January 16, 2006
-
We're about to go to war with Iran.
The rhetoric is taking us down that path, and I just want to revisit some of what I said about the run-up to Iraq, trying to get some perspective and learn a few things.
When George W. Bush announced that he promoted a policy of 'regime change' in Iraq, I knew we were going to invade. This is how the Bush administration operates; they decide something, and then they engage in some fake debate about it, and then they do it. They do their best to pretend to have considered the issue, but the fact is that they've already made up their mind. This is how I know we're about to go to war with Iran.
Initially, I thought it was plausible that Hussein might have been developing WMD. But a cursory examination of how much money was flowing into Iraq showed me that the strategy of containment, while brutal to the Iraqi people, had effectively stopped weapons development. This guess was vindicated later; Bush had to adopt the vocabulary of 'weapons-related program activities' in order to pretend to declare victory. Those 'weapons-related program activities' included drawing bombs on coctail napkins. Iraq wasn't a threat to the US, and had no way of becoming a direct threat to the US.
Which leads us to the next argument put forth: Iraq could send terrorists, perhaps even terrorists who have their own WMD. But of course this was stupid and silly, because terrorists hated Hussein, and Hussein hated terrorists. Hussein would never attack the US in such a way, because he couldn't take credit for it. And the Islamist terrorists propped up as bugaboos for the American public hated Hussein because he was secular. In fact, Osama Bin Laden was reportedly very happy with the American invasion of Iraq, because it meant that Hussein was gone, and radical Islamism could begin to flourish.
And lo and behold none of these things turned out to be true. The Bush administration and assorted stenographers in the press advanced these ideas, but they're all bullshit. They were propped up to justify what was already a fait accomplis. The Bush administration was going to invade, and even UN weapons inspectors couldn't change that (Bush had the inspectors pulled out before they could reach a conclusion about Iraq's weapons).
So here we are again. Iran is in the crosshairs, because they have nuclear weapons programs. Militarily, the US can very easily invade Iran. But we're already unable to effectively occupy Iraq and Afghanistan, and Iran is much larger. As a military plan, it's a bad one, especially because there will be no exit strategy.
What BushCo wants is to control the oil economy at the source. We're invading and occupying OPEC nations. They even tried to get rid of Hugo Chavez, president of OPEC nation Venezuela. That's what military action in Iran will really be about, just as it was in Iraq.
Comments (2)
I was pretty sure that if he got re-elected, we would go to war with Iran during his second term. And that is terrifying to me. It will make Iraq look like a tea party.
a pretty good indicator that we're going to war is when we're already dropping bombs on somebody, as was the case with iraq many weeks prior to bush's official declaration of war.
and as far as iran is concerned, they were the second nation mentioned in bush's "axis of evil" speech, when he was testing the waters for an iraq invasion, so it's only reasonable to think they're next in line.... and, like you say, the bush admin makes up it's mind about somethin', then does it -- regardless of repurcussions, logic, smarts, or anything else -- and those things they abandon, it's only because it was merely a red-herring issue to begin with -- like social security and gay marriage.
the price tag for iraq has been estimated to reach 2-3 trillion dollars, and our military is stretched too thinly as it is, and the oil factor is becoming quite clear to everyone.... do you actually think the bush admin is foolhardy enough to wage an additional war and risk the future of the u.s.?
yeah, i do too.
Comments are closed.