Friday, April 14, 2006
Please don't throw me in the briar patch!The way the president of Iran is talking, you'd think he wants the U.S. to attack his country. And you know what? He might be right. He would probably benefit politically should Bush decide to do so.
posted by Quiddity at 4/14/2006 10:04:00 PM
14 comments
The L.A. Times had a piece today about the Iranian president's religious beliefs. It seems he's is a member of a sub-branch of Shiitism that is messianic. They are waiting for the coming of Mahid. It can happen anyday now because we are in the end times, don't-you-know. The article's subtitle inplied that he might be proned towards irrational decisions and actions because of his psychotic beliefs.
I read further, isn't Bush prone towards irrational decisions and actions because of his evangelical, psychotic beliefs?
And you're asking: do I think all religious people are psychotic? I think that a large majority of church goers are going for the ritualal, some for the community, and some out of hope. Some have a mild belief and that is a mild psychosis. Those with a strong belief are irrational and psychotic.
Unfortunately they both stand to benefit.
brainhell: I agree.
I find it interesting that the same set of observers note that war/military action on the part of a nation creates political support for the leader of that nation - i.e. the anti-war left note the political benefits for both sides of a military confontation. However, those who are inclined to support military don't recognize that perhaps maybe Iran's president and Bush are doing the same thing - talking the military talk in a ploy to amass political support.
" ...perhaps maybe Iran's president and Bush are doing the same thing - talking the military talk in a ploy to amass political support."
Iran's president is not talking the military talk! Please stop spreading falsehoods.
It is the U.S. that is making threats against Iran, not the other way around and not both.
Iran is not doing anything illegal, the media is not making this clear. Attacking Iran would be illegal, again, the media is not reporting this to the public.
This is serious. We don't need people inventing scenarios which scare the public into accepting excuses to commit yet another war of aggression.
Tom, you're not completely right on this.
You're right that Iran is not talking about attacking the US. OTOH, Iran IS talking about annihilating about the only ally the US has in the Middle East these days, Israel. As much as many of us don't believe that the US government is playing with a full deck these days, the Iranian goverment doesn't quite even have whole card...
That said, I do agree that the US talking about attacking Iran is wrong.
Tom - Pardon my shortcut. To clarify: Iran's president is employing strident, provactive language to elicit a bellicose response from the U.S. And yes, I am including "wiping Israel off the map" as belligerent language aimed at the U.S.
Except for the part where they hunt him down and subject him, many years down the road, to a "trial" run by and staffed by, his enemies.
That part he'd possibly regret.
Neither Iran nor its president has said that they would "wipe Israel off the map" or that they would "annihilate" Israel.
Please be care about what has actually been said.
Also, what does ending the Israeli system actually mean? What would wiping Isral of the map or annihilating Israel actually mean? We need to look at what Israel actually is, and it isn't pretty. For example, if all the people living in Israel had equal rights, the same rights we demand for ourselves, that would be the destruction of Israel by definition. Keeping in place a system of discrimination based on religion is not something Americans should risk their lives for. Keeping in place a system of injustice is not something Americans should support. Should the Confederacy have been wiped off the map?
There is so much suppression that I suggest people seek out more info. There are striking cases of suppression of facts concerning Israel. Also see if Americans knew
While there are many legimiate criticisms of Israel, the Iranian president trumpting "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm" can only be considered inflammatory rhetoric at best.
"And yes, I am including "wiping Israel off the map" as belligerent language aimed at the U.S."
Said what??? Bro, Israel is NOT a part of the US (despite the fact that many in this administration seem to hold a greater sense allegiance to it than the US) and any threats that Iran (and the rest of the Muslim world) cast at it are not cast at the US, despite the fact that we've done SO much to enable their holocaust against Palestine! Israel is like some snotty little kid with a big bad brother who goes out of his way to start fights, so that his big brother will step in and defend him. No more! There's been one too many Palestinian school-kids shot in the head by IDF snipers, one too many Rachel Corries intentionally pulverized by bulldozers for the US to stand in the way of any and all threats that those monsters bring on themselves.
No More!
Guys, the media is making fools of you. From what some of you are saying I susspect you don't know that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had already called for targeting Iran "the day after" Iraq is crushed. Iran is REACTING. The media suppresses a lot of things. See though barely noticed by North American media, as Prime Minister Ariel Sharon called for an invasion of Iran "the day after" Iraq is crushed. ISRAEL’S Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has called on the international community to target Iran as soon as the imminent conflict with Iraq is complete.
Anon - totally onboard with you. Israel, imo, is not paramount in US foreign policy. And I agree that Israel's security issues are Israel's. Having said that, Iran recognizes (most of the Arab, too, world recognizes) the substantial backing Israel enjoys from the US. And probably recognize that some in the adminsitration have more allegience to Israel than the U.S. (as you assert). Iran also knows (and knows that we know) that it cannot militarily attack the U.S. So, it makes sense that Iran would add all this up and make provactaive statements regarding Israel (as a proxy for the U.S.).
OFF THE TABLE
Bombing Iran is not only illegal and unjust, it is an unacceptable risk. The risks of "stopping Iran" are greater than not "stopping Iran." It isn't just my opinion that the risks that come with military actions against Iran are unacceptable. Look at the conclusion drawn from war-game simulations of attacking Iran. The final conclusion after running through many options was expressed by General Gardiner, a simulations expert at the U.S. Army’s National War College:
"After all this effort, I am left with two simple sentences for policymakers," Sam Gardiner said of his exercise. "You have no military solution for the issues of Iran. And you have to make diplomacy work.""
The CIA and DIA have war-gamed the likely consequences of a U.S. pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. No one liked the outcome. As an Air Force source tells it, ‘The war games were unsuccessful at preventing the conflict from escalating.‘” I HOPE SO! But the Bush Administration OFTEN IGNORES advice from intelligence.
The example of the USSR is an important one to analyze. The biggest close call was because of U.S. policy maker's recklessness and aggression toward Cuba. We don't want to repeat the same kind of mistakes. And the sick part is President Kennedy didn't know about the hypocrisy of U.S. nukes already based a mere 150 miles from Soviet boarders, in Turkey.
As far as the habits of other nuclear countries, the U.S. and Israel are heavily involved in terrorism. The U.S. has inflicted massive amounts of terrorism against Cuba, just one example. And the hypocrisy is incredible. Look at the case of Orlando Bosch. The U.S. Justice Department, which was overruled by Bush I, complained that the U.S. harboring Bosch put the public interests at risk because "the security of this nation is affected by its ability to urge credibly other nations to refuse aid and shelter to terrorists." Look also at the shameful case of the Cuban 5.
|
