The problem with trying to figure this out is that nobody
can figure out why we want war so badly. What is the
objective? To distract attention from the economy
until Nov, 2004? To get control of Iraq's oil? To assert
US power? To bring democracy to the Middle East?
Certainly, the ruling classes in Europe can't figure out
the objective and don't trust what Bush says. The
damage we've done to our relations with Europe must
worry any members of the US ruling class with
interests abroad (which is to say most of them).
I can't see how this new doctrine of preemptive
strikes is going to help us get stronger international
patent laws through the WTO. I mean if we can
strike against Iraq, why not Venezuela to topple
Chavez, or Brazil to get them to stop making ripoffs
of our drugs? This might worry some people.
I know it worries me.
Ellen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Yesterday, I had a conversation with a friend who's been on the left for
>about 55 years. He suggested that Bush's war may actually be against the
>collective interests of the ruling class, the product of a small clique
>within that class.
>
>I suggested instead that it was an example of playing high-stakes poker:
>if
>the Bushwackers win (e.g., Iraq doesn't turn into a major quagmire) it
>could
>be a big victory for them and for their class -- but that the odds against
>that result were quite steep.
>
>what do people think?
>
>Jim
