Bremer has been very clear about the mission of the occupation: to fully transform Iraq into a country hospitable to multinational corporate interests. This isn't ultra-left propaganda. At a recent talk, Bremer specifically said the U.S. "would not leave" until barriers to foreign investment were dismantled; oil, water and other vital industries and resources were privatized, and the country was otherwise handed over to multinational capital. That is the driving aim -- and will be the only consequence -- of continued occupation.
Of course Iraq and Vietnam are very, very different. But the content of the Chomsky quote I originally posted, I think, remains irrefutable. What will happen if the U.S. ends the occupation and leaves is anybody's guess. But we *know* that continued occupation is a recipe for violence, exploitation and death, and will fuel anti-U.S. sentiment, making us less secure.
Occupation also has the disadvantage of being against self-determination and other left values. "Internationalism" sounds nice (nicer than "imperialism"), but has gone wrong as frequently as (or probably more than) it's gone right. On the left, we'd do well to set the bar very high in making the case for intervention. Strategically, I think great sections of the U.S. population are now ready to be mobilized around the idea that we must Get Out Now.
So I'll stand by the slogan: U.S. Out of Iraq!
Chris Kromm Free Iraq! www.unitedforpeace.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20030723/6e0f2f6f/attachment.htm>