Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 





This is like Hitler's Suicide Order from the Bunker
Thursday, 01 February 2007 00:13
by Dave Lindorff

This is madness!

I wrote last September that Bush was gearing up for war with Iran, as evidenced by the moving up of the deployment date of the carrier group headed by the recently re-fueled and re-armed USS Eisenhower, some of whose crewmembers had leaked that its mission was to attack Iran.

At the time, there was considerable skepticism expressed about the article, which appeared in the Nation’s online edition.

Now, four months later, it is widely assumed in Europe that the U.S. is planning to attack Iran, and even in the U.S., members of Congress are openly talking about their concern that Bush is planning to attack Iran.

Does anyone think this is lunacy?

Known and very popular cialis coupon which gives all the chance to receive a discount for a preparation which has to be available and exactly cialis coupons has been found in the distant room of this big house about which wood-grouses in the houses tell.

The U.S. is deeply mired in a losing war in Iraq, and is also losing Afghanistan to a resurgent Taliban. The Pentagon is scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to come up with the measly 21,500 additional troops Bush has vowed to send to Iraq, and the 4000 troops that his commanders in Afghanistan are asking for.

Iran, meanwhile, poses no immediate threat to the U.S. But it does have a huge, battle-hardened army, much better equipped than Saddam Hussein’s rag-tag troops, and equipped with some very sophisticated weaponry courtesy of Russia and China. Any U.S. forces that went into Iraq could expect to take heavy casualties, and could hardly hope to conquer a nation with a population bigger than Iraq and Afghanistan combined—a population that, unlike Iraq’s—can be expected to rise as one against a US invasion.

Even if Iran is meddling in Iraq, it hardly seems like attacking that country is likely to put a halt to that kind of thing. Indeed, attacking Iran would be more likely to lead to an escalation of Iranian efforts to hobble U.S. forces in Iraq—something Tehran could easily do through its Iraqi Shia allies.

Nor would attacking Iran put an end to that nation’s nuclear program, which is spread out, carefully hidden, and in many cases located in underground bunkers. Nuclear experts agree that an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would only slow down its efforts, not end them, and moreover, would encourage the country to redouble its efforts to get the Bomb and achieve the kind of protection against future attack that countries with the bomb have.

Oh. I haven’t mentioned the economic disaster part, have I?

Iran is the second largest oil producing country in the world, and it borders the entire eastern shore of the Persian Gulf, through which a third of the world’s oil passes every year. If it was attacked, all of Iran’s oil, and most of the oil produced by Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, would be taken out of circulation indefinitely. Oil prices would soar way past $100/barrel, and maybe past $200 a barrel, causing a U.S. and a global depression.

So why are we even talking about this?

We’re talking about this because the President of the United States, the Vice President, and the neoconservative political gang that has brought the nation six years of war, destruction and Constitution-wrecking, is under attack, and this cabal of madmen and mad women has decided that chaos, death and destruction offers the best hope of salvation.

We are, it appears, about to witness the American equivalent of Hitler’s suicide orders to the German people as he scurried to his bunker in Berlin.

What to do? The answer is simple.

It is time for the Congress, and the American people, to act.

If Senators and Representatives pass a resolution barring the use of any military forces against Iran, or the expenditure of any funds for war against Iran, Bush will not be able to push the country over the precipice. American military leaders would have reason to ignore any orders that would put them in violation of the law of the land.

This would be a historic moment—a reassertion by Congress of its Constitutional primacy in matters of war and peace.

Members of Congress should follow up that move by initiating impeachment proceedings against this whacko immediately.

Congress must not duck its patriotic duty. President Clinton was impeached for a little blowjob. This president wants to blow a hell of a lot more than an intern.

An attack on Iran would be an international crime under the Nuremberg Charter, which calls the invasion of a country that doesn’t pose an immediate threat a “Crime Against Peace.” But even aside from such matters, anyone with a lick of sense knows that it would be crazy to go into another even larger war while the American military is completely tied down in two other desperate situations.

The whole Bush administration has clearly gone stark raving mad, and is willing to sacrifice the nation for its own short-term gain.

This cannot be allowed to happen.

No War against Iran!

Impeach the President now!
More from this author:
U.S. Military Has Killed Up to 238,000 Iraqi Civilians (15889 Hits)
A just-released study by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, published in the current issue of the prestigious British medical journal The...
Time for Truth and Consequences (12597 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff   The Bush administration, losing the war in Iraq, has come with a "new" strategy: setting a timetable for Iraq's...
Let's March in January! An Impeachment Call to Action (15143 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff   I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict that, barring some incredible act of criminal cynicism such as the...
Why Nancy Pelosi Has it Wrong on Impeachment (12672 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff   Forget her "Pledge," She Took an Oath: Why Pelosi is Wrong on Impeachment House minority leader Nancy Pelosi...
Kerry and Bush: The Joke's on Us (11503 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff   There are so many things to say about the John Kerry gaffe, it's hard to know where to start. Just the idea of...
Related Articles:
Why Bush wants immunity from prosecution for war crimes (244495 Hits)
Although not as widely remarked as the elimination of habeas rights and the consecration of torture, the recently passed Senate torture legislation...
More “Culture Wars” Gibberish from nutcase David Brooks (16282 Hits)
Most of us know David Brooks as the balding goofball on “The Jim Lehrer News Hour” who shrugs his shoulders and giggles gleefully whenever...
This Is The Way Of Dictatorships. (12234 Hits)
If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier... just so long as I'm the dictator.” George Walker Bush, 2000   Was...
"Boiling Point" - Eroding Freedom: From John Adams to George W. Bush (18619 Hits)
Put a frog into a pot of boiling water, the well-known parable begins, and out that frog will jump to escape the obvious danger. Put that same...
Read This Before You Vote (15772 Hits)
If one were to believe the hype, nothing less than the fate the civilized world is riding on the results of the upcoming midterm elections....

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Comments (3)add comment

a guest said:

It is an interesting point you raise. Clinton had a blowjob, lied about it because it was no one else's business (and it wasn't) and the media and much of the congress wanted to impeach him, he was pursued with such venom.

George Bush comes up with a story about weapons of mass distruction and present danger, all which proved to be false but leads the the death of over 3000 US military and a large number of Iraq's, places the US in a unwinnable war, and he is under no threat at all. At the same time he all but gives up chasing Osama Bin Laden who was responsible for the most horrific attack on US soil, leaving him to be still free today, probably planning further attacks.

I really have trouble with the numbers being killed for what appears to have been a lie to start with, and the lack of accoutability at the whitehouse. How many people have to die ?
February 01, 2007
Votes: +0

a guest said:

"At the same time he all but gives up chasing Osama Bin Laden who was responsible for the most horrific attack on US soil, leaving him to be still free today, probably planning further attacks."

Time for a little perspective here. More that ten times the number of people killed on 9/11 are killed each year in traffic accidents. Do we spend anywhere near the US military budget on preventing traffic accidents and reducing the severity of the injuries that result?

We seem to have killed about 700,000 people in Iraq, not counting the million or so that died as a result of our sanctions since George H.W. Bushes war against Iraq. Now if we add the deaths of Palestinians that we pay for by our support of the government of Israel, it can be seen that we are far far worse terrorists that Osama Bin Ladin and his merry men could ever be.
February 01, 2007
Votes: +0

Russell Wellen said:

Talk of an Attack. . .
. . . on Iran goes in one ear and out the other with most
Americans. They can only handle one war at a time and Iraq dominates the news.

But in the back of their mind they're thinking that, while an attack on Iran might be a mistake, it doesn't directly affect their own lives. Tens of thousands of Iranian lives lost is like water off their backs.

But they're not aware the price of gas and heating oil could double, which might lead to a depression, which means 25% unemployment. Which means they -- you and I -- could lose our jobs.

Presented as a threat to their job security, Americans might respond to calls to oppose an attack on Iran.
February 01, 2007
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger



Top 123