The emergence of US as the umbrella for a 'PAX Americana' has been clear for a long while. Bush snr spoke of it with his statement of the need for a 'new world order' way back at the time of Gulf-1. He was talking about a global stability (controlled by the US & allies) and as the basis for a level of globalism that is a logical evolution for today's nation-states. Some people feel very threatened by globalism & there are good rerasons for some fears.

RE the crisis the world faces today, put simply, we can all take sides as to the benefits & value of globalisation & control by one super power. If you are American like most here (or a UK or Aust citizen), *we* have a lot to gain, materially, culturally, and egotistically. But as citizens of the globalised world, we may pay a high price for this dominant role. It is characteristic of great powers that they want to, and will, dominate. It seems there is always going to be a 'top-dog' and right at this point in history, the US supported by selected allies has that opportunity.

My general case here (in this particular forum) has *not* been arguing against Pax Americana as much as it has been about being honest about it, about what is being done & the cost in achieveing it. One person here in the 'pro' Pax Americana column who (despite other issues,) seems to understand and accept the 'pro' position is 'Screamer'. Hvae said once to him though, we must be prepared to take the bad with the good and just as the Bader-Meinhoff gang were spawned from children of German parents who had no answers for these young people as to their (parents) acquiesence with Hitler's worst excesses. Iraq in particular, is an issue we will have to deal with in 15-25 years time when we are asked by a new generation, "why did we did we support a war that was based on deceptions orchestrated by our own leaders".

For those among us who have argued the pro case based on pure propaganda combined with a lack of understanding of the big picture, I can only say that I really hold these people in contempt because they are dupes and fools who don't really know why they are being co-opted into support for the Iraq war action. These are the people who suck in propaganda like a baby needs its mother's tit for both comfort and nourishment. In many ways, they are to be pitied because they are either too stupid or generally too immature to grasp the significance of what is happening.

To be perfectly honest (and completely selfish), as much as I will call out the obvious lies we are fed by our leaders, I am glad I am on the side of the power that will dominate rather than the side that will be dominated. But, despite this I refuse to suck the propaganda tit and *will* call a 'spade a spade' as all this action rolls out. I do feel for those people who are going to die in this quest and who are ultimately going to feel under the heel of the 'new world order'. But, like 'Screamer' I believe it is inevitable based on the realities of the human condition. This is the era of Pax Americana.

On the topic of oil. I also feel sorry for those people who fail to grasp that world power comes from control of the cheapest and most accessible energy. Over many years we have been witnessing a struggle between Russia & allies, Europe, Asia and US/UK in securing the best access to cheap energy by way of oil as this is **essential** to being the dominant power. Iraq is about oil, control of it by securing the largest cheapest supplies and dominating the other supplies in adjacent countries. The US as the dominant superpower, cannot afford to not control this vast pool of energy. If US did not, some other country would eventually find a way to do it. Saddam Hussien certainly had ambitions to control his country's oil and had he been able to obtain nukes he would have been more than tempted to create his own 'new world order' based on his Arab dominance. Osama Bin Laden had his own dreams of a new 'Andalusian' empire based around the moslem world. MY argument here is that to face reality, we have to admit that US is about to sieze Iraq but not because of any threat to US territory from Saddam - the threat is from someone like a Saddam or Osama controlling the middle east oil wealth.

If world power was built on diamonds (imagine they could fuel some kind of massive energy generators) then Africa would be being invaded not Iraq.


Doug Marker

#1 revised & clarified
#2 spelling of Andalusian