RSN June 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Parry writes: "In framing the story in support of the IAEA, the major US newspapers and TV networks ignored documentary evidence that the IAEA's new director-general was installed with the support of the United States and that he privately indicated to US and Israeli officials that he would help advance their goals regarding Iran. These facts could be found easily enough in WikiLeaks cables that the US news media has had access to since 2010. Yet, the Big Media has ignored this side of the story, even as the IAEA report has been touted again and again as virtually a smoking gun against Iran."

The USS John C Stennis is reportedly heading into the Persian Gulf in response to Iranian war games held earlier this month, 12/29/11. (photo: US Navy)
The USS John C Stennis is reportedly heading into the Persian Gulf in response to Iranian war games held earlier this month, 12/29/11. (photo: US Navy)



Slip-Sliding to War with Iran

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

29 December 11

 

ith the typical backdrop of alarmist propaganda in place, the stage is now set for a new war, this time with Iran. The slightest miscalculation (or provocation) by the United States, Israel or Iran could touch off a violent scenario that will have devastating consequences.

Indeed, even if they want to, the various sides might have trouble backing down enough to defuse today’s explosive situation. After all, the Iranians continue to insist they have no intention of building a nuclear bomb, as much as Israeli and American officials insist that they are.

So, this prospective war with Iran – like the one in Iraq – is likely to come down to intelligence assessments on Iran’s intentions and capabilities. And, as with Iraq’s alleged WMD, the many loud voices claiming that Iran is on pace to build a nuclear bomb are drowning out the relatively few skeptics who think the evidence is thin to invisible.

For instance, the recent report from the International Atomic Energy Agency about Iran’s supposed progress toward a nuclear bomb was widely accepted as gospel truth without any discussion of whether the IAEA is an unbiased and reliable source.

In framing the story in support of the IAEA, the major U.S. newspapers and TV networks ignored documentary evidence that the IAEA’s new director-general was installed with the support of the United States and that he privately indicated to U.S. and Israeli officials that he would help advance their goals regarding Iran.

These facts could be found easily enough in WikiLeaks cables that the U.S. news media has had access to since 2010. Yet, the Big Media has ignored this side of the story, even as the IAEA report has been touted again and again as virtually a smoking gun against Iran.

This pattern of ignoring – or downplaying – evidence that runs counter to the prevailing narrative was a notable feature during the run-up to war with Iraq. It is now being repeated not just by the right-wing news media, but by the New York Times, the Washington Post, MSNBC and other centrist-to-left-leaning outlets.

The IAEA Cables

Thus, very few Americans know that U.S. embassy cables from Vienna, Austria, the site of IAEA’s headquarters, revealed that the U.S. government in 2009 was celebrating its success in installing Japanese diplomat Yakiya Amano to replace Egyptian Mohamed ElBaradei, who famously had debunked some of President George W. Bush’s claims about Iraq’s supposed nuclear ambitions.

In a July 9, 2009, cable, American chargé Geoffrey Pyatt said Amano was thankful for U.S. support of his election. “Amano attributed his election to support from the U.S., Australia and France, and cited U.S. intervention with Argentina as particularly decisive,” the cable said.

The appreciative Amano informed Pyatt that as IAEA director-general, he would take a different “approach on Iran from that of ElBaradei” and he “saw his primary role as implementing safeguards and UNSC [United Nations Security Council]/Board resolutions,” i.e. U.S.-driven sanctions and demands against Iran.

Amano also vowed to restructure the IAEA’s senior ranks in ways favored by the United States. In return, Pyatt promised that “the United States would do everything possible to support his [Amano’s] successful tenure as Director General and, to that end, anticipated that continued U.S. voluntary contributions to the IAEA would be forthcoming.”

For his part, Amano stuck out his hand seeking more U.S. money, or as Pyatt put it, “Amano offered that a ‘reasonable increase’ in the regular budget would be helpful.”

Amano also rushed to meet with Israeli officials “immediately after his appointment,” consulting with Israeli Ambassador Israel Michaeli and leaving Michaeli “fully confident of the priority Amano accords verification issues.” That was another indication Amano's IAEA would take a hard line against Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions while ignoring Israel’s undeclared nuclear arsenal.

Michaeli also revealed that Amano’s public remarks about “no evidence of Iran pursuing a nuclear weapons capability” were just for show, designed “to persuade those who did not support him about his ‘impartiality.’” In reality, Amano intended to be anything but impartial.

Amano agreed to private “consultations” with the head of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission, Pyatt reported. The purpose was to hear Israel’s purported evidence about Iran continuing its work on a nuclear weapon, not to discuss Israel’s refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or to allow IAEA inspectors into Israeli nuclear sites.

In a subsequent cable dated Oct. 16, 2009, the U.S. mission in Vienna said Amano “took pains to emphasize his support for U.S. strategic objectives for the Agency. Amano reminded ambassador [Glyn Davies] on several occasions that … he [Amano] was solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision, from high-level personnel appointments to the handling of Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program.”

Amano also continued to indicate that he needed to hide his true intentions. “More candidly, Amano noted the importance of maintaining a certain ‘constructive ambiguity’ about his plans, at least until he took over for DG ElBaradei in December” 2009, the cable said.

In other words, the emerging picture of Amano is of a bureaucrat eager to please the United States and Israel regarding Iran’s nuclear program. Wouldn’t that evidence be relevant for Americans deciding whether to trust the IAEA report? But the Big Media apparently felt that the American people shouldn’t know these facts whose disclosure has been limited to a few Internet sites. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “America’s Debt to Bradley Manning.”]

Similarly, the U.S. press corps is now reporting the dubious allegations about an Iranian assassination plot directed against the Saudi ambassador as flat fact, not as some hard-to-believe accusation comparable to Vice President Dick Cheney’s claims in 2002 that Iraqi officials had a hand in the 9/11 attacks. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Petraeus’s CIA Fuels Iran Murder Plot.”]

Dangerous Cascade

There is now a cascading of allegations regarding Iran, as there was with Iraq, with the momentum rushing toward war.

Just as with Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, the U.S. news media treats Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a designated villain whose every word is cast as dangerous or crazy. Even left-of-center media personalities, like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow, talk tough against Ahmadinejad, just as many “liberals” did regarding Hussein.

Also, as happened with Iraq – when harsher economic sanctions merged with a U.S. troop build-up, making an escalation toward war almost inevitable – tougher and tougher Western sanctions against Iran have pushed the various sides closer to war.

In November, Iranian anger at escalating sanctions and other hostile acts led to an assault on the British Embassy, which then prompted new European demands for a full-scale embargo of Iranian oil. As tensions have grown, the U.S. Senate tossed in its own hand-grenade, voting 100-0 in favor of hitting Iran with ever more stringent sanctions.

In turn, Iran has threatened to retaliate against the West's economic warfare by blocking the Straits of Hormuz, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil flows, thus driving up oil prices and derailing the West’s already shaky economies. That threat has led to even more bellicose language from many U.S. political figures, especially the Republican presidential hopefuls who have denounced President Barack Obama for not being tougher on Iran.

With the exception of Rep. Ron Paul, virtually all the leading Republican contenders including Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich – have signaled a readiness to join Israel in a war against Iran. Romney has farmed out his foreign policy agenda to prominent neoconservatives, and Gingrich has gone so far as to suggest a full-scale U.S.-Israeli invasion of Iran to force “regime change.”

As the U.S. news media and politicians mostly reprise their performances on the Iraq invasion in regard to Iran, the principal obstacles to a new war appear to be President Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. Both are said to privately oppose a war with Iran, which was not true of how President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld felt about Iraq.

Though Obama and Panetta have talked tough about “all options on the table,” the Obama administration slipped loopholes into the Senate’s anti-Iran legislation, to allow the President to waive Iranian sanctions if he deemed them a threat to national security or to the economy.

One intelligence source told me that Obama is playing a delicate game in which he must placate hawkish anti-Iranian sentiments in Israel and on Capitol Hill while he continues to seek a broader Middle East security arrangement that would include Iran in the mix. On Wednesday, administration officials sought to tamp down alarmist anti-Iran reports in the U.S. press.

Still, whether Obama can head off a violent conflict with Iran remains to be seen. As the presidential election grows nearer – and the likely GOP’s nominee hammers at Obama as soft on Iran – a preemptive Israeli attack or a miscalculation by Iran could make war unavoidable.

For its part, the major U.S. news media has done its best, again, to line up the American people behind another war.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+53 # Activista 2011-12-29 17:32
The USraeli attack on Iran at this time would be disaster.
It seems that one can not start civil war in Iran as we did in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Kosovo.
Obama sold $30 billion of F-15 to Saudis, of course we will have to compensate with billions of military (oops foreign aid) aid to our ONLY friend Israel.
Obama of course marks this as defense (against Iran that never attacked others) and JOBS creation. How pathetic -
 
 
+13 # mjc 2011-12-30 08:14
With no thought about the possibility of a nuclear war in that area that would be deadly not only to oil traffic but also to tens of thousands of Iranians, Iraqis, Israelis and the fallout would affect the entire mid-East region, it seems we have lost control of our future. The Saudis will have the necessary jets, the Iraqis will have a number of abandoned bases to launch from or return to. Pathetic just isn't strong enough to denounce such a move.
 
 
+12 # WaldenPond 2011-12-30 19:02
Even without nuclear weapons, this will be a nuclear war, because we are planning to bomb nuclear reactors and nuclear refineries. In Chernobyl and Fukushima, LEAKING reactors, that release SOME of their radioactive contents, results in a regional catastrophe. In Iran, we intend to blow the whole contents into the atmosphere. It will kill millions locally, in a kind of genocide against Persians, and it will kill our own soldiers and sailors in the region, and our own children when the fallout comes round to North America. Bombing reactors in Iran is a kind of national suicide.
 
 
+20 # John Locke 2011-12-30 08:35
The Media is all owned by the Defense industries, ABC, CBS, (George HW Bush and another CIA asset are on their board of directors) and NBC, the Carlyle Group is also heavily invested in media and defense...CNN has CIA assets reviewing content before it is aired, and MSN's Bill Gates sold out to the government rather than be broken up through government litigation...so why would we not expect that the media would be promoting another war...the only way to stop another war is to educate our youth that they should stay out of the services, and if a draft is installed they should leave the country...or just plain refuse to go and take some time in jail instead, it would be better than being killed, or maimed for life for the 1% who reap the war profits at the expense of the expendable 99% of us...as for MSN Bill Gates he has installed a back door in his software that allows the government to see where we go on the Net, this is why several countries have banned Microsoft software being sold in their country...There is NO evidence that IRAN is any threat to us, but the Neoconservative war hawks from the PNAC (Project for a New American Century), planned an invasion for the US of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Saudi Arabia, we are supposed to be involved in war for the next 100 plus years, is this what we want?...NO! we want jobs! not war related jobs!
 
 
+10 # DoctorDemocracy 2011-12-30 12:11
You are correct, John Locke. Keep spreading the word. It is hard for decent working class loyal Americans to believe the scope of this problem is really about enormous international corporations, their servants, and their greed. Ike Eisenhower and Jack Kennedy were the last two Presidents still able and willing to call it by its name, which gives us important clues about how dire the circumstances of the 99% really have become. Even the President of the United States must support it or be very, very careful.
 
 
0 # tahoevalleylines 2012-01-02 11:16
Accurate original language in Qur'anic Suras are explicit on Islamic duties regarding Jews. Hitler's MEIN KAMPF is tame next to Sura exhortations to Mullahs, bound to remove Jews and Christians who refuse to convert to Islam. English translations of the Qur'an do not convey Arabic semantic intent of Islam's world-conquerin g mission. The Judeo-Christian chronicle is a message of Salvation; Islam seeks real estate.

Islam's mothers send their sons to die for Allah; God sent his son to die for mankind. Christ shed His blood once and for all; Islam wants billions to shed blood.

Threat of death prevents young converts to Islam from intellectually honest examination of Old or New Testament writings. Cherry-picking Koranic and New Testament scripture was adopted by the early custodians of the Qur'an, and woe to any who seek to delve deeper. In secret, Muslims can look at "Isabel Piczec image found" and do some thinking.

Those wishing to avoid prophesised billion-casualt y war in the Middle East can do one simple thing as spelled out in Genesis 12, verses 1,2 and 3. Let Israel alone. Oil money/jobs and Islamic charity (not nukes, RPG & AK47's) can raise living standards and bring prosperity for Palestinians. Everyone can stop giving war toys to the boys.

USA self-control: back off from rubber tire mania, consume less oil with railway not car/truck mobility model. Worked before we imported oil, folks.
 
 
+20 # 1984 2011-12-29 21:31
If America gets into a war with Iran, many many many more soldiers will die than did in the Irag invasion. Iranians are fanatically nationalistic and will fiercely fight and willingly die as they did in the war with Iraq started when Iraq, at the say so of the US, invaded Iran. It was a US backed and promoted war with Iran and despite the superior weapons Hussein had, given him (our dear friend), of course by the US, Iran won.
 
 
+16 # Martintfre 2011-12-29 21:31
I appreciate that the author separated Ron Paul from the rest for they are war mongers itching for a fight to cover up for bad domestic policies .. it is an age old game .. we will be fools to buy into it.
 
 
+16 # DurangoKid 2011-12-29 21:46
In the early 1970's the CIA commissioned a report on Middle Eastern oil fields as military targets. Among the elites, Peak Oil was already an issue. Now that Iraq is officially over, the US and NATO have turned to destabilizing Syria and saber rattling toward Iran. Libya has also been processed into the new era. Since the 70's it should have been obvious that the US would seek to control the oil patch. Why are so many people surprised by this? The establishment has been more or less open about the plan. The price of oil is not the crux of the matter. Whatever the price of oil, we'll pay it for as long as we can. There is no other choice. One way or another Iran will be brought to heel. The more they resist, the worse it will be for them. Western capital is unrelenting. The only real question is whether or not the US will overreach and collapse. Be careful what you wish for.
 
 
+13 # John Locke 2011-12-30 08:43
The media is the first step to unite the US population toward war, and unfortunately the majority of us are so ignorant we accept whet we read in the media or hear on our nightly dose of propaganda and never go any further to check it out...sadly this is the state of our literacy and intellect...and this is one of the major reasons we as a nation will ultimately collapse as a world power...let's face it, as the strongest military in the world at this time we were unable to win the last three wars... remember Germany had the strongest military in the world for its day and was destroyed, we will be no different its just our time to collapse because we have become so arrogent and corrupt...
 
 
+12 # anarchteacher 2011-12-29 21:46
Robert Parry is correct. Ron Paul is #1 in Iowa and New Hampshire because of all the presidential candidates in both major parties, only he has repeatedly spoken out clearly and forcefully against the belligerent war propaganda and calculated lies in the bipartisan lead up to war with Iran, against the bipartisan campaign for punitive sanctions against Iran, and against further covert operations to destabilize the fragile geopolitical situation in the Mideast.

Ron Paul is not afraid to speak truth to power, which is why he is greatly admired by stalwart GOP conservatives, grass-roots tea party activists, independents, and disillusioned Obama Democrats.

The principled constitutionali st and nonintervention ist Paul was right from the start about our disastrous preemptive imperial wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, right from the start about the destructive 'blowback' fomenting more hatred directed towards America, right from the start about the Federal Reserve's monetary policies creating the housing bubble which led to the 2008 financial meltdown, right from the start about the War on Drugs, the USA Patriot Act and the TSA imposing a police state upon the American people.
 
 
+1 # Felix Julian 2011-12-30 18:59
The very strange Dr. Paul is a crackpot who chooses his sound bytes carefully.
 
 
+3 # Archie1954 2011-12-29 21:49
Why are individuals so easily corruptible? This man is probably an American plant, a man with no moral code, no ethics and on the take. How disgusting and dangerous is that?
 
 
0 # John Locke 2011-12-30 08:44
Archie: But so typical of human kind....
 
 
-29 # uglysexy 2011-12-29 22:02
Oh Stop Parry....It takes two or three to Tango and in this situation Iran is a serious Threat....while Iraq was not
 
 
+7 # John Locke 2011-12-30 08:47
uglysexy: are you some kind of government plant or just stupid? you make the most rediculous statements without any real knowledge, you are as dangerous as the media, and from your posts which I have responded to before, i believe you are either a stupid fool or a plant...which are you?
 
 
+21 # Artemis 2011-12-29 23:52
What a nightmare, so reminiscent of the days leading up to the brutal war against Iraq, which caused inestimable suffering and torn the country apart. It seems Israel is prepared to sacrifice its own citizens, the majority of whom appear to be thoroughly brainwashed, in its eagerness to play bully. I suppose the UK would tag along again, but let us hope that Germany and France would again stand firm in opposition. Certainly European citizens will not be so easily hoodwinked as Americans. Utter madness.
 
 
+25 # ozken 2011-12-30 01:53
It is pathetic Activista. The 'Axis of Evil' as descibed by George W Bush was Iraq,N Korea & Iran. Iraq all along denied that they had WMD but hey baby - the USA KNEW they had OIL. Result perhaps 200,000 dead Iraqis and 4000 dead American kids mostly from poor families. Oh yeah and a few American families that got mega richer out of the war. Shock & Awe baby - hey guys - look at the good Ol USA bringing DEMOCRACY to the Middle East by killing thousands of people - YEAH!

N Korea - Gee baby - those bastards DO have nuclear weapons but they don't have oil - we'll leave them alone.They are backed by China too. No - best leave them alone.

Iran - Yeah baby - they have OIL and just like the U.S.A., China, Russia and all of the rest of the NUCLEAR POWERS - they say they are trying to develop nuclear power for electricity generation because - HEY STUPID THE OIL IS GONNA RUN OUT!They say that they are not developing nuclear weapons like all of the above - because let's face it any weapon that can wipe out the WORLD must be crazy. Yeah says the U.S. the Ayotolahs ARE crazy.

When is all this American & European bullshit going to end? MAD = USAIsrael + EU right now.
DO NOT INVADE IRAN!
 
 
+15 # cordleycoit 2011-12-30 04:23
We are not running low on young men and women to kill off needlessly in the Middle East. American bodies to supply the unneeded oil and enrich the shady beasts of unfettered capitalism. More adventure in mayhem, rape and murder for our boys and girls.
"When will you ever learn..." With thanks to Pete Seeger.
 
 
+6 # handmjones 2011-12-30 05:03
What is the legality of entering the straits? I thought international law stated that you needed permission of countries on both sides of the strait.
 
 
+18 # Glen 2011-12-30 05:34
An attack on Iran would be more than a disaster, Activista. Iran will put up a fight and use its power in shipping to shut it down, and so on, even if ultimately they lose. There is no reason at all to attack Iran other than more U.S. control and destruction.

I wonder how many in the U.S. military would go along with this? Many in the Marines refused to go back to Iraq after the initial attack, on moral grounds. They left the military or were granted transfers. The world would protest even more than prior to Iraq and many would die.

As I have said repeatedly, the U.S. is going to cause a world war.
 
 
+9 # John Locke 2011-12-30 08:57
Glen: Sadly if we go to war with Iran our military will follow orders, they will invade when ordered to...and Iran will set lose a wave of terrorists attacks on our soil... it would be the most destructive of any engagement so far and hit us here as well...but the problem is that this is the plan and the likelihood of stopping this war is like holding back the water of a dam by putting your finger in the hole...even Obama after he is re-elected will find a reason to attack Iran, we have already provided Isreal with Bunker Buster boms... and yes this will be a world war, and may yet be a truely religious war with the US and Israel against all of the muslim world, and possible China and Russ1a as allies of the Muslims
 
 
+7 # Glen 2011-12-30 12:11
Have you read War 2020? All of this has been predicted by strategists who have couched their intel and knowledge in novel form. Better that than be hounded by CIA or FBI. Yes, there is much to be listed in all that could happen if Iran is attacked. You did a fine job of it in short form. Ultimately we will all lose. The shame of the U.S. is causing thousands to leave the country. Those who can, that is.
 
 
+8 # John Locke 2011-12-30 12:46
Glen I was not aware of the book, and I have friends that have left, the problem is they have gone to Canada, and I believe Canada will follow us... better to stay here and try to stop the insanity, but it sure does appear a hopeless struggle... and the potential for imprisonment when we continue to speak up...is greater then we dare acknowledge...w hat we need is a minimum of 5 to 10 million protestors in the streets,... OWS has become very important, but hasn't it always been the youth that begin our struggles... never forget kent state and Jackson state...
 
 
+6 # Glen 2011-12-31 07:07
I am not an idealist so am of two minds concerning the efforts to "save" the union. Frankly, I would leave the country if possible. Should there be a major protest with many many casualties, who then would be the ultimate winner? Are we all so naive to think the military and militarized cops would allow citizen uprisings, no matter how peaceful? At any rate, it would be very difficult to organize that many people effectively. Each person will have to make the decision on their own, and if they decide to go for it, then go for it full force, with serious intent, prepared to accept any consequences.

Sounds dramatic, but war is coming, one way or another. If in country, it will make Kent State and Jackson State, even the mining killings and bombings look like a drop in the bucket. As has been said, the U.S. government does not care what citizen opinion is.

Time to prepare for the future.
 
 
+5 # Felix Julian 2011-12-30 19:24
Quoting Glen:
An attack on Iran would be more than a disaster, Activista. Iran will put up a fight and use its power in shipping to shut it down, and so on, even if ultimately they lose. There is no reason at all to attack Iran other than more U.S. control and destruction.

I wonder how many in the U.S. military would go along with this? Many in the Marines refused to go back to Iraq after the initial attack, on moral grounds. They left the military or were granted transfers. The world would protest even more than prior to Iraq and many would die.

As I have said repeatedly, the U.S. is going to cause a world war.

Quoting Glen:
An attack on Iran would be more than a disaster, Activista. Iran will put up a fight and use its power in shipping to shut it down, and so on, even if ultimately they lose. There is no reason at all to attack Iran other than more U.S. control and destruction.

I wonder how many in the U.S. military would go along with this? Many in the Marines refused to go back to Iraq after the initial attack, on moral grounds. They left the military or were granted transfers. The world would protest even more than prior to Iraq and many would die.

As I have said repeatedly, the U.S. is going to cause a world war.

No! Zionist AIPAC is going to cause a world war and American blood will be shed.
 
 
+7 # Carolyn 2011-12-30 05:54
I am a dissenting voice against Obama'a ever- ongoing pursuit of war against iran in order to light the spark for thermonucler War111. War has long been the preferred way for oligarchists establish empirical control and to depopulate the earth.
Mankind has outgrown war as the way of life. The destruction of the human race and planet earth is immanent. War has long since served its purpose. It is insane any longer to think of war as yielding positive results.
That is why I am embracing the ideas in Rabbi Michael Lerner's new book, "Embracing Israel and Palestine" and his call for the transformation of the consciousness of mankind to the level of compassion. -- empathy, non-violence.
 
 
+5 # John Locke 2011-12-30 09:04
Carolyn: a world of spiritual beings is an ideal world, but we are sitting in a forest where we are surrounded with evil in the form of satanic worship, that is where the leaders of our military and many politicians come from, a close friend who recently passed over (Ted Gunderson) the former agent in charge of the FBI is Los Angeles California, has disclosed the close association with our military and satanic cult worship..., we need to unite in thought and as you say try to change the direction our life form has embarked on...but even spiratually we may not have the strength or time
 
 
+7 # Carolyn 2011-12-30 10:15
Quoting John Locke:
Carolyn: a world of spiritual beings is an ideal world, but we are sitting in a forest where we are surrounded with evil in the form of satanic worship, that is where the leaders of our military and many politicians come from, a close friend who recently passed over (Ted Gunderson) the former agent in charge of the FBI is Los Angeles California, has disclosed the close association with our military and satanic cult worship..., we need to unite in thought and as you say try to change the direction our life form has embarked on...but even spiratually we may not have the strength or time


Thank you for your words to an eldery woman, whose eyes tear to be saying these words to you.
I have been around the block -- since I was a child during Hitler and the Holocaust. My life is marked forever and I recognize danger when I see it raising its ugly head,
My Only Hope is that the someone with some clout will see that when we have the power to destroy humanity and the planet we will not use it. Something said or done consciously has to be said or done to stop Obama from lighting the match in the mid-east.
I cannot tell you how grateful I am to have read your words to me, on behalf of life on earth.
 
 
+9 # John Locke 2011-12-30 12:34
Carolyn: maybe elderly in years, but not in thought, may you be among us for years and use the power of your mind and your lifes experiences for their true purpose...
 
 
+2 # Anarchist 23 2011-12-31 18:38
Hello Carolyn,
You are so right on this. Nevertheless, even surrounded by Evil, we must exemplify the Light. There are unseen vectors at work-who knows what will come out of the womb of the Unknown?
 
 
+7 # DoctorDemocracy 2011-12-30 12:40
John Locke, satan worship? Really? From my readings the greater threat to the US military is the Christian Dominionist movement. This movement is associated with the strong ties between some evangelical leaders and Israel. Citizens United for the Separation of Church and State has reported and participated in efforts to stop things like mandatory attendance at Christian churches and punishment of those who do not attend the right church. These things are wrong, but they do not rise to the level of supporting an invasion of Iran.

With this satanic worship claim, you have created an obligation on yourself to really look into that odd and unnecessary claim. My exposure to the US military reveals no such thing.

Has not greed itself long enough been sufficient reason to trick regular people into wars of profit?

My recommendation is you stick to the facts, for example about domination of oil fields, rather than attempt to read the minds and hearts of "the leaders of our military and many politicians."

Satanists? Really? You lose me on this one.
 
 
0 # John Locke 2011-12-30 13:33
There is a case of a coverup within the military higher up, i am aware of the evangelical movement within the Military but you may want to research Michael Aquino; The Presidio sex scandal, this will enlighten you to our real military
 
 
0 # Doubter 2011-12-31 23:54
Wow!
Here's a link:
http://www.real-debt-elimination.com/child_protection/child_sexual_abuse_at_the_Presidio_and_Westpoint.htm
 
 
-2 # John Locke 2011-12-30 13:50
DoctorDemocracy : you may also want to look up the Late Ted Gunderson's work relating to satanism he was a very close friend who just passed away, he was the former agent in charge of the FBI for Los Angeles, there is more going on in that area and our government than most are aware of, and yes the higher ups in the military are practictioners, feel free to research for yourself...Teds Videos are all over the web, he will forever be with us by the knowledge he has left us...he had documents to back up everything, and I have seen them... The satanists in our government had attempted to have him killed on numerous occasions, one was by filling his car with some kind of poison gas, i met with him a day or two later and experienced its affects also...it was very obvious... but after the car had been aired out...
 
 
+2 # Anarchist 23 2011-12-31 18:43
Hello John.

I do think these things should be taken seriously;whate ver they call themselves, these people are following Evil. Perhaps there are opposites somewhere, fighting them on a white magic level, doing ceremonies for the Good.

As our 'reality' now seems to come straight from the pages of various dystopian novels, SF and history's greatest nightmares, perhaps this part of the story is true also. You should read Illuminatus by Wilson & Shea 1973-it will cheer you up immensely
 
 
+2 # Doubter 2011-12-31 19:53
"satan worship"/"the greater threat to the US military is the Christian Dominionist movement."
I venture my Agnostic opinion that they are the same thing.
 
 
-11 # Cicero 2011-12-30 06:00
It's rather curious that you fault the current IAEA head for being vigilant regarding Iran's intentions -- all the time accepting the fanatical doomsday Iranian regime's word -- but find El Baradei credible when his hiding of Iranian nuclear progress had a great deal to do with hatred of Israel.
 
 
+5 # DoctorDemocracy 2011-12-30 16:07
@Cicero, read the IAEA report. It is available on their website.

It does not say that Iran is not complying with inspections. For example, it notes that Iran has improved the measurement and documentation of nuclear material so that little or no "wastage" could be going anywhere else. The IAEA report also does not say that Iran is developing anything that could be used in nuclear weapons. What is being reported to us is a very selective and nuanced version of what the IAEA report does say...and then blown into all sorts of weird proportions by hype.
 
 
+3 # John Locke 2011-12-30 18:53
Thank you DoctorDemocracy : Lets hope some of those who read this will read the report and that will help counter the propaganda
 
 
+1 # James38 2012-01-01 03:41
Doctor Dem, you are wrong on all counts. Here is an article referenced by Activista. Problem is he didn't read the article himself: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has released its latest report on Iran's nuclear programme, presenting new evidence suggesting that Iran is secretly working to obtain a nuclear weapon. Iran has dismissed the claims as fictitious.

What does the IAEA report say?

Iran's nuclear facilities remain under IAEA monitoring and the IAEA produces regular reports. It has long expressed concern about Iran's nuclear programme, but the latest report lays out the case in much greater detail than before.

Drawing on evidence provided by more than 10 member states as well as its own information, the IAEA said Iran had carried out activities "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device".

It said that some of these activities could only be used to develop nuclear weapons - though it did not say that Iran had mastered the process, nor how long it would take Iran to make a bomb.

The report documents alleged Iranian testing of explosives, experiments on detonating a nuclear weapon, and work on weaponisation - the processes by which a device might be adapted and hardened to fit into the nose-section of a missile.

There are some allegations that are listed openly for the first time, including the claim that Iran has used computer modelling on the behaviour of a nuclear device."
 
 
+18 # walt 2011-12-30 06:08
The good old Israel lobby is again hard at work to get the US to do its fighting. As if we have not had enough war in the middle east!

One has to ask why the USA provides them with expensive and sophisticated military equipment at great cost to the country?

Watch now as the media whips public opinion into shape. We could see another of those "Shock & Awe" productions!
 
 
+9 # mwd870 2011-12-30 06:09
No, we don't want to precipitate a nuclear war. However, we have a far more important war to wage against social and economic injustice in this country.

Will we ever stop with the propaganda, the dominance of the military-indust rial complex, the secrecy, and the media duplicity that do nothing to help this country, but add exponentially to our debt and budget issues?

I just heard Mitt Romney talk about saving the soul of Amercia. Uh-huh.
 
 
+9 # walt 2011-12-30 06:37
The last sentence says it all:

"For its part, the major U.S. news media has done its best, again, to line up the American people behind another war."

Why?
 
 
+3 # John Locke 2011-12-30 09:10
Walt: resources! Oil... In afghanistan it was Oil and Opium, the oil pipeline...whic h has now been built, and Opium which the CIA has controlled from the day of the invasion...in Iraq it has been Oil, in Iran it will be oil and shipping lanes, in Syria it is again oil, in Viet Nam it was Oil reserves and opium... and every war that is promoted it will be one or the other of these "valuable" resources...rem ember the Medellian Drug Cartel was trained at our CIA stronghold Fort Brag
 
 
-24 # Robt Eagle 2011-12-30 07:02
So let's bury our heads and let Iran develop the nuke and their not of a leader wouldn't hesitate to use it, on Israel and our homeland. Israel is the only safeguard for the globe against the Iranians. If we do not back Israel we shall surely have the wrath of Iran on our shores. Grow a pair and back our own protection of America. By the way I have two children in the military, one is a Navy SEAL and he is headed back to Afghanistan, so don't give me crap about not having anything at risk. My daughter is on a ship and has already been in the Gulf for more than 6 months as well. They are protecting your right to express your BS on this site.
 
 
+11 # cadan 2011-12-30 08:03
I beg you Robt, find some way to get your children out. All the oil in Iran is not worth one human soul.
 
 
-9 # James38 2011-12-30 08:41
Nobody in their right mind wants a war or any military action against Iran. The problem is the development of nuclear weapons capacity along with long range missiles by Iran. That is a waste of money at least, and at worst sets up a scenario of threats and devastation that is intolerable to the entire world. This is the issue, and Iran can defuse it by allowing inspections. Also, if they really are not trying to develop Nuclear Weapons, what on earth do they need long range missiles for? Nobody is even remotely talking about attacking them if they allow inspections and put to rest the idea of nuclear weapons.
 
 
+9 # Kootenay Coyote 2011-12-30 09:51
& when will the IAEA demand to inspect Isreali nuclear facilities & armaments???
 
 
+3 # Glen 2011-12-31 07:18
I take it James38, you were not in any way upset when Pakistan developed nukes, along with India, and a number of other countries. Why suddenly Iran? Iran is surrounded by militaries that DO have nukes. Would it be acceptable to nuke Iran because it MIGHT have one nuke? When was the last time Iran attacked a country or even threatened to do so? Don't let the media and the U.S. gov. determine your assessment of their need for war. The U.S. government has been caught lying about a so-called threat from another country, remember.
 
 
-6 # James38 2011-12-30 08:44
None of this has anything to do with Iran's oil. The world is trying to allow the oil production to continue while asking for inspections of the Nuclear Facilities. Iran is refusing, and is trying to use its oil as a bargaining chip to avoid inspections. Saudi Arabia has offered to cover the loss of Iranian oil, so the Iranians have much less room to argue against inspections. If they continue to stonewall and evade, what does that mean?
 
 
+1 # John Locke 2011-12-30 18:54
Cadan, I so very much agree,
 
 
+12 # reiverpacific 2011-12-30 08:56
So you and your family have bought into the "B.S.'" that gets young people to waste their futures in wasting the planet (the U.S. military is by far the biggest polluter in and of the world) engaged in a mindless war against nature as well as the human occupants of this other nations.
It's people like you who are enabling the medievalization of a nation which could be such a beneficial force around the globe instead of such a destructive one. Having family in the military does NOT qualify you to lecture the rest of us on how it is: they only get to know as little as they need to be told to become as unquestioningly and obediently destructive as humanly possible.
If you don't like the contents of this site, why don't you take your tunnel vision "BS" elsewhere.
I enjoy informed debate but not wanton, mean-spirited defense of an already broken status-quo. Your kids are protecting the corporate takeover a region already wrecked by US/UK interventionism , not freedom of any kind. I hope they survive to perhaps join the growing ranks of Veterans Against ALL Wars, which meetings I attend to learn some truths from those who have been disillusioned by the whole war racket, as General Smedley Butler called it.
And don't be surprised to see the military being turned against those of us at home who chose to challenge the power structure: it's already happening by the arming of the police.
Let freedom ring (for a few) like that do you?
 
 
+14 # angryspittle 2011-12-30 08:59
Robert, You sound like a raving lunatic. Israel is the greatest problem for the US. Iran hasn't attacked another country in over 300 years, they have never posed a threat to anyone unless they were invaded and then they defended themselves.
 
 
+9 # RMDC 2011-12-30 11:25
That's right. Iran is a great nation with the best of intentions. My brother in law is a medical doctor who teaches at a university in the US but also teaches in Iran for 3 months a year. He says that his experience in Iran is just wonderful. IT is a nation that is really trying hard to be modern, open, and friendly with all other nations. He does not believe that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons based on his first hand knowledge.

Iran is a member of the IAEA and allows inspections and abides by all IAEA rules. Israel is not a member and does not allow any inspections, although it has MOssad agents inflitrating IAEA operations. Israel is not a member of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty eithers, but Iran is.

It is time for thinking people of the world to point the finger at the real axis of evil in the middle east -- the US and Israel. I'm not against Israel as a nation or a Jewish state. I am against Israel as a fascist and imperialist state. That part of Israel will, as Achmadinejad said, pass into the pages of history. This would be the best thing for Israelis who are beginning their own Israeli Spring now.
 
 
+8 # John Locke 2011-12-30 09:15
Robert you have just discredited yourself in my eyes, stop watching FOX news, and open your eyes, it would help to meditate and open that third eye, but i sense you don't have that ability you sound like a fool... there are two reasons men and women join the military today, one is a false flag theory, they believe they are fighting for their country, the other is to get away from a dead end existence, from your rant i believe your children chose door number two...
 
 
-9 # Robt Eagle 2011-12-30 15:14
John Locke, my two children graduated from the US Naval Academy. They decided to serve after 9/11/2001 when our town on Long Island, NY lost 48 citizens to terrorism from the Middle East. Each of my three children had dear friends who lost parents...that is nine who were very close to my family. I lost four fellow co-workers who I worked with for many years saving lives. Angryspittle, I find your comments laughable...can 't someone have a difference of opinion? Isn't that what America is all about. Does this site only want progressives who all agree that the world is screwed up and trying to keep them down? I am a successful businessman who was thrown out of my childhood house at age 16 because I was persuing a life I chose to follow working to educate and train people in a worthwhile endeavor to have fun in and under the water. Get real and do something worthwhile rather than complain about your not doing or having because of business or the government. By the way taxing the wealthy is a great idea, but all that won't change the run away spending that is killing this country.
 
 
+3 # John Locke 2011-12-30 18:50
Robt: I understand, and what i am suggesting is that you pay little attention to what propaganda you are being subjected to and keep an open mind, serious insiders have already come out and stated Iran is being staged for an invasion and there is NO evidence they are attempting to make any atomac bomb...you more than anyone should know our government lies to us and is very imperialistic.. .we have become an empire like Britain was... this government does not stand behind its veterans, for that reason alone i would be against any child of mine being involved with the military...ask any Viet Nam vet who was subjected to Agent Orange. I won't go into my thoughts as to why both children joined the service, this is not a forum for that... I ask only that you keep an open mind especially after two unnecessary wars of choice for resources... No one should be harmed or lose their life for resources...Tha nk you for your response, and yes you have a right to state your opinion as I do mine
 
 
+2 # Anarchist 23 2011-12-31 18:49
Dear Robert,

I quite understand the wave of patriotism that inspired your family especially when people you knew personally lost their lives on 911. However, you should really consider if jet-grade kerosene fuel can melt all those 100,000 tons each of steel in the towers, not to mention the impossibility of a pancaking building falling down at free-fall speed.

Because if the Official History is true, you are dealing with Evil Magicians and will need more than bullets and bombs.

As for runaway spending-what is being spent on this militarization of every aspect of society is not to the American people's benefit.
 
 
+1 # Doubter 2011-12-30 09:54
Ref. Robt Eagle
Holy shit! sounds like the Iranians have aircraft carriers up the Hudson and Mississippi ready to wipe us out!
You had better worry about the Zombie army about to swim over underwater from Haiti to take over Miami. Thank your kids for protecting my right to say this. I hope they are as willing to protect me from our own rouge government.
PARANOIA:
1. A psychotic disorder characterized by delusions of persecution with or without grandeur, often strenuously defended with apparent logic and reason.
2. Extreme, irrational distrust of others.
 
 
+2 # Felix Julian 2011-12-30 19:09
Quoting Robt Eagle:
So let's bury our heads and let Iran develop the nuke and their not of a leader wouldn't hesitate to use it, on Israel and our homeland. Israel is the only safeguard for the globe against the Iranians. If we do not back Israel we shall surely have the wrath of Iran on our shores. Grow a pair and back our own protection of America. By the way I have two children in the military, one is a Navy SEAL and he is headed back to Afghanistan, so don't give me crap about not having anything at risk. My daughter is on a ship and has already been in the Gulf for more than 6 months as well. They are protecting your right to express your BS on this site.

Backing Israel? Really? As if the 3 billion per year in aid and weapons isn't support enough? Why are so many Americans sold on the Zionist state as the only thing between us and WW3? Israel is armed to the teeth and has refused to allow the IAEA to inspect it's nuclear weapons facilities. Israel is pushing action against Iran for numerous reasons, most of them strategic and nothing to do with "security" in the ME. I admire your children for making the choices they have. But their service does not mean we should all shut up. Their service, we are constanly reminded, is so that our freedoms are guarded- and one of those freedoms is freedom of speech.
 
 
+3 # X Dane 2011-12-31 02:32
Robt, That's it, I have had it with this constant telling us that our military is protecting our rights. That is damned lies. The military is endangering our lives and our
country, because nobody wants to be occupied as Iraq was or attacked. The activities of our military is making us hated all over the world.

Maybe you need to tell yourself that your children is protecting us.I DON'T BUY IT. They may not understand it, but they are making more people hate us.

You may not have heard, but our military committed atrocities too. Abu Graib is only one of several incidents.

Many of our people do not want to go when they have to deploy, but they end in jail if they refuse.
 
 
-14 # James38 2011-12-30 07:21
Equating the situation of Iraq and Bush with the present situation in Iran is a mistake. Bush was determined to start his war, and did so with lies and foolish claims. El Baradei was correct about the so-called WMD.

However, now Iran has not only built extensive uranium enriching facilities, and the whole world knows it, they are underground and have weapon-grade uranium enriching capacity. Iran has refused to allow open inspections. Their claim to peaceful purposes rings hollow, especially since they are developing missiles also. The Iranian government has suppressed its people, Ahmadinejad stole the last election, and his Quds force is brutal and uses any sort of torture and extrajudicial detention it feels like.

The situations are totally different. If Iran is serious about wanting to develop peaceful nuclear power, which makes a lot of sense globally since we must stop burning fossil fuels, all Iran has to do is open their nuclear facilities to inspection, without reservations. If Iran does not do this, there is no way that they can not be seen as a potential nuclear threat.

Parry and the rest of the people complaining about actions being taken to put pressure on Iran are ignoring these obvious facts. Their case is therefore weak and irrelevant.
 
 
+8 # mjc 2011-12-30 08:16
Iran has had the facilities open to inspection but the US and Israel didn't like the conclusions so they got their own boy to damn Iran. Your case is the weak and irrelevant one.
 
 
-8 # James38 2011-12-30 08:34
Would you please support this statement? As far as I have seen, the Iranians have not allowed open inspections.
 
 
+6 # John Locke 2011-12-30 09:56
James, that is another lie, just like Iraq refused inspection, "they did not refuse inspections"
 
 
+4 # Felix Julian 2011-12-30 19:14
To my knowledge Israel is the only player in this mix that has refused to allow IAEA inspections of its numerous nuclear weapons facilities.
 
 
0 # James38 2012-01-01 03:25
I do not know where you are getting your ideas, but you and Activista and others are totally wrong to defend Iran. Here is a quote from an article Activista referenced - in defense of ideas opposite to what the article said. Weird.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has released its latest report on Iran's nuclear programme, presenting new evidence suggesting that Iran is secretly working to obtain a nuclear weapon. Iran has dismissed the claims as fictitious.

What does the IAEA report say?

Iran's nuclear facilities remain under IAEA monitoring and the IAEA produces regular reports. It has long expressed concern about Iran's nuclear programme, but the latest report lays out the case in much greater detail than before.

Drawing on evidence provided by more than 10 member states as well as its own information, the IAEA said Iran had carried out activities "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device".

It said that some of these activities could only be used to develop nuclear weapons - though it did not say that Iran had mastered the process, nor how long it would take Iran to make a bomb.

The report documents alleged Iranian testing of explosives, experiments on detonating a nuclear weapon, and work on weaponisation - the processes by which a device might be adapted and hardened to fit into the nose-section of a missile."
 
 
+6 # Activista 2011-12-30 10:11
BBC News - Q&A: Iran nuclear issue
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11709428
Nov 9, 2011 – Iran's nuclear facilities remain under IAEA monitoring and the IAEA ...
 
 
+1 # James38 2012-01-01 03:20
Activista, this is from the article you referenced. Apparently you did not read the article yourself.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has released its latest report on Iran's nuclear programme, presenting new evidence suggesting that Iran is secretly working to obtain a nuclear weapon. Iran has dismissed the claims as fictitious.

What does the IAEA report say?

Iran's nuclear facilities remain under IAEA monitoring and the IAEA produces regular reports. It has long expressed concern about Iran's nuclear programme, but the latest report lays out the case in much greater detail than before.

Drawing on evidence provided by more than 10 member states as well as its own information, the IAEA said Iran had carried out activities "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device".

It said that some of these activities could only be used to develop nuclear weapons - though it did not say that Iran had mastered the process, nor how long it would take Iran to make a bomb.

The report documents alleged Iranian testing of explosives, experiments on detonating a nuclear weapon, and work on weaponisation - the processes by which a device might be adapted and hardened to fit into the nose-section of a missile.

There are some allegations that are listed openly for the first time, including the claim that Iran has used computer modelling on the behaviour of a nuclear device.
 
 
+5 # mjc 2011-12-30 10:35
I can't imagine why you believe that, James38. That's one of the real criticisms of the US and other Iran haters to detail that ElBaradei failed to support the US and Israel conclusion that Iran was building a nuclear bomb./
 
 
+9 # mjc 2011-12-30 08:17
You are aware that the nation that has never had inspection of its nuclear program is Israel...,right ???
 
 
+2 # James38 2012-01-01 03:31
Yes, I am aware that Israel has never had inspection of its nuclear program. That does not excuse Iran, which has a totally oppressive totalitarian government, and has also refused open inspections. See the article I quoted. Activista gave us the reference to the article, but he totally misconstrued the content. He implies that Iran is complying with inspections and no weapons program has been found. His conclusion is a fantasy, and not at all supported by the article he referenced.
 
 
+6 # John Locke 2011-12-30 09:20
James you must know Robert, you both expouse the same foolish propaganda, your ilk, can never admit you were lied to, you have to believe the propaganda you are fed or your whole world with its insecurities will collapse...I bet you were all over the Weapons of mass destruction about Iraq even though the major thinkers had investigated and found it was a lie...time to pull your head out from that hole and open your eyes, you have been fooled and fell into it...I feel sorry for you, your world must be a horrible place to live..
 
 
+2 # Felix Julian 2011-12-30 19:12
James, you drank the kool-aid brother.
 
 
+1 # James38 2012-01-01 03:34
John Locke and Felix Julian are the propagandists in this discussion. Quoting my previous comment, "Equating the situation of Iraq and Bush with the present situation in Iran is a mistake. Bush was determined to start his war, and did so with lies and foolish claims. El Baradei was correct about the so-called WMD. " Locke, you should read my comments before you make stupid assumptions. You are the propagandist here, not me. You and Julian sound like Iranian agents.
 
 
0 # John Locke 2012-01-04 20:29
James38: You have had your say, but the facts speak a different pattern, and who I ask is now in charge of the inspections and what is their relationship with the US. The latest REAL evidence is that they are using this form of energy for peaceful purposes and not to create any "BOMB" if you want to consider this Propaganda, that is your choice, but before you do open your eyes, blindly trusting this government or its controlled media is the greatest mistake we can make...and if you doubt our media is controlled that is the sign of someone who lacks real knowledge...
 
 
+9 # RMDC 2011-12-30 07:40
The US is backing itself into a corner with its war-mongering rhetoric and lies. Soon, the USG will have to start a war just in order to prove that it means what it says. Of course, this would be a war of aggression just like Iraq and Afghanistan were.

Both Iraq and Afghanistan were beaten down by 20 years of war and sanctions. Neither had the capacity to fight back. This is not the case with Iran. And Iran is almost 4 times bigger than Iraq -- 70 million people.

I just don't see the US or its cowardly little pit bull Israel taking on a ground invasion. All they will do is murder people from the sky, hoping that with enough bombing Iran will surrender. But that is not likely. No one surrenders from a bombing campaign. The theory of "shock and awe" is false.

I guess we are just waiting to see how low Israel can drag the US government. An attack on Iran would be the very bottom and would probably be the end of Israel in terms of legitimacy.
 
 
-9 # James38 2011-12-30 08:37
I do not see the US backing itself into a corner. If Iran allows open inspections, the requirements of the international community would be satisfied. It is not just the US that is concerned. The only nations that are not demanding inspections are Russia and China, and they seem to be changing their attitude a little. I do not understand why they want to drag their feet on this issue. More conflict in the Middle East benefits nobody.
 
 
+8 # RMDC 2011-12-30 11:37
James -- actually Iran has the support of the whole world except for the US and its lackeys like Israel, and UK. Achamdinejad gets a warm welcome from nearly all nations when he speaks at the UN. The BRICS nations support Iran. Turkey supports Iran.

The whole world knows the US is wrong on this issue. Every nation that is threatened with war by a nuclear-armed nation, has a right under the terms of the NPT (non-proliferat ion treaty) to build nuclear weapons as a deterrance. The NPT forbids nuclear armed nations from threatening war against any non-nuclear nation. The US and Israel are in clear violation of the NPT -- only Israel has never signed the treaty and the US regards itself as "an exceptional nations" -- exempt for all laws that it holds others to.

The US and Israel are wrong on this issue. They are trying to drive Iran into building a nuclear bomb by threatening Iran with attack. The US has build special deep bunker penetrator bombs that weigh about 30,000 pounds and have nearly the power of a nuclear bomb but are not nuclear. These have been specially designed for Iran underground labs. Everyone knows this, especially Iranians. These bombs are illegal because they are a direct threat to a particular nation. It would be like my buying a 9mm and carving your name on the barrel. You'd be right to report me to the police. And the police would be right to take the gun away. No one can threaten another with death.
 
 
+9 # rebelgroove 2011-12-30 08:21
What gets me about all this are those who follow the orders. Do these otherwise normal folks not see that these decisions by our so-called leaders affect them too?

No one should be blindly obedient.
 
 
+4 # Doubter 2011-12-30 10:12
"No one SHOULD BE blindly obedient."
How true; but the first requirement for the military is to surrender your body and soul to your immediate superiors; to become a cog in an immense and relentless gear train. If you don't believe me, ask Robt Eagle above.
There aren't many "Bradley Mannings" in the armed forces.
(nobody believes me when I tell them I actually shot over the German's heads in WWII)
 
 
-10 # James38 2011-12-30 08:31
I see negative votes on my comment. What I would really like to see is a discussion of the facts presented. I certainly do not want to see more war, but I equally do not want to see Iran develop nuclear weapons. Iran has a radical religious fanatic government, suppresses its people and propagandizes them as much as possible to support the fanatics in charge of the government. They do not seem to me to be sane enough to handle or need nuclear weapons. Actually, in an ideal world we would not have such weapons at all. At present there is no way to know what they are doing, but we know they have developed or are developing the capacity to refine nuclear weapons grade uranium.

In my original post, in the last paragraph, I explained why arguments against restrictions on Iran are irrelevant if they do not consider all the facts. I am again calling for commentators to explain what, if anything, I am missing. If you think we should ignore Iran and let them do anything they want with their nuclear capacity, without insisting on open inspections, I would like to hear how that policy can be justified. On the basis of trusting Iran? Extremely dubious at best, as I see it. If they say they are only developing peaceful nuclear power, but refuse to allow inspections, what does that mean? That they are just being honest and don't like inspections? Really?
 
 
+2 # Activista 2011-12-30 10:14
On the basis of trusting Iran?
On the basis of trusting Israel?
Now Google what PROPAGANDA gets to US media!
 
 
+9 # DoctorDemocracy 2011-12-30 11:46
Fact #1: The Iranians have not been refusing to allow inspections. You can read the actual "November report" at the IAEA website. They have hosted many, many inspections for years.

Fact #2: Our then-President Bush said the same thing about Iraq when it also was not true. Remember?

Fact #3: Iraq had even collected and destroyed the so-called WMD they did have (old, chemically armed artillery shells they acquired from US, France & Russia and about which we had known for years), during the same time period that our then-President was telling us Iraq was not complying with our demand that they destroy their so-called WMD.

Fact/Interpretation #4: A chemically armed artillery shell is in no way comparable to a nuclear bomb. The very term "WMD" is a made up term to scare people while simultaneously confusing them about the potential magnitude of damage. No one on Earth, except some survivors of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, has witnessed anything comparable to a nuclear attack. Not a chemical artillery shell. Not a tornado. Not a hurricane is comparable. An especially devastating tsunami produces similarly extensive and complete destruction, but not the same long-term damage. We should all boycott the term.

Fact #5: The IAEA report does not claim to have any evidence of Iranian development of nuclear weapons. There is not any evidence nor even a claim of evidence in the IAEA that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.
 
 
0 # Doubter 2012-01-01 00:23
Fool me Once..
or "don't fool me twice," please.
 
 
-1 # Doubter 2012-01-01 00:21
What a beautiful description and assessment of of the Iranian Government.
You don't mind if we extend it to ALL known governments, specially featuring the current United States government..?
 
 
+3 # angryspittle 2011-12-30 08:55
If you think Iraq was a clusterboink just wait until war with Iran. As the doddering old dimwit was fond of saying "You ain't seen nothin' yet".
 
 
+4 # DoctorDemocracy 2011-12-30 11:36
The worst part is that rational people have to hope that Iran has MORE potential as an adversary so that the global military industrial mob cannot get our own military involved. The reality is that all those trillions of tax payer funds have purchased a military without peer. The US military can crush any potential opponent on Earth with relative ease. So, the mob has no qualms about using it, especially when lots of oil can be stolen. All that a few of us have learned is that the crushing of another nation's military leaves a hugely expensive, corrupting, bloody mess to pretend to clean up for years...at the further expense of American sons and daughters and taxpayers.

Now is the time to try to stop this. Once they invent enough pretexts, even a relatively rational Obama will not be able to stop it.

This is the first good article I've seen on the subject. Forward it to all your family and friends.
 
 
+3 # ABen 2011-12-30 14:41
The repressive regime of Iran will fall of its own accord if we just let it. Of course the Iranian leaders want nuclear weapons and the status that comes with them. But those same leaders know that the worst day of their existence will start one second after they decide to use one on another country. The one sure loser in any such event would be Iran.
 
 
+5 # gertie 2011-12-30 15:25
Should it be decided that war in Iran is necessary, reinstate the draft and let politician's children be first, no exemptions. Then let's see how "vital" it is to get involved.
 
 
+2 # Felix Julian 2011-12-30 19:34
We don't need a draft now that our "military" consists/will consist of armistice-for-h ire aka mercenaries or the current preferred descriptor: security contactors who, by the way, adhere to no particular rules of engagement, international law, or rules of engagement as they are private contractors and not Government Issue (GI).
 
 
0 # Felix Julian 2011-12-31 14:00
Auto correct turned my word "armies-for-hir e" into armistice while my handheld revolted in general. Sorry folks!
 
 
+2 # oakes721 2011-12-30 20:38
When 9/11 airplanes ignored nearby Nuclear Plants (The Ideal Terrorist Targets?) ~ Was it Because it Just Might Give the Nuclear Industry Some Bad P.R.? All Investigations Were Stopped!

Now, with ongoing nuclear meltdowns in Japan still out of control as the deadly radiation sweeps across the Pacific Ocean, We Still Argue About Building More 'Friendly' Atomic Toys.

Welcome to the Atomic Shell Game. Pick a Car, Any (Forced) Card...
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2011-12-31 09:13
oakes721: Good point, however the Trade Centers were the target of choice for our government, and this is not a conspiracy theory but Conspiracy fact...I have read reports and letters that the US was aware of the threatened attack by (40) high jackers not the 20 we know about. A CIA asset Robert Reconiseuto (sp) informed Colin Powell-- Powell ignored him...I saw the letter that was mailed by Reconiseuto's attorney to Powell...My good friend who i mention above investigated the attack, and offered his findings to the commission that did the "government" cover up, investigation, it was declined...why? there were records in the building involving ongoing cases that were not backed up on computers, all lost, and three (3) pasports just happened to be found intact from the alleged highjackers when everything else had beemn turned into dust...
 
 
+1 # Anarchist 23 2011-12-31 18:53
Don't forget the multiple military drills that were going on that very day simulating of all things -hijacked airplanes!
that is what was keeping NORAD busy. 911 was an inside job, every fact about it points to that conclusion!
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN