The point about destroying infrastructure - the Americans will be using electromagnetic bombs which destroy computers, phone lines, electrical supplies and car engines. So the point will be to disable to country, without killing people (except of course for Saddam and cronies). They have already released millions of leaflets all over southern Iraq, explaining to the Iraqi people what will happen, and how to protect themselves, and they've set up a radio frequency where Iraqis can tune in and hear directly from the American government.
You asked about the troops - the British and Americans have sent in troops because after disabling Iraq as a fighting force, they intend to invade and hold power for, I believe, at least one year.
I agree with what you wrote about intentions, but I wouldn't say they don't matter at all, just that they're not the be and end all (which is my argument against the "it's all about oil" position).
Iraqi society is not like America before the revolution, where people could take up arms and fight. The oppression inside Iraq is 100 per cent. No-one can speak their mind, no-one can do anything. I think maybe it's hard to understand just what a hell it us. When they're liberated, then we'll hear from them. Until then, we have to trust we can do it, and trust that they're worth it, which I think they are, both in and of themselves, but also because it could have a knock-on effect in the Middle East, and could democratize other movements and governments, and I'm thinking particularly of the Palestinians, another group of people badly in need of (and deserving) democracy.
Sarah
At 8:20 AM -0800 02/16/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Democracy requires education. From what I understand, the country (Iraq) is not at a point politically or socially where democracy would succeed.
