portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

animal rights | imperialism & war

Global Eye -- Gangs of D.C.

So the game's afoot; the knives are out; the gangs are on the march. What happens next, no one can tell, but this much is certain -- whatever the cost, in lives and lucre, the elites will not be paying it.
Global Eye -- Gangs of D.C.

By Chris Floyd

"And the war came."
-- Abraham Lincoln

The war is always coming, it's always here, either in utero, full fury or chaotic aftermath. The newest war -- the invasion of Iraq -- will come because a gang of like-minded men is willing it into being. They want it -- it's as simple as that. They want what they believe this war will give them: wealth, dominion, and empire.

The ultimate goal is not Iraq -- that bombed, blockaded state partially controlled by a witless thug whom the gang once succored -- but domination of the world's oil supplies in the coming century, when the surging nations of China and India will reach their economic peak. These vast entities could eventually tilt the imbalance of world wealth away from the Anglo-American elites who have for so long held the high and palmy ground of privilege. But the voracious economies of the Asian behemoths will require unstinting draughts of the oil reserves now locked under the sands of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. There is oil elsewhere, yes -- but nowhere else in the world are there reserves deep enough to satisfy the thirsts of China and India as they come into their own.

Therefore it is imperative for the Anglo-American elites to dominate this indispensable resource, if they are to maintain their wonted ease beneath the palms. Or so they believe. Actually, the narrowly-concentrated wealth of the West is so staggeringly great that these elites could quite easily devote abundant resources toward developing new forms of energy, national self-sufficiency, and what used to be known in Abraham Lincoln's day as "internal improvements" -- roads, schools, hospitals, parks, the extension of liberty, leisure and opportunity -- and still keep their corpulent noses planted deep in the trough of their unearned riches.

But alas, they too -- like the thugs they hire and fire so easily (Noriega, Saddam, bin Laden) -- are moral idiots. They don't care about their own nations. They don't care about the hapless people they rule -- except, of course, as cannon fodder or hired help. The "national interest" is what best serves the elites and their retainers.

Throughout history, elite factions have always acted in similar ways to maintain and augment their dominance. At various times, for various reasons, their interests converge and they act loosely in concert; at other times, they tear each other to shreds -- killing millions of people in the process. You can see this pattern of behavior -- the belligerent lust for dominance coupled with crafty temporary alliances -- at work among many primate groups. Our modern "elites" (the Ba'athist clique, al-Qaida, the Bush Regime, the British Establishment, etc.) are simply secretions of the most primitive and ape-like elements still lurking in our brains. They're a kind of heavy scum that forms on the free-flowing, light-dazzled stream of human existence.

So, the attack on Iraq isn't really a war for oil, not in the strictest sense. The United States doesn't need Iraq's oil. In recent years, America has been carefully diversifying its own sources of foreign oil, and is no longer overly dependent on the Arab-held fields. In fact, that's one reason the long-planned attack on Iraq is coming now. Before, America couldn't risk a military takeover of one of the major oil states (minor Kuwait, of course, has been occupied since 1991): Too much could go wrong, irreplaceable supplies could be cut off. Now, however, the game is worth the candle; even in the highly unlikely event of disaster -- an Arab oil embargo, a long, intractable war -- the Bush Regime believes they can ride it out until the situation stabilizes by drawing on other sources: Africa, Venezuela, Russia, plus the oil still lying off America's coasts and under its scarce remaining wilderness.

Iraq is not the end, but the means. What America needs -- or rather, what the thugs in the Bush Regime desire -- is dominance of Middle Eastern oil in order to hold the economies of China and India hostage in the coming decades. The aim is not conquest, in the classic sense; our elites are imperialists, not colonialists. They don't want to settle amongst all those funny-looking foreigners; heaven forefend! It's bad enough there are so many of them in God's country already, where, as one august national leader, Republican Representative Sue Myrick, noted recently, they "run all the convenience stores," thus posing the ever-present danger of gustatory terrorism. ("What's that white powder on my donuts? Aieee!")

No, what is sought -- what is demanded, what will be enforced with human cannon fodder and treasure extorted from ordinary citizens ("You're under attack! Give us your money!") -- is that the emerging powers become pliant "friends" and business partners, along the lines of Western Europe. Naturally, this will require a heavy U.S. military presence in the vicinity for generations, as in Europe (58 years and counting); naturally, as in Europe, obedience to U.S. "interests" will be mandatory -- or else, as warlord Donald Rumsfeld recently threatened Germany, there will be "punishment": the threat of economic ruin. And of course, there will be the overarching "missile shield," the exciting "new generation" of nuclear weapons the Regime is developing, and the "full spectrum dominance" of space-mounted superweapons to provide that hint of violent coercion so essential to any warm friendship.

So the game's afoot; the knives are out; the gangs are on the march. What happens next, no one can tell, but this much is certain -- whatever the cost, in lives and lucre, the elites will not be paying it.

homepage: homepage: http://bartcop.com

I Vant to Be Alone 13.Mar.2003 22:21


I Vant to Be Alone


It will go down as a great mystery of history how Mr. Popularity at Yale metamorphosed into President Persona Non Grata of the world.

The genial cheerleader and stickball commissioner with the gregarious parents, the frat president who had little nicknames and jokes for everyone, fell in with a rough crowd.

Just when you thought it couldn't get more Strangelovian, it does. The Bush bullies, having driven off all the other kids in the international schoolyard, are now resorting to imaginary friends.

Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense, spoke to the Veterans of Foreign Wars here yesterday and reassured the group that America would have "a formidable coalition" to attack Iraq. "The number of countries involved will be in the substantial double digits," he boasted. Unfortunately, he could not actually name one of the supposed allies. "Some of them would prefer not to be named now," he said coyly, "but they will be known with pride in due time."

Perhaps the hawks' fixation on being the messiahs of the Middle East has unhinged them. I could just picture Wolfy sauntering down the road to Baghdad with our new ally Harvey, his very own pooka, a six-foot-tall invisible rabbit that the U.S. wants to put on the U.N. Security Council.

Ari Fleischer upped the ante, conjuring up an entire international forum filled with imaginary allies.

He suggested that if the U.N. remained recalcitrant, we would replace it with "another international body" to disarm Saddam Hussein. It wasn't clear what he was talking about. What other international body? Salma Hayek? The World Bank? The Hollywood Foreign Press Association?

The not-so-splendid isolation of the White House got worse this afternoon when Donald Rumsfeld suggested the unthinkable at his Pentagon briefing: we might have to go to war without Britain.

Even though Tony Blair said he was working "night and day" to get us international support (and beating back a revolt in his own party), Mr. Rumsfeld dismissively remarked that it was "unclear" just what the British role would be in a war.

Asked whether the U.S. would go to war without "our closest ally," he replied, "That is an issue that the president will be addressing in the days ahead, one would assume."

The Brits covered up their fury with typical understatement, calling Rummy's comment "curious." But behind the scene, Downing Street went nuts and began ringing Pennsylvania Avenue, demanding an explanation. How could Rummy be so callous about "the special relationship" after Mr. Blair had stuck his neck out for President Bush and courageously put his career on the line, and after he had sent one-quarter of the British military to the Persian Gulf?

Even though Mr. Rumsfeld scrambled later to mollify the British, one BBC commentator drily said that perhaps he was trying to be sensitive, but "as we all know, Donald Rumsfeld doesn't do sensitive very well."

Now we've managed to alienate our last best friend. We are making the rest of the world recoil. But that may be part of the Bush hawks' master plan. Maybe they have really always wanted to go it alone.

Maybe it has been their strategy all along to sideline the U.N., deflate Colin Powell and cut the restraining cords of traditional coalitions. Their decision last summer to get rid of Saddam was driven by their desire to display raw, naked American power. This time, they don't want Colin Powell or pesky allies counseling restraint in Baghdad.

Rummy was unfazed by Turkey's decision not to let our troops in, and he seemed just as unruffled about the prospect of the Brits' falling out of the war effort. And in a well-timed display of American military might, the Air Force tested a huge new bomb called MOAB in Florida. Tremors traveled through the ground, and the scary dust cloud could be seen for miles.

"These guys at the Pentagon Wolfowitz, Perle, Doug Feith when they lie in bed at night, they imagine a new book written by one of them or about them called, `Present at the Recreation,' " an American diplomat said. "They want to banish the wimpy Europeanist traditional balance of power, and use the Iraq seedbed of democracy to impose America's will on the world."

The more America goes it alone, the more "robust," as the Pentagon likes to say, the win will be.
I Vant to Be Alone
I Vant to Be Alone