[Marxism] Re: A tactical debate

Marvin Gandall marvgandall at rogers.com
Thu Mar 11 17:13:33 MST 2004

Good answer in reply to my question, but then the French and Russians
already had big oil concessions and they would have had to share them
with the US -- rather than vice-versa -- if a US-led armed force
occupied the country. An invasion of Iraq wasn't, as far as I know,
seriously contemplated by the Clinton admin even though it was the one
which had adopted the policy of "regime change"(internal coup or
uprising provoked by sanctions);  and the Europeans would have had to
worry about the effect on their antiwar movement and Muslim communities
if they didn't find WMD -- the rationale given for the invasion. Their
own inspectors (Blix, Baradi) told them there was nothing there. I'm
still inclined to thing it was a US neocon ideological adventure to test
out their theories about a "muscular" foreign policy, and now they've
had their test. But we'll never know for sure.

And, yes, I think all debates between the liberal and conservative
bourgeoisie have been about the best way to defend the system, rather
than over the system itself. What's happening now internationally is
like the debate they had about the right mix of the carrot and the stick
when they had to come to terms with the trade union movement in the
first half of the 20th century.

Marv Gandall

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom O'Lincoln" <suarsos at alphalink.com.au>
To: <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:25 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Re: A tactical debate

Marvin replies:

>>1) If the Bush administration wasn't able to get the Europeans to
sanction the invasion with a UN resolution using all kinds of coercive
tactics, why do you suppose Kerry could have done so using sweet talk?<<

He would have had to offer them a stake in it. Bush chose to carve them

>>4) The big split between the early Bush admin, before it was tamed,
everyone else wasn't over ends, ie. US-led OECD control of the world
economy and the isolation and punishment of small rogue states. The
difference, IMO, has always been over means<<

Well that was really the point I was getting at, so perhaps we don't

Marxism mailing list
Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu

More information about the Marxism mailing list