Build An Internet Explanation Engine, Not an Alien Defence

14 Aug

Most people say that US and Global Economy are in decline.

However everybody has different solutions. In the following piece, Harward Prof. Stephen M. Walt believes that it is the military and wars that have caused the US decline. But, the Cold War generated immense military spending, but did not cause the U. S. Decline. And the next piece I took for you is from Nobel Prize Winner Prof. Paul Krugman. He argues that useless spending for an imaginary  defense project  against aliens will save the US economy. Nobody will accept wasting tax dollars on imaginary wars. Then I added a piece from Mary Bellis. She summarizes 10 innovations we need.

I will cut it short and sweet here. The internet explanation engine is not a waiste of money, and has the real power to lift our world to a next level of civilization. This will free our world from all evils including money and employment slavery and will open the stage to the innovations mentioned by Mary Bellis. The US should lead our world into a freedom and new life like this. We should free ourselves from the evil thinking of wars. By the way, it is innovations which make growth. China grows with innovations from the US. The same innovations do not help us here due to our higer wages. We need that innovation engine running. These innovations as mentioned by Mary Bellis can be achieved by first building the internet explanation engine. It is is the only chance to turn the tide of this decline. I will go on with this later with fresh developments as they arise.  

 

When did the American empire start to decline?

Posted By Stephen M. Walt Tuesday, August 2, 2011 – 10:51 AM Share

Today is the 21st anniversary of a key date in world history. On this date in 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, setting in motion a train of events that would have fateful consequences for Saddam himself, but also for the United States. Indeed, one could argue that this invasion was the first step in a train of events that did enormous damage to the United States and its position in the world.

Of course, we all know what happened in the first Gulf War. After a brief period of vacillation (and a vigorous public debate on different options), the first Bush administration assembled a large and diverse international coalition and quickly mobilized an impressive array of military power (most of it American). It got approval from the U.N. Security Council for the use of force. Although a number of prominent hawks predicted that the war would be long and bloody, the U.S.-led coalition routed the third-rate Iraqi forces and destroyed much of Saddam’s military machine. We then imposed an intrusive sanctions regime that dismantled Iraqi’s WMD programs and left it a hollow shell. Despite hard-line pressure to “go to Baghdad,” Bush & Co. wisely chose not to occupy the country. They understood what Bush’s son did not: Trying to occupy and reorder the politics of a deeply divided Arab country is a fool’s errand.

Unfortunately, the smashing victory in the first Gulf War also set in train an unfortunate series of subsequent events. For starters, Saddam Hussein was now firmly identified as the World’s Worst Human Being, even though the United States had been happy to back him during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s. More importantly, the war left the United States committed to enforcing “no-fly zones” in northern and southern Iraq.

But even worse, the Clinton administration entered office in 1993 and proceeded to adopt a strategy of “dual containment.” Until that moment, the United States had acted as an “offshore balancer” in the Persian Gulf, and we had carefully refrained from deploying large air or ground force units there on a permanent basis. We had backed the Shah of Iran since the 1940s, and then switched sides and tilted toward Iraq during the 1980s. Our goal was to prevent any single power from dominating this oil-rich region, and we cleverly played competing powers off against each other for several decades.

With dual containment, however, the United States had committed itself to containing two different countries — Iran and Iraq — who hated each other, which in turn forced us to keep lots of airplanes and troops in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. We did this, as both Kenneth Pollack and Trita Parsi have documented, because Israel wanted us to do it, and U.S. officials foolishly believed that doing so would make Israel more compliant during the Oslo peace process. But in addition to costing a lot more money, keeping U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia for the long term also fueled the rise of al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden was deeply offended by the presence of “infidel” troops on Saudi territory, and so the foolish strategy of dual containment played no small role in causing our terrorism problem. It also helped derail several attempts to improve relations between the United States and Iran. Dual containment, in short, was a colossal blunder.

But no strategy is so bad that somebody else can’t make it worse. And that is precisely what George W. Bush did after 9/11. Under the influence of neoconservatives who had opposed dual containment because they thought it didn’t go far enough, Bush adopted a new strategy of “regional transformation.” Instead of preserving a regional balance of power, or containing Iraq and Iran simultaneously, the United States was now going to use its military power to topple regimes across the Middle East and turn those countries into pro-American democracies. This was social engineering on a scale never seen before. The American public and the Congress were unenthusiastic, if not suspicious, about this grand enterprise, which forced the Bush administration to wage a massive deception campaign to get them on board for what was supposed to be the first step in this wildly ambitious scheme. The chicanery worked, and the United States launched its unnecessary war on Iraq in March 2003.

Not only did “Mission Accomplished” soon become a costly quagmire, but wrecking Iraq — which is what we did — destroyed the balance of power in the Gulf and improved Iran’s geopolitical position. The invasion of Iraq also diverted resources away from the war in Afghanistan, which allowed the Taliban to re-emerge as a formidable fighting force. Thus, Bush’s decision to topple Saddam in 2003 led directly to two losing wars, not just one. And these wars were enormously expensive to boot. Combined with Bush’s tax cuts and other fiscal irresponsibilities, this strategic incompetence caused the federal deficit to balloon to dangerous levels and helped bring about the fiscal impasse that we will be dealing with for years to come.

Obviously, none of these outcomes were inevitable back in 1990. Had cooler heads and smarter strategists been in charge after the first Gulf War, we might have taken advantage of that victory to foster a more secure and stable order throughout the Middle East. In particular, we would have pulled our military forces out of the region and gone back to offshore balancing. After all, Saddam’s decision to invade Kuwait in 1990 did not force the United States to choose “dual containment.” Nor did it make it inevitable that we would bungle the Oslo peace process, pay insufficient attention to al Qaeda’s intentions, or drink the neocons’ Kool-Aid and gallop off on their foolish misadventure in Iraq. But when future historians search for the moment when the “American Empire” reached its pinnacle and began its descent, the war that began 21 years ago would be a good place to start.

 

—————————————————————————————–

US economy: Space aliens to the rescue?

Paul Krugman goes into the Twilight Zone.

Thomas MuchaAugust 12, 2011 15:30

A protestor dressed like an alien holds a banner during the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009 on December 8, 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark. (Miguel Villagran/Getty Images)

When you’re a Nobel Prize-winning economist, you get a lot of leeway. 

That was clearly the case today when Paul Krugman crafted a logical and out-of-this-world argument for greater government spending. 

Check out this fascinating and spectacularly nerdy economics discussion between Krugman, former IMF chief economist Ken Rogoff, and CNN’s Fareed Zakaria:

Fareed Zakaria: Wouldn’t John Maynard Keynes say that if you could employ people to dig a ditch and then fill it up again, that’s fine, they’re being productively employed, they’ll pay taxes, so maybe the bigger – maybe Boston’s big dig was just fine after all.

Paul Krugman: Think about World War 2. That was not – that was actually negative social product spending, and yet, it brought us out. I mean, probably because you want to put these things together, if we say, look, we could use some inflation. Ken and I are both saying that, which is, of course, anathema to a lot of people in Washington but is, in fact, what basic logic says. It’s very hard to get inflation in a depressed economy. But if you had a program of government spending plus an expansionary policy by the Fed, you could get that. So, if you think about using all of these things together, you could accomplish a great deal. If we discovered that space aliens were planning to attack and we needed a massive buildup to counter the space alien threat and really inflation and budget deficits took secondary place to that, this slump would be over in 18 months. And then if we discovered, oops, we made a mistake, there aren’t any aliens, we’d be a better –

Ken Rogoff: And we need Orson Welles, is what you’re saying.

Paul Krugman: No, that’s a – there was a “Twilight Zone” episode like this in which scientists fake an alien threat in order to achieve world peace. Well, this time, we don’t need it – we need it in order to get some fiscal stimulus.

Top 10 Inventions Needed – Future Technology

By Mary Bellis, About.com Guide

See More About:

This was a wish list that was originally intended to provide inspiration for inventors. First written in April of 1997, I thought it might be fun to follow-up each year and find out if anyone has been working on these ideas for future technology. I have included websites for you to “check out” inventions that are, are close to, or kinda close to what I am hoping will soon exist in the technology available to us presently.

1. Future Technology – Free Energy

I want my energy bill to come only once, not every month. So be it solar or electro-magnetic, please make it personal and portable with batteries that keep going and going.

Check out – D.O.E. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Switch to Renewable SolarSign Up for Solar by Aug 31 to Get $900 Off Your Home Solar Systemwww.SolarCity.com/AugBigSolarSale

How To Patent Your Idea3 Easy Steps To Patent & Make Money Request a Free Inventor Kit Today!www.Patent.InventionHome.com

Information Technology ClassHands On, Interactive Classes In NJ Financial Aid Available, Call Todaywww.Dover.edu

2. Future Technology – Transporter

What kind of technology is required to scramble a person’s atoms and send them for regrouping in foreign lands all in the blink of an eye? Imagine, I could work in Tokyo and sleep in Paris. Beam me up.

Check out – Quantum Teleportation or Scientists Report ‘Teleported’ Data

3. Future Technology – Replicator Technology (Stuff for Free)

Every time I saw Captain Picard (Star Trek Next Generation) ordering his Earl Grey Tea or Councilor Troy getting a triple alien fudge dessert from one of those replicators on the Enterprise, it made me jealous. I imagine you could send the dirty dishes back to the void where they came from. BTW, a replicator is a device that uses transporter technology to dematerialize quantities of matter and then rematerialize that matter in another form.

4. Future Technology – Universal Communicator

Forget long distant bills and roaming charges (especially with me working in Tokyo and sleeping in Paris). I want a very small device that lets me talk and see anyone, anywhere and anytime. All for the price of the device and please throw in the ability for universal translation for a modest surcharge.

5. Future Technology – The Cure

For you name it.

Check out – Curing Brain Diseases by Growing New Cells?

6. Future Technology – Fountain of Youth

As a woman I consider this as a no-brainer desire for future technology. The “Fountain of Youth” was a legendary spring that renders anyone who drinks of its waters permanently young. What is the real future technology that will extend our lives and keep us looking youthful without surgery?

Check out – Scientists discover cellular ‘fountain of youth’ and Anti-Aging Medicine or Longevity and Anti-Aging Medicine.

7. Future Technology – Protective Force Field

To shield me from the sticks and stones.

Check out – A Force Field for Astronauts?

8. Future Technology – Flying Cars

I want a smooth ride all the way and I hope it’s a convertible.

Check out – How Flying Cars Will Work, Flying Cars Ready To Take Off, Flying car more economical than SUV.

Eastwick College, NJinformation technology Secure Your Future Todaywww.eastwick.edu

Get $75 Free AdvertisingGrow Your Business With Google. Claim Your $75 Coupon Now!www.Google.com/AdWords

9. Future Technology – The Battery Operated Butler Did It

What can I say – housework sucks.

Check out – Robotics and Robots

10. Future Technology – The Time Machine

I have a few famous inventors I would love to meet in person and the idea of messing with the time-space continuum is exciting as well.

Check out – Attention Chronic Argonauts and fellow Time Travelers

Future Technology

Related Guide Picks

Other Related Resources & Guide Picks

Related Articles

Mary Bellis
Inventors Guide

Advertisement

http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/abt.money/money_inventors;svc=;site=inventors;t=3;bt=1;bts=1;pc=1;auc=2;fd=0;fs=0;sp2=0;go=13;a=;kw=;chan=money;syn=about;tile=3;af=0;r=-2;sz=336×280;u=B8EIIZ2z20kA0B2p78197;dc_ref=http%3A/inventors.about.com/od/fstartinventions/tp/Future_Techno.htm;ord=1B8EIIZ2z20kA0B2p78197Inventors Ads

Sponsored Links

Have An Invention Idea?Find Companies That Can Turn Your Idea Into A Real Product. Start Nowwww.idea4invention.com

Got an Invention Idea?Turn Your Invention Idea Into a New Product – Let us Help You!www.Davison.com

How To Patent Your IdeaGet Free Patent Info & Book Today! We Can Help Your Patent Succeed.MatchProduct.com/Patents

Related Searches energy efficiency and renewable energy future technology free energy energy bill inventors inventions

Explore Inventors

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: