It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by soficrow
...Socialist countries start venture funds so government can play the role of an investment firm - usually because established firms think business in their nation is too risky to finance.
...It's a completely different thing...
Originally posted by soficrow
...Socialist countries start venture funds so government can play the role of an investment firm - usually because established firms think business in their nation is too risky to finance.
...It's a completely different thing...
The ideology in the socialist countries is Marxist. The idea of a socialist state was drawn from Marx and then later developed by the first leader of the first socialist state – Vladimir I. Lenin. The Soviet Union was the first “socialist experiment” and also a prototype for socialist countries later on. The system was created from scratch. While it started as a fairly dynamic system, later it ossified due to political rigidity.
A socialist state as any other modern state has three main branches of power – legislative, judiciary, and executive. Nevertheless, in most socialist countries the overarching power is the party – the party makes the decisions about production, the party supervises production, in short the party combines both political and administrative functions. Most (all) socialist countries functioned or continue to function as one-party state. Property Forms In a socialist system the means of production (physical capital) belongs to the state that represents the people. There is no private ownership of land. There is limited private ownership of housing and small-scale physical capital.
Socialist and Communist countries have what you call a Military-Governmental-Industrial Conspiracy....not the US....
Originally posted by soficrow
Governments in capitalist countries do not need - or want - to hire venture capital/ investment firms to develop business - communist/socialist countries do, because capitalist venture funds won't touch them. ...If you don't get that, you need to take a few business courses.
...Carlyle Group has prospered and increased its profit margin by upwards of $8 Billion(?) since Bush became president - why?
re: "Military-Governmental-Industrial Conspiracy" is the title of the
article I quoted - I added a question mark to initiate discussion.
Originally posted by Muaddib
What you don't seem to understand is that there is a difference between state owned venture funds, or state owned corporations, which is what socialist/communist countries have, and hiring private firms such as Carlyle Group, Microsoft, GE, etc, etc, to meet the needs of the military or undertake tasks which could not be done without the help of such private firms, which is what capitalist countries do. There is a difference soficrow and what the US is doing has been done in other capitalist countries.
[edit on 4-2-2005 by Muaddib]
Originally posted by Maudib
the Carlyle Group has bought corporations which have products from many different fields soficrow. Carlyle has over 100 businesses, here is a link with a list of those businesses.
www.creda.sk.ca...
Originally posted by soficrow
Like these?
Carlyle Flying Club;Carlyle Golf Club; Carlyle Sports Arena; Halliburton; Houston Technologies Inc. ?
and these?
....Cut & Curl Beauty Salon; Carlyle Co-op Lumber; Prairie Dog Drive Inn; Royal Canadian Mounted Police; Moose Mountain Nursing Home; Canada Post; and my favorite ...Froggies Gym.
................
Carlyle has offices for Halliburton, Houston Technologies, and a few more of the usual suspects. .....Do you have some kind of inside info? Like Carlyle Group bought the town to escape the coming conflagrations, floods and catastrophes and is using US tax dollars to build their getaway?
[edit on 4-2-2005 by soficrow]
Originally posted by Muaddib
Originally posted by soficrow
Like these?
Carlyle Flying Club;Carlyle Golf Club; Carlyle Sports Arena; Halliburton; Houston Technologies Inc. ?
and these?
....Cut & Curl Beauty Salon; Carlyle Co-op Lumber; Prairie Dog Drive Inn; Royal Canadian Mounted Police; Moose Mountain Nursing Home; Canada Post; and my favorite ...Froggies Gym.
................
Carlyle has offices for Halliburton, Houston Technologies, and a few more of the usual suspects. .....Do you have some kind of inside info? Like Carlyle Group bought the town to escape the coming conflagrations, floods and catastrophes and is using US tax dollars to build their getaway?
[edit on 4-2-2005 by soficrow]
First of all, do you realize you are making fun at, and pointing the fact that many of the companies that Carlyle Group owns are nothing out of the ordinary?.... which would mean the "conspiracy attributed to this company is false".....
Second, those are the services and products that they offer to the public...there are other services and products which are not for the public of course....
Originally posted by soficrow
Hmmm. Did you notice the part about this being a small town in Saskatchewan Canada? ....I guess you don't know that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Canada Post are actually owned by the government of Canada...
...or are you saying that Carlyle group owns the government of Canada, not just a small twon in Saskatchewan named Carlyle?
Emergency:
Ambulance 453-2455
Fire Alarm 453-2200
Hospital 455-2771
Royal Canadian Mounted Police 453-6707
Originally posted by smallpeeps
Muaddib: This is not correct. The MIC of America is financed by taxpayer dollars whereas the Russian MIC is more of a central government industry.
Originally posted by smallpeeps
You noticed how THEIR Vietnam war (Afghanistan) bankrupted their nation, right?
The deterioration in the economy, and the paralysis of central power that occurred in the late 1980s and ultimately the collapse of the Soviet Union is thus seen as the direct outcome of Gorbachev’s perestroika.
Originally posted by smallpeeps
Our Vietnam made the core war-profiteers very rich. The American taxpayer and his belief in his vote will fund a MIC because he'll happily think that his tax dollars are going to something good when in fact, half his taxes are being used to build weapons and train warriors. He will gladly pay those taxes year after year and not question the need for war. It's a pretty sweet system for those on top (and who never face a bullet).
Originally posted by smallpeeps
The military priorities in Russia and China are in response to us. Presumably they'd want to buy butter and not guns, right? In America, we could end war (yes we have that power) but instead, the profitability of war continues to be massaged. The socialist states cannot change the world, only America has the power now.
CHINA AND INDIA ARE THE TWO MOST-POPULOUS COUNTRIES IN
THE WORLD. MUTUAL SUSPICIONS REMAIN, AFTER THE TWO COUNTRIES
FOUGHT A SHORT WAR MORE THAN 35 YEARS AGO. V-O-A'S STEPHANIE HO
REPORTS THE THIRD COUNTRY IN THE CURRENT NUCLEAR PICTURE IS
PAKISTAN -- A COUNTRY INDIA ACCUSES CHINA OF PROVIDING WITH
MISSILE TECHNOLOGY.
TEXT: BLAME FLIES FREELY AMONG THE THREE ASIAN NEIGHBORS --
CHINA, INDIA AND PAKISTAN.
Originally posted by smallpeeps
Here's an article about Nixon's Madman Theory in which he wanted China to think he was nuts and capable of nuclear first strike. Comforting, eh?
Countries like Russia and China have not been the moving force of war on the planet during century #20. They have responded to war fostered by America.
Originally posted by smallpeeps
Prescott Bush was part of the Wall Street machinery that funded the Nazis. You know this, right?
Originally posted by smallpeeps
You are really ignoring some big facts. America profits from war and war has made it the Juggernaut it is. That fact is made possible by wall street and the bankers who love to see men die in war. These men hear cash registers when others hear .50 caliber weapons fire.
you did mention the 1980s war of the U.S.S.R. against Afghanistan.... The Russian government went to war against this country...the US didn't make them do it.....
Operation Ajax was the first time the Central Intelligence Agency orchestrated a plot to overthrow a democratically-elected government. The success of this operation, and its relatively low cost, encouraged the CIA to successfully carry out a similar operation in Guatemala a year later. However, many historians argue that dissatisfaction with the reinstalled Shah led directly to the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran.
Originally posted by soficrow
This thread has some good information about Carlyle Group, and figures regarding its phenomenal growth and profits under the Bush administration.
.
Originally posted by smallpeeps
The US's involvement with Operation Ajax caused the rise of the first Islamic state.
In simple terms, the first Islamic state established in Medina was based on a social contract, was constitutional in character and the ruler ruled with the explicit written consent of all the citizens of the state. Today we need to emulate Muhammad (PBUH) and draw up our own constitutions, historically and temporally specific to our conditions and based on the eternal and transcendent principles revealed by Allah (SWT).
Originally posted by smallpeeps
From Wikipedia:
Operation Ajax was the first time the Central Intelligence Agency orchestrated a plot to overthrow a democratically-elected government. The success of this operation, and its relatively low cost, encouraged the CIA to successfully carry out a similar operation in Guatemala a year later. However, many historians argue that dissatisfaction with the reinstalled Shah led directly to the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran.
Originally posted by smallpeeps
As for my use of rhetoric, I'll just quote the dictionary and thank you for the compliment.
Rhetoric: 1: the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a : the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b: the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion.
3. palaver, hot air, empty words, empty talk, rhetoric -- (loud and confused and empty talk; "mere rhetoric")