Carlos Ruiz Zafon Quotes

When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes.

The sinews of war are infinite money.

War is never economically beneficial except for those in position to profit from war expenditures.

They [the bankers and financiers] own the country and if they don't set the example of fighting for it, why should you?

War is hugely profitable. It creates so much money because it's so easy to spend money very fast. There are huge fortunes to be made. So there is always an encouragement to promote war and keep it going, to make sure that we identify people who are 'others' whom we can legitimately make war upon.

War begun without good provision of money beforehand for going through with it is but as a breathing of strength and blast that will quickly pass away. Coin is the sinews of war.

Nine out of ten significant people have to do with money or war!

He who first called money the sinews of the state seems to have said this with special reference to war.

When war comes, two things happen - profits go way, way up and all perishables go way, way down. There becomes a market for them.

I guess if people couldn't profit from war I don't think there would be war.

They're out there, this appalling idea that there are companies that profit - not just profit but profit enormously - through war.

Money creates a power relationship between the payer and the payee.

War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it.

The goose that lays the golden egg has been considered a most valuable possession. But even more profitable is the privilege of taking the golden eggs laid by somebody else's goose. The investment bankers and their associates now enjoy that privilege. They control the people through the people's own money.

The munitions manufacturers and the war lords are in the saddle.

Were the expense of war to be defrayed always by a revenue raised within the year ... wars would in general be more speedily concluded, and less wantonly undertaken

The big bankers of the world, who practice the terrorism of money, are more powerful than kings and field marshals, even more than the Pope of Rome himself. They never dirty their hands. They kill no-one: they limit themselves to applauding the show. Their officials, international technocrats, rule our countries: they are neither presidents nor ministers, they have not been elected, but they decide the level of salaries and public expenditure, investments and divestments, prices, taxes, interest rates, subsidies, when the sun rises and how frequently it rains. However, they don't concern themselves with the prisons or torture chambers or concentration camps or extermination centers, although these house the inevitable consequences of their acts. The technocrats claim the privilege of irresponsibility: 'We're neutral' they say.

The only neutral parties in a war are those who are making money from it.

If the United States loses the economic weapons of control, it is very much weakened.

Because of the expensive system and the competition among various groups, democracy needs a lot of money. As a natural consequence it becomes the slave of the great Jewish international finance which subjugates it by subvention. In this fashion the fate of a people is given into the hands of a caste of bankers.

The only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war.

A war undertaken without sufficient monies has but a wisp of force. Coins are the very sinews of battles.

At present the peace of the world has been preserved, not by statesmen, but by capitalists.

If we fix it so's you can't make money on war, we'll all forget what we're killing folks for.

When war becomes a trade, it benefits, like all other trades, from the division of labour.