|
Nuke Iran,
Blame the Jews
Who
Benefits from the Israel-Lebanon Flare-Up?
By
Jorge Hirsch
07/24/06 "Information
Clearing House" -- -- Members of the
Jewish faith and others
correctly point out that
Jews are often blamed for the sins of others. They
may be about to be proven right again, in a big way. The
current conflict may escalate to the point where
the US will
use nuclear weapons against Iran, in what will be
the first use of nuclear weapons in war since Nagasaki.
And the world will
blame it on the Jews.
Israel's
hugely disproportionate response to Hezbollah's
actions is causing
immense suffering, is in blatant violation of the
Geneva conventions, and deserves the strongest of
condemnations. It is especially important for Jews today
to distance themselves from
Israel's immoral government policies and
US's support for them. Fortunately some are doing
this
[1],
[2],
[3], unfortunately, many are not.
"Thousands of American Jews clogged the streets" in
New York and elsewhere in the US
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4],
[5],
[6],
[7],
[8] in
support of Israel's actions, reports the Jerusalem
Post. Both Houses of the US Congress have just passed
solidly backed bipartisan resolutions supporting
Israel's actions in Lebanon
[1],
[2], to "solidify long-term backing of Jewish
voters" according to
the Washington Post.
The irony is, Israel's war crimes are going to be
dwarfed in comparison to the crime against humanity that
will take place if the
US uses nuclear weapons against Iran. Israel, by its
disproportionate reaction and by accusing Iran (without
proof) of being behind Hezbollah's actions
[1],
[2],
[3] ,
[4], will be seen as having played a key role if the
conflict escalates to engulf Iran and the United States.
Yet the motivation for those that want this to happen
[1],
[2] is not to
ensure Israel's hegemony in the
Middle East, rather it is to ensure
US hegemony in the world.
Israel's Interests
It goes without saying that Israel would benefit from
the destruction of Hezbollah. Yet it is hard to see how
the
indiscriminate attack against Lebanon that is taking
place will achieve anything other than
strengthening the already strong support for Hezbollah
in Lebanon and elsewhere in the Arab world. Shmuel
Rosner argues in a Haaretz OpEd that Israel is
"America's deadly messenger", being used to promote
Bush's
"democracy agenda". It certainly appears that
Israel's current actions are irrational and
self-destructive. Unless
their real aim is to
draw Syria and Iran into the conflict, following
directions from Washington. At the very least it is
clear that Israel would not be doing this in the absence
of a guarantee from the US that it will intervene if the
conflict widens, which in any event
Bush has already publicly announced.
If
Iran enters the conflict and shoots a single missile
against Israel,
the US will step in and destroy the military
infrastructure of Iran by aerial bombardment. As
suggested by
Seymour Hersh and others
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4], this is likely to involve the US use of
nuclear "bunker busters".
It has been predicted that if the US or Israel attack
Iran, Iran will
unleash Hezbollah who will carry out devastating attacks
against Israel.
"Hizbollah was also seen as a means of tying our hands
on the Iranian nuclear threat," says an Israeli
official. Well, we are in the dress rehersal, and we are
seeing that despite all the hype,
Hezbollah is a paper tiger. Green light for the
Iran attack.
Iran's Interests
What is really unusual about the current flare-up in the
Middle East is the barrage of strident denunciations
against Iran, from the
Bush
administration, politicians
from across the political spectrum
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4],
[5],
[6], and the mainstream media
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4], that uniformly accuse Iran (without presenting
evidence) of being behind the Hezbollah actions. This
has never happened before when there was
conflict in Lebanon where Hezbollah was involved,
why now?
One argument is
Ahmadinejad's stated animosity against Israel.
However, that has been
Iran's stated position since 1979.
The other argument is that
Iran is trying to "divert attention" from the
nuclear issue. That defies the most elementary
logic. If Iran was really intent in getting nuclear
weapons and destroying Israel, it would try to keep
things as quiet as possible until it gets those nuclear
weapons,
several years into the future.
The reality is that, whether one ascribes to Iran
evil or benign intentions, Iran draws no benefit
whatsoever from the current turmoil in Lebanon. Neither
does Syria. Consequently the rhetoric from the US and
Israel suggests a
deliberate attempt to draw Syria and Iran into the
conflict.
The US's Interests
A US
attack on Iran has been
predicted by
analysts for several years. The US policy vis-a-vis
Iran is clearly directed towards confrontation rather
than accommodation. There are many reasons for the US to
attack Iran, including the control of energy resources,
suppression of a regional power opposite to US and
Israeli interests, etc. However I have
argued for many months that the key reason for the
US to seek a military confrontation with Iran is that it
will
"force" the US to cross the nuclear threshold and
use low yield nuclear weapons against Iranian
installations. And this is seen as essential to further
US geopolitical goals.
The United States used nuclear weapons against Japan
not because it had to. It did so to demonstrate to the
world that it was in possession of a new weapon that
packed the destructive power of thousands of bombing
missions into a single one.
To tell the rest of the world, beware.
Since then, it has spent
over 5 trillion dollars in building up its nuclear
arsenal, but nuclear weapons have become
"unusable" after 60 years of non-use.
America has achieved nuclear primacy but it is
useless, until it shows that nuclear weapons are usable
again.
Everything has been
put in place. The US is likely to have obtained
classified "intelligence" concerning hidden Iranian
chemical and
biological underground facilities. Low yield
B61-11 nuclear bunker busters must have been
deployed, just in case
"surprising military developments" give rise to
"military necessity". Once Iran is drawn into a
conflict and shoots a single missile against Israel or
US forces in the region, the US administration will
argue that the next Iranian missile could carry
chemical or
biological warheads and cause untold casualties
among Americans, Iraqis or Israelis. A low yield nuclear
bunker buster will be touted as the most "humane" way to
prevent further loss of life.
Why it may happen
In 1941, a
vast military effort was started by the United
States to create nuclear weapons, culminating in the
Trinity test and subsequent bombings of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki in 1945. The effort was shrouded in secrecy and
any
moral qualms were set aside.
When it succeeded, it was argued that
many American and Japanese lives had been saved by
nuking Japan into surrender.
Any speculation during the period 1941-1945 that the
United States had 100,000 people devoted to create a
secret weapon million-fold more powerful than any known
weapon would have been dismissed as the ultimate
"conspiracy theory".
Similarly,
much evidence indicates that a deliberate project,
shrouded in secrecy, exists today that will culminate in
the nuking of Iran, to
"save lives". Many are
privy to parts of the plan, as
Seymour Hersh revealed, only
a few know the plan in its entirety. Low-yield
nuclear bunker busters will be used,
untested but as
reliable as the untested
"Little Boy" that leveled Hiroshima. Americans will
buy the "military necessity" argument because it will be
true: American troops in Iraq will be sitting ducks
facing Iranian missiles, with or without WMD warheads.
After the US uses nuclear weapons again, it will have
established the usability of its nuclear arsenal against
non-nuclear countries. It will be possible to
wage war "on the cheap", saving many American lives
in future conflicts. "Support the troops" is the one
thing all Americans, no matter how diverse their views
are, agree on.
It should not be allowed to happen.
The President has sole authority to order the use of
nuclear weapons against Iran. We know from previous
actions of this administration what
Bush,
Cheney
and
Rumsfeld
are capable of. There have been
radical changes in US nuclear weapons policies and
in
preemption "doctrine", and the Bush announcement
that
the nuclear option is "on the table". In response,
there needs to be a strong groundswell call to
restrict the absolute presidential authority of this
President to order the use of nuclear weapons against
Iran. By the general public, by
"antinuclear" organizations, by scientific,
political and professional organizations. To push
Congress into action before it is too late. Without a
"nuclear option", the US will be more interested in
negotiation than in confrontation with Iran.
Cui Bono?
In the short term, Israel certainly will benefit from
the destruction of Iran's military capabilities. But
Israel will not enjoy peace as a result, because the
nuking of Iran will create enormous animosity against
Israel in the Muslim world and beyond. To the extent
that the world buys the US fable that the nuking of Iran
was required by "military necessity" and not
premeditated, Israel (and Jews worldwide) will bear a
heavier than deserved brunt for having contributed to
"precipitate" these events.
The US will reap enormous benefits. Flexing its
nuclear muscle, it will establish its absolute hegemony
in the Middle East and Central Asia and beyond, and
gradually squeeze China and Russia into nuclear
disarmament and complete submission.
In the end of course we will all lose. Because the
nuclear genie, unleashed from its bottle in the war
against Iran, will never retreat. And just like the US
could develop nuclear weapons in only 4 years with
completely new technology 60 years ago, many more
countries and groups will be highly motivated to do it
in the coming years.
Think about the current disproportionate response of
Israel, applied in a conflict where the contenders have
nuclear weapons.
10 to 1 retaliation, starting with a mere 600
casualties, wipes out the entire
Earth's population in eight easy steps. Who will be
willing to stop the escalation? The country that lost
60,000 citizens in the last hit? The one that lost
600,000? 6 million?
As the nuclear holocaust unfolds, some will remember
the Lebanon conflict and subsequent Iran war and blame
it all on the Jews. Others will properly blame
Americans, for having allowed their Executive to
erase the 60-year old taboo against the use of nuclear
weapons, first
in doctrine and then
in practice, despite having the most powerful
conventional military force in the world. Others of
course will blame "Muslim extremism".
And then the blaming will wither away as a
three-billion-year old experiment, life on planet Earth,
comes to an end.
Jorge Hirsch is a Professor of Physics at the
University of California at San Diego, a fellow of the
American Physical Society, and organizer of a recent
petition, circulated among leading physicists, opposing
the new nuclear weapons policies adopted by the US in
the past 5 years. He is a frequent commentator on Iran
and nuclear weapons. Email to:
jorgehirsch@yahoo.com. |
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
ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |