Wednesday, May 28, 2008

"Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" McCain's Chant Becomes Closer to Fruition

Thomas Riggins

I remember a few months back seeing McCain on TV doing this little chant for his fellow moral defectives at a rally. Our intelligence agencies seemingly put the kibosh on this when they announced it looked like Iran had abandoned its nuclear weapons program, if it ever had one, several years ago. Then the International Atomic Energy Agency said they had no evidence of an arms program and that Iran was cooperating. Israel continued to insist the Iranians were trying to make the bomb and so did the Bushites here at home. The fact there is no evidence of the bomb is itself evidence of the bomb and the cleverness of the deceitful Iranians. So goes the logic of imperialism.

Now a wonderful gift has been handed to Bush. The NYT headlines on page 1 for Tuesday May 27:


The new IAEA report has fallen like manna from Heaven to feed the war frenzy gripping Bush-Cheney-McCain and their followers. They will assume a "We told you so" righteousness and the bombing plans will be revived with a vengeance. Already the TV news has reported a "high official" in the Bush administration has said that a bombing attack on Iran could come in a matter of a few months.

In the body of the article we are informed that the IAEA says much work must "still be done before definite conclusions about the nature of the program can be made." This will take many months.

There is one definite conclusion we can draw. The lack of definite conclusions will not stop Bush-Cheney-McCain from drawing definite conclusions. Iran should be more forth coming with the IAEA because the war maniacs in Washington are chomping at the bit and looking for any excuse to widen their middle east war.

1 comment:

Harold said...

Though few in the world want Iran to have nuclear military capabilities, logically, it makes all the sense in the world for the Islamic Republic to be at least considering acquiring nuclear capabilities as a deterrent to U.S. and Israeli aggression. Some have said that Iran would be "crazy" not to be pursuing such action. The fact is the U.S. once supported Iran's pursuit of nuclear energy, when the reasoning was that they could use nuclear energy for themselves and continue to export their crude to the West.

And while the IAEA may have concerns over Iran's actions, there has been no indication that Iran has done anything that violates international regulations or international law. The U.S., on the other hand, has repeatedly violated the United Nations Charter by openly threatening military strikes against Iran.

Besides being illegal and immoral, there are numerous reasons why an attack of any kind on Iran is a terrible idea - and would bring consequences that are contrary to U.S. interests.

Nevertheless, it continues to look like the hawks in Washington are pushing for strikes against Iran, and it becomes increasingly likely everyday that these strikes will happen before Bush and Co. leave office.

We can hope that the U.S. sees the error of it's warlike ways, one way or another, before this happens. While I realize that is highly unlikely, we can hold out hope.

I'm currently working on a paper that outlines the numerous reasons why attacking Iran is a very bad idea, for all parties involved. Once complete, I will probably submit it to PA for consideration.