|
McCain Starts Bombing Run on Iran
"Lights Out in Tehran"
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
02/05/06 "Counterpunch"
-- -- Senator John McCain is on track for another rhetorical bombing
run. In Munich, he's been squaring up to Iran, gravely telling the
allies that the military option can't be ruled out if diplomatic
efforts fail to stop Iran developing a nuclear bomb: "Immediate UN
Security Council action is required to impose multilateral
sanctions, including a prohibition on investment, a travel ban, and
asset freezes for government leaders and nuclear scientists."
"Every option must remain on the table," McCain said. "There's
only one thing worse than military action, that is a nuclear armed
Iran."
The senior senator for Arizona is, thus far, sparing the Iranians
his riper bouts of pugilism, as when he bellowed for "lights out in
Belgrade" and for NATO to "cream" the Serbs back at the close of the
Nineties.
Perhaps Defense Secretary Rumsfeld has reminded McCain forcefully
that McCain could be writing condolence letters to a lot more war
widows in his home state if the Iranians want to remind Washington
that it holds some high cards of its own. As Andrew Cockburn wrote
here last week, in his piece "Bush's
130,000 Hostages". Iran recently hosted Moqtada al Sadr for a
high profile visit, in the course of which he obligingly pledged
that his militia, the Mahdi army, would retaliate for any American
attack on Iran. His spokesman quoted him as telling his hosts "If
any Islamic state, especially the Islamic Republic of Iran, is
attacked, the Mahdi Army would fight inside and outside Iraq."
"This warning should be taken seriously, " Andrew wrote. "The
Jaish al Mahdi, al Sadr's militia, has emerged as a formidable force
since its formation in 2003. Fifteen months ago, in November 2004,
when it was less well trained and equipped than today, this army
held off a determined assault by US Marines for three weeks in
Najaf."
Not long ago a top Republican from Illinois was confiding to a
Democratic lobbyist in DC that that "the fix is in for McCain to be
the nominee", but, as close scrutiny of his demeanor on tv confirms,
there a questions about McCain's health. His face and
mouth-movements suggest a stroke at some point in the recent past.
In Washington, some speak of a cancer scare.
The pundits love McCain because of his grandstanding on soft
money's baneful role in politics, thus garnering for himself a
reputation for willingness to court the enmity of his colleagues.
In fact colleagues in the Senate regard McCain as a mere
grandstander, as during the State of the Union last Tuesday when he
clapped and wagged his head vigorously as Bush hailed Congress for
working on earmark reform, because the federal budget has too many
special interest projects."
What Chavez Gave Morales
Bright spot. Frank Bardacke tells me he read in his local paper
down in Watsonville that at Evo Morales' investiture as president of
Bolivia, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela gave him a portrait of
Simon Bolivar made out of coca leaves. Folk art at its finest. Maybe
Bush could still upstage Chavez by sending Morales a conceptual
piece, in the form of a mirror, titled "Portrait of Bolivar (Before
I Sneezed)".
Bush Blows Centaur Vote
Back at the start of the 1970s President Nixon made a determined
bid to split his liberal opposition. His strategy was to present
himself as an environmentalist, a friend of Mother Earth. He
celebrated Earth Day, founded the Environmental Protection Agency in
1970 and signed the Endangered Species Act in 1973. and in so doing
proved himself a greener president than any since. Politically it
didn't help him, at least in the short term. Watergate soon
overwhelmed him, and the environmental movement displayed no
appetite to defend their crusader.
Listening to Bush on Tuesday night, I wondered whether he was
trying to play the same game. How many Greens today dreamed they
would hear George Bush call for more investment in " revolutionary
solar and wind technologies" , let alone "cutting-edge methods of
producing ethanol, not just from corn but from wood chips, stalks,
or switch grass. Our goal is to make this new kind of ethanol
practical and competitive within six years".
Of course Bush has zero credibility on such issues, as Ralph
Nader points out this weekend, here on this site. In his speech Bush
also called for money to go into "zero emission" coal plants and
into "clean, safe nuclear energy".
Bush's substantive policy proposals were a forlorn parade of
ghosts: "energy independence", a souvenir of the Carter era of the
1970s, when Carter made a oint of wearing a sweater and the White
House first ran, at least in part, on solar power. Ronald Reagan
made it his first order of business, after taking up residence at
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in 1981, to tear the solar panels down and
ship them off to Unity College in Maine, where they're apparently
still working, heating the cafeteria.
Bush has a solar set-up at his place in Crawford, and in his
first term, without much fanfare, the National Park Service
supervised the installation of a grid of 167 solar panels on
the roof of a maintenance shed to deliver electricity to the White
House landscape lighting and watering systems. Another solar
installation has been helping to provide hot water.A third has been
heating the water in the presidential pool.
Three or four years ago, in Santa Monica, I met the man who
installed that solar system atop the Carter White House, though I
forget his name. He was still angry. "It was Reagan's first act," he
said, gnashing his teeth.
Bush's call to reduce US "dependence" on Middle Eastern oil by 75
per cent by 2025 has zero credibility.
His other proposals were equally remote from political reality,
and sometimes comical. At one point he declared in ringing tones
that "Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most
egregious abuses of medical research--human cloning in all its forms
... creating or implanting embryos for experiments ... creating
human-animal hybrids ..."
"He just blew the centaur vote," I muttered to my dog Jasper,
imagining the inevitable reaction from the president of the Chiron
Society, deploring in hoarse terms an American president "pandering
to the old Lapith-sponsored slurs on the centaur community."
I waited for the post-speech commentators to pick up on the
human-animal hybrid ban, almost the only feature of interest in the
entire speech, but they passed it by. Jay Leno finally picked up on
the animal-human hybrid on Thursday night. He ran the relevant clip
from the speech, (where Bush had muffed the phrase, saying
huma...uh...animal-human hybrids), then cut to the Congressional
audience, where they'd put a dog's head on some woman member and had
the dog growl.
It seems that what Bush's "human-animal hybrids" ban actually
referred to is low-level Frankenstein-lab stuff like injecting human
DNA into pig's livers to make them more hospitable to transplants,
not centaurs and the like. But I'm sure human-hippopotami are being
plate-tested in the labs of General Foods, to ensure continued and
profitable voracity in an American market were humans are at max
capacity in bloating both themselvesw and the food industry's bottom
line.
Hybrid cars, running on gasoline or electricity, are all the rage
these days among the virtuous set, even though there are probably no
end savings in terms of total energy inputs into manufacture, also
in servicing and replacing those $4,000 batteries. A friend told me
the other day that the net gain in efficiency--not relating to top
speed or comfort -- of autos since the Model T is under ten per
cent. A man in Chico rebuilds Model T engines and gets terrific
efficiency out of those old four-cylinder engines.
Arc in Mystery Trip
The bulk of the president's speech was a series of defiant and
sometimes incoherent raptures about the great tasks of American
Empire. "Sometimes," Bush proclaimed, "it can seem that history is
turning in a wide arc, toward an unknown shore". What did this arc
portend? The answer came in a reprise of John Kennedy's famous call
in 1961 for America "to shoulder any burden" in the cause of
freedom. "Once again," cried Bush, " we accept the call of history
to deliver the oppressed, and move this world toward peace."
In substantive terms this means the war in Iraq which at least 60
per cent of the American people would like to see their troops quit
in the near future. In rhetorical terms it meant fierce presidential
invective against the government of Iran and the Hamas party in
Palestine, both of them denounced by Bush as undemocratic even
though their electoral credentials are stronger than his.
Rhetorical artifice prompted Bush to acknowledge the presence in
the gallery, right behind the First Lady, of the parents and widow
of Marine Staff Sergeant Dan Clay killed last month in Fallujah. The
reality is that Bush's ambassador in Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, is
now deep in friendly negotiations with the leadership of the very
Sunni insurgents who probably killed Sergeant Clay.
It was thus throughout the speech. Rhetoric and reality in
America have drifted further apart than ever, and the people know
it. Bush talked about a jobs boom in the US. The people know that
Ford and GM between them are laying off 60,000 workers. They know
that in Chicago 15,000 people lined up when Wal-Mart advertised 325
jobs. In Bush's six years in the White House America has lost about
16 per cent of its manufacturing jobs. The present jobs "boom" is
mostly for waitresses and bartenders.
"We move forward--optimistic about our country, faithful to its
cause, and confident of victories to come." That was the
presidential rhetoric. The reality is that most Americans are
depressed and pessimistic. Tax season is on us, and the rain here in
the Pacific Northwest isn't helping either.
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.) |