For actual reasons here are several old articles of mine on the background of the US invasion of Iraq.
My theory:
The aim like the rest of the so called anti-terror campaign was to raise the US military budget, which sank during the Clinton administration to the lowest levels since the 1930s. The rise in the military budget was to function as a locomotive for the whole US economy.
The aim like the rest of the so called anti-terror campaign was to raise the US military budget, which sank during the Clinton administration to the lowest levels since the 1930s. The rise in the military budget was to function as a locomotive for the whole US economy.
This worked beautifully after the US invasion of Iraq of 1991, because Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Germany, Japan, etc. paid the bill plus a war dividend. Accordingly, the US received a capital transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars.
But things did not work this way following the "anti-terror campaign" starting 2001. Because of its islamo- and arabophobic character Saudi Arabia withdrew much of its investment in the US and nobody else was ready to pay the enormous costs. An economic crash was inevitable.
1)Extending American Empire is the Goal Behind the War on Iraq, Dissident Voice
January 2, 2003:
January 2, 2003:
"U.S. Had Key Role in Iraq Buildup" says the Washington Post of 12/30/2002 . But the Post "forgot" to mention that this US-aided buildup continued after the end of the Iran-Iraq war (the first Gulf War) and that not all the details of this affair - known as Iraqgate) - have yet been exposed.
We can recognise a pattern of US foreign policy -- building up an enemy in order to be able to fight against him afterwards for economic and political reasons that do not necessarily have anything to do with the "enemy."
2) A longer one and the part dealing with Iraq is towards the end:
They can’t distinguish the forest from the trees
They can’t distinguish the forest from the trees
Between the Lines 22 January 2003
ON ISRAELI ELECTIONS, THE ISRAELI PEACE MOVEMENTS, THE IRAQ WAR AND ETHNIC CLEANSING OF THE PALESTINIANS
Why did the leader of the “Labor” Party, Amram Mitzna [a Res. General, former commander of the Israeli army in the Central District (the West Bank) in the first Intifada and the mayor of Haifa for the last ten years] awaken such strong expectations among veteran Israeli peaceniks? Why is the Iraq war almost a non-issue for the majority of Israeli peace activists while the Israeli government is pushing continuously towards it? Why is there no broader mobilization against this war, despite the fact that this catastrophe will endanger Israel as well? Furthermore it is known that the Israeli government might use the Iraq war as a pretext to expel as many Palestinians as possible. Isn’t that reason enough to give the subject a much higher priority on the political agenda of Israeli peace movements?
3) Play it again Uncle Sam , 28 May 2003
"... The present Bush administration is looking to finance its Iraq adventure and its "anti-terror campaign".
As a first step, it has to stop the threatening massive Islamic/Arab capital drain from the US. In August 2002 the Financial Times claimed that, since 11 September 2001, the Saudis alone withdrew some 200 billion dollars from their investments in the US, estimated to be between 400 and 600 billion dollars."
Edited by George Malent
No comments:
Post a Comment