> -I´ve read elsewhere that the cost could achieve up to 200 billion dollars
> -(2% of GDP). If Stiglitz is right, then the war would be easily afforded.
> -This estimates, of course, don´t make for the costs of prolonged
> occupation.
> -and of a eventual prolonged rise in oil prices
Here is what Stiglitz is saying in his article "War is no spur to economic growth", which I posted on lbo-talk on 24 January:
"By contrast, the direct costs of a military attack on Saddam Hussein's regime will be minuscule in terms of total US government spending. Most analysts put the total costs of the war at less than 0.1% of GDP, the highest at 0.2% of GDP.
Much of that, moreover, includes the usage of munitions that already exist, implying that little or no stimulus will be provided to today's economy."
>> What is the state of Afghanistan today after the Soviet occupation and
the
>> US response to it? It's a disaster for Afghans and their neighbours.
> -This is the price paid for US hegemony....the Afghanistan disaster was
> -largely orchestrated by US policies
The US is certainly responsible the Afghan disaster. IMO the fSU had no business occupying Afghanistan irrespective of the US policies.
> Now, US imperialism is directed against
> -fundamentalism and this confontation is unavoidable. Maybe it could
> -end with a defeat to both sides.
Maybe. As I wrote in my previous post, Islamic fundamentalism may be strengthened in the medium term.
>EU and China still armed forces still are to weak to seriously contest US
>hegemony. US itseld id responsible for almost 40% of world overall military
>spending, so, those diplomatic moves won´t do anything to prevent US
>agression against Iraq. To make things even worse, Europe is deeply divided
>on this matter
>(althought the European people is against military agression) and European
>elites seem unable to to have a common policy (with UK working as an
>effective US 5th column in the EU)
I agree with you. It is premature to talk about China and the EU as hegemons. Xinhua commentary on Chinese economy in People's Daily (29 January) said recently:
"China's impact on the world economy remains limited. In 2001, China's GDP accounted for only 3.7 percent of the world total, lagging far behind the United States' 32.6 percent and Japan's 13.6 percent."
Ulhas
>Alexandre Fenelon