PJ, shame on you. You're trying to confuse the unedumacated among us.

Let's look at the definitions, shall we?

ge·o·pol·i·tics ( P ) Pronunciation Key (j-pl-tks)
n. (used with a sing. verb)

1. The study of the relationship among politics and geography, demography, and economics, especially with respect to the foreign policy of a nation.

2.
a. A governmental policy employing geopolitics.

b. A Nazi doctrine holding that the geographic, economic, and political needs of Germany justified its invasion and seizure of other lands.

3. A combination of geographic and political factors relating to or influencing a nation or region.

Now, let's examine your use of the word in the context of the discussion in this thread, shall we? You used the term in relation to the U.S. doing what is in its best interests because it has the power to do so. You even said it was a law of nature, too. (Need I remind you how that relates to geopolitik as envisioned by people like Haushofer?). You said that what matters in Iraq is ultimately our interests and our needs. That our needs justified the invasion of Iraq.

Now...

Which definition above does your stance most closely resemble? Invasion. Check. Justified by the political and economic needs of the invading nation. Check. Sound familiar at all?