Nice to see an article pointing out the economic rationale for many of our wars.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is all economic reasons, issues of security are still part of the equation, they're just a much smaller part than we are told.

Dear Chris
Most of what you said... as I've intimated before...is quite true.

I feel you are missing some vital aspects of the big picture.

You characterize the 'religion' aspect and them/us as an artificial construct which you basically blame on Corporates Identities who's only goal is 'Profit uber alles'.

When it comes to Islam, such is not the case. Granted, the interests you identify will make use of this spiritual divide and seek to exacerbate it if they see profit in it, but..and its a huge but...
that is just one side of the story.

You need to see this... "Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam"

Now.. its
-Produced by a Jew
-Shown on Fox news
-Has been shown in a very 'election' timely way.

So, of course, with those credentials it could not possibly have any credibility whatsoever right ?

But look more closely. Look at the actual words spoken by the Islamists...Look at Ahmedinajads mouth..when he utters the words "Islam will rule....all the mountain tops of the world" (then look at his military expansion and war games and Nuclear program)

at another ..saying "We (Muslims) ruled the world before and we will do it again"

or another (Hamza) saying "If you meet a kafir in a Muslim country, you can":
-Take him to the market and sell him
-Kill him.

Or another saying "We will see the Black Stone (Khaba)rule the white house.
Another yelling "Death to America" on US streets protected by US law.

Others saying "We will put our flags in Downing street"
LOOK...at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8E4rMJVHyeg

These words were not put in their mouths by the CIA mate... they come from the Quran, and Islamic history and the very nature of this faith.

Footage was taken from Arab/Islamic news casts.

If you think you have provided us with the one 'key' to human conflict you are seriously mistaken mate.

To Chris, excellent article, mate, expect more of the same now with the gratifying change in the Americana Congress.

To Boaz, bit disappointed right now with your remarks. In fact, was hoping with the chance now for more Socratic Reasoning in America, that our side at least will give away laying the blame and separating our world into goodies and baddies. Let's hope that GWB will now resist his nasty temptations about an Axis of Evil. Such nasty phrases spoken out loud are not meant to tame but only spoken by idiotic world leaders about nations they know they can crush.
Let us hope what is happening in Iraq, and still predicted yesterday to still last a long time, will teach future headstrong unipolarists a never forgotten historical lesson.

"Security" of what TurnRightThenLeft?
"Security" for whom?

It most certainly isn't 'security' for the jobs and lives of the sons and daughters of working class families ...which includes, of course, the lower echelons of the so-called 'middle class'!

You must be referring to the 'security' of "America's/Australia's interests" ... whatever the hell that means.

'Ordinary' American or Australian citizens neither start nor profit in any way from the "humanitarian" wars and 'police actions' that are cynically planned and 'managed' by and in the 'interests' of Corporate 'players' and their silent partners - wealthy shareholders/owners of the myriad military-industrial corporations, their sub-contractors and various parasitic 'service providers'.

I must start by commending BOAZ_David for his response, as I think he has focused in on the only important issue facing us today.

That said, I consider myself an innocent in affairs of finance, as things seem so simple to me, but I must be wrong. I would appreciate correction from the more astute posters.

The first thing I cannot understand is why people hate banks. Banks are only intermediaries, between depositors and borrowers. Depositors are investing their funds for a reasonable return. Is that wrong? Should they not get a return? Should they donate their capital to the government and then commit suicide?

The second thing I cannot understand is why people borrow money to buy luxury consumables. I have always lived by the maxim that the only essential things in this world are bread, water, and elementary shelter to keep off the rain. Everything else is a luxury. You can buy luxuries, but what you do is save the money first, and then buy the luxury with cash. Why do people borrow? You have to borrow to buy some assets, such as housing, but they are assets.

The result of my philosophy is that I have more money than I can spend, and yet I still keep an eye out for ways to save money and to spend as little as possible. Is this wrong? Do I have a duty to waste? I am constantly being bombarded by banks to have my credit limit increased. I agree every time, but don't borrow. I get the feeling that I am committing economic terrorism, by not indulging in this orgy of spending. Am I wrong? Please advise me.

Sowat, when I refer to 'security' I am referring to action taken to prevent the threat of armed conflict. Kind of ironic insofar as it's triggering armed conflict, but it's more an issue of hitting first.

As I said... I don't think it's the primary reason. I certainly don't think it's a good one, and I don't believe we're at any real threat from terrorists.

But evidently some do. It's all well and good to characterise the bush administration (in cahoots with faceless economic overlords) as some evil empire out to spread their control.

And it's part right. But ultimately, I still think they believe they are doing the right thing... even if it is horrendously wrong and awfully convenient for their purposes.
If we can learn anything from Iraq it is that powerful people can screw up too.