|
Memo on the Margin
The Bush-Bolton Plan to Bomb Bushehr
Memo To: Republican Senators
From: Jude Wanniski
Re: With Tony Blair’s Support
05/14/05 "Wanniski.com"- - Buried down in today’s New York Times report on President Bush reaffirming his unqualified support for John Bolton as U.N. Ambassador is the reason why almost all of you are ready to vote for his confirmation.
| “Republicans are hoping to shame Democrats into a quick vote on Mr. Bolton. They argue that he needs to be in place by June so that the United States will have the latitude it needs to press its concerns about Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program before the Security Council.” |
Why the big rush? My reliable
sources tell me it is because there is a timetable that makes it
urgent for Bolton to be ready for action in June in order to
cripple the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as part of the
plan to bomb the Iranian nuclear-power plant at Bushehr. That’s
because Bushehr, under construction with Russian supervision, will
soon be ready to receive the Russian fissionable material enabling
it to produce power. In 1981, remember Republican Senators, Israel
bombed the Osiraq nuclear power plant near Baghdad just before it
was to be fueled by its French contractors. Once fueled, bombing
is out of the question because of the radiation that would be
emitted, with clouds traveling who knows where.
Of course you must know by now that at the time the Israelis blew
up Osiraq, the situation was quite different. We were in the midst
of the Cold War, the United States was supporting Iraq in its war
against Iran, and the Russians were supporting Iran. So when the
billion-dollar Osiraq plant went up in smoke (with the help of the
neo-cons who were already occupying the Pentagon in that first
year of the Reagan administration), there was no reaction from
Russia because the Israelis were essentially bombing us!! We also
know by now that Iraq did not have a nuclear weapons program at
the time, but only began its (unsuccessful) clandestine effort
after Osiraq.
The same is now true of Iran. If a month or two from now you are
advised by President Bush that it is necessary to take out Bushehr
to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, you would have to
wonder if the neo-cons and their Likud allies in Tel Aviv aren’t
simply threatening World War III on a faulty premise. Wouldn’t
you. The situation now is quite different, with Bushehr a Russian
project in Iran.
On a recent, quite incredible FoxNews
special, Lieut. General Thomas McInerney said we are already
moving aircraft carriers into positions from which we could
strike. He was then asked: “If you had to put a percentage on
it, the chances that the US will eventually have to take military
actions against Iran, what would you put it at?” to which
McInerney replied casually: “Well, I would put one percent of
using ground forces, boots on the ground in Iran, I would put up
50 percent on a blockade and I would put up fifty to sixty percent
on precision air strikes on their nuclear development sites.” He
also observed casually that Iran wouldn’t dare take on the
United States. Perhaps the 60 million Iranians would greet our
bombers with garlands and sweets. Do you see what I mean? FoxNews,
as you may know, is commonly known as "The War Channel,"
for similar work it did in promoting the war against Iraq.
Is Iran this kind of threat to anyone? As far as I can tell,
ladies and gentlemen of the GOP Senate, the answer is
“absolutely not,” at least as long as they remain members in
good standing of the NPT, which means they will permit the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to inspect intrusively
and constantly, as they have been doing. It has been the mission
of John Bolton and his underling, Stephen Rademaker, to
“reform” the United Nations in a way that dissolves the NPT
and the need for the IAEA, not only to pave the way for the
bombing of Bushehr, but also to get out from under the NPT
provisions that require all the nuclear-weapon powers to make
progress toward making the world a nuclear-free zone.
If you wish to really understand what’s going on, instead of
getting briefed by the same people who briefed you prior to the
invasion of Iraq, please read Dr. Gordon Prather’s commentaries
on the crisis just around the corner. First, on WorldNetDaily.com,
he writes Strengthen
the NPT -- Or Else, in which he walks us through the
misinformation that Bolton, Rademaker and the neo-cons have been
spreading on Iran’s alleged violations of its treaty
obligations. Dr. Prather, who by the way came to Washington under
the patronage of Sen. Pete Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, and
is no left-wing liberal, also penned a second column today for
antiwar.com, Bush-Blairs
Nutty U.N. Proposal, which you have to read to realize how
“nutty” it is.
There is also today on the antiwar.com website today an overview
of this looming crisis that I highly recommend, as it was highly
recommended to me by Dr. Prather, The
Iran Crisis in Global Context. If you and your staffs do take
my suggestions seriously and go to these links, I think you may
have greater doubts about the Bolton nomination than you have now.
If you have any doubts about Dr. Prather, check with your
colleague, Senator Domenici, who was instrumental back in getting
Prather an appointment as the Army’s chief scientist during the
Reagan administration.
This isn’t too much to ask, is it? For good measure, I’d hope
those of you who are reading this memo to the GOP Senators and are
among their constituents would urge them to take a second look
before they send Bolton to the United Nations. His mission is not
to clean up the so-called “Oil-for-Food Scandal” or promote
UNICEF gift cards. It is to bomb the nuclear facilities in Iran
after undermining the work of IAEA and the need for the NPT.
© 2005 Wanniski.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 Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |