Posted September 28, 2002

CPP

Regarding "Will War Wreck the Economy?," by Alan Bock:

Most people don't understand the numbers he writes in his editorial, it should be continually mentioned what the annual cost per person is, for the 150 million working Americans, to finance a $200 billion war with Iraq. Hell, I'm not even sure about dividing billions into millions, is that $1,000 per person? When the media starts putting the cost per person in parenthesis for costs, outlined as cost per person, abbreviated cpp, then people will probably get it.

~ Guy G.

The Backtalk editor replies:

Assuming 150,000,000 taxpayers, the average cost per person of a $200,000,000,000 war would be $1333 and change.

Tyson Vs. Herman

With all the media hype about the impending war with Iraq, instead of "showdown with Saddam " it should be called "Iron Mike Tyson vs. Pee Wee Herman"! The truth is that at one time Saddam was the "Tyson" of the Middle East, he is getting old and tired, and his military has been seriously degraded. With the northern and southern thirds of Iraq declared a no-fly zone, its economy and military wrecked, the "Tyson" of the Middle East has had both legs and his right arm amputated. He is a threat to Mr. Bush's ego and little else. Let's get the weapons inspectors in and call it good. A mugging of Iraq for her oil resources is far below the dignity of our great country.

Call your senator today and say no to this war! No one's gonna hurt you if you do this, but if you don't speak up now, one day soon you may not be allowed to.

I'm sending a donation today, thanks, Justin, for asking!

~ Rick O'Connor

Al Gore's Message

Concerning Justin Raimondo's "Al Gore, Warmonger Lite":

That's all I can stand, I can't stands no more! Once again I feel I have to speak out against Justin's attack on what I consider to be a very acceptable antiwar message from Al Gore. Can you not keep in mind that any message conveyed in your country at this time has to be dealt with delicately? Witness the majority of your politicians on both sides afraid to take a position for fear of losing their base of support. That's putting it politely! Less politely, they wouldn't say sh*t if they had a mouthful. This site is either going to concentrate on the antiwar message or it's going to be partisan, and that will surely doom it to failure. Your condemnation of a very decent message for no other reason other than preconceived political notions will surely lead to that failure. If you choose to continue in that vein, you run the risk of alienating possibly half of the decent people that now support this worthwhile site. Nuff said; get with the program or lose your credibility. At this time you cannot afford to do that.

~ DHG, Canadian Antiwar.com supporter

Ally against Crass Imperialism

While the $25 I have provided you is hardly a substantial sum, I hope it helps to keep you running for a while yet. I think you are providing a valuable service; the "War Party" needs to be exposed and people need to learn the truth about what's going on out there. I disagree a bit with your politics -- I'm a Marxist leftist -- but I agree with a recent article by Justin Raimondo. "No wonder all those crunchy-granola kids hate capitalism, or think they do." My objection to capitalism is more to the imperialist excesses it shows today than any fundamental objection to the notion of private property and individual rights. Maybe in time your site will someday convince me to join in your libertarian cause; in the meanwhile, I look forward to having a valuable ally against crass imperialism.

~ Karl P.

Gangland Government

It has only been in the last couple years that I have felt compelled to voice my feelings on current issues. Before I had been apathetic to politics, but as I have observed the different attitude in Washington, I admit that I am quite alarmed. The talk of a war with Iraq is the most upsetting because I fail to see how anyone could logically think that it is a good thing. If preemptive strikes are going to be sanctioned by the government -- taking care of a problem before it even happens -- then shouldn't gangland killing convictions be reversed? After all, they are just killing someone before getting killed. America doesn't need to flex its muscles in a display of power from across an ocean and a continent, leaving the immediate neighbors of Iraq in more danger than we, the ones who will be irretrievable guilty should this insanity actually reach fruition. As an American, I do not feel threatened by any foreign power, whether it's bin Laden or Hussein. However, I do feel threatened by my own government, an entity seemingly intent on dragging a nation into war with a country that has only proved itself a viable threat to U.S. oil interests, and that was over 10 years ago. If America is intent on being a global power, it needs to learn to interact globally on a respectful and mature scale, not with this Old West sense of self-righteous justice and self-important egotism cloaked in the term of "national security."

~ Karla Bushway, New Hampshire

Blair's Dossier

Thank you, Antiwar.com, for posting Blair's so called Dossier.

Reading this document taught me many things.

There are charges of extreme brutality, human rights violations, and war crimes committed by the government of Iraq. Interestingly a great number of these charges occurred during a period when the US and Britain were actively supporting this, apparently monstrous, regime (though much to my surprise Mr. Blair neglected to mention this). I guess it is OK for dictators to torture and murder their own citizens, employ chemical weapons, and engage in aggressive war if they are doing it for such high ideals as stopping the nebulous threat of the spread of Islamic fundamentalism from Iran.

The document also describes Saddam's nuclear program. Apparently Iraq has had a nuclear program since the 1950s. In 1959, with Soviet aid, a nuclear reactor and research center was constructed. We are led to believe that Iraq is only months away from building nuclear weapons. Right, they've had a nuclear program for over 50 years, have they suddenly gotten smarter over the last four years? And how would they deliver these nukes? Maybe on the backs of camels, because the dossier admits that Saddam's missile the dreaded SCUD is based on Soviet technology also dating back to the 1950's.

Watch it Iraq, armed with this dossier Bush and Blair are coming for you and your oil....

~ Jim Vinsel

Containment

India’s merry gang of China baiters headed by the notorious Brahma Challaney are having a field day lately. Uncle Sham and Bharat, two old flames who joined hands in staging the 1959 Tibetan uprising and the 1962 border war with China are rekindling their courtship and a renewed campaign against China, by all accounts this congenial pair plus a new partner, Japan, has everything -- principally China, the quarry -- nicely sewn up, literally.

Mind you that was pre-911 when a few vital pieces were not yet in place, now that Uncle Sham, riding on the “anti-terrorism” crusade has planted bases all around China, right down to Philippines and Nepal, and probably India, the likes of Challaney and their 'amen corner' in the US just can’t wipe the smiles off their faces. See, the Chicoms are running scared what with this much heralded US-India-Japan-led anti-China iron ring. They are starting to be nice with India and even rolled over and played dead when Vajpayee spat in their face in Beijing!

Serve them right these Chicoms, not content with a “sneak attack” on India in 1962 they have been trying hard to encircle India too, so now they are getting a taste of their own medicine, huh?

Leaving aside the question of how credible the allegations about China’s “anti-India” activities in Burma etc. are (I am not a great fan of all these “congressional testimonies” and all that jazz -- if you know what I mean -­ but I heard the latest blockbuster from Bill Gertz of the Washington Times fame, which was, as always, based on that “CIA top secret information” ... and impeccable “Pentagon reports” has managed to convince ninety-five percent of Yanks to believe the Chicoms are a menace to the world in general and Uncle Sham in particular! Now I wonder what's all these talk about the brainwashed Chicoms ?)... what these “experts” didn’t tell you is that Uncle Sham was the one who started all this containment business, right after his favourite dictator Chiang Kai Shek “lost” China to the Chicoms -- and Bharat was there right from the start.

No sooner was the last shot in the border war fired when India volunteered to join in the great “let’s contain China” crusade. Bharat has not looked back since, the last 4 decades saw Indian military envoys shuttling from Hanoi to Washington, Moscow, Taipei, Tokyo -- in short, anybody who had an axe to grind with Beijing, tirelessly stitching up this noose around China’s neck. All these efforts are not for nothing, so today Bharat has his coveted cordon to crow about, and ... those Chicoms , they even had the cheek to seek alliance with Pakistan and Burma to encircle India! Here’s an even less known story: how many know that Bharat/Israel military collaboration actually started 4 decades ago, barely months after the border war, when Bharat was already shopping for hardware for a return match with China? ...

~ Deng Xi Chang, Hong Kong

Editor's note:

Backtalk editor Sam Koritz is profiled in the Real World section of October's Smart Money magazine (print version only, not available online).