Posts tagged Iran
Are we being told to “take out Iran’s nuclear power” because they are a threat to Israel—or because it would make it more difficult to launch another regime change campaign in the country?
Make sure to check the articles at the very bottom, gold.
Article from the surprisingly striking MilwaukeeStory.com
The Iran question is often posed, as it was in last week’s debate to Ron Paul, as a hypothetical. If Iran was proven to have a nuclear weapon what steps would be taken by the US to assure they did not attack Israel? The establishment media is skillful in the presentation and structure of the debate. The question assumes it is the responsibility of the US to protect Israel from a strike by Iran. But more importantly it assumes that Iran has the ability and strategic desire to attack Israel.
This unclassified assessment of Iran’s military capability by the US Department of Defense clearly states that “To ensure regime survival, Iran’s security strategy is based first on deterring an attack.”
The document goes on to make this key statement, “Iran’s nuclear program and its willingness to keep open the possibility of developing nuclear weapons is a central part of its deterrent strategy.”
But what if the unpredictable Ahmadinejad and company in Tehran suddenly changed their strategy and decided to go on the offensive? Fortunately they would not have the capability according to the DoD which states, “At present Iran’s forces are sufficent to deter or defend against conventional threats from Iran’s weaker neighbors such as post-war Iraq, the GCC, Azerbaijan or Afghanistan but lack the air power and logistical ability to power much beyond Iran’s boarders or to confront regional powers such as Turkey or Israel.”Stated simply Iran wants to obtain the necessary weapons to defend itself in a bad neighborhood where it finds itself surrounded by a global superpower.
The hyping of the potential nuclear program in Iran is Washington’s attempt to establish a pretext that would garner public support for a strike/destabilization campaign on Iran. The obvious goal would be regime change.
So the real reason the Pentagon sees a nuclear program in Iran as a threat is not because it would be used as a first strike weapon against Israel, but because it would make it more difficult for the US and its allies to take out the regime in Tehran.
Many in Washington would love to have cooperative leadership in place in Tehran because it would tilt the control of world energy resources sharply in favor of the US and its allies. But as long as Iran is rogue and friendly with Russia and China we can expect to hear about Iran’s potential nuclear program and the danger it presents Israel and the world.
In the light of these facts the current debate in the Republican presidential primary seems like nothing but propaganda, save the argument made by Ron Paul.
A great look at the machinations behind the scenes and the people who wield incredible power behind the scenes in our government and by slopping their mass to one side of the boat or the other can steer the great ship America to horrible ends.
When The Pentagon is spending billions per year and employing nearly 30,000 people purely for the purpose of “recruitment, public relations and advertising” it might help to have a little healthy skepticism.
A brilliant analysis from a man who knows exactly what he’s talking about. Does it sound familiar? Please see an earlier post about the translation errors in recent quotes from Ahmadinejad about “wiping Israel off the map.”
Do you trust Michelle Bombmann and Rick “Sandstorm” Santorum or proven experts like Michael Scheuer and Inspector Ritter for your advice on wether to bomb or not bomb Iran to eliminate their alleged nuclear weapons.
Another zinger from Inspector Ritter:
The incredibly important (and nearly always overlooked) issue of President Ahmadinejad’s alleged quote about “wiping Israel off the map” is discussed at length by Dr. Paul and Sean Hannity.
This quote is one of the most important in the history of the world as it is used as a motivator for war and a weapon against Iran on a weekly basis.
For more must-see, must-know, must-think-about detail on this quote please see a previous post on this site: “Are we being lied to again about Iran?”
*Comment: We put iron-clad sanctions on Iraq and 500,000 children died from lack of medical supplies. Now the same tactical luminaries are planning on doing the same thing to Iran. Grreeeeaaaat. In theory, they sound like effective means to creating change. In reality, all it really does is piss off the people, make them rally against a perceived threat, and allow the wealthy leaders to continue their lives as is. ::slapping forehead::
The Folly of Sanctions by Ron Paul:
Many people have the misconception that sanctions are an effective means to encourage a change of behavior in another country without war. However, imposing sanctions and blockades are not only an act of war according to international law, they are most often the first step toward a real war starting with a bombing campaign. Sanctions were the first step in our wars against Iraq and Libya, and now more sanctions planned against Syria and Iran are leading down the same destructive path.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) latest report, just out this month, there is no evidence that Iran has diverted enriched uranium from the peaceful and lawful generation of power toward building a nuclear weapon. According to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has every right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Unfortunately, US foreign policy has boxed Iran into a corner where they may view development of a nuclear weapon as the only way to maintain sovereignty.
They are surrounded by unfriendly nuclear powers and history has shown that having a nuclear weapon is the best way to avoid being bombed or invaded. The unintended consequences of our confrontational policies toward Iran may be to actually encourage them to seek nuclear weapons capabilities. We should be using diplomacy rather than threats and hostility.
Although it’s easy to judge this as more “crazy Arabs” hell bent on the destruction of all things holy to the western world; can we use our imagination for a second and see things from their perspective?
For ten years in the 90′s and 00′s, Iraq was held under the grip of sanctions and 500,000 children died from lack of medical care.
Might there be a logical reaction that the sanction we have now placed on Iran could bear similar fruit?
(Reuters) – Iranian protesters stormed two British Embassy compounds in Tehran Tuesday, smashing windows, hurling petrol bombs and burning the British flag in a protest against sanctions imposed by Britain, live Iranian television showed.
Iran’s semi-official Mehr news agency said protesters took six British diplomatic staff hostage from an embassy compound in the north of the city but it withdrew the story from its website minutes later without giving any explanation.
The attacks followed the rapid approval by Iran’s Guardian Council of a parliamentary bill compelling the government to expel the British ambassador in retaliation for the sanctions. A lawmaker had also warned Sunday that angry Iranians could storm the British Embassy as they did the U.S. mission in 1979.
Several dozen protesters broke away from a crowd of a few hundred protesters outside the main embassy compound in downtown Tehran, scaled the embassy gates and went inside.
Protesters pulled down the British flag, burned it, and put up the Iranian flag, Iranian news agencies and news pictures showed. Inside, the demonstrators threw stones and petrol bombs. One waved a framed picture of Queen Elizabeth, state TV showed.
Others carried the royal crest out through the embassy gate as police stood by, pictures carried by the official Fars news agency showed.
The British Foreign Office said it was outraged.
“There has been a incursion by a significant number of demonstrators into our Embassy premises, including vandalism to our property,” the Foreign Office said in a statement. “This is a fluid situation and details are still emerging. We are outraged by this. It is utterly unacceptable and we condemn it.
The Iranian government had a duty under international law to protect diplomats and London expected it to bring the situation under control and ensure the safety of the staff, the Foreign Office said.
Demonstrators waved flags symbolizing martyrdom and held up portraits of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Despite the hysteria we hear about Iran and their alleged financing/support of terrorist organizations, I can’t blame them for wanting a nuclear weapon. They’re surrounded by enemies and have just seen Libya give up their weapons only to be pummeled into the ground.
Here we see US-based Halliburton supplying nuclear supplies to Iran. If it weren’t for the blatant hypocrisy I see in this I might not even care, but when Cheney and his cronies sound the alarm about Iran and their firms end up supplying them I can’t hold back.
If you’re fired up about “Achmadinnerjacket’s” (Ahmadinejad) comments about “wiping Israel” check out this previous post on the subject; we might be losing a LOT in translation.
Is it possible that the financial, military and public support for Israel amongst the people and politicians of The United States actually make Israel more likely to be attacked?
CIA veteran Michael Scheuer and The Judge sound off on both the counter-intuitive and the counter-productive actions we’re taking in the vast quagmire that is the middle east.
I’ll concede than the Iranian government is a significantly nutty bunch but if they’re really behind this why is their a cookie trail of clues leading right back to them? Robert Baer’s thoughts in this very telling vid are striking, “Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy, not characteristic of Iran at all!”
Remember folks, Jesus said “Blessed are the peace makers, not “Blessed are the bomb makers.”
Perhaps the new allegations that Iran is actively trying to commit terrorism in The United States are legitimate, but would it be something entirely new and different if this was a fabrication? Or at least a modification of the truth?
While on this topic of Iran and our perception of the nation, we should discuss Ahmadinejad’s comments related to “wiping Israel off the map.” These words are continuously repeated and used to justify the anger, angst and aggression “good Americans” are supposed to have when they think of Iran; but are the statements accurate?
Ahmadinejad was quoting the long deceased Ayatollah Khomeini for the aformentioned threatening speech—understandably it is bothersome.
However, Juan Cole a professor of modern middle eastern history at the University of Michigan translates his words as, “this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.” He didn’t say the country or the Israeli people; rather the zionist regime that is occupying and running the country should vanish.
From my limited perspective, this is all-to-similar to the situation during the Cold War when Nikita Khrushev was quoted as saying to America, “We will bury you!!” However, there is a stark contrast to different translations; according to the Translation Research Group the quote should be translated as, “Whether you like it or not, we will be present at your burial.” While this is hardly a love and bunnies statement, it is radically different than what we’ve been told and aims at the longevity of The Soviet Union rather than an attack on The United States.
Blessed are the peacemakers indeed. Let’s keep that in mind. Amen.