A second battle group has been ordered to the Gulf and extra missiles have already been sent out. Meanwhile oil is being stockpiled.
The Progressive Review’s MORNING LINE report on 12 February revealed:
“In the popular vote, all three leading Democrats are locked in a statistical tie with McCain and Giuliani. In the electoral vote, however, the GOP would win about 280-211 with 47 undecided.”
Richard Mazess, violator of contribution limits by giving one thousand too many dollars to Wisconsin Democrats in 2003, generous donor to the Green Party at least since 2004, and passionate observer always, cites those stats in “A missive on Iran“. I like his missive for three reasons. Firstly, he cites some excellent material. Secondly, he seems genuinely angry that Democrats are continuing the occupation and hawking yet another insanity-fuelled (ad accepted by Ha’aretz – View image), immoral invasion based on lies. Lastly, he mentions Saudi Arabia and the Iraq resistance in the same sentence, something people in the public eye are doing more often lately. Intelligent public discourse is not likely to follow.
By Dick Mazess, 12 February 2007
The annual Cassandra award has to go to the 33% of the American public who knew from the outset that the invasion of Iraq was ill-conceived, ill-fated, and illegal. This is the same know-nothing group that believes in : the unproven “theory” of evolution, global warming, social equality, an economic safety net, progressive taxes, and treatment not incarceration for drug abuse.
Now that the situation in Iraq has gotten so bad that even the corporate press has been bad-mouthing it another third of the population has joined in the chorus for withdrawal . Military expert Gen. Wm Odom has summarized the situation recently and critically analyzed the various excuses for continued occupation.(1) Even the ultra-conservative Council on Foreign Relations has concluded that the situation is hopeless and that US forces should withdraw.(2)
The new shift in policy is “the surge”, another term for “stay the course”. Many feel that the real target of the Iraqi invasion was Iran, and now the US has armed forces on both sides of that country. Noted film maker John Pilger comments that:
The United States is planning what will be a catastrophic attack on Iran. For the Bush cabal, the attack will be a way of “buying time” for its disaster in Iraq. In announcing what he called a “surge” of American troops in Iraq, George W Bush identified Iran as his real target. “We will interrupt the flow of support [to the insurgency in Iraq] from Iran and Syria,” he said. “And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.”(3)
The apparent plan over the past few months has been to ratchet up the rhetoric over Iranian complicity in the Iraqi insurgency (see NYT report by Krugman below). Again we have an administration fabricating “evidence” as a basis for war.(4) The fact is that most (>90%) of American casualties have been caused by Sunni insurgents, supplied by Saudi Arabia, and not by the Shii allies of Iran. This is not just scapegoating to divert attention from the failure of the US military to quell a relatively small, but widely supported, group of ragtag insurgents. People who defend their own country from foreign invaders always have the advantage. The Bush administration also is attempting to provoke Iran into a “hostile” position by arresting its diplomats for aiding terrorism, interfering with banking transaction, and stationing warships off Iranian shores . The long-anticipated attack on Iran will most likely occur this spring, perhaps as early as mid-March.(5)(6)
The confrontation with Iran will cost the US dearly in terms of international support ; it may also jeopardize the troops in Iraq as well as the existence of the Israel.(7) Former national security adviser Abigniew Brzezinski has testified that the US is trying to manufacture an excuse for an ill-conceived attack on Iran.(8)
The major advocates of the attack on Iran are Dick Cheney, honorary head of AIPAC (US supporters of Likkud), and a cabal of Likkudite neo-cons (the “youngsters of Zion”) who haven’t learned a thing from Iraq.(9) Progressives can expect leading Democrats to be even less vocal about an Iran confrontation than they have been about the continued occupation of Iraq. The leaders of the Democratic party all strongly favored the invasion of Iraq in 2003 (especially John Kerry, who chided Bush for being too slow to act!!) and all (including that smarmy poster boy for populism, John Edwards) have agitated for an aggressive “military response” to Iranian truculence, with no weapons (ie nuclear) off the table. The DLC (they call it Democratic Leadership Council and but it is really Deceitful Lying Cowards) and its honchos (Clinton, Biden, Bayh, Obama, Richardson) have been vocal AIPAC-funded supporters of the invasion and opponents of withdrawal (only Russ Feingold had the courage to speak out a year ago). Now that things are getting worse all these erstwhile supporters have suddenly become critics, of course saying that the invasion they advocated and supported was “mismanaged”. It’s all a political game to saddle the Republicans with failure, and it worked in the 2006 elections. Democrats were elected to to facilitate withdrawal from Iraq. The continued failure of the namby-pamby, Democratic pantywaists to live up to the promises they made in order to gain congressional control is sure to have a backlash in 2008. Even if it does not the leading Democratic presidential contenders, all trying to outhawk each other, are well behind in electoral votes against virtually any Republican (except Dick Cheney). For those who care about the longer-term health of our democracy the most important thing we can do is to make sure none of the current crop of hopeless, hapless contenders makes it through the 2008 primaries.
(1) Victory Is Not an Option: The Mission Can’t Be Accomplished — It’s Time for a New Strategy, by William E. Odom, The Washington Post, 11 February 2007
(2) US think tank urges retreat from Iraq, by Dave Clark, Agence France Presse, 9 February 2007
(3) Iran: The War Begins, by John Pilger, The New Statesman, 3 February 2007
(4) Target Tehran: Washington sets stage for a new confrontation, by Patrick Cockburn, The Independent, 12 February 2007
(5) The War on Iran, by Stephen Gowans, Global Research, 31 January 2007
(6) Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring, by Ewen MacAskill, The Guardian, 10 February 2007
(7) Helping Israel Die, by Ray McGovern, TomPaine.com, 9 February 2007
(8) Why is the US press silent on Brzezinski’s warnings of war against Iran?, by Barry Grey, World Socialist Web Site, 3 February 2007
(9) Wake Up! The Next War Is Coming, by Ray McGovern, TomPaine.com, 12 February 2007