A scary thought ...

In the past, Imperial powers such as the UK, France, Portugal and Spain annexed territories for the following purposes:

• Natural Assets (Tea in China)
• Access to new markets (Construction of the Railways by British contractors)
• Tax Revenue
• Strategic Location/Importance (Gibraltar)
• Spreading their religion
• Access to warriors (Indian/Burmese soldiers during World War II)

Of course, each of these is important enough in today's context to justify imperialistic action - The US action on Iraq fits each of these objectives.

• Natural Assets - Oil, check
• Access to new markets - Halliburton, Bechtel, even McDonalds eventually ! Check
• Tax Revenue - Maybe not directly
• Strategic Location/Importance - Check
• Spreading their religion - This is why looney evangelists supported the war, check !
• Access to warriors - Guess who will fight the war against Iran ? Iraqis - Check

However another critical need for the US is a "low cost manufacturing base" that it controls. China is fine, but who knows what the Chinese government will want to do in a few years !! The need for the US is a new territory where it will not follow the minimum wage levels, environmental legislations it has put in place in the US. The US could go in and put the infrastructure up, keep wages artificially deflated and have all manufacturing done there - Maybe they would use China as the model.

Now, which country could the US annex ? North Korea ? Algeria ? Cuba ?