded by Iraq's own oil money -- with the cash routed back to American companies providing materials and services. The virtuous cycle of war -- sound business practice for the military industrial complex and the new world colonialism. All that's needed are some friends in the right places, and a docile and scared shitless population back home.
Updated: October 15, 2006
- Why is CNN Censoring Its US Domestic News? -- truth is a casuality in the race to present disinformation. The media gladly plays along.
- US War Against Iran Seen As Inevitable -- if you apply the same virtuous cycle above, the US will invade Iran next, but will leave North Korea alone. Why is North Korea off the radar? A war with North Korea would piss off China and kill the South Korean economy.
- Bush keeps revising war justification -- why is there a war in Iraq right now? Bush doesn't seem to know.
- Can Bush Cancel Elections? -- oh shit ...
Comments
Post a Comment