[Peace-discuss] Trumping the Constitution (does that matter?)

[E. Wayne Johnson]

Applying what I learned from Ron Szoke,  it's all in the way that you 
define stability.

An unbroken thread of war across several presidential changes is 
actually pretty
steady business for the military-industrial complex.  Bringing that to 
an end would
lead to a destabilization of their international trade. They are likely 
very interested in
international stability as defined as continual wars and continual 
uprisings presenting
new opportunities crying out for military "solutions"




Karen Medina wrote:
> I lost track of who wrote this:
>   
>> [by] signing treaties [the US] gains something in return,
>> of course -- like, better support for international
>> stability -- or we wouldn't sign them.
>>     
>
> Those signing treaties on behalf of the US are not currently interested in international stability, unless of course it means that the US gets to manipulate everything -- the world's resources, our military presence pointing at every other powerful nation, and one-way free trade.
>
> Kyoto Treaty could be used as a counter example, except of course that the US is not a signer.
>
> -karen medina
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080828/9b3bcfd4/attachment.htm