Well, is it? According to Condoleezza Rice, our esteemed Second Lady, Iran is the neverending threat to world peace we’ve all been waiting for since the Soviet Union collapsed:
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described Iran as “increasingly dangerous” and refused to rule out US military action if Tehran refuses to suspend its nuclear program. […]
“This is a relationship that is, I think, increasingly difficult in a country that is increasingly dangerous,” the chief US diplomat told CNBC television.
Rice outlined Washington’s numerous complaints about Iran, saying it supports terrorism, backs armed militias threatening US forces in Iraq and pursues technologies “that would lead to a nuclear weapon.”
Now, I know that Iran’s government is evil incarnate. I’m well aware that they do not allow dissent, execute teenagers for homosexuality, and enforce a strict religious code on their people. I know their nutjob of a President is a holocaust revisionist, and hates Israel enough to wish it wiped off the face of the earth. But let’s be realistic here.
When did Iran invade another country in order to guarantee access to its oil? In fact, when was the last time Iran invaded or occupied any country? How many civil airliners has Iran’s military shot down “by mistake?” When was the last time that Iran’s intelligence services overthrew a democratically elected government in another country and installed a dictator in its place, a man who brutalized and terrorized his own people? Has Iran supported, sheltered and armed terrorists that have carried out terror attacks against civilians inside the United States? Has Iran ever supported a rogue regime to enable it to prosecute an illegal war of aggression against the United States using weapons of mass destruction? And has Iran ever labeled another nation part of an “axis of evil” or threatened to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state?
Of course, if you followed the links I provided above, you would realize that Iran has done none of those things, but another country with which we are all familiar is guilty of each one of the events described in the articles and reports to which the links in the paragraph above led. The name of that country is the United States of America.
(cont.)
America deposed the democratically elected regime in Iran of Prime Minister Mossadeq in 1953, and installed the brutal regime of the Shah of Iran, our ally and puppet, in it’s place. The Shah, with our support, brutally repressed dissent in Iran through the use of torture and other abusive measures carried out by his secret police, the infamous SAVAK, and also purchased billions of dollars of arms from American defense contractors.
Once the Shah was overthrown, we supported the megalomaniacal Saddam Hussein in the war he commenced against Iran to acquire the oil rich fields of Khuzestan in southwestern Iran, even going so far as to help Saddam acquire the means to make chemical weapons which he then used against his own people as well as the Iranians. More recently the Bush administration has financed terrorist groups such as MEK and Jundallah to carry out terrorist attacks inside
Iran against innocent civilians, while also drawing up plans for military strikes against Iran in which the use of nuclear weapons may be employed.
So, the question really shouldn’t be how much of a danger Iran has become to the United States. The proper questions to ask are why has the United States consistently carried out policies over the past 6 decades that have led to the deaths, directly or indirectly, of millions of Iranians, undermined the current Iranian government with violence, economic sanctions and threats of violent regime change and authorized the US military to prepare plans to attack Iran at a moment’s notice?
I suspect the answer to that question can be found right here:
… At the end of 2000, Iran had the second largest natural gas reserves (23 trillion cubic meters) and the fifth largest crude oil reserves [89.7 billion barrels (Gbbl)] in the world according to the Oil & Gas Journal (2000b). These figures apparently do not include 1999 or 2000 Iranian reserve additions. […]
On 29 October 2004 Iran and China announced the signing of a deal on Chinese investment in Iran’s oil fields and the long-term sale of Iranian natural gas to China that could eventually be worth $100 billion. The gas deal entails the annual export of some 10 million tons of Iranian liquefied natural gas (LNG) for a 25-year period. The deal could eventually reach 15-20m tons a year, taking the total value to as much as $200bn. Delivery could not begin for at least five years, as Iran must first build the plants to liquefy the natural gas. This stunning development was widely considered a major blow to the Bush administration’s sanctions on Iran.
After all, Bush himself has confessed we are in Iraq for the oil. The neoconservative organization, the Project for a New American Century, whose members include Vice President Cheney and many current and former members of the Bush administration, has had its sights set on regime change in Iran for the very same reason that they favored an invasion of Iraq: to assure access to Middle Eastern oil.
In 1992, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney had a strategy report drafted for the Department of Defense, written by Paul Wolfowitz, then Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy. In it, the U.S. government was urged, as the world’s sole remaining Superpower, to move aggressively and militarily around the globe. The report called for pre-emptive attacks and ad hoc coalitions, but said that the U.S. should be ready to act alone when “collective action cannot be orchestrated.” The central strategy was to “establish and protect a new order” that accounts “sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership,” while at the same time maintaining a military dominance capable of “deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.” Wolfowitz outlined plans for military intervention in Iraq as an action necessary to assure “access to vital raw material, primarily Persian Gulf oil” and to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and threats from terrorism.
We would be fools not to take them at their word. And we would be equally fools to believe the rhetoric issuing from the mouths of Bush administration officials, such as Secretary Rice, when they claim Iran is the greatest threat to peace in the world, and the greatest danger to our national security. Unfortunately, the truth is that the greatest threat to our nation now sits in the Oval Office of the White House dreaming of initiating more wars in the Middle East, secure in the delusional belief that he has been appointed by God to carry out these “holy wars” in his name.
.
Australian Defence Minister Brendan Nelson has admitted that securing oil supplies is a key factor behind the presence of Australian troops in Iraq. He said maintaining “resource security” in the Middle East was a priority.
…
● Australia backtracks on Iraq war oil link claim
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Treasurer Peter Costello appeared separately on national television to insist that Australia’s main reason for maintaining troops in Iraq was to help defeat al-Qaeda.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Heh heh, its good to know our allies are on the same high moral ground as ourselves.
Is anyone surprised that “we have seen the enemy and he is us”! How the hell is it remotely possible that there are folks out there that willingly except as gospel the effing liars’ pronouncements as truths but there are tons of idiots willing to accept his truths as self evedent.
Well i gotta tell anyone listening that unless the goddamned leadership of the dems grows a pretty quick pair, we are all going to have to start wearing brown shirts in the very near future.
So, when anyone tells you that it is all being done in the service of making the US safer and stronger you can just laugh at the morons- then run!It is all we can do at this time- run, hide, organize, and then emerge in full attack mode. If needed, formation of a new party; or if needed, pick the few that are willing to support the true USA and go to the mat for them.
The present situation is simply no longer acceptable.
If anyone wants to see what is happening just wach tomorrow (sunday) am talkies. That should open up a few eyes and a few is a start.
See youall at the barricades!!!!!!!!!!!!
Very interesting post except for one little (but very important) piece of information: The “Wiped of the map/face of the earth” accusation has now been well documented as being a canard.
This is an interesting read as well.
Thanks for the links!
The Lie that will never die apparently no matter how many times it is debunked. Ahmadinejad can say enough stupid things on his own-we don’t have to put words in his mouth.
Quite! Although it is my contention that the “stupid” things that he comes up with are not meant for us but for the Mideast. What sounds ‘stupid’ to us can make a helluva lot of sense when viewed within someone else’s context.
meanwhile, as condi defines iran as the greatest threat to world peace, the real threat…the one that’s got nuclear weapons, delivery systems, the proven ability to destroy satellites, and a huge army…get’s the white
glove treatment, going so far as to provide them with the iran did it excuse:
just another nameless /senior us official, and one more diplomatic failure on the BushCo™ resume.
lTMF’sA
You just gave answer #358 to the general question- Why do they hate us? That is one country’s laundry list. We have got to stop fucking with people. Stop using our armies to create markets for our weapons. Its not ethical.
Thanks for this Steve. This is good stuff on our past dealings with the Iranians.
Yes BIG OIL is involved. But who is pushing the US into an attack on Iran? BP? Exxon-Mobil? Bullshit. Condi Rice now takes her orders from Livni representing Israel’s perceived best interests. A second nuclear power in the Middle East is a risk to Israel’s future, namely, the annexation of the West Bank and the final screwing of the Palestinians.
Olmert only seems to be Israel’s greatest asshole. In truth, he is following the dictates of Israel’s major political parties: to fuck the Palestinians twice over.
you know, the Saudis are just as concerned about Iran as Israel. It’s really disingenuous to simplify everything that goes on in the Middle East down to Israel’s interests. It is one of the most important factors, but it is not the only one.
Booman, you are a great blogger but you do have blinkers on when it comes to Israel. Of course, there are other interests at play but were it not for the power of the Israel Lobby in Washington, across the board in the US even, a power that it uses in that it serves as the gate through which other lobbies such as “this one” must pass in order to gain access to the levers of US power, then perhaps the US would not be in the mess that it is now. In the case of Bandar, however, the game is a bit more complicated that just helping the Saudi lobby; his was more akin to a one man show, but that’s another story.
Respectfully, I do not have blinkers on about the role of right-wing Israelis in setting U.S. foreign policy. That is precisely why I get upset by people that needlessly exaggerate that influence or attempt to explain EVERYTHING by reference to it.
Iran has been in a simmering war with the United States since the day the Shah fled. Blame can be placed on both sides in how they have acted.
But our opposition to Iran is informed by a plethora of interests, not to mention a cycle of revenge. Israel plays an important and very complicated role in this relationship, but it is only one piece.
Need I remind you that is was Israel that supplied the weapons to Iran in the Iran-Contra affair?
Whether Israel is only one piece or not, nobody can deny that it is leading the offensive. Who else is in a position to attack Iran except Israel and the US? Here is some interesting propaganda which provides details about how Israel would engage Iran and the problems it forsees militaristically:
I posted this diary on Daily Kos several months ago, which is directly relevant to Israel’s intents vis a vis Iran, and possibly America’s involvement:
The BBC and Israeli Propaganda
by shergald
Sat Nov 11, 2006 at 05:28:22 AM PDT
Read Cook’s article concerning the strategic details. It is perhaps other interests like Big Oil or the Saudi regime that spurs Israel on, but there seems to be little argument here as to who the ultimate task will likely fall to.
And Iran helped the US in Afghanistan! Such idiosyncratic alliances do not mean much even if, admittedly, they do have an impact on the ‘big picture’.
As for the “blinkers” thing, I did not mean to offend. Sorry if I did.
A better way of thinking about Iran is to look at the relationship they had with us prior to their revolution. And I do not mean only our support for the Shah and all the negatives associated with that.
They were our military/industrial complex’s LARGEST customer. We were making gobs of money in their oil industry. Donald Rumsfeld was our Sec. of Defense and Cheney was Ford’s chief of staff when our military aid reached its peak. You’ve seen them roll back the clock on the reforms of the 1970’s, like FISA. Well, the want to roll back the clock on the Iranian revolution too. It has been bad for business. Very bad. They would oppose Iran even if Israel didn’t exist.
[…] the return to normalcy of U.S.-Iran relations has been impeded by a special relationship between the global hegemon and a small but powerful regional ally. In the process, the United States has alienated Iran, a major regional hegemon and a country that in the long term is critical to U.S. national interests. – James A. Bill
Thus, when you write that “they would oppose Iran even if Israel didn’t exist,” you may be right, Booman [I couldn’t say as that’s not my field of expertise) but certainly only up to a point if one is to give credence to Bill’s analysis quoted above.
In my opinion, Israel provides more of an excuse than a prime motivating force.
Dick Cheney isn’t Jewish and I don’t think he is even more than nominally Christian. Ditto for Rumsfeld. Ditto for James Woolsey. Ditto for Brzezinski. Ditto for Scooter Libby.
They find kindred spirits in people like Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, who definitely have some genuine interest in Israel’s security.
And so they use them. And they use Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.
But where does the real power reside?
On that note, perhaps the final word belongs to you … but also to Norman G. Finkelstein who writes: In the current fractious debate over the role of the Israel Lobby in the formulation and execution of US policies in the Middle East, the “either-or” framework — giving primacy to either the Israel Lobby or to U.S. strategic interests — isn’t, in my opinion, very useful. It’s not either/or, he argues.
Fair enough! Indeed when one considers the industrial military complex and the role that the conflict in Palestine plays in feeding that complex, both in situ and in its repercussions around the World, the linkage between the two seems fairly obvious, to wit:
Support for the continuation of mayhem in that region of the World is thus not limited to ultra-right Zionist Jews. Which brings us back to Iran …
Exactly. The problem is much bigger than the I/P conflict. Energy is the prime mover, defense contracts are the second biggest mover. The game is played at a high level. And on the highest level no one cares what religion anyone else is.
Note that our militarism hasn’t got us fighting wars against Argentina or Brazil – both of which recently got access to the same nuclear technology that Iran is seeking. But for some reason, we have Iran in the cross hair and pro-Israeli agents regularly lobby the US to attack Iran – that’s not background “militarism” at work – that’s Israel at work, period.
Baloney.
First of all, ask any Argentinian about how America deals with them.
Second, look at how we treat Chavez as compared to non-oil producing Latin American leaders that are on the left.
Third, look up how much military hardware we sold to Iran during the Ford administration.
Finally, our friends in the Gulf hate Iran every bit as much as the Israelis do. It was the Saudis that told Bush we couldn’t leave Iraq or they would fund a proxy war against the Shi’ite government and it was the Saudis that decided to help us create an anti-Hizbollah shock force in Lebanon.
We deal with Argentina quite nicely and invest heavily in their economy now that their bubble is over.
We certainly don’t threaten to bomb them just because they’re developing a civilian nuclear program – the same sort of program that Iran is seeking.
The point being: our militarism is not the explanation for our attitude towards Iran, nor is Iran’s civilian, IAEA-monitored, American-instigated nuclear program.
The explanation for our urge to bomb Iran is primarily and perhaps exclusively in the in pro-Israeli lobbyists who have made a daily habit of pressing for a US-Iran war.
Nor is this a big secret:
“These regular mailings from the Israel Project to “opinion agents” such as yours truly are, in effect, a public relations campaign for war. The monthly missives I receive from this one pro-Israel lobby are a small part of a broader effort to “secure the information stream” and prep Americans for the next exotic stop in the war on terror: sunny Iran. …
Let me light a lantern in a bell tower for my fellow Americans. You must awake. There are PR armies of the night with shiny media kits and Dick-Cheneyfied “intelligence” reports quietly at work right now, building momentum for a strike on Iran and a vast broadening of this too costly–and let’s just say it–too crazy war on terror.”
http://uscatholic.claretians.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=12368&news_iv_ctrl=0&abb
r=usc_&JServSessionIdr011=69rqc8s7o2.app14b
FWIW, Booman, here is a good essay that addresses some of the issues in this thread: Has A Right-Wing Zionist Cabal Hijacked The White House?
Also I have just started reading Murray Friedman’s The Neoconservative Revolution – Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy. I could not offer a resume at this point but a review can be found here: The Legacy of the Trotskyite Right.
.
Even before finishing the military operation, Israel needs to hammer home “the Iranian-Hizbullah-Syrian axis of terror” message. By doing so, he said Israel would create legitimacy for future action against Hizbullah, or even against Iran.
“Iranian’s President Ahmadinejad doesn’t only want to erase Israel off the map, he wants to erase the map and build Islamic components. Lebanon is the clearest example, and we need to show that.”
Jerusalem Post
Ra’anan Gissin, prime minister Ariel Sharon’s recently sidelined, gravel-voiced spokesman, may be watching the current crisis from his living room, but he had advice for how Israel should be waging the public relations campaign: “Emphasize Iran, Iran and Iran.”
≈ Cross-posted from Sirocco’s diary in August 2006 —
Famous Author Excoriates Israel ≈
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Mundus vult decipe.
but I see the horseshit pile did not cease. It strikes me that in all the world the greatest number of people, Muslims in this case, have been selected for a genocidal type of war based upon their belief systems. That plus the fact that they are sitting on top of our oil.
Gee, I thought the US and Russia each had the capacity to nuke the entire surface of the world no less than seven times at the height of the cold war. With the cold war “over” then who could profit from all that arms building/trading/designing.
The Muslims in fact even when presented with the “wonderous” splendor that is western “civilization” have in fact rejected it in favor of religious beliefs, at least that is what we are told.
So in summary even Americans don’t all buy this crap anymore even if our “media” says we do.
StevenD, Do your homework and stop being sloppy:
SOURCE: http://www.nyblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=1786
No, BooMan. The most dangerous Nation on Earth is the United States under Bush-Cheney.
You said:
“It’s really disingenuous to simplify everything that goes on in the Middle East down to Israel’s interests.”
Nothing simple about it. The Neo-conservative movement/ideology is what drives this country’s foreign policy. Period.
Read this and see if you disagree that that is what all the evidence now points to:
http://www.counterpunch.org/christison1213.html
My “Most Dangerous Nation” list, in order of severity.