5 ms·

You let entrepreneurs make billion-dollar fortunes on war, they're going to make wars keep happening. Roosevelt said 'not one war millionaire' from WWII and it

You let entrepreneurs make billion-dollar fortunes on war, they're going to make wars keep happening. Roosevelt said 'not one war millionaire' from WWII and it's one of the things that made WWII legitimate and successful. Adventurers wearing the mantle of patriotism while enriching themselves and leaving a trail of destruction and hatred that will last for generations are one of the things that made Iraq and Afghanistan a travesty.

explorigin 11y ago
Have you heard about IBM's role in WWII? Go read "IBM and the Holocaust" by Edwin Black. Those tattooed numbers on the arms of people in concentration camps were numbers tabulated by IBM machines.
- phreeza 11y ago
  I believe Roosevelt was mostly talking about nobody making a fortune off american war expenditure, not german. (also, the Holocaust and WW2 are not the same thing)
- artimaeis 11y ago
  Pretty interesting read from IBM about this: https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/1388.wss https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/1388.wss
maaku 11y ago
> Roosevelt said 'not one war millionaire' from WWII and it's one of the things that made WWII legitimate and successful. WWII made a lot of millionaires. I suggest you re-evaluate what you've been led to believe regarding that.
- RockyMcNuts 11y ago
  I never said it didn't, however it was a goal and a statement Roosevelt made, and there were no billionaire private army princes. So I gently invite you to re-evaluate your reading comprehension before getting snide :)
kosmic_k 11y ago
Is that really a realistic solution for maximizing profits for a PMC? Constant conflict? In the first place the suggestion that human conflict will somehow extinguish and contractors would need to generate demand seems to fly right in the face of 3,400 year of history of which a mere 268 had peace. Security spending isn't just for active demand - wouldn't it be more profitable to be contracted to guard something when nothing happens then to be actively engaged in a conflict? Also contractors didn't make Iraq and Afghanistan a travesty, that was on state actors.

explorigin 11y ago

Have you heard about IBM's role in WWII? Go read "IBM and the Holocaust" by Edwin Black. Those tattooed numbers on the arms of people in concentration camps were numbers tabulated by IBM machines.

phreeza 11y ago
I believe Roosevelt was mostly talking about nobody making a fortune off american war expenditure, not german. (also, the Holocaust and WW2 are not the same thing)
artimaeis 11y ago
Pretty interesting read from IBM about this: https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/1388.wss https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/1388.wss

maaku 11y ago

> Roosevelt said 'not one war millionaire' from WWII and it's one of the things that made WWII legitimate and successful. WWII made a lot of millionaires. I suggest you re-evaluate what you've been led to believe regarding that.

RockyMcNuts 11y ago
I never said it didn't, however it was a goal and a statement Roosevelt made, and there were no billionaire private army princes. So I gently invite you to re-evaluate your reading comprehension before getting snide :)

kosmic_k 11y ago

Is that really a realistic solution for maximizing profits for a PMC? Constant conflict? In the first place the suggestion that human conflict will somehow extinguish and contractors would need to generate demand seems to fly right in the face of 3,400 year of history of which a mere 268 had peace. Security spending isn't just for active demand - wouldn't it be more profitable to be contracted to guard something when nothing happens then to be actively engaged in a conflict? Also contractors didn't make Iraq and Afghanistan a travesty, that was on state actors.