|
Nuclear Iran? You bet!
By Mike Whitney
12/05/05 "ICH"
-- -- Is there a case to be made for allowing Iran to
develop nuclear weapons in the interests of peace? Or has all the
air been sucked out of the debate by American and Israeli demagogues
who dominate the airwaves?
The case for a nuclear Iran doesn’t emerge from fear-mongering or
saber-rattling, like the alternate view, but from reason and respect
for widely accepted facts; both of which are sadly missing from the
analysis appearing in the western media. Any reasonable person can
compile the evidence, weigh the facts, and draw the very same
conclusions as myself. Regrettably, they will have to swim against a
torrent of misinformation broadcast daily by an entire industry
devoted exclusively to deception and propaganda.
The problems in the Middle East are clear and indisputable despite
30 years of obfuscation designed to promote the continued occupation
of Palestine. Just this week, the UN General Assembly voted
overwhelmingly on 6 separate items which reinforced resolutions 242
and the 1967 borders of the Palestinian state.
Predictably, Israel and the US voted in the minority obstructing the
application of international law and sticking with decades of
willful “rejectionist” policies. John Bolton, the US “mad-hatter”
who now presides over Israel’s interests in the UN, ludicrously
called the balloting “irrelevant” because it fell short of the
expansionistic ambitions of Israel and jeopardized the further
colonization of the region by the US.
No one expected anything different.
Never the less, the media smokescreen has not obscured the brutal
realities of life under occupation nor has it concealed where the
blame ultimately lies. The language of state-terror,; carefully
crafted in Israeli think-tanks (“the generous offer”, “partner in
peace”, “infrastructure of terrorism” and “targeted assassinations”)
has done little to disguise 30 years of imperial politics supported
by a rotating list of toadies operating from the Oval Office.
Do we agree, so far?
Now, Washington has joined the Middle East tussle, flaunting its
public relations campaign; “The War on Terror”, to justify another
century of exploitation, resource-theft, and jack-boot subjugation
of the native people.
So, how does this relate to Iran?
Clearly, if things had gone smoothly in Iraq, Dick Cheney would be
unfurling the Stars and Stripes in Tehran right now. No serious
critic of the Bush administration’s Defense Policy Strategy for
preemptive warfare would dispute this.
No one.
So, how does one discourage American and Israeli aggression and
occupation?
Both Bush and Sharon have made it painfully clear that nothing short
of nuclear weapons will stop their regional ambitions. The war on
terror is just a smokescreen intended to mask the real goals of
disarming the world and seizing its resources.
So, how bad would it be to put nukes in the hands of the Mullahs?
Well, first of all we need to establish whether or not Iran has a
history of territorial aggression.
Have the Ayatollahs followed a policy of ignoring the UN for 30
years while they occupy an area that (according to the vast majority
of sovereign countries) belongs to the indigenous people?
No.
Do the Mullahs have a record of preemptive war on 6 continents,
massive, regionally-destabilizing covert activities, coup d’etats,
and an archipelago of concentration camps spread across the globe?
No.
Has Iran done anything that would indicate that it would use a
nuclear weapon against a civilian population like the United States
did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
No.
The real issue with Iran is that its leaders have shown the temerity
to control their own resources, which the corporate globalists and
Washington plutocrats claim as their own.
Isn’t that true?
So, if we are serious about peace in the region, and do not want to
see Iran degenerate into the dark-winter of American genocide that
we see in Iraq; it should be provided with the weaponry to defend
itself from foreign aggression.
After all, the policy of “Deterrents” worked for the US and Soviet
Union for nearly 40 years, preventing the probability of nuclear
holocaust.
Perhaps, it will work again.
Translate
this page
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |
