[Marxism] NY Times edit: More troops needed in Afghanistan

Carrol Cox cbcox at ilstu.edu
Sun Jul 23 07:30:27 MDT 2006

Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
> There will never be a serious breakdown of the ruling class unity over
> Iran, Lebanon, and Afghanistan, nor will there be one even on Iraq.
> Unlike the Vietnam War, the ruling class can afford the Iraq War,
> politically and economically.

I've argued this from another perspective. The Mideast is crucial where
Vietnam was not!

The ruling class has been unified on this from before WW2: The U.S.
_must_ exert hegemony over the Mideast oil, and given the geography that
means having troops there. The present war began with the overthrow of
Mossadegh. And given the stakes, _of course_ the ruling class can afford
the cost!

In battles which we _have_ to fight (and we certainly have to fight this
collection of wars) but can NOT win we need to focus on using them to
build for the future. This is one reason why the "single issue" slogan
of the '60s is so pointless in the present context.


> --
> Yoshie
> <http://montages.blogspot.com/>
> <http://mrzine.org>
> <http://monthlyreview.org/>
> ________________________________________________
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism

More information about the Marxism mailing list