i agree but i also add that we need a lot more than regional. more now than before especially as the retreat in humanist philosophy and the ideology of socilism allow the fundementalist to fill a void. the needs could be partitioned at all levels international regional and national... but iraq as you may know is a sore spot and in the order of priorities iraq comes before the mullah regime.
----- Original Message ---- From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, January 7, 2007 2:05:03 PM Subject: Re: Spinning the Execution of Saddam Hussein On 1/7/07, soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the battle for iraq is the battle of the > international working class not the battle for iranian nukes Nukes are a secondary issue for the US-Israel vs. Iran, to be sure, just as they were a secondary issue for the US-Israel vs. Iraq -- more means than ends. What Washington has in mind isn't a "battle for Iraq," though. It has in its sight -- correctly imho -- a battle for the control of *the entire oil reserves in Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf states* (as you know, the Gulf states have the biggest proven oil reserves in the world, and the combined oil reserves of Iran and Iraq rival those of the Gulf states). What we need to have is a regional vision, not a country vision. -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/> __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
