but who at this point are 'the Iraqis' who should the US 'leave' power to? Ahmed Chalabi? Al Sadr?
>From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Nader Does the CFR
>Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 21:51:01 -0500
>
>I think they've argued (and I would agree) that the demand should be
>immediate US withdrawal -- corporate and military -- without waiting for
>the US to arrange UN replacements or an international presence, because
>it's clear whose interests would be served under those circumstances. If
>the Iraqis want to arrange UN replacements or an international presence,
>they would of course be free to do so. The only matters left for the US
>would be trying the American war criminals (or, preferably, delivering
>them to an international tribunal, like Milosevic) and paying reparations.
>
>--CGE
>
>On Sun, 30 May 2004, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> > At least two of our distinguished listmembers, Cdes Cox and Furuhashi,
> > repeatedly have said no UN replacements, no international presence -
> > leave it to the Iraqis.
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk