Re: U.S. Continues To Reserve "Right" To Attack Iraq

[Dennis R Redmond <dredmond@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 14 Nov 1997, Shawgi A. Tell wrote:

> After the vote in the Security Council to impose travel
> restrictions on Iraqis responsible for non-compliance with UN
> Resolutions (see item on p. 3) U.S. Ambassador to the United
> Nations Bill Richardson told reporters, "The message has been
> clear. Iraq must comply or face consequences. We are not
> excluding any options, including military options."

Is it just me, or has the Clinton Administration finally plumbed
the depths of searing, cosmic awfulness you normally find only in
a Netanyahu cabinet minister or the executive board of the Cato
Institute? Clinton, that vile New Southern paddy-roller of the global
rentiers, is starting to make Disraeli look civilized. Maybe it's just
that the Powers That Be fear a recession like the plague, and are whipping
up "Starship Desert-storm-troopers" in order to distract us from the Asian
catastrophe and the crash and burn of neoliberalism. Or maybe military
supergiant Boeing needed some live-action tests done on some new weapons
systems -- what's a Government for, if not to create markets for the
capitalists it serves? Anyone got any figures on proposed U.S. military
spending for the 1997-2002 period, and how much to that goes directly to
the contractors?

-- Dennis