You are on page 1of 15

EVIDENCE ASSEMBLED BY PRITPAL ON A WAR PROFITEERING KRITIK

Shell: AThe US War Profiteers ..................................................................................................................................1 SHELL: BPrivatization of Warfare .............................................................................................................................2 Shell: C---Turns the Case ................................................................................................................................................3 Shell: D---Alternative .....................................................................................................................................................4 A2: Alternative doesnt work .........................................................................................................................................4 Link to Case ....................................................................................................................................................................5 Democracy Link-- = Trojan Horse of Economic Exploitation ..........................................................................................6 Internal Link Extn. US villanizes the Region ..................................................................................................................7 Ans to Their Impacts--- The US Will Exaggerate Threatsdont buy the hype ............................................................7 ImplicationThey Cannot Solve....................................................................................................................................8 IMPACT / CASE TURN DEMOCRACY = WAR ................................................................................................................9 ImplicationWar will happen inevitably through democracy ......................................................................................9 Impact: Economic Destruction ....................................................................................................................................11 Dehum Impact Extn. ....................................................................................................................................................12 Internal LinkPrivate Militaries Fill-in ........................................................................................................................13 Permutation Answers ..................................................................................................................................................14

SHELL: ATHE US WAR PROFITEERS


A) Stability through democracy is never feasible because there is not enough money in it. The United States war profiteers
Dawes 09 James Dawes The gulf wars and the peace movement AMERICAN LITERARY H ISTORY VOLUME 21,
NUMBER 2, James Dawes is an Associate Professor of English and Director of the Program in Human Rights and Humanitarianism at Macalester College. Project Muse

War profiteering and business-government collusion have always been sources of moral nausea in post-war discourse, from John Dos Passoss claim that World War I provided good growing weather for the House of Morgan (147, 341), to Anthony Swoffords grim joke about being transferred from the Marine Corps to the Oil Corps, his life squandered to secure the financial interests of Bush Sr. & Sons (11). Just so, in Patrick *End Page

the confluence of militarism, global outsourcing, and economic depletion is an urgent concern (9). Win or lose, writes contributor Randy Martin, there is money to be made (18). While Deers collection is multifarious, with articles on the
419+ Deers special edition of Social Text, The Ends of War (2007), militarized USMexico border and rape as a weapon of war in Peru and Guatemala, its primary focus is the invasion of Iraq. For Deer, there is significance to the rhetorical affinity between high-tech warfare in the Gulf and high-tech globalization more broadly. In each, the vision of a frictionless and

humane command-and-control network supervising the march of history obscures the messy reality of suffering, from maquiladoras to urban guerrilla warfare (2). The parallel packaging reflects the mutually supportive roles of economic and military policyan integration now become addictionand also reveals the allure of war discourse, which promises to instill order and govern the epoch of globalization with the efficiency of an armed Wal-Mart (9)

SHELL: BPRIVATIZATION OF WARFARE


BPrivatization of Warfare Ensures that Instability is Inevitable. Democracy becomes a cloak for warfare. The best time to invest is when there is bloodshed 1. What else did we learn in Iraq? Privatization is the name of the game and a cycle of peace for investment and instability for a bigger market fosters those goals. Case solvency is only temporary.
Dawes 09 James Dawes The gulf wars and the peace movement AMERICAN LITERARY H ISTORY VOLUME 21,
NUMBER 2, James Dawes is an Associate Professor of English and Director of the Program in Human Rights and Humanitarianism at Macalester College. Project Muse

As one contributor to The Ends of War puts it, globalization is the name that implicitly designates the

pacification of populations in the name of world market integration, and the US Global War on Terror is the territorially unbounded, politically malleable military strategy that this pacification actually demands (Medovoi 55). Cultural critics like Naomi Klein concur. In The Shock Doctrine: the Rise of Disaster Capitalism (2007), she argues that US attempts to privatize Iraq, and to privatize its warfare in Iraq, were central rather than incidental war goals . Just eight days after announcing the
end of combat operations in Iraq, she notes, President Bush revealed his hand by calling for the establishment of a US-Middle East free trade area within a decade (329). Two weeks after arriving in Baghdad he himself described as on fire, Paul Bremer declared the country open for business (339). As Klein was told by a delegate at the Rebuilding Iraq 2 conference, The best time to invest is when there is still blood on the ground (326).

2. The United States is in Middle East for resources and has caused the current problems there Shah 11 Anup Shah May 25, 2011
http://www.globalissues.org/issue/103/middle-east

To maintain superiority, control and influence over the region, the West has placed corrupt Arab leaders into positions of power and supported the overthrow of those that are not seen as favorable. This has also served to keep their populations at bay, in return for militarization , power and personal wealth of the elite. Sometimes this has been done in the name of fighting communism. The common theme underlying it though has been the struggle to control access to important resources such as oil. The Middle East is the most militarized region in the world and most arms sales head there. A suppressed people that sees US
influence as a major root cause of the current problems in the Middle East has led to a rise in Islamic militancy, acts of terrorism and anti-west sentiment, anti-US in particular. When looking at some of the actions of the US, it can often be seen why this is unfortunately so.

SHELL: C---TURNS THE CASE


C. Impact: Turns the Case

Dehumanization justifies unspeakable wrongs Katz 97 Katheryn D. Katz prof. of law - Albany Law School, 1997, Albany Law Journal
It is undeniable that throughout human history dominant and oppressive groups have committed unspeakable wrongs against those viewed as inferior. Once a person (or a people) has been characterized as sub-human, there appears to have been no limit to the cruelty that was or will be visited upon him. For example, in almost all wars, hatred towards the enemy was inspired to justify the killing and wounding by separating the enemy from the human race, by casting them as unworthy of human status. This same rationalization has supported: genocide, chattel slavery, racial segregation, economic exploitation, caste and class systems, coerced sterilization of social misfits and undesirables, unprincipled medical experimentation, the subjugation of women, and the social Darwinists' theory justifying indifference to the poverty and misery of others.

United States uses democracy as a cover to fight resulting in millions of deaths Massad 11 Associate Professor for Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New
York. http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/06/2011689456174295.html For decades during the Cold War, the rhetoric of US and Western European imperial power was one of promoting democracy around the world. Indeed, as the Soviet model became attractive to many countries in Asia and Africa (not to mention Latin America) ridding themselves of the yoke of West European colonialism, the US system of apartheid, known as Jim Crow Laws or racial segregation, was less than a shining example for people who just liberated themselves from European racial supremacy that was used to justify colonial rule. As is well known, it is this that prompted the United States to begin the road to end its apartheid system, signaled by the famous legal case of "Brown vs the Board of Education" in 1954, which set the stage to desegregate schools in the American South. But as US action around the world aimed at eliminating the recently won right to self-determination for the

peoples of Asia and Africa under the guise of "Western democracy" fighting "totalitarian communism", which left a trail of millions murdered by the US and its allies (starting with Korea and moving to the Congo, to Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, and from Guatemala to Brazil to Argentina, Uruguay, El Salvador, and Chile, to Southern Africa and the Middle East), the cruel US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan in the last decade have hardly changed this antidemocratic trend.

SHELL: D---ALTERNATIVE
D. Alternative: Non-Violent Resistance Conflict Research Consortium 98 http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/treatment/nonviolc.htm Non-violent resistance strategies, such as those pioneered by Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King are designed to avoid this trap by absolutely refusing to be drawn into a violent confrontation . Far from being
cowardly, this is a strategy that requires tremendous courage, self-control, as well as a willingness to endure pain and sometimes even death.

The strength of nonviolence lies in its ability to dramatically reduce the moral legitimacy of those who persist in using violent strategies against non-violent opposition. This loss of legitimacy can, in turn, contribute to coalition-building efforts leading to widespread condemnation of parties using violent strategies and often the imposition of sanctions by the international community. In essence, non-violent resistance is a strategy for countering the power of violent force with the power of the integrative system. Many non-violent techniques can also be effective when used against illegitimate uses of legal, political, or other types of force.

A2: ALTERNATIVE DOESN T WORK


Non-violence works. It has worked for womens rights too
Cortright 02 http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0201-02.htm

The belief that nonviolence is meek or ineffective reflects a misunderstanding of the rich tradition
of nonviolent resistance. In recent decades the Gandhian method has achieved worldwide success. In the United States nonviolent action helped to achieve historic gains for AfricanAmericans, farmworkers and women. Nonviolent methods brought down the Marcos regime in the

Philippines, undermined Communist dictatorships in Eastern Europe and helped to end apartheid in South Africa. In Serbia trained nonviolent resisters helped to overthrow the Milosevic regime. The power of nonviolence is real, and has proven to be far more effective as a method of social change than the resort to violence and destruction

LINK TO CASE
The ontological wall separating the closed world of Capitalism necessitates continuous foreign wars and incessant violence to maintain electoral systems favorable to its interests.
Badiou, Alain. The Meaning of Sarkozy. London: Verso Publishing, 10. Pp. 53-70.
We are familiar today with the concrete form of this 'expansion' of democracy to which the 'international community' - the coalition of the planet's gendarme states - is so devoted. It is, quite simply, war. War in

Palestine, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Somalia, in much of Africa ... The fact that long wars are needed in order to organize elections should lead us to reflect not just on war, but on elections as well. What conception of the world does electoral democracy rest on today? After all, this democracy imposes the law of numbers, just as the world unified by commodities imposes the monetary law of numbers. It might well be that the imposition of electoral numbers by war, as done in Baghdad or Kabul, leads back to our present problem: if the world is one of objects and signs, it is a world in which everything is counted. And those who do not count, or are poorly counted, have our laws of counting imposed on them by war. Besides, if the law of counting gives a result different from the results we expect, we additionally impose, by police violence and war, not just counting, but the 'right' count, one that ensures that democracy must elect democrats, in other words docile proAmerican clients and no one else.

The United States is already planning on increasing military presence in the region Shanker and Myers Oct 29, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/world/middleeast/united-states-planspost-iraq-troop-increase-in-persian-gulf.html?pagewanted=all The Obama administration plans to bolster the American military presence in the Persian Gulf after it withdraws the remaining troops from Iraq this year, according to officials and diplomats. That repositioning could include new combat forces in Kuwait able to respond to a collapse of security in Iraq or a military confrontation with Iran.The plans, under discussion for months, gained new urgency after President Obamas announcement this month that the last American soldiers would be brought home from Iraq by the end of December. Ending the eight-year war was a central pledge of his presidential campaign, but American military officers and diplomats, as well as officials of several countries in the region, worry that the withdrawal could leave instability or worse in its wake. After unsuccessfully pressing both the Obama administration and the Iraqi government to permit as many as

20,000 American troops to remain in Iraq beyond 2011, the Pentagon is now drawing up an alternative. In addition to negotiations over maintaining a ground combat presence in Kuwait, the United States is considering sending more naval warships through international waters in the region. With an eye on the threat of a belligerent Iran, the administration is also seeking to expand military ties with the six nations in the Gulf Cooperation Council Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. While the United States has close bilateral military relationships with each, the administration and the military are trying to foster a new security architecture for the Persian Gulf that would integrate air and naval patrols and missile defense. The size of the standby American combat force to be based in Kuwait remains the subject of negotiations, with an answer expected in coming days. Officers at the Central Command headquarters here declined to discuss specifics of the proposals, but it was clear that successful deployment plans from past decades could be incorporated into plans for a post-Iraq footprint in the region.

The US is involved for oil and military bases, democracy promotion runs counter to our interests Shah 11 http://www.globalissues.org/article/792/mideast-north-africa-unrest#Westlookson The Wests interests in the region are of course well known: oil/fossil fuels mostly. Even where a specific country may not have significant oil resources itself, their neighbors, or neighbors neighbors may do, so stability for the West means secured energy access. As Noam Chomsky charges, the US and its allies would want to prevent democracy in the Arab world because the region would be less susceptible to Western influence: Turmoil in places like Libya has already caused stock markets to shudder, and oil prices to rise, leading to even more protests domestically following the global financial crisis and the resulting structural adjustment programs within countries that once imposed it on others to devastating effect. Reliance on foreign sources of non-renewable energy resources is discussed further on this sites energy security section. Another interest the West has in the region is military: not just geopolitically as alluded to above, but also selling vast amounts of arms and/or military training. Some of this is justified as improving relations (and the message in the past decade or more has also been about improving cooperation and encouraging democracy, though that has hardly been the intent).

DEMOCRACY LINK-- = TROJAN HORSE OF ECONOMIC EXPLOITATION


The US is riding the wave of democracy protests for economic ends Massad 11 Associate Professor for Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New
York. http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/06/2011689456174295.html

There is an increasing understanding among US policy makers that the US should ride the democratic wave in the region in those countries where it cannot crush it, and that in doing so, it should create political conditions that would maintain the continued imperial pillage of their economies at the same rate as before and not threaten them. Saudi money followed by American money and IMF and World Bank plans and funds are all geared to supporting the business elites and the foreign-funded NGOs to bring down the newly mobilised civil society by using the same neoliberal language of structural adjustment pushed by the IMF since the late 1970s. Indeed, Obama and his business associates are now claiming that it is the imposition of more neoliberal economic policies that is the main revolutionary demand of the people in Egypt and Tunisia, if not the entire Arab world, and which the West is lovingly heeding. That it is these same imperial policies, which were imposed on Poland by the IMF (and produced Solidarnosc in 1980), and ultimately led to the fall of the Soviet Union, as they marched onwards to impoverish the entire globe, with special attention to Africa, the Arab World, and Latin America, is glossed over as socialist whining. In this sense, the US will ensure that the same imperial economic policies imposed by international capital and adopted by Mubarak and Ben Ali will not only be maintained, but will be intensified under the cover of democracy.

INTERNAL LINK EXTN. US VILLANIZES THE REGION


The United States villanizes the Middle East Shah 11 Anup Shah May 25, 2011
http://www.globalissues.org/issue/103/middle-east

As a result, for centuries, western populations have been acclimatized to a type of propaganda and vilification of the Arab and other people of the Middle East, and of Islam in general. This was especially so during the European colonial times, as so vividly examined by Edward Said, in his well-respected book, Orientalism. This negative stereotyping has served to provide justifications for involvement and to ensure stability for the national interests of the powers that want to be involved in the region. This cultural stereotyping and racism has occurred in the modern times too. Often, especially in the 1980s, war films depicting an Arab or Islamic group as the bad guys were common place, sometimes reflecting prevailing turmoils at the time. Even in the 1990s, those ideas continued, where the bad guy was often a despotic Arab from one of the rogue states and as a result of the terrorist attacks against the US in September 11, 2001 and the resulting War on terror, such imagery is likely to continue. Over such a long time then, such boundaries of discourse about the Middle East have already been framed. To overstep those boundaries is to be labeled anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi, anti-West or some other equally negative label. For most journalists in the mainstream then, selfcensorship is often the course, sometimes unknowingly.

ANS TO THEIR IMPACTS--- THE US WILL EXAGGERATE THREATSDONT BUY THE


HYPE
The US constantly exaggerates threats Goodman 09 Melvin A. Goodman, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and adjunct professor of
government at Johns Hopkins University, is The Public Records National Security and Intelligence columnist. He

spent 42 years with the CIA, the National War College, and the U.S. Army. His latest book is Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA.

http://pubrecord.org/commentary/5161/exaggeration-threat-then/

The Pentagon study demonstrates that the Soviet military high command understood the devastating consequences of nuclear war and believed that the use of nuclear weapons had to be avoided at all costs. Nevertheless, in 1975, presidential chief of staff Dick Cheney and secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld introduced a group of neoconservatives, led by Harvard professor Richard Pipes, to the CIA in order to make sure that future NIEs would falsely conclude that the Soviet Union rejected nuclear parity, were bent on fighting and winning a nuclear war, and were radically increasing their military spending. The neocons (known as Team B) and the CIA (Team A) then wrongly predicted a series of Soviet weapons developments that never took place, including directed energy weapons, mobile ABM systems, and anti-satellite capabilities. CIA deputy director Gates used this worst-case reasoning in a series of speeches to insinuate himself with CIA director Bill Casey and the Reagan administration.

IMPLICATION THEY CANNOT SOLVE


War Profiteering turns the case because they give the military a place of stability to create more longterm conflict and sell arms. Also, they cannot solve without a massive restructuring of the US intelligence systewhich they do not do.

US intelligence needs to be reformed

Goodman 09 Melvin A. Goodman, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and adjunct professor of government at Johns Hopkins University, is The Public Records National Security and Intelligence columnist. He spent 42 years with the CIA, the National War College, and the U.S. Army. His latest book is Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA.
http://pubrecord.org/commentary/5161/exaggeration-threat-then/ The exaggeration of the Soviet threat in the 1980s led to an additional trillion and a half dollars in defense spending against a Soviet Union that was in decline and a Soviet military threat that was disappearing. It is time to recognize the great harm that was done to the intelligence community and the CIA with the politicization of intelligence in the 1980s as well as the militarization of intelligence over the past twenty years. If we dont reform the intelligence process and create a genuinely independent intelligence capability there will continue to be threat exaggerations that cost us greatly in blood and treasure over the next 10 years.

IMPACT / CASE TURN DEMOCRACY = WAR


Their project will fail and they are complicit in a violent regime of democracy that uses democracy assistance to punctuate military conflict, justifying that military conflict.
Badiou, Alain. The Meaning of Sarkozy. London: Verso Publishing, 2010. Pp. 53-70.
As we have seen when Westerners, with certain of our intellectuals in the lead, applauded the interruption of the electoral process in Algeria which gave a victory to the 'Islamists', or when the same people refused to recognize the crushing electoral victory of Hamas in the Palestinian territories. These same Westerners did not hesitate to mount a military operation to force the resignation and exile of the regularly elected President Aristide of Haiti, who enjoyed an absolute majority support in public opinion. Not to mention that Hezbollah's majority in southern Lebanon does not prevent it being termed a 'terrorist' organization. In all four cases, this denial by the 'democracies' of their own norms of counting simply shows the truth of these norms: the perpetuation of the established capitalist order by parties that in the end are indistinguishable from one another, and the defence of this perpetuation through war. For war is indeed the price of these electoral counts when they are simultaneously imposed and denied. Civil war and invasion in Palestine, atrocious civil war in Algeria, war of aggression in Lebanon, and the assiduous maintenance of various warlords across the African continent. All this proves that 'the world' thus conceived does not really exist. What exists is a false and closed world, artificially kept separate from general humanity by incessant violence.

IMPLICATION WAR WILL HAPPEN INEVITABLY THROUGH DEMOCRACY


US economy based on war Dawes 09 James Dawes The gulf wars and the peace movement AMERICAN LITERARY H ISTORY VOLUME 21,
NUMBER 2, James Dawes is an Associate Professor of English and Director of the Program in Human Rights and Humanitarianism at Macalester College. Project Muse

In his Autobiography, published posthumously in 1968, Du Bois wrote: The United States . . . apparently believes that war is the only way to settle present disputes and difficulties. For this reason it is spending fantastic sums of money, and wasting wealth and energy on the preparation for war, which is nothing less than criminal. Yet, he continued, the United States cannot stop spending money for war. If she did her whole economy, which is today based on preparation for war, might collapse. Therefore, we prepare for a Third World War; we spread our soldiers and arms over the earth and we bribe every nation we can to become our allies. Du Boiss bitter words are echoed by many todaybut now with greater institutional support. In February 2007, 215 years after Benjamin Banneker proposed the creation of an office of peace, Keith Ellison, the first African American elected to Congress from Minnesota and the first Muslim American elected to the US Congress, helped cosponsor a bill proposing the creation of a Department of Peace. Largely a reaction to the Iraq war, the billwhich is still before

Congresssymbolizes what David Cortright describes as the unprecedented credibility and legitimacy achieved by the peace movement since the Bush administration first signaled its intent to invade Iraq (176).

The United States instigates wars, Pakistan is example Lillis Nov 6, 2011 http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/192023-ron-paul-us-is-inciting-civil-war-inpakistan

"We're dropping a lot of drone missile/bombs in Pakistan and claim we've killed so many, but how about the innocent people [who have] died? Nobody hears about that. This is why the people of Pakistan can't stand our guts and why they disapprove of their own government," he said. "We're bombing Pakistan and trying to kill some people, making a lot of mistakes, building up our enemies, at the same time we're giving billions of dollars to the government of Pakistan," he added. "We're more or less inciting a civil war there, so I think that makes us less safe.

The US fights both sides to encourage conflict Kayyem 2011 September 19, 2011

http://articles.boston.com/2011-09-19/bostonglobe/30176732_1_afghan-national-police1afghans-first-insurgents Handling logistics for the war in Afghanistan is no easy feat, given the distance, weather, terrain, and constant threat of violence. But recent evidence shows that by linking our military logistics planning to a separate counterinsurgency strategy to build up the Afghans, we have created an extortion racket that helps fund the very people we are fighting. It begins with the trucks. If war is business, its a supply-chain business. Unlike in Iraq, where the military utilized American contractors, the Pentagon has hired local businesses to sustain our military presence in Afghanistan. We signed nearly a thousand new contracts with non-US vendors in Afghanistan last year alone. This made sense for our counterinsurgency strategy; it would promote Afghan businesses and help them develop the capabilities necessary to control their own destiny. But whether it was good for our military is another question. In our desire to put Afghans first, we have now lost track of nearly $400 million of $2 billion distributed under the Armys Afghanistan Host Nation Trucking contract. This isnt the typical accounting error or failure to verify an expense. The evidence strongly suggests that the militarys primary logistics contract has fueled a scheme of kickbacks and laundering to fund insurgents, warlords, and criminal networks. Their primary target: us.
War is a way for the US to make money; wars are determined by economic factors Carchedi 6 (Guglielmo, Senior Researcher in the Department of Economics and Econometrics at the University of Amsterdam, Rethinking Marxism, Volume 18, Number 1, January, The Fallacies of Keynesian Policies, p. 77-78, ebsco) If neither civilian nor military Keynesian policies can jump-start the economy, the alternative is war. The use of weapons in time of war is a specific, powerful method of destruction of excess capital in its commodity form, of value that cannot be realized in times of peace. Their main contribution to an upturn is not through employment and

the extra production of surplus value (which are modest because of their high value composition) but through the destruction of surplus capital: the more commodity capital is destroyed (both as weapons and as the other commodities that are destroyed by those weapons), the more commodity capital can be subsequently created. At the same time, this expanded reproduction is spurred by the higher rates of exploitation, and thus of profit, induced by wars. Wars make possible the cancellation of the debt contracted with Labor (e.g., inflation destroys the value of money and thus of state bonds) and the extraction of extra surplus value (the laborers, either forced or instigated by patriotism, accept lower wages, higher intensity of labor, longer working days, etc.). Wars thus create the conditions for an economic upturn. Capitalism needs weapons and thus wars. If capitalism needs wars, wars need enemies. The imperialist nations display great ingenuity in finding, or creating, new enemies. Before the fall of the USSR, the pretext for the arms industry was International Communism. After the Fall, International Communism has been replaced by Arab Fundamentalism and International Terrorism. As the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq show, the substitution is now complete. The attacks of September 11, 2001, were a golden opportunity for the arms industry and U.S. imperialism. This shows that political and ideological factors are of paramount importance for the modes and timing of the conflagration, but they themselves are determined by economic factors. The notion that wars are caused by extraeconomic factors is simply wrong. The Western world has exported (created) countless wars in many dominated countries and has engaged in military Keynesian policies for the above-mentioned reasons.

Shah Nov 7, 2011 http://www.globalissues.org/issue/38/free-trade-and-globalization The world is becoming more globalized, there is no doubt about that. While that sounds promising, the current form of globalization, neoliberalism, free trade and open markets are coming under much criticism. The interests of powerful nations and corporations are shaping the terms of world trade. In democratic countries, they are shaping and affecting the ability of elected leaders to make decisions in the interests of their people. Elsewhere they are promoting narrow political discourse and even supporting dictatorships and the stability that it brings for their interests. This is to the detriment of most people in the world, while increasingly fewer people in proportion are prospering

IMPACT: ECONOMIC DESTRUCTION


US economically exploits other countries Perkins 04 Confession of an Economic Hit Man, Prologue That is what we EHMs do best: we build a global empire. We are an elite group of men and women who utilize international financial organizations to foment conditions that make other nations sub-servient to the corporatocracy running our biggest corporations, our government, and our banks. Like our counterparts in the Mafia, EHMs provide favors. These take the form of loans to develop in-frastructure electric generating plants, highways, ports, airports, or industrial parks. A condition of such loans is that engineering and construction companies from our own country must build all these projects. In essence, most of the money never leaves the United States; it is simply transferred from banking offices in Washington to engineering offices in New York, Houston, or San Francisco. Despite the fact that the money is returned almost immediately to corporations that are members of the corporatocracy (the creditor), the recipient country is required to pay it all

back, principal plus interest. If an EHM is completely successful, the loans are so large that the debtor is forced to default on its payments after a few years. When this happens, then like the Mafia we demand our pound of flesh. This often includes one or more of the following: control over United Nations votes, the installation of military bases, or access to precious resources such as oil or the Panama Canal. Of course, the debtor still owes us the money and another country is added to our global empire.

Dawes 09 James Dawes The gulf wars and the peace movement AMERICAN LITERARY H ISTORY VOLUME 21,
NUMBER 2, James Dawes is an Associate Professor of English and Director of the Program in Human Rights and Humanitarianism at Macalester College. Project Muse

The theoretical implications of this encompassing free-market militarization are among the chief concerns of Deers The Ends of War. Randy Martin sees preemptive war as an extension of financial risk management, a technique for converting uncertainty into calculable gainand the greater the volatility, the greater the profit (13). Leerom Medovoi offers the Foucauldian conclusion that war has now become the model for the regulation of domestic populations. Collapsing the distinction between internal and external enemies, globalization/global war targets cultural abnormality of all kinds: beliefs, meanings, and practices of any sort that threaten or resist its Jupiterian vision of incorporation into a global liberal society (74). Contributor Jonathan Michael Feldman argues that because the peace movement has failed to centrally target this dysfunctional military-industrialism, it has restricted itself to the marginal role of affecting the length of time allowable for any given conflict. Antiwar dissent in the US must focus instead, he urges, on the generalized civilian disenfranchisement that has enabled the growth of US militarism. It must create a progressive shadow statea network of local governments, socially responsible corporations, trade unions, and universitiesto resist parasitic globalism and to fill the vacuum created by the abdication of basic governmental functions and services wrought by neoliberal privatization

DEHUM IMPACT EXTN.


Dehumanization outweighs all impacts
Berube 97 (Professor of Communication at South Carolina) 1997 (David, Ph.D. in Communications, Nanotechnological Prolongevity: The Down Side, NanoTechnology Magazine, June/July 1997, p. 1-6, URL: http://www.cla.sc.edu/ENGL/faculty/berube/prolong.htm) This means-ends dispute is at the core of Montagu and Matsous treatise on the dehumanization of humanity. They warn its destructive toll is already greater than that of any war, plague, famine, or natural calamity on record and its potential danger to the quality of life and the fabric of civilized society is beyond calculation. F or that reason this sickness of the soul might well be called the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse Behind the genocide of the Holocaust lay a dehumanized thought; beneath the menecide of deviants and dissidents in the cuckoos next of America, lies a dehumanized image of man (Montagu & Matsou, 1983, p. xi-xii). While it may never be possible to quantify the impacts dehumanizing ethics may have had on humanity, it is safe to conclude the foundations of humanness offer great opportunities which would be foregone. When we calculate the actual losses and the virtual benefits, we approach a nearly inestimable value greater than any tools which we can currently use to measure it. Dehumanization is nuclear war, environmental apocalypse, and international genocide. When people become things, they become dispensable. When people are dispensable, any and every atrocity can be justified. Once justified, they seem to be inevitable for every epoch has evil and dehumanization is evils most powerful weapon.

Loss of ones value to life is the greatest impact


ZIMMERMAN

94

[Michael; Professor of Philosophy at Tulane University; Contestinq Earth's Future; Berkeley: University of California Press; 1994; p. 119-120] Heidegger asserted that human self-assertion, combined with the eclipse of being, threatens the relation between being and human Dasein. Loss of this relation would be even more dangerous than a nuclear war that might "bring about the complete annihilation of humanity and the destruction of the earth. 1114 This controversial claim is comparable to the Christian teaching that it is better to forfeit the world than to lose one's soul by losing one's relation to God. Heidegger apparently thought along these lines: it is possible that after a nuclear war, life might
once again emerge, but it is far less likely that there will ever again occur an ontological clearing through which such life could manifest itself.

since modernity's one dimensional disclosure of entities virtually denies the many "being" at all, the loss of humanity's openness for being is already occurring. Modernity's background mood is horror in the face of nihilism, which is consistent with the aim of providing material "happiness" for everyone by reducing nature to pure energy.s6 The unleashing of vast quantities of energy in nuclear war would be equivalent to modernity's slow- motion destruction of nature: unbounded destruction would equal limitless consumption. If humanity avoided nuclear war only to survive as contented clever animals, Heidegger believed we would exist in a state of ontological damnation: hell on earth, masquerading as material paradise. Deep ecologists might agree that a world of material human comfort purchased at the price
Further, of everything wild would not be a world worth living in, for in killing wild nature, people would be as good as dead. But most of them could not agree that the loss of humanity's relation to being would be worse than nuclear omnicide, for it is wrong to suppose that the lives of millions of extinct and unknown species are somehow lessened because they were never "disclosed" by humanity

INTERNAL LINKPRIVATE MILITARIES FILL-IN


Private Military loves extortion and this opens the gate for them. Afghanistan is an example Isenberg Dec 13, 2011
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-isenberg/lets-all-do-the-sigoco_b_1144986.html?ref=iraq Last year I led a six-month subcommittee investigation of a $2 billion Department of Defense trucking contract in Afghanistan. This investigation found that the trucking contract had spawned a vast protection racket in which warlords, criminals and insurgents extorted contractors for protection payments to obtain safe passage. A follow- up hearing held by this subcommittee in September showed that the department has made little progress in rooting out bad actors who undermined our anti-insurgency efforts in Afghanistan. We know now that many of these bad actors continue to serve as U.S. government contractors.

Us is selling arms to countries in the middle east for military influence Landler and Myers Dec 29, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/30/world/middleeast/with-30-billion-arms-deal-united-states-bolsters-ties-tosaudi-arabia.html

Fortifying one of its key allies in the Persian Gulf, the Obama administration announced a weapons deal with Saudi Arabia on Thursday, saying it had agreed to sell F-15 fighter jets valued at nearly $30 billion to the Royal Saudi Air Force. The agreement, and the administrations parallel plans to press ahead with a nearly $11 billion arms deal for Iraq , despite rising political tensions there, is dramatic evidence of its determination to project American military influence in an oil-rich region shadowed by a threat from Iran .

US has a monopoly in arms trade CBS News 2010 In 2008, according to an authoritative report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), $55.2 billion in weapons deals were concluded worldwide. Of that total, the United States was responsible for $37.8 billion in weapons sales agreements, or 68.4% of the total "trade." Some of these agreements were long-term ones and did not result in 2008 deliveries of weapons systems, but these latest figures are a good gauge of the global appetite for weapons. It doesn't take a PhD in economics to recognize that, when one nation accounts for nearly 70% of weapons sales, the term "global arms trade" doesn't quite cut it.

PERMUTATION ANSWERS
Read from the Colonialism file and the January file and Friendly Fascism as well 1) TURN: The perm will be circumvented Money is funneled through aid organizations for other purposes than they were intended for Perkins 04 Confession of an Economic Hit Man, Preface

Economic hit men {EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign "aid" organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization. I should know; I was an EHM.

(2 ). Its a methods argumenta permutation makes no sense. The perm still includes and starts from their method of violence. Extend our Conflict Research Consortium 98 card that says violence makes a non-violence movement ineffective ( 3 ). Even if the permutation is determined to be legitimate (which it isnt), it is still not competitivewe solve better alone.

( 4 ). The permutation does not capture our alternativethey have no evidence, they are still defending the plan and external agents for change, and there is no net benefit. ( 5 ). TURN: Fighting the war profiteering must be the First-priority and starting point. The alternative has them and the perm doesnt. If we can win that the starting point matterswhich we do starting in the 1NCwe win the entire permutation debate. ( 6 ). TURN: The perm co-opts the movement and still linksthe 1NC evidence is enough to answer this.

( 7). Avoid the fixed nature of the permutationit will shut down the flexibility of the alternative alonefight against their state-sponsored Marxism.
Casas-Corts, UNC Chapel Hill, 08 (Mara Isabel with Osterweil, Michal. Powell, Dana E., Blurring Boundaries:
Recognizing Knowledge-Practices in the Study of Social Movements Anthropological Quarterly - 81, 1, Winter 2008)

Finally, and also closely related,

in Italy's movimiento no global, the conjunctural, self-reflexive and un-fixed forms of analyses and theory developed by movement activists are largely reactions to universalizing and generalizing political theories of the pastmostly of a Marxist bentthat had little ability to take place-based or circumstantial specificities into account. As a result, they not only failed to achieve radical social change, but often, even if unwittingly, produced exclusions and marginalizations that exacerbated political problems because of their lack of accountability and reflexivity.