I agree with Foxbat on most points of fact, and his historical viewpoint is basically that of a good Marxist, but I can't agree that the answer to an imperialist world is to be the biggest imperialist on the block. Maybe if you're George Bush, but not if you're one of us. Aside from being just plain deplorable, fascists have a way of subjugating not just foreigners but also the domestic population-- us. Witness all the Ashcroft crap these days, plus the ongoing attack on workers' wages and benefits. An ordinary American who finds he can stomach the idea of conquest would still have to ask himself if he benefits from it. I think the answer is "no."
Even if you are Bush or one of his friends, I think the course we're on is suicidal. That may be the only argument that has any chance of swaying them. You won't get far telling these bastards that it's criminal. They know it is.
Foxbat is a sort of fantasy of mine in that he wants war not for the (patently bullshit) ostensible reasons like freedom, self-defense, humanity, and so on, but for what I agree are the real reasons, all of which have to do with self-interest. (They still fail on that score.) Listening to Bush and co., I'm thinking that what they're saying is stupid, but they're not stupid, and their agenda isn't stupid. I mean they couldn't be that stupid. It's just that the real reasons (the ones that make any sort of sense) can't be spoken. Foxbat speaks them, or seems to try. Sadly, the viewpoint is too ugly to look at, and the whole thing has put me in a bad mood.
Andy, two points:
One, there is virtually zero-point-zero-zero-zero chance that the Bush administration would ever permit anything resembling democracy in Iraq. If they did, Iraq would instantly become an Islamist state. They are likely to replace Saddam with another Saddam, equipped with the willingness to (among other things) commit atrocities against the Kurds, just like our NATO friend and leading recipient of military aid in the hemisphere (excl. Israel and Egypt), Turkey.
Two, your average Iraqi under Saddam was not too bad off in the years before the first Gulf War. If we were overthrowing regimes on humanitarian grounds, Iraq would be on the list, but not at the top. As you point out, Indonesia is worse, and it carried out its crimes with full US support and approval. In fact, aid seems to flow proportionately to the worst violators, and we'll probably continue the trend in the new Iraq.
So your "what if" scenario remains safely in the realm of fantasy.
---
What others say about boorite!