Man, War, Poverty

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Many here are associating terrorism with poverty.  Correct assumption, history proves out that therory.

But man as a civilization has through out history and based on our beliefs been divided into the "haves", and the "have nots" who desire what the "haves" have.  Nature of the beast, those who can impart thier will by strength, or belief, on those deemed weaker aquire more, while the have nots vent thier anger on those who have. 

This cycle repeats, the "have nots" declare "war" on the "haves", possibly win the "war" and then the "have nots" become the "haves" and no matter how well intended an ideal, aquire power, wealth, and another group of "have nots" develope and desire what they now feel is denied them, and away we go into the next cycle.`

Poverty, is a tool that rulers of any culture use for control, we have done it, europe has done it and the Radical Movements use it.  Recent example is Arafats wealth on the backs of the Palistinian cause, he aquired wealth while the intended recievers of this "aid", continued under his "control" by his use of thier "poverty" to further his "cause" and more to further his personal wealth.  His war was and still is a war for personal profit for the haves of the Palestinian cause.

What is the answer, that is unknown, monarcy, democracy, communism, all in thier time seen as the "answer", then the human element is thrown into the idea and the cycle continues, while the initial "good" idea flounders in mans struggle for personal power and wealth.

Currently we are fighting an idea, Radical Islam, just as we fought National Socialism, Communism, and whatever cause celebre', each idea counter to American Ideals, and each bend on imparting their ideals on us, exerting thier percieved "better" way of life on us because for no other reason, we have what thier leaders desire, and will use their cultures "have nots" poverty as a weapon in thier personal struggle to get it, and what will change for the "have nots" in thier culture. 

Unfortuanately many in the world now see us as the "haves", and many a cause desires to impart thier will, their ideals on the world and see us as an obstacle to that aquisition of power.

Thoughout our history America has never embarked on a true war of conquest, though many an opertunity has been presented.  From the Spanish -American War, where we aquired many of the Spanish colonies and interests in the Pacific and Carribean, eventually we let go our hold, let them move from "colony" to independance, and yes under a set of ideals we imparted, nature of the beast.  As for Cuba, look at that historically, Batista was a "have", and Castro had a better idea and led the "have nots" against the "haves" promising the people equality, and now Castro and his ruling elite are the "haves", and again the peasents are the "have nots", Castro used poverty to fight his war and once he aquired power, just changed the name the "have nots" lived under.

America just uses a differant approach in its "wars", we do have a highr moral ground than most "world powers" and see our way as "better", and those who differ in opinion in that statement give me an example of a current world leader and or power you would prefere to see in our role in the world, who would not use it to thier advantage in aquisition of power and wealth.

This idea we are fighting Radical Islam, is led by Islamic "haves" (find me a poor terrorist leader in the mix), who will continue as they have done throughout history to use thier "have nots" under promise and threat of thier "religion" to further thier "cause", and will continue till they "win" and impart thier brand of "control" on those they feel as weak, and the Islamic elite will still keep the control of poverty on those they wish to control.

Nature of the Beast, and no amount of "aid" or "social engineering" will change the basic human element of the equation, man as an animal is a predator, instinct of projection of his power of those seen as weaker.

Edited by oldsoldier