Dissident Voice

April 4, 2003

CNN News online carried a report by a recent speech by former Admiral of the U.S. Navy and former CIA chief James Woolsey in which Admiral Woolsey notified the world that the U.S. is currently engaged in World War IV. This war is to be fought, according to Woolsey, with Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Al Qaeda. And Woolsey said that it would be best for the governments of Egypt and Saudi Arabia should be worried about the goal of the U.S. in prosecuting this war. According to Woolsey, the purpose of this war is to spread democracy into these (Muslim) nations, and Woolsey claimed the leaders of these nations (Egypt and Saudi Arabia) should be concerned about this war because, in his view, the U.S. is more concerned with the well-being of the citizens of those nations than they own governments are.

Do Woolsey's claims have the ring of truth? In the nations so mentioned, who has been more likely to support U.S. corporate and government interests, the governments or the people? Who has controlled the wealth in those Muslim nations, the governments or the people?

Many knowledgeable observers of the Muslim/Arab world believe that if democracy was installed today, the peoples of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, for starters, would oppose the policies of the U.S. government. Many knowledgeable persons believe that Arab and Muslim peoples of the world would reject the U.S. unequivocal support of Israel and denial of Palestine rights and liberties. Many knowledgeable persons believe that the citizens of Arab/Muslim lands would strongly oppose the presence of American military bases and troops within their national boundaries, and would deny their airspace to American warplanes.

Perhaps most importantly at this moment in history, Woolsey's comments show that the War on Iraq is not a war against one regime or a war of self-defense by America against a threat, but this is truly a strategic war of conquest. The War on Iraq is an OFFENSIVE war, a preemptive war in a planned continuation of preemptive, strategic wars for control of economic resources considered vital to U.S. national interests. This war is not about Saddam Hussein, it is about Chevron and Exxon and Bechtel and Halliburton and the U.S. Economy. All prior explanations and "justifications" for this war are revealed to be subterfuges.

Prior to the Woolsey speech, we had to go to obscure, printed policy statements to find out what the War on Iraq is all about. Now, Woolsey has brought it all out in the open. The U.S. has declared a global war, using military assets to promote corporate interests, and arguably planning to pay for this and future wars by selling off the assets of the vanquished victims of this war. This war is planned as a Win-Win War on a scale never seen before in human history. The idea is to use massive American military might to take what we want for our national economy, while limiting the power of potential future adversaries, while frightening the world into submission, and simultaneously declaring this to be a war for democracy.

Few people think the world beyond the borders of the U.S. will believe in the nobility of such a world war. The real question is: Can the rest of the world stop the U.S. plan and the ongoing War for World Domination, called World War IV by Admiral Woolsey?

Even the allies have much to fear. The Canadians and the Mexicans have to worry if some of their resources might be coveted by the Americans. The Russians and the nations of Central Asia must be worried as well.

As long as the Brits continue to suck the teats of the American War Hog, they may feel comfortable, but even that could change if Britain finds its own interests losing compatibility of American ones.

Leading the war is the Commander-in-Chief George W. Bush, the first American president in history to be labeled an "idiot" by a diplomat of a foreign nation. This is the same George W. Bush who partied during his own time of military service during wartime, and who relies on the current soldiers and officers of the U.S. military to be much more effective and to sacrifice themselves at a level far different from his own.

It is truly an ugly prospect. Not the proclaimed prospect of democratization of the world, but the REAL one; establishment of pseudo-democratic U.S. puppet regimes by military conquest. On the CNN television news tonight, it was revealed that the U.S. may "install" a government in Iraq even before the war is ended. "Installation" of a democracy in Iraq is not exactly a comforting thought, but it appears to be a procedure to be used repeatedly in World War IV, here in the "American Century."

Stan Moore lives in San Geronimo, CA. He can be contacted at: hawkman11@hotmail.com