1.23.2008

Everything Iran

On Thursday Israel carried out missile tests which, according to New York Times speculation, "was part of a program to develop longer-range weapons which could act as a deterrent against Iran." Israeli radio said that the missile could deliver an "unconventional payload", or in other words, a nuke (which they have). This is another threat in a sea of recent conflict between the seemingly inseparable American-Israeli alliance and Iran. We all remember the speed boat incident a few weeks ago and the video that very obviously shows Iran being aggressive... right?


To understand the increasing militancy between Iran and America, we have to look back at the infamous 2002 State of the Union speech.
"States like these [Iraq, Iran, and North Korea], and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic. We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction."
Imagine being in Iran and hearing that the most powerful country in the world just classified you as a threat to world peace -- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected in 2005 for being tough on defense. And the rhetoric only steepened as Bush and Cheney continually let it be known Iran cannot have nuclear weapons or even the "know-how" (as if that was a word). It reached its pinnacle in October 2007, around the time Bush threatened World War III. All the while knowing, at earliest in August, that “Iran does in fact have a covert weapons program, but it may be suspended.” The National Intelligence Estimate showing that Iran halted it's nuclear program was released to the public December 3rd and seemingly eased tensions between our two countries, at least for a month.

With this embarrassment behind him, Bush continues his campaign to attack Iran with a new, more familiar approach: repetition of the false. He continues to declare nuclear Iran a threat to the stability of the world while leading the charge on a new set of sanctions, which were drafted yesterday. While Bush may only hurt Iran economically, last Monday Israel President Olmert stated "All options" are on the table for force:
"Israel clearly will not reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran," the meeting participant quoted Olmert as telling the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. "All options that prevent Iran from gaining nuclear capabilities are legitimate within the context of how to grapple with this matter."
Incidentally, on the very same day Bush was in Saudi Arabia selling $20 Billion in arms to the major Sunni power in the region while systematically ranting about Iran being a threat.

So, the response to this Israeli missile test came from Iran on Thursday as well:
"The Zionist regime ... would not dare attack Iran," Ahmadinejad told Al Jazeera television in remarks translated into Arabic, referring to Israel. "The Iranian response would make them regret it, and they know this."
"It knows that any attack on Iranian territories would prompt a fierce response," he added.
If Israel starts fighting with Iran, the United States will undeniably become involved. Only blind speculation can go from there, but I just wanted to bring this worsening confrontation to the spotlight. It feels inevitable at this point with Iran saying that they refuse to halt their nuclear program and Israel saying that if Iran doesn't stop they will be attacked and if attacked Iran will retaliate. Of course Israel has full and unquestionable support from the U.S. in everything they do. Does anybody else see this happening? It almost seems like Bush and Cheney are in full kamakaze mode with Iran. They are even able to fend off clear evidence! I would like to hear what everybody else has to say on this issue because it scares me to no end.

7 comments:

Kilgore Trout(man) said...

Good thing Giuliani is not performing in the polls... he argued that Israel should be included in NATO, which would undoubtedly get us in way too many wars in Southwest Asia.

filabusta said...

Yeah! When I was writing this post late last night I went to haaretz.com (Israeli news), and in a huge picture it had Rudy's face and it said something around: "Rudy needs a win in Florida to survive, but if he loses we need to pick a new candidate to support" and I was baffled. I didn't really think much of it until today and I checked the site again and I can't find that anywhere. Maybe it was just an ad but it sure caught my eye.

Kilgore Trout(man) said...

I don't know if you've ever played the drinking game where you watch a Giuliani speech and drink everytime he says 9/11, but it gets you fucked up quick g.

filabusta said...

Whenever you come up (or we come down) we definitely need to do that. Did you see that the NY firefighters publicly called Rudy a weenie?

Kilgore Trout(man) said...

You know I'm down. Yeah I saw that... did you ever read the rawstory story about firemen and their new responsibilities? I'll look for it and post it soon.

ThoughtPolice said...

I love RawStory for news... That site pulls it together well. Thanks Pat for opening me up to it. An article I read a bit ago regarding Rudy's moral standing and what really drives his policy stances can be found in Rolling Stone.

Kilgore Trout(man) said...

http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf

This is the NIE report on the IAEA findings and their assessment.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/BDB8B4DE-EC48-46A4-BA53-BF305B65182F.htm?FRAMELESS=true&NRNODEGUID=%7bBDB8B4DE-EC48-46A4-BA53-BF305B65182F%7d

This is a story from al Jazeera on Bush's response to the report and findings.

"Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure... suggests that some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures." -NIE report

"George Bush has insisted Iran remains a 'danger to the world' and the US will keep 'all options' against it open." -Al Jazeera

Though it's a poor policy, to B's credit, he's acting on what he and his cabinet thinks the intelligence assessment says. Which explains his behavior (threats, sanctions), however much doomed to fail, is at least rational and has a bit of a basis.

But the NIE report continues, "...intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, might... prompt Iran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program."

The report goes on to say, "In our judgment, only an Iranian political decision to abandon a nuclear weapons objective would plausibly keep iran from eventually producing nuclear weapons."

In my opinion I think the NIE was playing politics and catering to the administration's predicted frustration with the report, and by including these recommendations the report legitimizes the Administration's efforts to "stay the course" with their sandpaper (abrasive-bully) policy.

That's just my interpretation, and a complete assumption, so it's difficult to critique his approach beyond the inevitable failing of such a policy. I guess I'm saying I don't blame the administration so much for their policies in the wake of the report. At least US is seeking multilateral solutions. The big thing is the same report that makes us sure Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program, advises Bush to apply pressure.