The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] Compensations!

>encouraged it or stood watching it happen, the
>occupation forces are legally responsible for
>compensations to be paid to people and enterprises
>suffering losses because of those actions.
>How can the US/UK be held responsible for those acts
>of pillaging, and how can they be forced to pay
>compensations (from their money, not from Iraq's oil

I shall attempt to give an answer to this, hopping that I will not carted
off as a seditious traitor to my country -- and yet with the best of
intentions for long term peace and the betterment of everyone.

It comes down to a question of whether the world is willing to stand in
unity. It seems unlikely considering that even a convening of the UN
members for the "uniting for peace" process failed. Perhaps now, as the
rhetoric for imposing sanctions and taking military action against Syria
will convince the world that such efforts are necessary.

The US is unquestionably the greatest military power, which no nation, or
perhaps even any combination of nations, can withstand. Yet, it not more
powerful than the rest of the world. It lacks political power, legal
legitimacy, and above all overarching and decisive economic power.

Uniting against the US would be difficult, and entail losses for
everyone, but we have to consider the losses entailed in WW2, for
example, and whether they were worth the goal of preserving liberty.

If the world decides that the power and agresssion of the US must be
reigned in, that Woolsey's world war 4 must not be allowed to proceed as
planned, that the world must not be the victim of the "New American
Century" as oulined by the neo-cons, then there are actions which would
be effective:

Total economic and productive embargo.

The US currently is woefully unprepared to manufacture all of the goods
it consumes. While there are many evil aspects to the globalization of US
industry, in which labor and resources are exploited by largely US run
multinationals, there a weakness -- a dependency -- inherent in it. In
other words: a world-wide strike.

This would, of course, require the other nations to pull together to
compensate those who incur losses -- a kind of ersatz strike fund put
together for the international "labor union" which would need to put

If the space aliens decided to pick up the whole of the US and transport
it to their home planet museum, the rest of the world would survive.
There would be difficulties, but it would survive, and if everyone made
special efforts and worked together, it would survive rather nicely.

The dollar would be replaced by another currency, perhaps a new one, or
perhaps the euro. Goods would have to be rerouted. Again, look to the
last world war where that was essentially accomplished, respective to the

The great problem here is that is not simply the US which is the villian,
but the multi-national corporate structures. In effect, it not simply the
US which has invaded Iraq, and the New American Century is not strictly
American, but rather a New Century of the Nobility. The neo-cons are
actually neo-nobles, set in opposition to the poor and working classes of
all nations, Americans included. It is led by the US, but has infiltrated

Given that, every nation must hold their own leaders and corporate
magnates responsible. We have seen some success already in that endeavor,
when the UN refused to authorize the attack on Iraq.

In essence, it is a form of the old "nobles vs peasants" struggle -- a
class struggle to some extent. But it is not simply one of "workers of
the world unite", but more complex. There are nobles on both sides, and
peasants on both sides. Those people with good sense realize that only in
a world governed by law and moral principle is it possible for all
peoples to live well. People with limited vision, who succumb to short
term goals, jingoism, and the propaganda of the neo-cons (and
neo-liberals) will in the end lose out also.

We do have a global village, and if the environment of any part of it is
polluted, so is the environment of all -- as is seen in the environmental
situation. Political and economic pollution is just as much of a
pervasive problem which must end by poisoning everyone.

And yet, the key point of pressure is now, still, the US government. If
the world mounts a coordinated campaign against it's foolish and morally
bankrupt policies, even the American people, so many of whom are still
under the spell of illusion which the neo-cons have woven, will wake up.
When the flow of the electronics from the East, the automobile components
from Europe, the produce from South America, the coffee from Africa --
all the goods from the rest of the world -- are cut off and no longer
available to US consumers, the US government can not continue as it has.

I see no other power which can match the current hegemony of the US.
Strike. World-wide strike.

In the history of the US there were great catch-phrases such as "united
we stand; divided we fall", and "if we do not hang together then sure we
will all hang seperately". I suggest the world must take note of this
principle -- and do it now, before it is altogether too late. Do we all
really want to live under empire?

Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]