4 ms·

Well, we don't fight wars for any reason other than war profiteering so it might as well be as blatant on the ground as the geopolitical calculations are.

Robotbeat 5y ago
Did the US fight in World War II only for war profiteering?
- tehjoker 5y ago
  Mainly yes. WW2 is the only US war where I can identify some objectives that decent people can support. However, US war aims in WW2 were based on expanding US influence around the world. I think if you look in retrospect, the results of post-war planning are obvious. The US is the world hegemon after we turned on our Soviet ally, whom collapsed decades later leaving us a monopole. US business interests were very friendly to the Nazis, providing manufacturing knowledge, financing, and equipment for chemicals, tanks, and advanced computing equipment. Without IBM computing equipment, the holocaust would have been logistically impossible. They have never been brought to justice and are name brands today including what is now Monsanto, IBM, Ford, General Motors, and Chemours. After the war, the United States helped the former Nazis escape on the "rat line", seeding them inside US industries, around Europe (including NATO command), and South America. Nazis and their ideological descendents were used for US covert operations around the world to counter the communists and latin american governments that were a bit too independent. We live in this world now.
  - refurb 5y ago
    I think you need to take a break from the internet for a while. Too many conspiracy theories at once will fry your brain.
    - tehjoker 5y ago
      Look it up. I am fairly sure everything I said you can find on Wikipedia or even ordinary history websites. IBM: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers-willing-business-partners/303146/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers... Monsanto's Merger with IG Farben's Descendant: https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/bayer-monsanto-merger-cant-erase-nazi-chemists-past/ https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/bayer-monsanto-merger-c... https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/09/27/monsanto-bayer-and-two-wars/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/09/27/monsanto-bayer-and-t... Ford & GM deny responsibility for German subsidiaries: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/n... DuPont Chemical: https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-researcher-dupont-helped-nazi-germany-out-of-ideology-1.7186636 https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-researcher-dupont-h... Ratlines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_(World_War_II_aftermath) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_(World_War_II_afterma... Example of a NATO officer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Heusinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Heusinger Klaus Barbie: https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/02/26/how-real-nazis-came-to-the-americas-the-recruitment-of-klaus-barbie/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/02/26/how-real-nazis-came-...
    - tomcam 5y ago
      Which parts are untrue?
    - mafuy 5y ago
      I thought it was common knowledge that the US (esp. industry) for years collaborated with Nazi Germany? Near the time they entered the war, the US propaganda machine worked hard to erase the fact. They were successful, especially after winning the war. This is not meant as calling-out the US in particular. The nazis and soviets had large scale propaganda, too. It goes without saying that the latter still do, just like the US. There is an abundance of examples, but one that I personally really like is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_for_Death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_for_Death . When I first saw it, I was certain it was fake.
- thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
  >> Did the US fight in World War II only for war profiteering? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor was also a factor in the US entering the war.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Everyone knew Korea and Vietnam would be a waste of money at the time but we did it anyway because we thought the alternative would be worse. It was more or less a purely ideological thing. Afghanistan was basically all spite. Latin America intervention, Gulf Wars you'd have a better argument.
- tehjoker 5y ago
  Vietnam & Korea: I think you have to ask, all that money was spent... where did it go? In great part, the increased military spending went to contractors who don't care how many helicopters get shot down because they get to make more. The ideological part is about expanding global markets so US interests can extract natural resources and sell it back to them at increased prices. That's called imperialism, but it's also a kind of war profiteering (if you win). Afghanistan: They wanted to place US military bases within striking distance of Iran, China, and Russia -- the few countries in the world that aren't fully integrated into the US lead world order. Afghanistan is also sitting on trillions in mineral deposits that were mapped out by Soviet planners. Iraq has some other stuff going on too, but just look at what country sits between Afghanistan and Iraq. Not too hard to figure that one out.
  - fnord77 5y ago
    if you look at a map with all the military bases in the region, the US has (well had) Iran surrounded. Iraq and Afghanistan were the final two pieces. I don't understand why we're so antagonistic towards Iran? Some corps still mad that their assets there got seized during the Iran revolution? edit map: https://i.imgur.com/qw6dOWE.png https://i.imgur.com/qw6dOWE.png
    - hutzlibu 5y ago
      Well, US is aligned with Israel. And Israel and Iran are mortal enemies by tradition now. The iranian leadership has the US and Israel as the enemy as their core agenda that is thought in schools. Israelian hardliners brag how about they will wipe out iran (and do carry out attacks) It is hard to break out of that cycle. Plus, it is much more complicated, because the other Ally, Saudi Arabia is mutual enemy of iran, too. Not just geopolitics, also religious reasons. And .. a whole lot more. I think it is sad, because the iranian people I met, were very nice persons.

Robotbeat 5y ago

Did the US fight in World War II only for war profiteering?

tehjoker 5y ago
Mainly yes. WW2 is the only US war where I can identify some objectives that decent people can support. However, US war aims in WW2 were based on expanding US influence around the world. I think if you look in retrospect, the results of post-war planning are obvious. The US is the world hegemon after we turned on our Soviet ally, whom collapsed decades later leaving us a monopole. US business interests were very friendly to the Nazis, providing manufacturing knowledge, financing, and equipment for chemicals, tanks, and advanced computing equipment. Without IBM computing equipment, the holocaust would have been logistically impossible. They have never been brought to justice and are name brands today including what is now Monsanto, IBM, Ford, General Motors, and Chemours. After the war, the United States helped the former Nazis escape on the "rat line", seeding them inside US industries, around Europe (including NATO command), and South America. Nazis and their ideological descendents were used for US covert operations around the world to counter the communists and latin american governments that were a bit too independent. We live in this world now.
- refurb 5y ago
  I think you need to take a break from the internet for a while. Too many conspiracy theories at once will fry your brain.
  - tehjoker 5y ago
    Look it up. I am fairly sure everything I said you can find on Wikipedia or even ordinary history websites. IBM: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers-willing-business-partners/303146/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers... Monsanto's Merger with IG Farben's Descendant: https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/bayer-monsanto-merger-cant-erase-nazi-chemists-past/ https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/bayer-monsanto-merger-c... https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/09/27/monsanto-bayer-and-two-wars/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/09/27/monsanto-bayer-and-t... Ford & GM deny responsibility for German subsidiaries: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/n... DuPont Chemical: https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-researcher-dupont-helped-nazi-germany-out-of-ideology-1.7186636 https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-researcher-dupont-h... Ratlines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_(World_War_II_aftermath) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_(World_War_II_afterma... Example of a NATO officer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Heusinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Heusinger Klaus Barbie: https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/02/26/how-real-nazis-came-to-the-americas-the-recruitment-of-klaus-barbie/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/02/26/how-real-nazis-came-...
  - tomcam 5y ago
    Which parts are untrue?
  - mafuy 5y ago
    I thought it was common knowledge that the US (esp. industry) for years collaborated with Nazi Germany? Near the time they entered the war, the US propaganda machine worked hard to erase the fact. They were successful, especially after winning the war. This is not meant as calling-out the US in particular. The nazis and soviets had large scale propaganda, too. It goes without saying that the latter still do, just like the US. There is an abundance of examples, but one that I personally really like is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_for_Death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_for_Death . When I first saw it, I was certain it was fake.
thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
>> Did the US fight in World War II only for war profiteering? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor was also a factor in the US entering the war.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

Everyone knew Korea and Vietnam would be a waste of money at the time but we did it anyway because we thought the alternative would be worse. It was more or less a purely ideological thing. Afghanistan was basically all spite. Latin America intervention, Gulf Wars you'd have a better argument.

tehjoker 5y ago
Vietnam & Korea: I think you have to ask, all that money was spent... where did it go? In great part, the increased military spending went to contractors who don't care how many helicopters get shot down because they get to make more. The ideological part is about expanding global markets so US interests can extract natural resources and sell it back to them at increased prices. That's called imperialism, but it's also a kind of war profiteering (if you win). Afghanistan: They wanted to place US military bases within striking distance of Iran, China, and Russia -- the few countries in the world that aren't fully integrated into the US lead world order. Afghanistan is also sitting on trillions in mineral deposits that were mapped out by Soviet planners. Iraq has some other stuff going on too, but just look at what country sits between Afghanistan and Iraq. Not too hard to figure that one out.
- fnord77 5y ago
  if you look at a map with all the military bases in the region, the US has (well had) Iran surrounded. Iraq and Afghanistan were the final two pieces. I don't understand why we're so antagonistic towards Iran? Some corps still mad that their assets there got seized during the Iran revolution? edit map: https://i.imgur.com/qw6dOWE.png https://i.imgur.com/qw6dOWE.png
  - hutzlibu 5y ago
    Well, US is aligned with Israel. And Israel and Iran are mortal enemies by tradition now. The iranian leadership has the US and Israel as the enemy as their core agenda that is thought in schools. Israelian hardliners brag how about they will wipe out iran (and do carry out attacks) It is hard to break out of that cycle. Plus, it is much more complicated, because the other Ally, Saudi Arabia is mutual enemy of iran, too. Not just geopolitics, also religious reasons. And .. a whole lot more. I think it is sad, because the iranian people I met, were very nice persons.