Leigh Meyers wrote: > > Personally, I think it's delusional to think that ANY of these people > support a complete withdrawal from Iraq OR the Middle East or are > anti-war in ANY way.
Agreed. They're just throwing a legislative temper > tantrum because their 'pigs' got 'skinned', their 'christmas trees' > didn't get decorated. This is silly and just confuses both analysis and thinking about strategy for resistance. > I'm working on a blog post about permabases in Iraq right now. Here's the > lead: > > "When the Democrats or Republicans advocating 'withdrawal' say "We're > going to leave a contingency force in Iraq to prevent terrorism", keep > in mind that ANYBODY who interferes with the flow of oil from Iraq This is really bad. The conclusion is correct, but the whole rhetoric of "war for oil" is nearly as confusing and disruptive as conspiracism. The imperialist goal is NOT, repeat NOT, to keep the oil flowing -- that could be achieved by peaceful economic processes. The goal is CONTROL over that flow, control to reduce or stop it as much as control to keep it flowing. You are right as to the virtual unanimity of the ruling class to stay in the Mideast, but to oppose that we need to understand it in more complex terms. Carrol
