From what i've seen, many of the wars in recent history have been supplied by the United States (and some others). For example, the US has attacked Iraq; a country that has not killed americans before (before the war), nor even plotted to killed americans (before the war). Why would we attack them, especially when we were the ones that supplied them with weapons in the first place (http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/usiraq80s90s.html ). There have been many other wars in which were started by the US, or the US supplied weapons to one or more sides. Why is this occurring?
2007-09-01 10:40:16 · 14 answers · asked by ☢☠☣☢☠☣ 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Why is this occurring? War brings tremendous PROFITS. You are right to question these events!
Iraq For Sale, The War Profiteers part 1 of 10 parts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szrrbLQpE9s
Full Video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6621486727392146155&q=war+profiteers&total=418&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
*
2007-09-01 10:48:05 · answer #1 · answered by >Golden Ticket< 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋
When you have an allie, to keep them as allies and not have them over run, you send aid, weapons, troops etc. The us has stared less wars then most countries on this planet. If you think about iraq, they are enough of a threat that we had to create an alliance between them. we are building them stronger than ever with a democracy where ppl are enjoying school, not dieing for voting for who they realy want, etc. The US doenst start wars, but somtimes we make first moves so that we fight them over there so you dont spend your sundays fighting them in your own streets. Iraq was aiding taliban and other terrorist groups and was pulling away from US and democratic ways.
2007-09-01 11:49:39 · answer #2 · answered by Para-diddle 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
name these wars that the us has started? we supply weapons? the arms industry supplies the weapons. the fact that the arms come from US arms manufactures doesn't mean that the US played a part in the war. it does mean that the weapons were being used for there intended purpose to fight and wage war with. what is wrong with that?
Iraq started the Iraq war by first invading Kuwait, we are there now as a continuation of that episode in history, not for oil or wmds. so again name the wars that the US has started?
2007-09-01 11:08:09 · answer #3 · answered by darrell m 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I won't go so far as to say we "create" every war but we certainly love to jump right in.
I mean, it's pretty obvious we are one of the most militarily aggressive nations on earth----we have been at war for the last 65 years or so with someone or other and we presently have troops in over 140 countries.
Welcome to the Roman Empire and the land of perpetual war.
No we don't start them all but we seem to feel compelled to butt into everyone else's business in order to control the world.
And besides, when we aren't at war we are selling weapons---both these things are absolutely necessary for our economy to survive at the pace that it does.
I'm not smearing the country. Just about any huge, rich, powerful nation is bound to get caught up in trying to rule the world. Rome did it, Britain did it, and now we're doing it.
I wish we could somehow break this pattern of imperialism but it doesn't seem likely.
Maybe China will someday....who knows?
2007-09-01 10:52:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
All wars are started by government with a profit motive - border expansion, resource acquisition, taxing new populations - its a story as old as history itself.
We are taught to believe that this global order of colony building by vast empires was ended in the 1950s, that WW2 was the war to end all wars and that we had learned our lessons. This couldn't be further from the truth.
During the cold war, the major empires were the USA and the USSR - remember this important fact, both claim to be republics and both claim socialist rhetoric. Name a war outside the Falklands or North Africa and one of these empires was elbows deep in the politics of the warring nation(s). England had a few flings and France stayed very busy in Africa, but the end result of this period of the colonial game was won by the USA with few seriously doubting that fact.
The period ended when the USSR and France were simply too exhausted to compete any longer. This is where China comes out on the world stage, essentially replacing France as the colonial heir to Vietnam and Africa and setting itself up as the USA's cooperative rival in the colony race.
2007-09-01 10:58:23 · answer #5 · answered by freedom first 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
ok usa goveronment create war for political and industerial purposes if there were not wars where should weapons be sold? and from where oil for factories should be found? if a country help usa will be in peace and if it be not so ...war
usa have a modern path in postmodern and post post modern world
2007-09-01 12:17:47 · answer #6 · answered by zahra 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gee, I don't know, because they invaded a sovereign nation and then controlled a quarter of the world's oil. Then we got involved in Kosovo, thanks to the UN as we did in Somalia. But I guess we didn't have a reason to invade Afghanistan, they didn't hurt us.
2007-09-01 11:12:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No we spin the globe and stick a pin in where we attack next!
2007-09-01 10:46:30 · answer #8 · answered by Bob from Mars 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No and this question makes no sense
2007-09-01 11:48:06 · answer #9 · answered by tap158 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are many people here in the U.S. who subscribes to your theory.
2007-09-01 10:46:10 · answer #10 · answered by WC 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋