George Soros: US Supremacy bubble waiting to burst:

[AndyMan 7]

http://blogs.salon.com/0000014/2003/03/13.html

Quote

I see parallels between the Bush administration's pursuit of American supremacy and a boom-bust process or bubble in the stock market. Bubbles do not arise out of thin air. They have a solid basis in reality, but misconception distorts reality. Here, the dominant position of the US is the reality, the pursuit of American supremacy the misconception. For a while, reality reinforces the misconception, but eventually the gap between reality and its false interpretation becomes unsustainable.

Quote

Rapid victory in Iraq with little loss of life could bring about a dramatic change in the overall situation. Oil prices could fall, stock markets could celebrate, consumers could resume spending, and business could step up capital expenditures. America would end its dependency on Saudi oil, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could become more tractable and negotiations could start with North Korea without loss of face. That is what Mr Bush counts on. But military victory in Iraq is the easy part. It is what comes after that gives pause. In a boom-bust process, passing an early test tends to reinforce the misconception which gave rise to it. That is to be feared here.

Also, from the Wall Street Journal, written by ORIANA FALLACI. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003191

Quote

Upheld by their stubborn optimism, the same optimism for which at the Alamo they fought so well and all died slaughtered by Santa Anna, Americans think that in Baghdad they will be welcomed as they were in Rome and Florence and Paris. "They'll cheer us, throw us flowers." Maybe. In Baghdad anything can happen. But after that? Nearly two-thirds of the Iraqis are Shiites who have always dreamed of establishing an Islamic Republic of Iraq, and the Soviets too were once cheered in Kabul. They too imposed their peace. They even succeeded in convincing women to take off their burqa, remember? After a while, though, they had to leave. And the Taliban came. Thus, I ask: what if instead of learning freedom Iraq becomes a second Talibani Afghanistan? What if instead of becoming democratized by the Pax Americana the whole Middle East blows up and the cancer multiplies?

Finally, Scott Rosenberg of Salon sums up:

Quote

It seems odd that only now, with a quarter of a million troops in the field and war hanging by a hair, is the debate beginning to turn to that ultimate question of any military conflict: What happens afterwards? Scariest of all is the thought that President Bush, who has so far botched the peace in Afghanistan, hasn't grappled with it at all.

Of course, I clearly got these quotes from Salon, so people on the right will probably choose to ignore the opinions they don't like.

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[rgoper 0]

excellent post. these are the things i worry about, post sadaam iraq and ALL of it's consequences.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

these are the things i worry about, post sadaam iraq and ALL of it's consequences.

Yeah. It would suck to win the war and lose the peace.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[billvon 3,120]

Here are some other concerns:

We've berated Hussein for going after his own people with chemical weapons, killing thousands. What happens after we invade and the Kurds are suddenly free of their brutal oppression? Might they pursue their long-desired goal of a new Kurdistan with their brothers in Turkey? Whose side will we take then the Kurds in Turkey start fighting for their independence? If we take the Kurds side, we violate our NATO agreement with Turkey. If we take the side of Turkey, and expand our bombings to include the Kurds, well, we'll make Hussein look like a nice guy. At least he's largely leaving the Kurds alone now.

What about free elections? As the above article points out, most of the country is Shi'a, who favor fundamentalist Islamic theocracy. If there is indeed ever a free election there, and they decide to vote in a fundamentalist Islamic government under their belief that we will allow them freedom of religious expression, what will we do? Will we allow Taliban II into power? Or will we "crush the rebellion?" It might just be easier to establish a US Supreme Court there who will invalidate any election results we don't approve of.

And what about Iran? They've been looking for an opportunity to invade Iraq for years. Will it take a permanent US military presence there to deter them? Too bad we just put the UN out of the peace business; we'll be on our own.

Finally, we're going to be putting tens of thousands of US troops there for up to two years; up to 200,000 by one general's estimate. What happens when Al-Quaeda gets a foothold in the new Iraq (now free to pursue such interests) and comes after our troops there? I know, we'll crush them mercilessly, but what do you think the world will think of us when we take over from Hussein and the killings and human rights violations don't stop? And much more importantly, for how long will we be willing to pay the price in dead american soldiers?

[rgoper 0]

while everything you mentioned is of valid concern, i'm more inclined to be concerned about Vladimir Putin's remarks today. if Russia, France, Germany and China bind together, we may find ourselves in a precarious position, no longer wielding the mightiest sword, that would be a switch. insinuations of retaliation were referenced today by the Russian president, i don't think he's joking around either. we don't need this.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[Jib 0]

While post-war Iraq is an interesting question for debate, I think the above ignores who Saddam is and the present problem he presents. I would be more interested in the writers' plan than their verbose expression of concern and analogy to the business cycle of writing off accumulated financial losses every so often or a futile battle. It seems inconsistent to argue that the Shiites will start their own islamic republic (which the northern Kurds will not doubt oppose) while at the same time, they won't be happy to be rid of an oppressive regime to be able to do so. If there is a bubble to be burst, it is Saddam's delusions of gradeur.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[Jib 0]

Quote

insinuations of retaliation were referenced today by the Russian president

What did he say?

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[MC208B 0]

We must have seen different things in the news regarding the Russians. What I read is that they don't approve, think it was "a mistake and illegal" but the Russian went on to say that they basically didn't want to get in a pissing contest with the US. And as far as France and Germany being mad at us, geez, that's a scary thought......

[bodypilot90 0]

maybe we should ask the ppl of iraq


http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/rubin/rubingettough.htm

[Shark 0]

Quote

Of course, I clearly got these quotes from Salon, so people on the right will probably choose to ignore the opinions they don't like.

Yes. I can see the similarities between the capital markets and American supremacy. Interesting, but out there. Gimme a break.

I only ignore whining bitches who want attention and believe their opinion is the right opinion.