Re: questions for discussion

In a message dated Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:58:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
boles@svsu.edu writes:

> The only
> possibility lies with a mass anti-war movement in Europe, 
> which just
> isn't very likely, not unless the war becomes protracted.

I'm not sure why you find this so unlikely.   According to your analysis, 
anti-war sentiment was sufficient to sway an election in Germany--and the war 
hasn't even begun (assuming we are defining the war as a new invasion by US 
troops, putting aside ongoing bombing, etc).  A US anti-war movement (larger 
than 'the usual suspects') only seems likely if there is a widespread belief 
that US blood is being shed for no clear reason.  A European movement emerges 
out of other considerations, since no European blood is likely to be shed.

I've been thinking:  Why is exactly is the US going to war?  I've heard four 
reasons.

1.  The US fears Saddam Hussein gaining nuclear weapons and using them on the 
US or its allies (the official reason).

2.  The US is seeking to secure future oil supplies, shifting its focus from 
Saudi Arabia to Iraq.

3.  The US wants to terrify the entire world into realizing it can and will 
take military action whenever, wherever it wants.

4.  Bush is popular as a war president, unpopular as a domestic president, so, 
let's have a new war.

I can think of a fifth--'inter-imperialist rivalry'.  France and Russia (in 
other words, the Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis Wallerstein used to talk about) are 
relatively friendly to the current regime.  The war provides an excuse to put 
in a friendly US regime in an area of resource and geostrategic significance.

I suspect all these reasons have some truth to them, although we would have to 
toss 'and use them on the US or its allies' from reason one (the fear is more 
that an unfriendly state will have a genuine deterrent from US attack and act 
as a counterbalance to Israel) and recognize that four is not possible without 
the consent of elites who aren't so dependent on Bush being President.

Steven Sherman