SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/24/2003 2:53:09 PM
From: abuelita  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
lurqer-

A secure plentiful supply of oil is a necessary first step in the establishment of an American hegemony.

your post is the most succinct description
of the current administration's motives i
have read.

thank you for piecing it together.

rose



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/24/2003 3:49:18 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Re: It's not about oil...

lurqer: Great insights...Thanks for sharing them...you should be posting over on the foreign policy thread...;-)
-s2



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/24/2003 4:00:57 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
To Some in Europe, the Major Problem Is Bush the Cowboy

By DAVID E. SANGER

The New York Times

PARIS, Jan. 23 — In Europe, it often seems that it is not only the wisdom of a war against Iraq that lies at the heart of trans-Atlantic differences, but the personal style of George W. Bush himself.

To European ears, the president's language is far too blunt, and he has been far too quick to cast the debate about how to separate Saddam Hussein from his weapons of mass destruction in black-and-white certainties, officials in Paris and Berlin say. They add that his confrontational approach, his impatience with the inspections and even his habit of finger pointing as he speaks undermine the possibility of common strategy against Saddam Hussein.

"Much of it is the way he talks, this provocative manner, the jabbing of his finger at you," said Hans-Ulrich Klose, the vice chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in the German Parliament. "It's Texas, a culture that is unfamiliar to Germans. And it's the religious tenor of his arguments."

Over the past several months, as Mr. Bush has mounted his argument for forcing Iraq to disarm, the president himself has once again become the issue here. In interviews in three capitals over the past week, diplomats, politicians and analysts said they believed relations between the United States and two of its most crucial allies — Germany and France — were at their lowest point since the end of the cold war.

As the White House was quick to argue today, the American president has friends and admirers among the leading politicians in several Western European countries, starting with Britain, Italy and Spain, and spreading east to Poland.

It is no wonder, Mr. Bush's foreign policy aides say, that he has redrawn his mental map of America's alliances, and that Paris and Berlin have been placed in the deep freeze for failing his loyalty tests.

An American diplomat trying to keep European objections from delaying Mr. Bush's timetable for disarming Iraq said he heard similar complaints all the time.

"Much of it is the way he talks, the rhetoric, the religiosity," he said of Mr. Bush. "It reminds them of what drove them crazy about Reagan. It reminds them of what they miss about Clinton. All the stereotypes we thought we had banished for good after Sept. 11 — the cowboy imagery, in particular — it's all back."

From the French Foreign Ministry to the chancellor's office in Berlin, there is broad acknowledgement that the breach between the United States and its traditional allies in Western Europe has gone beyond the friction that has long been a staple of French-American relations or the misunderstandings that have grown since the cold-war ended.

Senior officials insisted in interviews that in France and Germany Mr. Bush had not made the case that Iraq posed a more imminent threat than, say, Al Qaeda.

One French official argued that the American military's failure to hunt down Osama bin Laden and other members of Al Qaeda's top command had led Mr. Bush to search for "easier but less important prey."

"Terrorists are a hundred times more likely to obtain a weapon of mass destruction from Pakistan than from Iraq," one senior European official said, not permitting a reporter to identify even his nationality because tensions with Washington are so high. "North Korea is far more likely to sell whatever it's got. But can we say this in public? Can we have a real debate about priorities? Not with George Bush."

This sense that many European officials have of dealing with an American president who makes up his mind and then will accept no argument is a central element in the current friction.

In interviews, German and French officials acknowledge that Mr. Bush's goal — the disarmament of Iraq and ouster of Mr. Hussein — would be best in an ideal world. In the next breath, though, they argue that for now, the containment of Mr. Hussein's power — with inspectors keeping the Iraqi leader off balance for months — is a perfectly acceptable second choice.

While Vice President Dick Cheney has argued that a show of military might will begin to change the map of the Middle East, German and French officials say it will more likely lead to a radicalization of the Arab world, a fractured Iraq and a prolonged struggle with Washington over who will pick up the pieces.

The bitter exchanges between President Bush and America's European allies over whether and when to go to war against Saddam Hussein have now gone well beyond an argument about strategy.

(Page 2 of 2)

Mr. Bush's defense secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld, gave voice to that thinking on Wednesday when he dismissed the mounting opposition in France and Germany, calling the two countries "old Europe," and all but declaring that in the Bush White House, they no longer mattered.

Mr. Rumsfeld's comments predictably raised a storm today in both Paris and Berlin, with a French cabinet minister responding by alluding to a vulgarity that one of Napoleon's generals used when the British sought his surrender at Waterloo.

A floor lamp that spreads sunshine all over a room

The DVD/DVR Digital Video Recorder easily records non-copyrighted DVDs

Fruit Saver... the most innovative kitchen appliance since the microwave oven

Atomic accuracy in any U.S. time zone

Scientists adapt NASA technology to create "smart bed" sleep surface

Mr. Bush has made no secret of ranking his allies by their fidelity to his missions. Britain remains at the center of his universe, with Prime Minister Tony Blair a reliable ally. After that comes Poland, the most gung-ho new member of NATO, whose president, Aleksander Kwasniewski, said in an interview last week, "if it is President Bush's vision, it is mine."

Next in line is Spain, whose conservative prime minister, José María Aznar, "probably talks to Mr. Bush more frequently than any other European leader," a White House official reports. Then comes Australia, Italy — with a third conservative prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi — and Russia, led by a man with whom Mr. Bush seems to have bonded, President Vladimir V. Putin.

But Germany fell to the bottom of the list with last September's elections, when Chancellor Gerhard Schröder violated what Mr. Bush thought was a pledge and ran a virulently antiwar campaign.

France fell off this week, with its vow to organize a common European position against military action, at least for several months. Both countries "failed the Bush loyalty test," the senior aide noted.

Bush-bashing is old sport here. The president got off to a bad start with the Europeans when he declared the Kyoto environmental agreement on the environment "dead" — an undiplomatic wording that White House officials now cite as one of their biggest mistakes in Mr. Bush's first year in office. Then came the charges of unilateralism as Mr. Bush rejected American participation in the International Criminal Court and pulled the plug on the Antiballistic Missile Treaty.

His handling of events after Sept. 11 won him new respect, but that has eroded now.

Even in Britain, Mr. Blair has been worn down by months of standing by Mr. Bush's side. In a political cartoon in The Observer newspaper last weekend, Mr. Bush was depicted as the Lone Ranger, replete with two pearl-handled revolvers, and Mr. Blair was drawn up as Tonto, his loyal Indian companion. When Mr. Blair expresses doubts about their mission, Mr. Bush says, "Shut up, Tonto, and cover my back."

Mr. Blair seems genuinely convinced that Iraq poses a threat to Britain, and several British officials said in interviews that it was critical not to show any public differences in tactics with Mr. Bush.

"You can't show any ankle at all in an operation like this," one official said, "because the inspections only work if the forces on Saddam's borders are a credible threat." He paused, and added, "You would think the Germans would understand that."

If members of Mr. Blair's government fear he is too close to Mr. Bush, some in Berlin fear Mr. Schröder has burned his bridges while Mr. Bush sits in the White House.

Mr. Schröder's advocates in Berlin remain convinced that without renouncing any German participation in an Iraq conflict, he was doomed to electoral defeat.

But White House officials say Mr. Schröder went back on a promise to Mr. Bush not to attack the American approach for political advantage — and that Mr. Bush will not forget it. They are unimpressed with his recent, quiet offer to give the United States use of German airspace and extra protection for American bases in Germany.

Germany, too, is unimpressed. "The likelihood of using force is deterring Saddam, but it is also deterring the allies," said Karsten D. Voigt, the coordinator for German-American cooperation in the country's foreign office.

Mr. Voigt is scornful of German colleagues who refuse to recognize that, in his view, the arms inspections in Iraq have only gotten this far because Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair have been willing to put forces on the Iraqi border. But using them, he says, is another thing.

"We know about containment," he said at breakfast the other day, gesturing in the direction of where the Berlin Wall once stood. "We lived with it for 50 years. It worked. And at the end, we got regime change."

Germany's moment to make this point is only a week away, when it takes over the chair of the Security Council for the month of February.

In France the rhetoric is less heated, but the suspicions of Mr. Bush's motives are no less real. French officials may have been playing to the home audience when they hinted that the country may use its veto power in the Security Council to prevent a second resolution, authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, to pass anytime soon.

But there is a clear fear here that Mr. Bush will respond to the French threat by avoiding such a vote altogether. One senior diplomat predicted the next few weeks "will be the defining moment on whether the United States decides to stay within the international system."

nytimes.com



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/24/2003 6:59:25 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
John Kerry Outlines Foreign Policy

Democratic Presidential Hopeful John Kerry Outlines Foreign Policy to Refocus War on Terror

The Associated Press

DES MOINES, Iowa Jan. 23 — Accusing the Bush administration of "blustering unilateralism," Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry outlined a foreign policy that would refocus the war on terrorism and launch a trade initiative to bring the Mideast into the world market.

"We must embark on a major initiative of public diplomacy to bridge the divide between Islam and the rest of the world," the Massachusetts senator said in a prepared speech made available to The Associated Press on Wednesday. "Mr. President, do not rush to war."

The four-term senator first elected in 1984 was to deliver the speech Thursday in a high-profile address at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

Kerry joined in the call to disarm Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, calling him "a particularly grievous threat," but warned against a quick assault on Iraq.

"The United States should never go to war because it wants to. We should go to war because we have to," Kerry said. "But we don't have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action."

"The administration must pass this test," Kerry said. "I believe they must take the time to do the hard work of diplomacy. They must do a better job of making their case to the American people and to the world."

Administration actions to date have left the country isolated, he said. "In practice, it has meant alienating our longtime friends and allies, alarming potential foes and spreading anti-Americanism around the world," Kerry said.

"The Bush administration's blustering unilateralism is wrong and even dangerous for our country," he said.

Kerry has formed an exploratory committee to seek the Democratic presidential nomination. His backers say that as a decorated Vietnam War hero, he is the Democrat best able to counter an expected effort by President Bush to make foreign policy and the war on terror central to the 2004 campaign.

Thursday's speech is the beginning of Kerry's effort to draw distinctions with Bush. He said the president made mistakes in prosecuting the initial war on terrorism that likely allowed key terrorists like Osama bin Laden to escape.

"They relied too much on local warlords to carry the fight against our enemies and this permitted many al-Qaida members, likely including Osama bin Laden himself, to slip through our fingers," said Kerry.

Kerry urged the United States and its trans-Atlantic partners to launch a high-profile Middle East trade initiative "to stop the economic regression" in the region, saying that is key to cutting off the roots of terrorism.

The traditional U.S. peacemaking role in the Mideast must also be revived, he said.

"This administration made a grave mistake when it disregarded almost 70 years of American friendship and leadership in the Middle East," said Kerry.

And the United States must "engage thoughtfully, strategically and firmly" in the high-stakes dispute with North Korea, he said.

"But the Bush administration has offered only a merry-go-round policy they got up on their high horse, whooped and hollered, rode around in circles and ended right back where they started," said Kerry.

Copyright 2003 The Associated Press.

abcnews.go.com



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/25/2003 6:02:59 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Swiss-Info: Anti-US sentiment pervades Davos

swissinfo.org

The Bush administration has come in for strong criticism at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in the Swiss resort of Davos.

Opposition to war in Iraq dominated Friday’s main session, with the most scathing criticism coming from Malaysian prime minister, Mahathir bin Mohamad.

The US attorney general, John Ashcroft, used the session to defend American policy, declaring that US actions were guaranteeing liberty around the world.

But he failed to convince many participants. A former Swiss cabinet minister, Adolf Ogi, who spoke to swissinfo after Ashcroft’s speech, said many in Davos were seriously worried about US policy.

“I felt somewhat that the Americans and their way are not supported by all,” he said.

“We are all very much concerned because if we have a war in Iraq, we will have problems not just in Iraq but all over the world. The economic leaders here know that clearly.”

Disquiet

Kenneth Roth, the executive director of US-based Human Rights Watch, said that he had never encountered so much opposition to the US at a WEF meeting.

“This time the economy is not a focus [at Davos],” Roth told swissinfo.

“The dominant issues are clearly the possible war in Iraq and the ongoing fight against terrorism, and in each of those cases there is much disquiet about the way Washington is moving.

“I only hope that the US government representatives pick that up.”

Observers on the second day of the six-day summit could have been forgiven for feeling like they had been transported to one of the alternative public forums running parallel to the WEF meeting.

Speaking out

Political and business leaders repeatedly appeared prepared to stick their necks out.

“I think people are more free here in Davos [to speak out] than they were in New York,” said Ogi.

“The WEF has always been dominated by Americans, especially last year when Americans were on all the panels. This time it’s not the same and maybe others feel a bit more free to give their point of view.”

The anti-Washington tone reached a crescendo when Mahathir bin Mohamad, the Malaysian prime minister, warned that US attempts to “out-terrorise the terrorists” would lead to a protracted period of hatred, revenge and greed.

Poverty and despair

Mahathir suggested that suicide bombers and hijackers, such as those who attacked the US on September 11, 2001, were driven by poverty and despair.

“People do not tie bombs to their bodies or crash planes into buildings for the fun of it,” he said.

"The weak have now hit back in the only way they can. Groping for the enemy, the strong hits out blindly in every direction, in every part of the world.

Mahathir’s comments came after the Swiss president, Pascal Couchepin, bluntly warned the US against taking unilateral military action against Iraq.

Both men drew hefty rounds of applause from many of the more than 2,000 corporate, political and non-governmental leaders taking part.

Unusual atmosphere

The anti-American tone that has infused this year’s summit is unusual, particularly given the WEF’s history and the large numbers of North American participants.

Kenneth Roth pointed out that in previous years the event had celebrated US entrepreneurialism and business philosophy, but this time around there were no economic successes to boast about.

“This time there is not a celebratory tone about the economy, both because it is intractable and because of the financial scandals of Enron and WorldCom,” he revealed

But this year’s shift is not just confined to a change in tone.

Many of Europe’s most important figures have shunned the gathering. The absentee list includes the heads of government of Britain, France and Germany.



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/25/2003 10:17:28 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Nice job. Yeah, there is something definitely more than just the oil, and the power you have by controlling energy (Thanks, Enron...Calrat@screwedbyene.shaft); something more sinister, I'm afraid, but I can't quite get it together yet. Ultimate big bro stuff with Sauron's eye, thought police, nazi/commie totalitarianism, that sort of stuff. Some quotes from the local paper, re upcoming (actually, yesterday and tonight) talk about the civil rights stuff by an ACLU lawyer....

" 'The US is in danger of turning into a full fledged surveillance society.' That's part of the message Judith Volkart, board member and lawyer with the ACLU, will deliver Fri.
Under the guise of fighting terrorism, she says the Bush Admin is increasing efforts to spy on Americans,while systematically undermining freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
As an example Volkart points to the creation of the Total Information Awareness Program. If that name sounds like something out of "1984", she says, it is no wonder, because it 'may be the closest true Big Brother program that has ever been contemplated.
'It is going to be run by a branch of the Defense Dept, and it will be headed by John (the Eye, ..my word not hers)
Poindexter. He was the guy who testified B4 congress that it was his duty to withhold information from Congress. '

blah, blah, tired fingers not wanting to describe program, nor previous abuses, fast forward to)...

'AG John Ashcroft has sought and has been successful at having many of the protections of the Church Committee guidelines (Domestic spying) overturned. The fallout from such decisions is already happening, she adds.

'There as a fellow in the Bay Area who found the FBI on his doorstep after he criticized George Bush in a 24 hr fitness center in SF. I think he got in an argument in the gym, and it was overheard by someone-we don 't know who, he doesn't know who- but the FBI wound up on his doorstep asking him questions.
As another example, Volkart points to a 'college freshman who had the Secret Service visit her, because somebody turned her in for having a poster of Bush in her dorm room. The SS (WR abrv) came to her door.'

The poster, adds Volkart, featured a photo of Bush when he was gov of Texas, holding a noose to show his support of the death penalty.
'They saw the poster, and B4 leaving her room they wanted to know if she had any maps of Afganistan or pro-Taliban stuff'".

Keeping all this somewhat relevant to gold, it should be noted that gold, silver, and gemstones have always been used by refugees as a way to take their wealth to a new country. Howard Ruff used to talk about that when it looked like the inflation of the 80's was going to lead somewhere. Recommended first a position in the metals in case of financial collapse, etc, ad nauseum, but recommended you get diamonds for the portability factor. I never thought about Yankee Stadium being portable before I read that.

Rat



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/25/2003 10:30:39 PM
From: abuelita  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
lurqer-

i don't know if you've seen this (maybe
stockman has already posted it) but it is
very much in line with your theory.

They envision the creation and enforcement of what they call a worldwide "Pax Americana," or American peace. But so far, the American people have not appreciated the true extent of that ambition.

accessatlanta.com

its a most disturbing read.

rose

edit: i just noticed it has been posted already.



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/26/2003 2:52:01 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
<<...What a look at the ''Kismet'' Broadway version of Baghdad really provides is not an opportunity to grasp at straws, but an illustration of our profound ignorance of the real city and people we plan to attack and our reliance, after decades of inattention, on fragmentary information and stereotypes. It shows just how desperately we need some caution and intelligence - military, political, and moral - before we plunge into an abyss of our own ignorance and fancy...>>

American's 'Kismet' approach to Iraq
By George H. Rosen
Editorial
The Boston Globe
1/25/2003

SEARCHING for a trace of Iraq in the history of America's popular imagination is, for the most part, digging a dry well. For one thing, the modern country dates only from the end of World War I, before which its current territory was split among three Ottoman provinces. But even Baghdad, the most storied name of the region, has been only a marginal mosquito in America's mythologizing.

Mark Twain, who went nearly everywhere he could in the world, never made it there. Although, in Damascus once, as Twain recounts in his ''Innocents Abroad,'' he dreamed of magic carpets flying toward Baghdad during a particularly romantic dusk.

The one Baghdad story that Americans have taken to heart - or at least consistently spent money to see - is ''Kismet,'' Edward Knoblock's 1911 ''Arabian Nights'' melodrama of a wily beggar, a capricious caliph, and an evil wazir. The play was a smash hit for 30 years for actor Otis Skinner and has been transformed into four movie versions and a Broadway musical comedy. ''Kismet'' is the source of the image of Baghdad as a metropolis of licentiousness - '' Not Since Nineveh! '' goes the song - that has fed the gossip columns of ''Baghdad on the Hudson'' (Manhattan) and ''Baghdad by the Bay'' (San Francisco).

It is particularly in Robert Wright and George Forrest's 1953 transmogrification of ''Kismet'' into Broadway musical schlock (the source of the hit song ''Stranger in Paradise'') that we hit the paydirt of prescience about our current predicament. ''Baghdad! Don't underestimate Baghdad!'' sings Lalume, the gorgeous and persistently dirty-minded wife of the wazir. ''You must investigate Baghdad!''

She goes on to reveal secrets of court life not unlike those recently uncovered by Saddam's former mistress (the dictator's favorite movie is ''The Godfather,'' his favorite song, Sinatra singing ''Strangers in the Night'') on network TV.

Could Lalume, who in the name of decency and a fondness for the lead baritone betrays her ruthless husband, be a promising omen for a postattack revolt in Baghdad by freedom-loving Iraqis? It's not the first time the idea has come up. In the 1944 movie of ''Kismet'' Lalume - her legs painted a Technicolor gold - was played by Hollywood's most celebrated anti-Nazi German, Marlene Dietrich.

Are there other auguries we can find for ourselves, given that ''Kismet,'' from the Arabic via Turkish, means ''fate''? George W. could well take heart at seeing how easily his predecessor (assuming Bush identifies with the wily beggar/lead baritone) handles the chief bad man in Broadway's Baghdad.

In the musical, the wazir is definitely on the axis of evil. Just as Saddam, again according to that former mistress, watches videotapes of his tortured enemies, the wazir gleefully sings of ''the time we caught the man who said I wasn't nice'':

Joy oh joy, that was a time!

We confiscated his mother And then did something or other

Involving her dissolving

in a vat of lime!

But in Kismet the evil wazir goes down more easily than even Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz would dare predict of the current Iraqi strongman. The lead baritone (Alfred Drake on Broadway) drowns him in the palace swimming pool. The misled, but handsome, caliph - maybe Uday Hussein, Saddam's son who publishes a recently banned newspaper that has dared to be critical of his father's regime? - then marries the lead baritone's daughter; the lead baritone goes off with the not-too-bereaved Dietrich figure, and all is well. Talk about targeted assassination and instantaneous regime change!

The evil wazir, by the way, was sung on a recent revival recording by the genial comedian Dom DeLuise. No, he can't sing. So, we have Curly the cowboy from ''Oklahoma,'' George Bush from the Crawford ranch, or even a deputized Donald Rumsfeld, who was a high school wrestler, versus DeLuise. A righteous lead baritone fights a bad but ludicrous wazir. Clearly, a walkover.

There is, however, some disturbing reading in the ''Kismet'' tea leaves. When the wazir crows about his interrogation procedures - ''they always begin to remember when I begin to dismember'' - one begins to think a little too uncomfortably about ''patriot'' acts, secret arrests, and what may be going on by Guantanamo Bay.

And even in a Broadway Baghdad, there are complications. ''Kismet'' may be a frivolous version of an ''Arabian Nights'' story, but the Arabian Nights were not really all that Arabian. The stories Sheherazade told her sultan husband to keep him from cutting off her head were collected in Arabic, but their roots are thought to be Persian - in Iran - and perhaps even Hindu. Moreover, Wright and Forrest, composers of ''Kismet,'' took their show's ''oriental'' melodies from the Russian composer Alexander Borodin.

Behind a lone lunatic wazir in musical-comedy Baghdad is really a complicated network of relationships and influences in a world - Russia, Iran, India, Pakistan - that we in our current fairy tale seem barely to understand. The administration's bellicose clerks wave the bloody flag of Saddam's gassing of the Kurds to chastize those who don't, as the president says, have enough ''steel in their spine'' for war.

Yet when Saddam was actually raining chemical weapons on Kurdish land in 1987 and 1988, it was the Reagan administration, in which nearly every current Bush hawk served, that called the idea of US sanctions against Iraq ''premature'' and granted Saddam a billion-dollar loan, supposedly as a counterweight to the Soviets and Iranian influence.

What a look at the ''Kismet'' Broadway version of Baghdad really provides is not an opportunity to grasp at straws, but an illustration of our profound ignorance of the real city and people we plan to attack and our reliance, after decades of inattention, on fragmentary information and stereotypes. It shows just how desperately we need some caution and intelligence - military, political, and moral - before we plunge into an abyss of our own ignorance and fancy.
_________________________________

George H. Rosen is the author of the novel ''Black Money.''

© Copyright 2003 Boston Globe Newspaper Company.

boston.com



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/30/2003 11:18:10 PM
From: techguerrilla  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Brilliant! <eom>



To: lurqer who wrote (12095)1/31/2003 3:38:47 PM
From: Jim Willie CB  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
if USA does not grab Iraqi oil
if Islamic War cuts off oil delivery shipping lanes
if USA realizes other non-Arab disruptions to oil (Venezuela)

then the US economy just might see $60-80-100 crude oil
and that would send our economy into a tailspin
I still maintain that Iraq will not be invaded by US Forces
that would occur without European or UN support
it would signal a dangerous new precedent of pre-emptive attack

we claim to possess Iraqi evidence of WMD
but not revealing has more power than revealing
(kind of like heightened expectation of earnings)

so we can complain all we want about motives on the Iraqi front
but it all comes down to securing oil
Russia wont be able to make up the difference

eventually Saudi Arabian oil production will be interrupted and shut down temporarily
from internal civil strife
from shaky Fahd Regime succession of power
from Wahabbi attacks on secular leadership

all this talk about quick resupply of oil is incredibly stupid, naive, and baseless
we havent solved the security problems at borders & airports
we havent brought the WTC conspirator leaders to justice
we havent subdued the Talibans in Afghany

so in order to secure future oil supplies, we threaten Sodomy
we go after the only enemy whose location is known

while we largely ignore BedLinen and the AlQaeda gang

this is about oil
and the saving of our economy in future months
as the Islamic War widens
it has little to do with Weapons of Mass Destruction
it never did, it never will
but that satisfies the ignorant, illiterate, myriad masses

we hope to be sitting on the Iraqi oilfields when it happens
because the Saudi oilfields will be interrupted

before long I expect an Arab and Iranian boycott of USA again
just like 1973
I lived through it, endured it, and it was scary

/ jim