Outsourcing The War Revisited

[FrankJL]

Well, I'm sorry if I'm disrupting this serious thread, but Frank, I just can't ignore your quote above, I just hope it wasn't a freudian slip stating the light engineers were setting up 'fornications', and if that's what they really were doing, I hope you were a good LDS soldier and didn't get involved in this immoral act! LOL

fornications = fortifications...I must have hit the wrong word on the spellchecker

Secondly, to whoever cited Wikipedia as a reliable source needs a reality check. Try turning a paper in college with Wikipedia as a source and see what grade you get. Wikipedia is not reliable for anything.

The whole pipeline deal, never really did exist, or was in serious planning to develop. Its another one of the twisting of the truth, that ended up being popularized by Micheal Moore's movie Fahrenheit 911.

Yes, most of the 9/11 hijacker where Saudis (15 of the 19 to be specific, 2 where from the United Arab Emirates, one from Jordan, and one from Egypt) Mohamad Atta the supposed main planner of the event was the one Egyptian. Though to attack Saudi Arabia (or the UAE, Egypt, or Jordan for that matter) wouldn't make sense. Lest we forget that Zacharias Mousai was to replace Ziad Jarrah, as the pilot of United 93 (the one that crashed into a farm in PA). Richard Reid (a British Citizen)was also to be on United 93 with Mousai, so that plane would have 5 hijackers. Remember, one of the main reasons theorized that the passengers took over the plane was United 93 only had 4 hijackers, the other three planes had 5 hijackers each.

err...there is more I wanted to write but my neighboor is here, and needs help with something...

[LukeAir2006]

"if it was terrorist that were responsible" I find that line the most idiotic thing written. What is more of a terrorist act than flying plane loads of people into buildings and into the ground than what happened 9/11. So what if they were "residing" withing the US. For one thing they weren't permanent residents. But that is beside the point . It was still a terrorist act. So just because they lived on US soil we don't have rights to defend or protect ourselves from attack? Oh please.

Maybe the second most idiotic thing Pam, you've just taken first place.

So terrorists residing within the US, oh, sorry, non-permanent residents residing within the US, carry out a criminal act of terrorism within the US, albeit on a huge scale, and so the US has the right to attack or defend itself. Eh? Defend itself from who exactly? Everybody! Cos a terrorist can be anybody! That would be stopping anyone even slightly suspicious from coming into the US. It wouldn't stop those already residing there. Attack who exactly? The towns or cities where they were residing? That would be the US! Maybe their home towns in Saudi? Remember, the US didn't say: we're going to attack what we believe are the terrorist training camps. There are training camps all over the globe. Quite possibly within the US too. A training camp can be a tent in the Syrian desert or an apartment in Los Angeles. Anywhere.

We know the US were shocked by 9/11. That this could happen on their sacred home turf. But the fact is nobody declared war on the US. No foreign nation attacked the US. This wasn't war. It was crime. I don't think the US could survive an attack by a foreign nation. You've proven that. You would go into meltdown. It would be like War of the Worlds with you guys leaping off buildings and stuff. Lets hope it never happens eh?

For decades the IRA carried out terrorist acts on the UK mainland. It was known that much of the money that paid for the guns and nail bombs that killed and maimed hundreds of innocent British people, was obtained from Irish-American sympathisers. Should the UK have launched a missile attack on New York or Boston where most of these sympathisers reside?

Yeh Pam, first prize baby!

[BenRaines]

Personal attacks are not permitted here. If you have a point make it. If you have a personal conviction air it. If you have reference material then cite it but personal attacks are not allowed.

Consider all warned.

Personal attacks will result in you being put on monitored posts or profile deleted and ISP banned.

Ben Raines

[LukeAir2006]

[The whole pipeline deal, never really did exist, or was in serious planning to develop. Its another one of the twisting of the truth, that ended up being popularized by Micheal Moore's movie Fahrenheit 911.

Do you really believe that FrankJL? You almost render me speechless. Google 'Afghanistan Gas Pipline' and check out some of the hits. Or 'Iraqi Oil'. If you want to be good citizens and good Americans, make sure you know the truth. Defending evil does not make a good citizen. America was not founded on lies and deception. As Latter Day Saints we are forbidden from supporting the secret combination which is today pushing forward with its satanic scheme to overthrow the freedom of all people. Our loyalty first and foremost is to the Lord Jesus Christ, not George Bush or ###### Cheney.

[CrimsonKairos]

Luke, considering that you live in the UK, I'm not surprised you believe the liberal lies that your media peddles to you. Nor am I surprised that you don't understand how a democracy is supposed to work, what with you being under a monarchy and all. No offense, but I wouldn't expect you to understand the value of a superior military when nearly all of your police are forbidden from even carrying guns.

CK you can go back to sleep. This is from Pres. Ezra Taft Benson at General Conference, November 1988:

I testify that wickedness is rapidly expanding in every segment of our society. (See D&C 1:14–16; D&C 84:49–53.) It is more highly organized, more cleverly disguised, and more powerfully promoted than ever before. Secret combinations lusting for power, gain, and glory are flourishing. A secret combination that seeks to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries is increasing its evil influence and control over America and the entire world. (See Ether 8:18–25.)

Luke, read that quote carefully. Did Pres. Benson say the secret combination was from America? No, but then if you admitted that your whole point would go out the window. Since you regard Pres. Benson's political views so much (and he had some great political philosophies), how about this quote from his "The Proper Role of Government"...

The proper role of government is to protect equal rights, not provide equal things.

That's a conservative view if I've ever heard one, and the best way to protect equal rights is with a superior military. The government is meant to be a "extended commercial limited federal democratic republic" (as John Adams once defined the USA). If Hillary and the majority of democrats have their way, we'll become a socialist state.

Oh, and I didn't really expect you to come up with the Joseph Smith quote. I just thought I'd give you a chance to prove you're not making stuff up, but I see you've passed that chance up without even a token effort.

[JcDean78]

<div class='quotemain'>

[The whole pipeline deal, never really did exist, or was in serious planning to develop. Its another one of the twisting of the truth, that ended up being popularized by Micheal Moore's movie Fahrenheit 911.

Do you really believe that FrankJL? You almost render me speechless. Google 'Afghanistan Gas Pipline' and check out some of the hits. Or 'Iraqi Oil'. If you want to be good citizens and good Americans, make sure you know the truth. Defending evil does not make a good citizen. America was not founded on lies and deception. As Latter Day Saints we are forbidden from supporting the secret combination which is today pushing forward with its satanic scheme to overthrow the freedom of all people. Our loyalty first and foremost is to the Lord Jesus Christ, not George Bush or ###### Cheney.

Luke those secret combinations are on the left with the likes of Harry Reid, Pelosi, and Hitlary Clinton who are out to destroy freedom any place it is and return to a world ruled by neo Hitlers and Stalins. They will lie, decieve, and do anything at all possible to destroy what is good in this world.

[Guest mamacat]

the outsourcing of u.s. mercenaries fits in very well with the following description of our current government ~

I suggest that most folks these days are very confused about what "capitalism" really is. What the corporate "globalism" of NAFTA, WTO, ECU, the World Bank, the international Monetary Fund, and other institutions (both governmental and "quasi-governmental") which portray themselves as advocates of "free trade" ACTUALLY support is not free enterprise capitalism at all ... but actually a form of MERCANTILISM that calls itself "capitalism" but is actually a very statist set of economic principles not terribly far removed from fascism.

Free enterprise means the government leaves people free to conduct their own economic affairs, with neither aid nor hindrance from government (other than enforcement of laws to prevent criminal fraud, theft, coercion and other violations of legitimate rights). Mercantilism, on the other hand (like fascism), is a system in which very detailed and restrictive laws and regulations control the economic actions of individuals and companies-- and like all systems in which the government has the power to grant preferential treatment to some at the expense of others, this often results in the de facto establishment of "government favorite" corporations that enjoy special permits, subsidies, approvals, government contracts and other preferential treatment that gives them enormous advantage over both private individuals and other companies. Indeed, the only major difference between systems of mercantilism and fascism, and those of socialism, is that the means of production and distribution are "owned" by private companies rather than by "the people" (a euphemism for "the government.")

Libertarian economist Murray Rothbard defined mercantilism (historically) as "a system of statism which employed economic regulation to build up a structure of imperial state power, as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individuals or groups favored by the state."

Although popular terminology (I'm avoiding the inflammatory word "propaganda") uses the terms "free enterprise" and "big business" almost interchangeably, there is in fact nothing "free" about the "enterprise" promoted by this form of government-sanctioned corporatism. It bears no resemblance whatsoever to the economics of Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson, and is in fact merely another form of coercive state control over economics. I'm opposed to that form of mis-named "free enterprise" too, although you won't find a stronger supporter of genuine free enterprise capitalism anywhere.

What happens with the World Trade Organization and IMF that makes so many people angry at "capitalism" is that these quasi-governmental agencies operate OUTSIDE the economic laws of genuine free enterprise, with vast sums of money that do NOT come from the informed investment decisions of private individuals but rather from the pockets of the taxpayers. (Or from the vaults of international bankers but "guaranteed" by government funds.) These institutions can then make huge risk-free "loans" to developing nations that are contingent on the developing nations doing business with particular "sanctioned" multinational corporations. Free enterprise my foot! The loans are also contingent on the developing nations agreement to revise their domestic currency policies along certain lines in order to receive this aid ... and while the "intent" of this strategy may (or may not) be noble, supposedly designed to come to the rescue of corrupt governments which inflate their currencies and ravage their economies and seeking to lead them to stability by offering massive aid in return for fiscal soundness, IN FACT such support not only keeps the officials in power and enables them to mismanage the reforms but also aggravates the corruption. Countless billions of IMF aid are wasted on bungled reforms by incompetent officials or have disappeared into the pockets of central bankers and crooked administrators; as well as leaving the PEOPLE of the developing countries saddled with enormous industries not of their own choosing that destroy their indigenous economic assets and natural resources, paid for with investment dollars that are NO RISK WHATSOEVER to the multinational corporations who benefit from these guaranteed "development loans" on conditions dictated by their cronies in the IMF! That's just the barest tip of the iceberg of what's wrong with "global corporatism" but the point is that many folks, having been convinced that this system is "capitalism," are justifiably angry at "capitalism." Only it ain't!

The biggest "bill of goods" we have been sold with respect to the whole political/economic spectrum (and here I'm not insulting anybody by saying they've been duped, because we've all been "duped" by this false dichotomy) is the idea that the two "sides" of the political coin are "massive government management of social welfare programs" versus "massive government support of big business and military." That's a joke, because those are the SAME side of the coin, just dressed up differently to appeal to our different emotional preferences! The real coin is "massive government of ANY stripe" versus freedom of the individual supported by minimal government protection of rights. But nobody tells us that anymore. That's what America is REALLY all about - not big business and military versus the welfare state, but big government versus the protection of individual freedom and initiative to solve our own problems and seek our own happiness through VOLUNTARY cooperation rather than the watchful eye of big brother who knows best! If we can export THOSE values to the world at large, then I am happy to stand up and say I am a proud supporter of the American system worldwide. But if we choose to identify American virtue with military might, and the free enterprise system with government promotion of big corporate interests, then I can easily identify with the harsh judgment this country gets from many quarters these days.

~ Gregory Ellison

[CrimsonKairos]

There are certain truths to that excerpt, mamacat, but reality is not often as simple as "free enterprise" or "mercantilism." I do believe in capitalism, but govt. must be able to regulate to some degree. Anyone remember when J.P. Morgan had to bail out the U.S. govt. because of a weak federal bank and other fiscal weaknesses of the USA?

[Guest mamacat]

Mercantilism, on the other hand (like fascism), is a system in which very detailed and restrictive laws and regulations control the economic actions of individuals and companies-- and like all systems in which the government has the power to grant preferential treatment to some at the expense of others, this often results in the de facto establishment of "government favorite" corporations that enjoy special permits, subsidies, approvals, government contracts and other preferential treatment that gives them enormous advantage over both private individuals and other companies.

this applies to the preferential treatment given to private corporations in the war. the following article ilustrates how the bush administration tries to cut funding from u.s. military to fund the enomous expense of the private corporations in Iraq. and why the large corporations will do whatever they can with their government clout and connections to extend war for as long as possible, as it gives them enormous profitability, as well as enormous power, operating with governmental power, without governmental accountability ~

Bush to propose trimming Army Reserve

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush will use his new budget to propose cutting the size of the Army Reserve to its lowest level in three decades and stripping up to $4 billion from two fighter aircraft programs.

The proposals, likely to face opposition on Capitol Hill, come as the Defense Department struggles to trim personnel costs and other expenses to pay for the war in Iraq and a host of other pricey aircraft and high-tech programs. Bush will send his 2007 budget to Congress on Feb. 6.

The proposed Army Reserve cut is part of a broader plan to achieve a new balance of troop strength and combat power among the active Army, the National Guard and reserves to fight the global war on terrorism and to defend the homeland.

The Army sent a letter to members of Congress on Thursday outlining the plan. A copy was provided to The Associated Press.

Under the plan, the authorized troop strength of the Army Reserve would drop from 205,000 — the current number of slots it is allowed — to 188,000, the actual number of soldiers it had at the end of 2005. Because of recruiting and other problems, the Army Reserve has been unable to fill its ranks to its authorized level.

Army leaders have said they are taking a similar approach to shrinking the National Guard. They are proposing to cut that force from its authorized level of 350,000 soldiers to 333,000, the actual number now on the rolls.

Some in Congress have vowed to fight the National Guard cuts. Its soldiers and resources are controlled by state governors unless Guard units are mobilized by the president for federal duty, as Bush did after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

"I remain convinced that we do not have a large enough force," Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., said in a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Proposals to cut funding in two key jet fighter programs were described by defense analysts and congressional aides, some of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because the reductions have not been announced.

One plan would eliminate funding for an alternative engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, the military's next-generation combat plane.

The second would cut money for F-22 fighters during 2007. But it is actually a contract restructuring that would add that money back — and more — over the long run by stretching out the program for an additional two years and buying up to four more planes. The new plan calls for buying 60 aircraft through 2010, rather than 56 in the next two years.

The Joint Strike Fighter engine is being built by General Electric and England-based Rolls Royce, and the plan to dump them as suppliers has triggered intense lobbying, including a handwritten note from British Prime Minister Tony Blair to Bush.

On the homefront, the close to $2 billion cut would hit General Electric engine plants, and possibly jobs, in Ohio and Massachusetts and a Rolls Royce plant in Indiana.

"This is a big question for GE," said Loren Thompson, military analyst with the Lexington Institute think tank. "They could get shut out of the fighter engine business over the next 10 years."

The proposal would benefit Connecticut-based Pratt & Whitney, which got the original contract for the Lockheed Martin aircraft, and delivered its first engine last month.

GE spokesman Dan Meador said the alternate engine program provides competition for Pratt & Whitney, helping to drive down costs while also providing a back-up if problems arise.

"It's very important to GE and Rolls Royce, and we're performing well," he said.

Defense officials, however, said the Pratt & Whitney engine has performed well and within budget, and noted that a number of other jet fighter programs — including the F-22 — have just one engine maker. Pratt & Whitney also makes the engines for the F-22.

Posted 1/28/2006

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...on-budget_x.htm

[FrankJL]

Luke... You've made it clear your nothing but a conspiracy nut, as such you don't deserve any sort of response, your ignorance and blindness to the world around you has clearly clouded any logical thought from you.

but then again, you probably regard me as part of some conspiracy as well...after all I'm in the Army, work with communication's stuff, and hold a pretty high level security clearance.

[CrimsonKairos]

Thanks for your service, Frank.

[pam]

I believe that the terrorists are waiting for the Democrats to be in charge and then they too will be tested and see what their non response is in the US when we are attacked and Democrats are the ones who have to respond.

I am prepared, are you?

Ben Raines

I'm in agreement with you Ben. And since Democrats have to analyze and analyze again and analyze again and consult and consult again every bit of information before making a decision to act....what ever act of terrorism would long be a piece of history before that action is taken.

[sixpacktr]

So Luke, I gotta ask:

Are you one of those people that believes that somehow Pres Bush "set up" 9/11? That the US Gov't blew up the WTC and blamed it on some Islamofascists to take the heat off of the close election?

[LukeAir2006]

Luke... You've made it clear your nothing but a conspiracy nut, as such you don't deserve any sort of response, your ignorance and blindness to the world around you has clearly clouded any logical thought from you.

but then again, you probably regard me as part of some conspiracy as well...after all I'm in the Army, work with communication's stuff, and hold a pretty high level security clearance.

Oh Frank you're so brave and true and I'm just a conspiracy nut. Maybe you've just got your head in the sand and can't stomach the truth. Do you care whats true or is it a case of if you can't see it, its not there, eh? Or maybe you just cherry pick which truths you like. Oh, by the way, this conspiracy nut is in the air force and has the great privelege of training US and UK pilots to destroy their 'enemies'. Oh and there's CK waving his flag. Whats your military service history, CK?

[LukeAir2006]

So Luke, I gotta ask:

Are you one of those people that believes that somehow Pres Bush "set up" 9/11? That the US Gov't blew up the WTC and blamed it on some Islamofascists to take the heat off of the close election?

Sixpacktr, I don't know what happened or who was responsible? Do you? I have an enquiring mind, quite rare it would seem, and there are a lot of things about 9/11 that don't add up? The government version doesn't explain the events of that day. A lot of information has been hidden or denied. If the government has nothing to hide, why? The most alarming thing is that certain individuals on this site, who identify themselves as LDS, are actually terrified to even think about such things. People afraid to think or engage in candid discussion are in an awful state of mental slavery.

[Outshined]

The 9/11 conspiracy theories have been disproven. Yes, we know what happened and who was responsible.

And I fail to see the point of attempting to characterize everyone who does not share your opinions as "terrified" or "afraid to think". That's a bit adolescent.

[JcDean78]

I loved the theory about the Pentegon being hit by a missile or by a bomb. I had an aquantiance here who is just 110% convinced it is the truth. Well as for me I know it is false because I come form an area up in middle of Virginia and just happen to personally know somebody who was there that day and was in the parking lot when the plane hit (He works for the Airforce).

If the planes had not be caught on video hitting the towers in NY, then there would be people would be saying the same thing.

If you think Bush knew and did not stop it then that is just as crazy. They said the same thing about FDR and Pearl Harbor.

All of those theories have been disproven. Can we even call them theories? Don't theories have to have at least some facts to make the plausible?

[Outshined]

Popular Mechanics even went to the trouble of devoting a cover story to explaining why the conspiracy theories are wrong.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...aw/1227842.html

[CrimsonKairos]

Oh and there's CK waving his flag. Whats your military service history, CK?

Actually, my emoticon was saluting the flag. It's a little thing called patriotism...heard of it?

I have not personally served in the armed forces. My dad was a fighter pilot and squadron commander in the Air Force. One of my older brothers also served in the Air Force. Another of my older brothers passed up going to the University of Washington Medical School (in the top ten med schools in the USA) to go the military medical school and serve as a doctor in the Army. One of my grandfathers was a tailgunner during WWII.

Oh, and our family genealogy uncovered a pay-stub from an ancestor who fought in the Revolutionary War (though I'm sure that's a period of history you'd rather forget, lol). So yeah, our family is pro-American, pro-military and dang proud of it. B)

p.s. please don't tell everyone that I stay awake at night, too terrified to go to sleep, afraid of facing the truth that I live in the world's leading secret combination who sups on the blood of innocents and follows a course that would make Hitler blush...please don't tell, it'd really embarass me.

[Guest mamacat]

[LukeAir2006]

I can't let this go unaddressed.

<div class='quotemain'>

The US has no mandate to be the worlds police. Joesph Smith warned that it would be the United States undoing.

Please provide me with the precise quote from Joseph Smith you speak of so glibly. Thanks in advance.

CK, here's the quote that I spoke of so glibly!

"There will be two political parties in this country. One will be the Republican, and the other the Democrat party. These two parties will go to war and out of these two parties will spring another party which will be the Independant American party. The United States will spend her strength warring in foreign lands until other nations will say ' Lets divide up the lands of the United States', then the people of the US will unite and swear by the blood of their fore-fathers, that the land shall not be divided. Then the country will go to war, and they will fight until one half of the US Army will give up, and the rest will continue to struggle."

Joseph Smith, Life Story of Mosiah L Hancock p.29 A typewritten copy of the original manuscript is available in the BYU library.

[a-train]

The father of one of my best friends growing up (who wasn't LDS) was a major John Birch Society adherent. It seemed that no conversation could be had with this man without benefit of Conspiracy Theory talk.

While I don't believe that there is a single earthly clandestine conspiracy of men behind all that is evil in the world, I do definitely believe that Satan is behind all evil. Furthermore, I don't doubt one bit that deception, plunder, and a general corruption exists throughout the U.S. government on levels from the smallest localities to the highest national offices.

I believe the wicked are far from united. And the divided kingdom of the devil will fall and great shall be the fall thereof.

I personally cannot rule out any possiblity and see little need to do so. We are the saints of God. We are not here to fight the enemy through engagements of war and go about enforcing our own interests with bloody horror and military force. It is certain that the inability of our government to protect us exists and its seeming constant state of warfare in distant lands is a sign of at a minimum a gross preoccupation.

Our duty as Saints is to do the work of the LORD and let him fight our battles. Remember the Jews? Was their military cunning and strategy what kept them from the spoil of the gentiles? Did the Nephites keep themselves out of destruction with nothing more than their armies? It is righteousness that qualifies a people for the protection of God. We should work to know the engagements of secret combinations and purge them from among us, but such knowledge will only be granted us if we are worthy to receive it. Otherwise, we will be left to the spoil as were the prideful covenant breakers we read of in the scriptures.

-a-train

[CrimsonKairos]

Until Christ comes again, I don't think it's useful to compare the running of a nation with the running of the Church.

The former must be able to physically enforce laws, while the latter deals with spiritual matters. In other words, the Church can't send you to jail for not paying tithing.

God has blessed America to become the greatest nation on earth, and for better or worse, that power carries with it responsibility.

We fight to preserve our right to worship freely and let others worship freely. Our enemy--by and large--would see a marriage of church and state such as exists in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries where the government enforces spirituality. Send a woman down the street without her abaya or veil, and see how quickly the "spiritual police" come with their clubs.

No thank you.

Luke, thanks for actually providing the quote you referenced. I see undertones of the Civil War in it myself, and nothing of what you ascribed to it, which was that America would fall because of foreign military conflicts. That, and this quote is attributed to Smith by someone who allegedly heard him say it. It wasn't written by Joseph Smith himself. I'm always wary of the "I remember hearing the Prophet Joseph say this once upon a time..." things.

[LukeAir2006]

You're welcome. I don't see the connection between America spending her strength warring in foreign lands and the Civil war but we can interpret these things lots of ways. The Civil war was certainly the start of the wars that would be poured out upon the nations.. At the end of the day all that will matter is who's side we're on. Let's hope all of us who profess to be Saints are on the side of the Lord.

I agree that America is a great nation and was established under the inspiration of God for a marvellous purpose. Its important that the citizens of this chosen land strive to keep it great.

[a-train]

Anybody got any details on the validity and accuracy of that quote? If Joseph Smith really said exactly that, then he made some extremely correct predictions. The Republican party didn't form for many years after his death.

-a-train