I appreciate the comments which break through a wall of imposed and self-imposed censorship.
There has been collusion by government and other media sources effectively to suppress the arguments for a negotiated settlement. >From their experience in northern Ireland the British government would be in favour of this, but would not like to publicise the logic that they should in due course sit down with Osama bin Laden. >From the point of view of socialism and democracy we should be promoting negotiations. Some of bin Laden's demands are just. Besides in terms of economic realpolitik it makes sense to negotiate. Chris Burford ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Baer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:05 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Economic terrorism > The first-order answer seems pretty simple: oil companies and > military contractors prosper from the current arrangement, and they > are the dominant sectoral interests behind the current politburo. > Costs to the nation as a whole are irrelevant as long as the revenue > streams and assets of those sectors (and the political power of their > agents) is maintained. > > --pb > > >Osama bin Laden was quite specific in his demands in several of his fatwas. > >I don't have access to it right now, but I believe it was his "First Message > >to America" that outlined demands to restore the Palestinians to their land > >and remove US forces from the Muslim Holy Land in Saudi Arabia. I think > >these demands were credible, in part because he had no apparent motive to be > >dishonest, moreover they were public demands, and, within the Muslim > >community would necessarily have had to have apparent sincerity and weight > >to draw adherents. > > > >What I think is interesting is to analyze the strategic choices made by the > >USA from an economic perspective. Prior to 9/11, as I recall, we had > >military expenditures in the area of $50 billion annually in the Middle > >East. Compare this with oil imports that I believe were in the area of > >$10-15 billion. Now, with Afghanistan, Iraq and all the other initiatives > >stretching all the way east to the Philippines and north to Mongolia, we're > >probably spending over $100 billion/year. And these costs are probably > >dwarfed by all the different costs, real, opportunity, imputed, etc., of > >economic terrorism. If we were to view the strategic choices made by the US > >as strictly a matter of achieving energy security in the most cost-effective > >way, the decisions made were/are clearly nonsensical. For less money we > >could simply enlarge our strategic petroleum reserve to buffer any > >interruption in supplies and withdraw from the Middle East. So, and this is > >my real point, there must be other reasons for our actions. And we must be > >willing to spend enormous sums for these reasons, whatever they may be. In > >part, I think the answer is that literally pouring money in a hole in the > >ground doesn't yield the same Keynesian effects as military expenditures. > >So there are probably political and institutional factors at play. Any > >thoughts? > > > >Peter Hollings > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael > >Perelman > >Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:51 PM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Economic terrorism > > > > > >Interesting. The Irish had specific demands. What are Al Quaida's? > >Some we know, but just getting out of Saudi Arabia and giving some land > >to Palastine would not likely be enough -- even if there were a strong > >political base that the group represented. > > > >Economic terrorism is probably effective. If the Palestinians kept up > >the Intifada much longer -- especially if they were able to make tourism > >dangerous -- might hurt the Israeli economy, but it might also enourage > >more private and public aid from the US. > > > >This is certainly a murky area. > > -- > >Michael Perelman > >Economics Department > >California State University > >Chico, CA 95929 > > > >Tel. 530-898-5321 > >E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu >
