Son of Iraq
Read.
Perhaps the scariest graf: In contrast, some conservatives are arguing that America’s position in Iraq would improve if Iran chose to retaliate there [in response to a U.S. bombing of Iran], according to a government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon’s civilian leaders, because Iranian interference would divide the Shiites into pro- and anti-Iranian camps, and unify the Kurds and the Sunnis. The Iran hawks in the White House and the State Department, including Elliott Abrams and Michael Doran, both of whom are National Security Council advisers on the Middle East, also have an answer for those who believe that the bombing of Iran would put American soldiers in Iraq at risk, the consultant said. He described the counterargument this way: “Yes, there will be Americans under attack, but they are under attack now.”
Neocons to U.S. troops: You're screwed anyway.
posted by Number Three @ 8:49 AM
1 Comments:
It's quite clear that the Bush administration's actions and attitudes on Iran are most, if not only, consistent with a policy of bombing to bring about regime change. In fact, we can go further. Bombing Iran for regime change is the only course of action open to them that is consistent with Neoconservative ideology (cutting a security deal on the model of Cuba is not). In short, if they are to remain true to their Neoconservative principles, they must bomb Iran unless the Iranians agree to give up their nuclear programme, peaceful or not, along with their current political system. The only hope of preventing bombing is if Iran blinks on the nuclear issue and Bush finally doesn’t listen to Cheney and his Neoconservative pals and he “blinks” on regime change.
Of course Bush and Cheney could care less about all the suffering (wartime and economic) that their actions will bring about for the average citizens of this planet, including those in the US. What both haven't quite figured out is that the US has gone from being the largest lender nation to the largest debtor nation under their watch and US economic might no longer bestrides the globe without any challengers who can leverage us. The Iranians themselves have the power to make the price of gas go above 5 bucks a gallon, prompting a worldwide recession. By the way, gas in Italy was already 1.30 Euros a litre, which is about 6 bucks a gallon. Try telling a European he should pay 2 Euros a litre or more because the US wants to bomb Iran rather than employ a policy of containment. That is why in a recent poll more Germans felt that the US was a greater danger to global stability and peace than the Iranians!
There is also the question of moral leverage, which is not to be underestimated. If the US bombs Iran, I can guarantee that several Western European governments will be forced by their citizens on moral grounds to take actions against American aggression or Europeans citizens will act on their own. This could take several forms, from demanding the shuttering military bases to pulling investments out of American companies, to refusing to travel to the US, or foreign students and workers fleeing the US... Under such circumstances it's hard to imagine that NATO will survive, or the UN.
Post a Comment
<< Home