Subject: Re: Excellent Article by Paul Krugman of the NYTimes
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:49:17 -0800



Subject: Re: Excellent Article by Paul Krugman of the
NYTimes


on 18 Mar 2003 12:02:00 David <persona69-AT-comcast.net> wrote:

>
>Things to Come
>
>By PAUL KRUGMAN
>
[snip]
>
>In February  2003, according to Ha'aretz, an Israeli
newspaper, Under
>Secretary of State John Bolton told Israeli officials that
after defeating
>Iraq the United States would "deal with" Iran, Syria and
North Korea.

Thinking along the lines of the "regime change" doctrine, i
bet Colombia
and Venezuela will be high on the target list too. And what
about Africa,
our mother continent, will she again be the battleground for
the global
power players, raped and carved up ? I weep for Africa
already.

It's impossible to predict what will happen on the
geopolitical scene the
coming years. But if history has taught us anything,
especially within the
frame of an emerging multi-polar political field, it is not
military might
but the art of diplomacy, the skills of negotiation and
forging alliances,
that have proved crucial and most succesful for (state)
security.

yours,
Jan

also check out Wallerstein's latest and somewhat sarcastic
commentary:
http://fbc.binghamton.edu/109en.htm


John here,

It would be cheaper to change regime in the US first. If the
US has to change all these regimes, then the US taxpayer
will have to pay for this. That adds up to billions of USD,
perhaps as much as 3 trillion, and that adds to the existing
debt, and deficit spending in the US. The US will have to
compete for loans at the Federal level, and this will force
interest rates up in relation to other countries.

This is one of the strategies of the anti's: to bankrupt the
US Federal government. This is one of the oldest strategies
of warfare: attrition. Hannibal was very successful in using
attrition against the ancient Romans. Hannibal was a
Carthegenian who lead a huge army against the Romans after
the Romans attacked and devastated Carthage.

Currently over 50% of US Federal expenditures are being
deployed to the funding of military forces.

Other countries are very wise in not funding huge militaries
presently because there are other ways to 'wage peace':
international trade agreements, infrastructure,
technological change, etc. The US is incredibly vulnerable
since it has the incredible problem of a negative balance of
trade with the world. Something like 50% of its trade is
imported, but only 5% of its GDP is exported. Very
unhealthy.

Thus the Bush Doctrine which basically stipulates a
pre-emptive policy for nations which defy it. That is, if
they have something worth spending Federal tax dollars for,
ie., huge oil and gas reserves in Iraq. There are many
nations which harbour terrorists besides Iraq, but many of
these nations have no oil or natural resources which the US
needs desperately.


chao

john foster





     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---




     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---