subject change (was Re:lbo-talk-digest V1 #7260

Dennis Perrin dperrin at comcast.net
Tue Jan 21 12:00:28 PST 2003


Doug:


> >Saddam's no threat to the entire world, true; and he's no real threat to
the
> >continental US, obviously.
>
> And Al Qaeda is. I thought they were supposed to be enemy #1, but
> we've pretty much forgotten about them.

I totally agree here. The police work continues in Europe and elsewhere, but rumor has it that al-Q will pop up on various "Not Hot" lists throughout the US.


> > But he is violent and will cross borders if he
> >thinks he can get away with it -- a small scale imperialist, but one all
the
> >same.
>
> Why is that our concern? Why is it that the countries closest to
> Iraq, and presumably the most at risk, aren't leading the war party
> (and instead are quite nervous about its consequences)? Instead, it's
> led by a fairly extreme right-wing faction within the U.S. ruling
> class.

A variety of reasons, the main one being that Saddam has tradtionally been the snuffer of the nationalisms and democratic movements that could threaten the oil kingdoms. Good gig for Saddam while it lasted, and good for the sheiks as well. But don't think that after Kuwait the monarchs aren't edgy about a fully-armed Saddam free of sanctions and inspections.

They're obviously nervous about a wide-scale US war that could lead to their downfall. This is what people like Scowcroft fear as well. There are those in ruling, rightwing circles who are comfortable with Saddam in power -- checked, but in place. It's not just a Saudi or Kuwaiti fear.


> Why is the U.S. free to develop all manner of weaponry but not Iraq?
> The U.S. bombs more people and places in an average year than Saddam
> could dream of in six lifetimes. By what rationale does Iraq get
> inspections and the U.S. get to call the shots? That's not a
> rhetorical question.

I prefer the UN, actually, despite its flaws. US weaponry should be part of any international disarmament agreement, obviously. Any country with WMD should be open about its arsenal. How this exempts Iraq from inspections I don't know. Hypocrisy? Fuck then, let Saddam build as many chemical and nuclear weapons as he wants. We do. Why not him?

DP



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list