Globalization; a new phenomenon?

People assume that the rise of global companies and foreign ownership is some sort of new occurrence. Think the Dutch East India company, the Suez Canal, and even the Panama Canal to name a few. The Suez Canal was made by a French architect De Lesseps created the Suez Canal Company, and employed 1.5 million labourers, including slaves, and over ten years to complete this massive work. This great project costs thousands of local their lives. The Panama Canal was made by the same French builder, raising $60 million from investors, hiring French to lead locals that happily worked and risked death, of yellow fever or landslides. It failed and still locals worked on it. The point I'm making is that local people were happier to risk all and work hard but have work all the same. Global employer or local.

Let the Punishment Fit The Crime - Mandatory Jail for Crooked Bankers

I don't understand why society thinks it's OK to send a criminal to jail for stealing $200 from a corner store at the point of a gun - because that's violent - but won't send a crooked banker to prison for defrauding investors and stealing millions or losing investor millions.

Let the punishment fit the crime.

If one person robs a liquor store, he may put the cashier, owner, and patrons in jeopardy and that is a crime worth some punishment.  Perhaps 10 people's lives and familes are affected. 

But if a crooked executive at a banking company gambles with the savings of bank clients and stock holders, that affects the tens of thousands of employees, share holders, businesses that rely on them, and in the end the taxpayer expected to bail them out.

That's tens of thousands if not millions of people affected.  That's retirements, dental work, college funds, businesses and then jobs, families futures, vacations and all the other hopes and dreams of the people who had no control over reckless behaviour. 

The injury to any one person is less than a gun injury, but the total damage is vastly more to society.store robbery?

I advocate for mandatory jail terms for any banker accused of criminal behaviour, and that they are exempt from using company assets to protect themselves in the legal system.  If that was a law, no company by-law could protect them and they would be punished to the level that they deserved. 

When will society see that a crime against society has more damage than a

Syrian Civil War Tactical Analysis

I've analysed the Syrian  tactics on both sides, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) working for Assad and the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and I have some recommendations for the FSA:
The biggest problem for the FSA is not taking and holding ground; it's neutralizing SAA's tank advantage. Frankly, FSA would do better in the long run arming tank hunter teams to go into a static tank defensive position, kill the tanks and retreat. FSA has time on their side. FSA shouldn't waste inexperienced fighters trying difficult missions that even NATO soldiers would have a hard time with. The regime will fall, they always do.

Eventually, the FSA infantry will outnumber the SAA, therefore the FSA needs to eliminate the tactical advantage of air and tanks. Grind down their armor first.  That's how they could win.

The Germans in WWII made very effective 3-man tank hunting teams. Go watch  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDbFdngVOJk

SAA Tank commanders are either incompetent or forced to make their tanks vulnerable by remaining static in defensive positions.  That is stupid tank warfare. No Soviet Tank school would teach them that. If they were taught to dig in tanks then it would have been on open ridges in defensive positions. Tanks must stay on the move or they are sitting targets, watch how Americans use tanks.  Inside cities are the WORST places to leave tanks. Limited visibility from building rows, and with no dismounted infantry to protect them locally, tanks are weak. The fact that they are using BMP to protect tanks with no dismounted infantry in urban combat gives FSA the advantage.

The FSA should arm tank hunters with Molotov cocktails to hunt tanks. Gasoline and bottles are cheap and easy weapons to slip through checkpoints.  Go to the higher stories in buildings and firebomb the tanks.  Molotovs will not kill tanks unless one can hit the exhaust vents. But firebombs blind tanks and then infantry can put grenades down the barrels to either damage the barrel or if the breech is open kill the tank. Then RETREAT. That's safer than trying to aim at the tank when the tank is aiming back.

The FSA doesn't need to win every battle now, they need to get the tactical advantage.

The biggest problem for FSA fighters is inexperienced targetry using line of sight weapons (LOS) like M40 105mm recoilless rifles, CORNET, METIS, and RPG. They are dying too quickly in some cases before they get good at aiming. Anti tank weapons work best if one can ambush the convoys and tanks when one is prepared first because that makes up for inexperience and the arcs of fire are set. It's the best way to compensate for all disadvantages.

IED's are working better than LOS weapons because one doesn't risk a firefight and inexperienced and under-resourced rebels can make the charge big enough to kill tanks.

Eventually, the rebels will win, they always do because they will outnumber the army no matter how much they are armed. Time is always on the side of the insurgent. Armies are made to fight foreign enemies but they don't work well against the people they were sworn to protect.