State of Play in the U.S.A.

international | anti-war / imperialism | opinion/analysis Saturday October 04, 2003 20:03 by Eye on America

A look at some of the things currently happening in the USA, Iraq, Iran and what it all means for the Bush junta and their friends.

Also, a report on the rapidly declining world oil resources.

US casualty chart

Four months after the Security Council ordered an independent board to monitor U.S. spending of Iraq's oil revenues, diplomats on Thursday accused the United States of blocking it from taking up its duties.

The diplomats blamed the delay on U.S. disagreements with the designated members of the as-yet nonexistent International Advisory and Monitoring Board over its duties.

They said the disagreement reflected a U.S. desire to keep Iraqi reconstruction exclusively in American hands, while an anonymous US offical said: "By getting more people involved, you are going to have a lot of quibbling over how the money is spent."

http://tinyurl.com/ppv2

The aftermath of the war is becoming increasingly more profitable for US companies. For example the value of Halliburton Co.'s contract to restore Iraq's oilfields has risen to $1.4 billion. A tidy little earner, that will no doubt rise in the future. The news is forcing the Bush junta to defend itself against accusations of conflict of interest and sweetheart deals as it struggles to maintain public support for U.S. involvement in Iraq. Let us not forget that VP Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton until 2000, and still holds stock options and draws a deferred salary from the company.

http://tinyurl.com/ppv8

We Don't Do Bodycounts

Well fortunatley others do. According to Iraqbodycount.org the current civillian casualty number is somewhere around the 10,000 mark. While the number of US casualties is about 316. Of course, most of us are aware that the majority of these US deaths have occured *after* Bush's triumpant "Misson Accomplished" preformance, and ther ehave been more US casualities than in Gulf War I (see the chart). Various military family groups have been springing up, demanding that Bush "bring [the troops] home now".

http://www.iraqbodycount.org
http://www.bringthemhomenow.org

Weapons of Mass Deception

Meanwhile, the failure to find WMDs has been interpreted in various ways. Of course us on the anti-war side are saying "Surprise, surprise", but Bush amazingly has said that the failure to find any WMDs actually proves that the war was 'just'. Bizarre logic, but then this man did almost choke to death on a pretzel.

What was found were "construction plans" for missiles that could travel "up to 1000km" and a single vial of botulinum bacteria that was stored in a scientist's fridge. Leaving aside that BT has other uses outside of making weapons, does a single vial prove ANYTHING? Experts have said that there are many, complicated steps between possessing a vial of the bacteria and producing enough of the toxin to create a weapon. That would require relatively sophisticated equipment and processing. Remember, this vial was kept in a family fridge (that is according to David Kay, cheif US weapons inspector).

The various theories that have been bounced around by establishment heads are that "Saddam Hussein may have possessed weapons of mass destruction and hid them, the chief U.S. weapons inspector says. Or the Iraqi dictator may have had the weapons and moved them outside the country just before the war. Or perhaps Saddam never had them at all, and just bluffed to appear strong."

I'm open to correction here, but as regards point three, I don't recall Hussein ever saying that he had such weapons. Wasn't that the whole point of the war? Wasn't that why the weapons inspectors were there? To find weapons that Hussein DENIED he had? Of course, the 'moving WMDs another country' theory will probably be one that is seized upon, if and when the further inspections fail to turn up anything. (see Whooping it up, below)

http://tinyurl.com/ppvf

Of course all this bad press is taking its toll on public opinion. Bush is at his lowest approval rating since September 11 2001. This is not just because of the failing occupation, but also because of the state of the US economy where job losses are still a regular occurance. However, according to a friend of mine, a lecturer in Huston: "Yes, Bush's numbers have gone down but most Americans are responding to very little actual information, which means they're still easily manipulated, and the Bush people have built up an incredible war chest so they can flood the airwaves with (mis)information."

http://tinyurl.com/ppvy

Whooping it up yet again

As regards the next stage in the 'war on terror' the White House is already hinting at using force. Warning Iranians that "development of a nuclear weapon is not in their interests", Bush said that "all options remain on the table". The LA Times subsequently reported that the CIA has briefed friendly foreign intelligence services on a contingency plan for air and missile strikes on Iranian nuclear installations.

The US continues to develop new forms of nuclear weapons. US-friendly states that refused to sign the non-proliferation treaty (NPT) but have nuclear weapons - like India, Israel and Pakistan - are treated with kid gloves. An NPT-signer such as Iran, against whom Washington bears ancient grudges, is threatened with punishment, and possible force.

http://tinyurl.com/ppvi

Oil "Production Crunch" Predicted for 2010

In related news, according to the London Independent, world oil and gas supplies are heading for a "production crunch" sometime between 2010 and 2020 when they cannot meet supply, because global reserves are 80 per cent smaller than had been thought, new forecasts suggest. This is up to 40 years before the previously predicted year 2050.

Research presented this week at the University of Uppsala in Sweden claims that oil supplies will peak soon after 2010, and gas supplies not long afterwards.

Dr James McKenzie, senior assistant on the climate change programme at the World Resources Institute in Washington, said: "We won't run out of oil - but what will happen is that production will decline, and that's when all hell will break loose.... That's why we went to war in Iraq," said Dr McKenzie. "Gas might have comparable reserves to oil, but it's not in the right place and we don't really have the infrastructure to transport it."

http://tinyurl.com/ph06