In a 2006 Oliver Stone interview, former Argentinian President Nestor Kirchner recounted details of a meeting with former President George W. Bush. According to Kirchner, Bush considered war to be good for economic revitalization. Bush also told Kirchner that war has been good for the economy of the USA.
In reality, war is destructive, and always results in net economic loss. The idea that war can be good for the economy is incorrect. In reality, war is bad for the economy.
The biggest problem with the USA’s wars: They are not based in a legitimate defensive prerogative. They are imperialistic. The wars, including the misnamed “war on terror,” are actually about global political/economic dominance. Defending imperialism does not defense make.
Rather than warring over resources, it would make more sense to promote equal distribution toward mutual benefit, to serve the economic uplift of all people. That would help reduce violence, making the world a better place for all.
Digital Access for only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
If the same amount of energy and time currently spent on wreaking violence were spent getting to know each other, respecting basic common human dignity and sharing equitably, then the world would be a much different, much better place.
In a world that allows for avarice and predation upon the disadvantaged, I encourage you to think about what gets spent on war, and then please, also think about “bringing the billions home” – to be used for inclusive, mutually and holistically beneficial, peaceful purposes. Please see WWFOR.org for more information.