Iran, Our Next Target in the Middle East
Posted By T. F. Kelley on February 9, 2010
We are again on a sure path to war and no one can stop it. The administration’s willingness and ability to attack Iran is independent of public opinion or congressional authorization. They have all the permission they need, the attack is simply an extension of the war in Iraq. A battle plan is in place that can be initiated within a hair-trigger 24 hours. A massive amount of firepower including two aircraft carrier groups has been assembled in that region. Weapons are reported to include long-range bombers, missiles, and bunker-busting nuclear bombs. 10,000 targets have been identified. A full attack even if it did not destroy Iran as a functioning society would set them back decades. It would be a war crime compounded. .
The rhetoric is getting increasingly bellicose, the war drums selling fearfulness beat louder. Bush concluded his most recent speech, again before a military audience, by claiming that Iran’s pursuit of nuclear technology could put the region “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust.” Not just a single “mushroom cloud” this time. His verbal threats such as, “When we catch you playing in a non-constructive role, there will be a price to pay” are not idle talk.
Translating Bush-speak such as, “Iran’s actions threaten the security of nations everywhere. We will confront this danger before it is too late” means an attack unless his demands are met. Those demands include regime change in Tehran: “We seek an Iran whose government is accountable to its people, instead of to leaders who promote terror and pursue the technology that could be used to develop nuclear weapons
The “pursue the technology” refers to Iran’s nuclear energy program. Article IV of the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) reads: “Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of the parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.” Iran has the right to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes and the right to obtain and enrich uranium to the level where it will sustain a heat-generating nuclear fission chain-reaction
Who will speak in opposition to the war? The Chief Hawk of the administration is Dick (“Military strikes against Iran are warranted”) Cheney. The latest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) was returned by him to the CIA four times for revisions because it did not exhibit enough enthusiasm for conflict in Iran. It was reported that Secretary of State Rice and Secretary of Defense Gates as well as some very senior military people are opposed to the war. But with a single day’s notice bombs will be falling before they can read their Email.
The Congress can or will do nothing; it is weaker than the last one. An amendment which mandated congressional authorization before any attack on Iran was withdrawn before a vote was taken. Sen. Joe Lieberman, an unrepentant cheerleader for war (“… the Iranian government by its actions has declared war on us.”) sponsored a resolution which accused Iran of acts of war against this country; it passed the Senate unanimously.
No rational person has expectations of hearing truth spoken to power from the television industry, now an even vaster wasteland. The will and conscience and spine of the national print media is still on vacation. Without the pro-war propaganda from the N.Y. Times and Washington Post hundreds of thousands of people would still be alive and with their families.
A significant section of George Bush’s electoral base factors into this equation. As an example, at a conference earlier in the year the Reverend John Hagee, head of Christians United for Israel called again “for preemptive war against Iran.” Many of these extreme believers have a vested emotional investment in the Middle East believing that current events are indicators of their “end times.”
To justify this attack Iran is being painted as interfering in Iraq. One General claimed that about 50 members of an Iranian military unit were training insurgents. However, he admitted finding no Iranians in his area of command and no illegal weapons were found during two months of patrolling 125 miles of the Iraqi- Iranian border. It was also claimed that Sunni insurgents were using Iranian weapons. Iran has been accused of arming Iraq insurgents with the sophisticated roadside bombs. On the other side, CIA director Michael Hayden is downplaying the quality of the evidence that Iran is interfering in Iraq. However, a significant Iranian influence in the big Iraqi election was welcomed because it pushed the results in the direction the administration desired. They have been many accusations but little evidence.
An American attack on Iran will be a disaster that makes their quick (few weeks), cheap ($80 million) “cakewalk” in Iraq look benign. It will bring an outpouring of outrage from the entire world-wide Muslim community. And if nuclear weapons are used we will become a pariah among nations.
The UN inspection programs under Dr. Hans Blix and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) under Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei were more than effective in neutralizing Iraq. There is every reason to believe that they are as effective now in Iran which has been subject to comprehensive inspections since 2003. Further, ElBaradei reports Iran has done nothing illegal.
It is not that we should avoid war because we might be badly beaten again, kill perhaps tens of thousands of innocent Iranians and leave a wasteland of radioactive fallout. We should not go to war simply because it is not necessary.
T. F. Kelley
Norwood MA
Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.