The dry-drunk little bitch who currently occupies the oval is hell-bent on getting another war started. He just had so much fun in Viet Nam that now wants everyone to feel the same pride he felt as he crawled through the jungle defeating communism...Oh wait - he pussed out - that's right. I forgot for a sec that he's a paranoid, pathological nutjob with delusions of militaristic grandeur; who is so distanced from reality that he makes Ronald Reagan circa 1987 look lucid - and Reagan forgot to tell us he had Alzheimers, for Christs sake. (Even Reagan didn't try to pull off anything so patently pandering as the "Mission Accomplished" photo-op.)
No, the reason I say we are doing more than sabre-rattling is this: The Navy is taking up offensive positions in the Persian Gulf. One US carrier task force is currently in position, and two more task forces are moving to take up their positions in the Iranian theatre.
This is not classified, so repeat it often, and ask questions about it at campaign events this fall. I came to this knowledge through a relative on one of those carriers in the gulf, and after independednt verification through information available in the public record, decided to throw down the gauntlet. Spread the word, folks. That's our Navy, after all.
Is a bombing raid on Iran, staged from carriers in the gulf the "October Surprise" that Karl Rove promised the faithful? If so, war crimes charges should be brought.
I am about the hardest nut to crack on the Iranian front. My dad was in the Persian Gulf in the days of the Shah, when the Iranian Navy was moving to modernize and the new naval headquarters were coming on line in Bandar-e Abbas, we were frequent visitor of the region and I spent a lot of time soaking up Persian culture. I saw that student-led Islamic revolution coming a mile away, and so did everyone else who knew the intricacies of the area and wasn't deep in denial.
My cynicism was born when I realized that I was more savvy at 16 than the State Department was at 200. As a teenager I had hung out in coffee shops with Iranian teens and mingled freely with them. Teenagers are social and we make friends wherever we are. Trust me when I say this: The schism was occuring long before November 9, 1979. Revolutions don't come about overnight. I do not know if any of the kids I knew in the mid-seventies were at the University in 1979 or not, but it would not take me by surprise to find out a couple of them were involved. I would be even less surprised to learn that some of them are hard-line clerics.
I am not overly optimistic. In fact, I am often accused of pessimism where US and Iranian relations are concerned. But making war is not how we get out of the mess that John Foster Dulles made in 1953, when he was Eisenhower's Secretary of State. John Foster Dulles was a man of narrow vision and jingoistic pursuits, a real ends-justify-the-means kind of fellow. The Karl Rove of his day.
It was Dulles who dreamed up the coup that would overthrow the Democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh. Mossadegh's crime? He had spearheaded the parliamentary movement to nationalize the British owned Anglo-lranian Oil Company (AIOC), the sole oil company operating in Iran. In March 1951, the bill for nationalization was passed, and at the end of April Mossadegh was elected prime minister by a large majority of Parliament. On 1 May, nationalization went into effect. This inspired the ire of the British, and Mossadegh's fate was sealed, his days numbered.
The Mossadegh government tried to do all the right things to placate the British: It offered to set aside 25 percent of the net profits of the oil operation as compensation; it guaranteed the safety and the jobs of the British employees; it was willing to sell its oil without disturbance to the tidy control system so dear to the hearts of the international oil giants. But the British would have none of it. What they wanted was their oil company back. And they wanted Mossadegh's head. A servant does not affront his lord with impunity.(from Killing Hope by William Blum)
I lean pessimistic not because I have ethnocentric issues with the Iranian people. Quite the contrary. I don't even have issues with the religious leadership of Iran. My pessimism is rooted in the west's long history of meddling in the region and in a lack of faith that they will act prudently now. History does not indicate that anyone west of Istanbul has any sense at all when dealing with the region.
If we leave well enough alone, and do not rush headlong into a war with Iran, the Mullahs of the Supreme Islamic Council will enjoy another decade in power, tops. If we make war on them, the Mullahs will retain their control for another 50 years, easily.
Take morality, nuclear threats, all the extraneous bullshit off the table and that is what is left. And that is why we shouldn't make war on Iran.
