Regarding Iran: More From Our Allies
The rest of the world continues to monitor the US rhetoric and actions at the UN and in the press, and what they are hearing is not making them happy. Iran appears to be the next Iraq. Germany's Financial Times Deutschland considers the evidence and recognizes the pattern.
We don't know how many years it will be before Iran has a nuclear weapon at its disposal. Nor do we know if in the remaining two and a half years of his administration, American president George W. Bush is prepared to bomb Iran if it doesn't give up its nuclear program.
But we do know this: The American president says publicly that for the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program, even the use of tactical nuclear weapons is legitimate. Those familiar with the Pentagon warn that the U.S. Defense Department's most recent war plans against Iran are more than routine planning for a remote possibility.
...It's true that European officials report that according to the American administration's own statements, Washington isn't seriously considering an attack on Iran. But we know how much we can depend on such assurances: Bush and his confidantes have shown that they mislead the public, their allies, and if necessary their own officials, if they think it's necessary for the success of their foreign policy plans.
...The first option - the repeated bombardment of a country that has attacked no one - would be indefensible, even for the U.S., especially if Teheran could portray itself as a victim. The West could survive this, but will in the end be forced to accept a country that had recently been a victim of a massive American air attack as a nuclear power.
...The demands of the Europeans and of more sensible U.S. senators are correct: it is high time that the U.S. began negotiations with Iran, and at the conclusion of the proceedings, Washington must declare that it recognizes the regime in Iran and will conduct no violent regime change. [Emphasis added]
This op-ed piece is fairly balanced, noting the aggressiveness of the Iran stance and suggesting the assertion that Iran wants the enriched fuel only for energy purposes to be ludicrous. Still, the emphasis is on what the US should and must do to avoid another war in that volatile region.
The piece also cannily points out the Emperor's messianic belief that only he has the courage to bomb Iran, that his successors would never carry out such a drastic plan. The whole world has apparently figured out the modus operandi of this regime. If only the citizens of this nation would in time for the November elections.
We don't know how many years it will be before Iran has a nuclear weapon at its disposal. Nor do we know if in the remaining two and a half years of his administration, American president George W. Bush is prepared to bomb Iran if it doesn't give up its nuclear program.
But we do know this: The American president says publicly that for the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program, even the use of tactical nuclear weapons is legitimate. Those familiar with the Pentagon warn that the U.S. Defense Department's most recent war plans against Iran are more than routine planning for a remote possibility.
...It's true that European officials report that according to the American administration's own statements, Washington isn't seriously considering an attack on Iran. But we know how much we can depend on such assurances: Bush and his confidantes have shown that they mislead the public, their allies, and if necessary their own officials, if they think it's necessary for the success of their foreign policy plans.
...The first option - the repeated bombardment of a country that has attacked no one - would be indefensible, even for the U.S., especially if Teheran could portray itself as a victim. The West could survive this, but will in the end be forced to accept a country that had recently been a victim of a massive American air attack as a nuclear power.
...The demands of the Europeans and of more sensible U.S. senators are correct: it is high time that the U.S. began negotiations with Iran, and at the conclusion of the proceedings, Washington must declare that it recognizes the regime in Iran and will conduct no violent regime change. [Emphasis added]
This op-ed piece is fairly balanced, noting the aggressiveness of the Iran stance and suggesting the assertion that Iran wants the enriched fuel only for energy purposes to be ludicrous. Still, the emphasis is on what the US should and must do to avoid another war in that volatile region.
The piece also cannily points out the Emperor's messianic belief that only he has the courage to bomb Iran, that his successors would never carry out such a drastic plan. The whole world has apparently figured out the modus operandi of this regime. If only the citizens of this nation would in time for the November elections.
posted by Diane at 5:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home