Aneirin
Posts: 6121
Joined: 3/18/2006
From: Tamaris
Status: offline
|
I am just wondering here, the ills that were South Africa, apatheid and all it entailed, the world has helped to destroy what was happening there via world condemnation and sanctions. Now it is the turn of Israel to recieive world condemnation and other actions for it's regime, so as it seems the world likes to pick less than ideal countries to change, so I am wondering, which country/regime is next ?
But it interests me to notice the countries that fall under scrutiny tend to be civilised but of little use to the rest of the world, in that they are just societies that provide nothing that is to the world's advantage, so perhaps a safe bet for worldwide attention.
But what of the countries that have what the world wants, you know commodities like minerals,oil and gas and the regimes that exist there, would the world be so brave I wonder for there are many societies less than ideal sitting on the wealth the big players and their sycophants want, but to ensure they own portion, they leave these countries problems alone.
Iraq I believe was a special case, Iraq I believe it was always intended to be beaten by outside forces, all the big players wanted was a good enough reason to invade. But why are places chosen to be invaded or bombed into submission when others just sanctions and world condemnation seem to work, or is it if the latter options do not work, the next stage is military force dependant of course on what the country holds that is of value to those who act. Say for instance sanctions on South Africa had not worked and Apatheid still existed, would military force from outside ever happen as sanctions do not help the world that seeks markets to export to ?
Is there a difference between those whom the world condemns, a difference based upon what the country has to offer and with that a different level of attention ?
So, on one level we have had South Africa and now the world's eyes are on Israel to receive a verbal bashing, as those countries are just people, nothing really there of use to those who commit wealth and man power to sort out, on that same level, which countries does anyone think is next once Israel is quelled for it will be, I cannot see the world backing down on this one ?
But on another level, the level that seems to require military intervention, undoubtedly countries that have something to control, Iraq was one, Afghanistan is a possible due to the mineral reserves, which country is next ? Iran ?
Now as I have if I have identified two different levels of attention, could it be the levels are intentional so that humanitarian need becomes the reason for trade conquests and with that is the military now what it always was, a tool to enable the merchants to expand their empire. But one wonders if the merchants are the people, or is it as it has always been the poor fight for ideals whilst the controllers reap the benefits.
_____________________________
Everything we are is the result of what we have thought, the mind is everything, what we think, we become - Guatama Buddha
Conservatism is distrust of people tempered by fear - William Gladstone
|
Ok, Israel, whos'e next ? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread