Current Observations Home Current Observations Home Current Observations Home

Been There, Done That

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

From a Huffington Post article, The Iran Crisis -- "Diplomacy" as a Launch Pad for Missiles, Norman Solomon notes that the "current flurry of Western diplomacy will probably turn out to be groundwork for launching missiles at Iran." He goes on to look at the various evidence that supports his observations. I tend to agree, reflecting on the buildup before our military occupation of the Iraq nation. If you're getting the sense of deja vu, it's because their recycling the same old script. It's the same play as last time, only they've changed who gets to play the antagonist.

From Solomon's article:
The Bush administration is in so much political trouble at home -- for reasons including its lies about Iraqi WMDs -- that it wouldn't risk an uproar from an attack on Iran.

But the White House has been gradually preparing the domestic political ground for bombing Iran. As the Wall Street Journal reported days ago, "in recent polls a surprisingly large number of Americans say they would support U.S. military strikes to stop Tehran from getting the bomb."

Above those words, the Journal's headline -- "U.S. Chooses Diplomacy on Iran's Nuclear Program" -- trumpeted the Bush administration's game plan. It's a time-honored scam: When you're moving toward aggressive military action, emphasize diplomacy.

Donald Rumsfeld proclaimed at a conference in Munich on Saturday that -- to put a stop to Iran's nuclear program -- the world should work for a "diplomatic solution." Yet the next day, the German daily newspaper Handelsblatt reports, Rumsfeld said in an interview: "All options including the military one are on the table."

Top U.S. officials, inspired by the royal "W," aren't hesitating to speak for the world. Over the weekend, Condoleezza Rice said: "The world will not stand by if Iran continues on the path to a nuclear weapons capability." Meanwhile, Rumsfeld declared: "The Iranian regime is today the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. The world does not want, and must work together to prevent, a nuclear Iran."
This last quote was from a different article which I have lost track of. It is still relevant to our conversation:
Robert Joseph sidestepped questions on the use of force yet said, "No options are off the table. We cannot tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran, but we are giving every chance for diplomacy to work."
After I read all this, an image flashed into my mind that I thought fitting. Here it is...

Is this their idea of a
Diplomatic Solution?


Blogger Mark said...

We cannot tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran.

What a ridiculous comment. First of all, who is "we"? I can tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. "We" tolerated a Soviet Union that had actual nuclear bombs for decades and "we" tolerate a nuclear-armed China and don't do much else but grumble about a nuclear-armed North Korea.

Hopefully, most people will see this stuff as the pure BS that it is and will not allow Bush to start another war because his foreign policy is failing.

2:31 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger |



Who Links