Re: [microsound] la france

[jan larsson <jlarsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

this is really OT so delete and go on ...  Ian i'm not saying you are=20
wrong, i just think we should look at alternative explanations.

if the US leaders all are standing there pointing at Iraq and wants us=20=

to look in that direction - maybe, just maybe, we should look in the=20
other direction. is there something they *dont* want us to see?

if I were to guess its the fact that the US economy is dangerously=20
close to becoming bankrupt. at the same time the Bush re-election=20
campaign is coming up.

so the reason for the war might be:

a) a distraction plus the Bush administration hope to add some of the=20
Iraqii oil to the US hard assetts in order to be able to borrow more=20
money abroad.

b) just a distraction

"the rest of the world"  currently sit on financial liabilities on the=20=

US of about 9 trillion dollars - now if only a small fraction gets=20
worried and wants his/hers/its money back ... the US is in big trouble.

the US is not really a superpower in other terms than military power. a=20=

united "rest of the world" can defeat this military superpower=20
peacefully simply by taking their money out of the US..

the US authoriries (the Fed, Greenspun & Co.) has put out some really=20
strange statements lately. they are trying to say that deflation is=20
nothing to worry about - if it happens "we will flood the market with=20
dollars in order  to create hyperinflation".  Like germany in the 20s.

.... and so it goes on. consult an economics site to get a fuller, more=20=

coherent picture of all this.

m=E5ndagen den 17 februari 2003 kl 04.53 skrev Ian Andrews:

> You must forgive Mr Taylor for his ignorance.  Unfortunately not a lot=20=

> of
> people know these things. Nor do they know that the US fears the Shia
> majority (the main opposition) in Iraq more than they do Sadam.  Nor =
do
> they know that the US (Iraq's biggest oil customer) virtually invited=20=

> Iraq
> into the invasion of Kuwait, when that rich little oligarchy cut of=20
> access
> to sea ports in the Persian Gulf.
>
> But everyone should know this: Saddam IS a dictator hence it follows=20=

> that
> the majority of the population of Iraq are not responsibe for his grip=20=

> on
> power as they have no say in the matter.  Nor are they responsible for=20=

> his
> actions. In this sense it would be immoral to bomb Iraq, especially if=20=

> all
> other courses of action had not been exhausted.
>
> If, on the other hand, the US and its allies, were to cooperate with a
> coalition of Iraqi opposition parties consiting of both Kurds and=20
> Shiites,
> then I would consider supporting this war. But this seems very=20
> unlikely. It
> is much more likley that the Barth party's (if not Saddam himself)=20
> grip on
> power will end up being reinforced after a severe slap on the wrist =
has
> been dealt.
>

------------------------------