No To War on Iraq
The U.S. government is preparing for a new war against Iraq.
The plan for war against Iraq represents another stage in the expansion of U.S. militarism that will not stop at Iraq's borders.
The Bush administration is using the political climate created by the events of Sept. 11 to wage what amounts to a war without end, and against anyone in the world that stands in the way of the U.S. asserting itself as the lone superpower.
Under the cover of the 'war on terrorism,' the U.S. military has been moving military forces to within striking distance of Iraq. The Los Angeles Times reports that military preparations for a new war are well underway. The paper stated, “The U.S. has forces, weaponry and supplies to equip 30,000 troops already in the region, while 150,000 or more fully equipped troops who would be needed to mount a full-scale invasion can be routed to the region well before Christmas.”
The Bush administration is campaigning for a new United Nations Security Council resolution demanding that Iraq carry out a series of demands or face war.
Meanwhile, people in the U.S. and around the world are speaking out against the war buildup. There have been anti-war protests in hundreds of U.S. cities. Delegations have gone to meet with congressional representatives. University and college faculty included their names on newspaper ads that demanded there be no war against Iraq.
While the public position of the U.S. government is that a war against Iraq is needed because Iraq may have 'weapons of mass destruction,' and is a threat to 'its own people and the region,' there are deeper political and economic issues at stake.
What is driving the war preparations is the economic need for the U.S. government – and the large corporations that it represents – to dominate the world.
The War Threat Against Iraq is the Real Face of Globalization.
An abnormally honest article published in The Washington Post, Sept. 15, says, in part: “A U.S.-led ouster of President Saddam Hussein could open a bonanza for American oil companies long banished from Iraq, scuttling oil deals between Baghdad and Russia, France and other countries, and reshuffling world petroleum markets, according to industry officials and leaders of the Iraqi opposition.”
The paper quoted former CIA director James Woolsey as saying, “It's pretty straightforward...France and Russia have oil companies and interests in Iraq. They should be told that if they are of assistance [in overthrowing the Iraqi government], we'll do the best we can to ensure that the new government and American companies can work closely with them.” The paper also reported, “Access to Iraqi oil and profits will depend on the nature and intentions of a new government. Whether Iraq remains a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, for example, or seeks an independent role, free of the OPEC cartel's quotas, will have an impact on oil prices and the flow of investments to competitors such as Russia, Venezuela and Angola.”
All the talk of 'getting rid of the dangerous Saddam' aside, what is really being prepared for is a war to control the profits from Iraqi oil. In essence, the U.S. is telling the world, “Soon a government propped up on the points of U.S. bayonets will be in charge of Iraq and its oil. You had better get out of the way or our puppet government will be used to wreck you.”
Only a small amount of the oil used every day in the U.S. comes from Iraq. What is at stake is not the arrival of oil into the U.S. from Iraq, or from any other country. What is at stake is which corporations will control the flow of profits from that oil.
The Bush administration was given an opening on Sept. 11, 2001 to launch a far wider series of military interventions than could have ever been contemplated before. Already, the U.S. has invaded Afghanistan and sent troops to numerous countries. Also, the U.S. has escalated the level of military aid to countries such as Colombia.
The real aims of the U.S. government were spelled out in a document entitled The National Security Strategy of the United States. This paper, a required report to Congress by the President, was released on Sept. 21.
As the Sydney Morning Herald in Australia reported, “The Bush Administration has spelt out its determination to enforce America's global domination, insisting it will allow no other power to challenge its military and economic superiority.”
The security strategy document says the U.S. “has no intention of allowing any other foreign power to catch up with the huge lead the U.S. has opened since the fall of the Soviet Union more than a decade ago.”
The New York Times suggested that such language is aimed at countries like the People's Republic of China.
The document also states openly that the U.S. will strike first at states and groups that the U.S. government identifies as a threat. The U.S. has 'struck first' with conventional military forces against many states, including Libya, Panama and Grenada – what is new is that the U.S. is stating it openly, as an issue of policy.
What is unstated in this new policy outline is that the U.S. military is moving toward first use of nuclear weapons, and that a whole new generation of nuclear weapons is being designed by the Pentagon for use against non-nuclear states.
Bush – Danger to Everyone
The U.S. government's war moves have nothing to do with making the U.S. people safe from terrorism, or bringing democracy to the world. Rather, the U.S. government is preparing to enforce its role of superpower.
If the U.S. occupies Iraq, Iran will then be right next door to what will amount to a U.S. puppet state. Bush has already identified Iran, along with Iraq and North Korea, as part of an 'axis of evil.'
This path of military intervention and war has nothing to do with making the people of the U.S. safe. It will actually make the world a much more dangerous place for the vast majority of people of the U.S., as well as the entire world.