...if I forward this piece to the White House? Hopefully someone there will read it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeach him!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The ICC at the Hague is what is needed for the Bush cabal.

Bush's keepers never intended to rebuild what 15 years of more or less constant bombing has destroyed. If the outcome was not intentional, DU munitions (which has the capacity to contaminate and kill for millions of years) would not have been deployed. What we do is genocide, and we do it more quietly than any other nation ever has. Look at Indo-China and Agent Orange. Look at "Desert Storm" and our actions in the Balkans and DU munitions' effects. History is written by the winners, not the losers of conflicts.

Why does any other nation need WMD?
To keep us from using ours on them first. (Look at Russia, China, etc.)

And any small nations with no credible WMD counter-threat, had just better hope they have nothing we covet, and that those who govern them are pliable to our needs. Or else, they are "toast", and they know it.

"Democracy" in this day and age means getting what we want, regardless of what it takes to get it, and how many have to die in the process. The meaning of the word "Democracy" has been co-opted, and is now only what our leaders claim it to be, as they redefine the terms, and rewrite history in the process.

Regards,,,John
( john_rice@neitherparty.org )

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One of the most serious misconceptions about the occupation is that the US is helping the Iraqi economy past its old performance levels long held down by Baathist statism and corruption. True, the Baathists were poor economic managers but this is hardly the point! The US corporate run reconstruction of the country is also rife with corruption. There are billions of dollars in no bid contracts, cost overruns, and unaccounted for public funds for contracts and projects. Quite aside from the corruption there are accountability issues regarding private contractors. Yet reconstruction differs from Baathist policies in that the US seems intent on total control of the Iraqi economy. When Colin Powell to Bush that he will "own 25 million Iraqis" who would have thought it was to be taken so literally?! The corporate led privatization of the Iraqi economy will leave local capital marginalized as foreign, mostly US, capital globalize the Iraqi productive sector and local market. Farmers who benefited from far-reaching agrarian reform under Saddam will now be unemployed by the dumping of subsidized US grain on her local market. Since the end of the First Gulf War Iraq, a country historically self-sufficient in grains, became 80% dependant for local cereal needs on US grain imports. As small and middle holders are migrating to the cities for scarce jobs, a more consolidated large holding sector becomes a market for expensive US agricultural inputs. In turn, genetically engineered seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides are used to raise new varieties of field crops for export to be processed into specialty foods like pasta for western markets. Imports will become expensive and out of reach as many Iraqis go hungry. Most of the former state owned enterprises that made everything from house hold products to industrial feedstocks will go out of business with massive job loss. Already the unemployment rate is over 65% and climbing. Even the Port and Umm Qasr, once a source of national pride, was privatized and is managed by a notoriously anti-union US firm called Stevedore Services with low wages paid to Iraqi workers and most of the port revenue leaving the country as private profits. Even the new Iraqi currency was minted out of the country by a UK corporation called De La Rue of the Carlysle Group! These are but a few examples. Iraq's economy belongs to the Iraq people. Its theft by western capital is no small reason for the ongoing insurgency.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is an important assessment of the way things stand as we approach the coming State of the Union Address by President Bush on February2. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will be offering the Democratic response afterwards. I expect Miss Pelosi will hawk-up the same tired old crap that has voters so excited about the Party. Re: the generals who refuse to stand up like men and fix what they've broken, I was reminded of the boldness of General Lucius Clay in Post-War Germany. Despite some missteps, Clay took it as his personal responsibility to create a floor for a new economy, a new currency, an organized and heartfelt approach to fixing Germany. And he was facing a REAL adversary: the Soviet forces down on the next block.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why doesn't Bush rebuild the country along the other Gulf--the Gulf of Mexico?
True, it was Hurricane Katrina which destroyed New Orleans and surrounding communities, but Bush Baby was so busy stoking his "wargasm" (see the "Demon Lover" by Robin Morgan for an explication of the terrorist mentality, she was prescient way back in the 80's) that George neglects/neglected this country.
gentlewoman2910

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]