I just heard my tape of Doug's interview of Tariq Ali, who was emphasizing
that the Saudi state is already fragile and the war can throw it into
turmoil.
If the "war" were just bombing the Afgan's, perhaps we could kill a few
thousand, declare victory, and leave. I think that Bush's demand that
everyone take up sides is very dangerous. I don't know how much
discontent there is in Pakistan or if siding with Pakistan will have
undersirable effects in India, but the world is very complicated. Quickly
reshuffling the deck is more likely to cause more harm than good.
Part of it is our fault. Bush has to act because the US public opinion
cannnot accept a weak-looking president. Gore would have had to bomb
already. I think that more is resting on the shoulders of the US
peace/rationality movement than ever before.
I would like to see us learn to craft a line that could communicate the
dangers. I mentioned yesterday about my colleague, George Wright's
difficulty in trying to do so here in Chico.
I think that there was much more doubt about the wisdom of war before the
Gulf War. The hoopla began afterwards when the US got off easily --
although the Gulf War illness had not been factored in at the time.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
