U.S. Cease-Fire Negotiating Team Heading to Baghdad?

Jay Moore pieinsky at igc.org
Wed Mar 26 11:28:19 MST 2003

The "socialist bloc", with the USSR and China at complete loggerheads, was
never the most reliable help for the Vietnamese revolutionaries.  On the
other hand, there are some vague indications that present-day Russia may be
helping Iraq right now with weapons and advice.  Why? Oil? Revenge for
Afghanistan?  In terms of a "rear area" for Iraq, Iran next door is neutral
and Syria is supportive.  Then what happens if the Jordanian and/or Saudi
regimes are overthrown by the masses?  Or, if Iran gets pissed off at
further "errant" missiles and shuts the mouth of the Gulf.  Iraq does not
seem to be fighting a purely conventional war -- which, yes, I think they
know they could never win -- but a mixture as advocated in the writings of
Mao, Ho, and Giap.  I think there are many factors that make the outcome far
from "inevitable".  In any case, what I have been most hoping for was a
"good showing" that would revive the Vietnam Syndrome here.  That, we seem
to be getting.  On polarity, I suppose you have seen the quote that now we
have a bipolar world again:  on the one hand, the U.S. imperialists; on the
other hand, people in the streets.


> This does not mean Iraq could not become a "new Vietnam." Compared to
> Vietnam, though, the situation Iraq faces is qualitatively harder, in that
> a) there is no socialist bloc or other source of weaponry or other
> b) there's no "rearguard" for the Iraqis, a place where the imperialists
> land forces can't go for geopolitical considerations. This world is
> "unipolar" that one was "bipolar."

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list