Will we go to war with Iran?

[Fucky McFuckerson]

"Washington's geopolitical interests are key to America's relationship to Iran and the Middle East in general. The US desires to control - or at minimum to keep out of "unfriendly" hands - the immense oil reserves possessed by Iran and neighboring Iraq. It fears a future alliance between these resource-rich developing countries, which also happen to be the only two nations in the world governed by Shi'ite Muslims. The US invaded to overthrow the "unfriendly", Sunni-backed Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein. But it can neither rely totally on its selected successor regime in Baghdad, nor has it yet been able to remove the theocratic government in Tehran, which is conservative domestically but puts forward an anti-imperialist foreign policy that drives the world's remaining superpower to distraction."

Bingo.

 

[ColdBlooded]

"In a private e-mail sent last week to nuclear experts and obtained by Newsweek, Tariq Rauf, a senior official with the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, wrote that the mainstream media are repeating mistakes from 2003, when they "carried unsubstantiated stories on Iraq and WMD - the same mistakes are being repeated re IAEA and Iran." Rauf added that "the hype is likely originating from certain (known) sources." The message does not specify the sources, but US and European officials have previously accused Israel of exaggerating Iran's nuclear progress.

. . .

But we believe that Iran - even if it knows how to produce a nuclear bomb - will not weaponize because it wishes to demonstrate its adherence to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and because it desires to survive the hostility of America and Israel. At the same time, Iran does not intend to be humiliated and hampered by hugely excessive restrictions and intrusive surveillance that is not applied to other countries in compliance with the NPT. Nor does it intend to turn tail because of threats from those who object to its support of the Palestinian people and its opposition to imperialism.

If the United States genuinely wishes to resolve its dispute with Iran, it is possible to do so rationally and without violence. But this means Obama must treat Iran as an equal, accept the reality that Tehran and Washington see the world differently, and negotiate in good faith.

Most Americans and virtually the rest of the world have high hopes about Obama, especially after the Bush administration. We certainly recognize the improvement but have doubts, not high hopes, when it comes to the direction of American foreign policy. We see little difference, other than the cosmetic, between the Obama administration's international strategy and the strategy of American global domination and hegemony based on military power that has prevailed in Washington in its present incarnation since the end of World War II.

We'd like nothing better than to be proven wrong. But that would take the development of a massive progressive movement in this country, focused in this instance on world peace, the equality of peoples, and justice for all, a not unreasonable goal worth struggling for, in our view. And as far as nuclear proliferation is concerned, the only true solution is total nuclear disarmament, a position, by the way, that Iran appears to be putting forth these days.
"

 

[NAMO]

"As we proceed with our analysis, here are a few things that should be kept in mind.

• So far, there is no evidence Iran is going to "weaponize" its nuclear power program and build atomic bombs. So far, it has been abiding by the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), has pledged not to produce nuclear weapons, is under very close scrutiny by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and obviously its program is the target of intensive surveillance by the United States. There is no secret way in which it could construct nuclear weapons under such circumstances.
  
  
• Israel possesses an arsenal of up to 200 nuclear weapons and thumbs its nose at the IAEA and the NPT, with which it is notoriously non-compliant. If US President Barack Obama must sternly castigate Iran, which does not have nuclear weapons, for "breaking rules that all nations must follow ... and threatening the stability and security of the region and the world", why does he protect Israel from international sanctions and subsidize its military machine? Pakistan and India are also non-compliant, but they, too, are allies of Washington and thus have been granted immunity.
  
  
• In this connection, it must be noted that the far right-wing Tel Aviv government appears to be on the verge of launching an attack on Iran and has made this well known to the world. But it receives no censure for such threats from the US and its European allies, or for the horror it inflicted on Gaza a few months ago. Imagine the outcry if Iran threatened to attack Israel, or its army entered the territory of a neighboring society and inflicted cruelties largely on its civilian population for not submitting to national oppression.
  
  And yet Tel Aviv calls Iran an "existential" threat, despite Israel's nuclear weapons, its superior military force and its support from the entire American military apparatus, including 2,600 strategic nuclear warheads on hair-trigger readiness. But as we've noted before, the only concrete threat to Israel's existence would be if the US government withdrew its political, military and financial support.
  
  
• Washington's geopolitical interests are key to America's relationship to Iran and the Middle East in general. The US desires to control - or at minimum to keep out of "unfriendly" hands - the immense oil reserves possessed by Iran and neighboring Iraq. It fears a future alliance between these resource-rich developing countries, which also happen to be the only two nations in the world governed by Shi'ite Muslims. The US invaded to overthrow the "unfriendly", Sunni-backed Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein. But it can neither rely totally on its selected successor regime in Baghdad, nor has it yet been able to remove the theocratic government in Tehran, which is conservative domestically but puts forward an anti-imperialist foreign policy that drives the world's remaining superpower to distraction."

good post, but if you were to post this on another forum that had any jews on it, you would be labelled 'anti-semite'

 

[Mike Manson]

^^^Saying that as a Politician means career suicide in alotta western countries...

 

[NAMO]

yeah because jews like to throw around the word 'anti semite' wherever possible

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Israel is like spoiled child being funded by Mommy and Daddy. They have access to anything they want, but don't know how to properly use it. You are right as well, Hezbollah is nothing compared to Iran (even though they help fund). Isareal going to Iran is absurd. The US doesn't even want to go in, what makes you think Israel can? They need to handle Palestine first.



I'm done here. I never discuss politics. It's pointless. No one will be convinced of anything and it won't even matter if anyone is...unless you are out there on the line.