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

Mon

27

Sep

2010

A defense which deserves being called "Holy"
Monday, 27 September 2010 05:29
by Kourosh Ziabari in Iran
 

Almost 20 years have passed since the conclusion of 20th century's longest, most erosive war which was brutally imposed on the defenseless people of Iran by a belligerent and aggressive dictator who was finally pushed to death by the same people who had once persuaded, funded, aided and supported him in attacking and invading the new-born Iran of post-revolution days.

 

The expansionistic ambitions of the beloved puppet of the White House who was granted the honorary citizenship of Detroit as a reward for his unconditional subservience to the United States, transpired to be a deadly pandemic which claimed the lives of more than 400,000 innocent Iranians who witnessed the most breathtaking years the country had experienced contemporarily.

 

With the intention of revitalizing the forgotten pan-Arabist sentiments of the 1950s, confronting an emerging Shiite power in the Persian Gulf region and taking over some of the strategic parts of Iran including the Arab-speaking province of Khuzestan and the triple islands of Abu Musa, Lesser Tunb and Greater Tunb which were handed over to Iran 9 years earlier in a trilateral agreement between Iran, the protectorate of Ras Al-Khaimah and the representatives of British forces in the Persian Gulf, Saddam Hussein unilaterally nullified the 1975 Algiers Agreement in 1980 and attacked Iran.

 

At that time, he was enormously supported by the United States and its European allies who had seen the post-revolutionary Iran an ideological threat to their liberal democratic values and feared of the growing embrace of Islam by the international community that was inspired and attracted by the charisma of Iran's revolutionary leader, Imam Khomeini.

 

Following the victory of 1979 Islamic Revolution which put an end to the era of U.S.-backed monarchy in Iran, White House frantically realized that it had lost its stooge in the Middle East, so it should have replaced Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi with an ambitious leader whose greed for power could serve the interests of Washington in the region. Consequently, the United States backed Saddam Hussein in bringing down President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, as it had done the same in coup against Abd al-Karim Qasim by entrusting Hussein the mission to assassinate the Iraqi Prime Minister. The assassination plan was designed with the cooperation of the CIA and Egyptian intelligence. Although the 22-year-old Saddam failed to kill the Prime Minister on October 7, 1959, he was killed in a February 1963 Baath Party coup.

 

In the case of confrontation with Iran, Washington did not spare any effort to support the Iraqi dictator who was armed by the United States to the teeth. In order to strengthen Saddam Hussein in war with Iran which started in 1980, the U.S. State Department first removed the name of Iraq from its list of state sponsors of international terrorism in February 1982.

 

From this point onward, United States took several steps to normalize its already strained relations with Iraq. One of these steps was pressuring the Export-Import Bank of the United States to provide Iraq with financing, enhancing its credit standing and enabling Baqdad to obtain loans from other international financial institutions.
 

 

Although the United States had publicly promulgated that it would take neither sides in the Iran – Iraq war, it was revealed later that Saddam Hussein pulled the first trigger with the direct support and encouragement of the United States. United States officially announced the normalization of its ties with Iraq in November 1984, the fourth year of Iran – Iraq war, while the U.S. had previously begun providing Iraq with military support and intelligence training in accordance with the directives personally issued by President Ronald Reagan, pursuant to his March 1982 National Security Study Memorandum in which a revision of U.S. Middle East policies was sought.

 

In the summer of 1983, Iran lodged a set of complaints against Iraq to the United Nations, informing the international body of Iraq's employment of chemical weapons against the Iranian civilians in violation of Geneva Convention. Influenced by the United States and its European allies, the United Nations did not heed the calls, but the secret documents of the U.S. Department of State confirmed Iran's allegations against Iraq. Intelligence documents revealed that Iraq had used chemical weapons against Iranian forces and Kurdish insurgents as well.

 

In a U.S. Department of State Information Memorandum dated November 1, 1983 signed by the United States Navy Admiral addressed to the Secretary of State, it was clearly stated that Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranians: "we also know that Iraq has acquired a Chemical Weapon production capability, primarily from Western firms, including possibly a U.S. foreign subsidiary."

 

Another U.S. Department of State unclassified document, an Action Memorandum signed by Jonathan T. Howe and Richard W. Murphy, the United States Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, addressed to the Secretary of State Lawrence S. Eagleburger, shows that the two high-ranking U.S. officials demand a serious and immediate action on the side of State Department with regards to the possibility of Iran's complaint being raised in the United Nations and the Security Council. They confirm that some of the European firms are selling Chemical Weapons to Iraq and this issue should be discussed with the European governments: "In October (1983) Iran accused Iraq of using CW and on November 8, it required the UNSYG to investigate. Iran also stated it would soon submit a report providing information and evidence on Iraqi CW use, but has not yet done so. We do not know whether or when this issue will develop further at the UN. It is important to make our approach to the Iraqis on this issue as early as possible, in order to deter further Iraqi use of CW, as well as to avoid unpleasantly surprising Iraq through public positions we may have to take on this issue."

 

The extent of U.S. support for Iraq during the war was so broad that needs an all-encompassing investigative research to be explained. On May 25, 1994, the U.S. Senate Banking Committee published a report in which it was stated that "pathogenic (disease producing), toxigenic (poisonous), and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq pursuant to application and licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce."

 

The Iraqgate scandal revealed that an Atlanta-based branch of Italy's largest bank, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, which was predominantly reliant on the United States for its funding and budget, transferred over US$ 5 billion to Iraq from 1985 to 1989.

 

As said by the German newspaper "Die Tageszeitung", more than 150 foreign companies, including American firms, supported Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction program during the 8-year war with Iran. Saudi Arabia dispatched hundreds of U.S.-manufactured Mark 84 general purpose bombs which entered the global service since Vietnam War.

 

President Reagan assigned Donald Rumsfeld as his special emissary to Saddam and conveyed to him America's willingness and decisiveness in supporting Iraq in war with Iran. In a nutshell, the United States and its cronies all around the world came together to support Saddam and defeat the independent Iran which was defiantly resisting the arrogant powers.

 

Now, 20 years have gone since those bitter days and Iran is marking the conclusion of 8-year war with Iraq from September 22 for one week. This week is named the Week of Holy Defense in honor of the magnanimous, righteous and praiseworthy resistance of Iranians against a congregation of bullying powers who supported a bullying dictator to dissolve the manifestation of Iranian nation's will. Iranians defended themselves nobly and their moral resistance against the coalition of global tyrants deserves to be called a holy defense.

 
More from this author:
Understanding the reality of Iran (10285 Hits)
by Kourosh Ziabari Perhaps, it would not be a digestible fact for the majority of western powers, public opinions and mainstream media, but...
"Change we need, change we did!" (4735 Hits)
by Kourosh Ziabari "It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment,...
Iran and S. Korea; friendship beyond football! (4745 Hits)
by Kourosh Ziabari In our outlandish and bizarre era where the mogul warmongers are bombarding the innocent children and women, corporation media...
So, We are Terrorists! (4430 Hits)
by Kouros Ziabari in Iran, Tensions between Iran and Canada lead to mistreatment and humiliation, and the unreasonable and questionable...
What does the Israel-backed UAE say? (4329 Hits)
by Kourosh Ziabari in Iran Speaking or writing as an Iranian citizen makes it difficult to weigh in on the latest remarks made by the UAE...
Related Articles:
Hussein's Defense Team Outraged - Ramsey Tossed out of Court (8692 Hits)
by Richard Kastelein Ramsey Clark was violently removed from the courtroom in Baghdad at the Trial. He claims it was a...
Blogswarm in Action - KSFO Radio - Racist, Repugnant and now being Ravaged by the Blogosphere (8259 Hits)
Guest Article by Mike Stark Most of you know that Disney owns ABC. ABC, of course, owns the ABC Radio Network. Finally, ABCRN owns KSFO, a...
The Hypocritical Christian Right is being “Left Behind” (7969 Hits)
by Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. Rev. Lonnie W. Latham was a fire and brimstone, Bible-thumping anti-gay Baptist pastor and member of the executive...
Waging Peace: Being at Peace (4242 Hits)
by ddjango In the Wikipedia, peace is defined as follows: Peace is a state of harmony, absent open hostility. This term is applied to...
For Five Years We've Called It Blood for Oil (4769 Hits)
by David Swanson And we've been right. The first of the five "benchmarks" in the war funding bill passed by the U.S. House of...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (2)add comment

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org said:

0
"holy" bit of bullshit
I have to respond to this "holy" bit of bullshit: “Iranians defended themselves nobly and their moral resistance against the coalition of global tyrants deserves to be called a holy defense.”

Are you a journalist or the PR spokesman of the beleaguered state?

Have you seen any war? War casualties?

No modern war is holy, for its victims are always non-combatant civilians - not to mention the butchery the modern uniforms do to each other even when they are paid to wear it in the name of duty. To defend oneself from aggression is an evil existential necessity, an existential right to self-defence that cannot be legislated away. But the exercise of that inalienable right in modernity almost always entails inflicting the most extreme forms of violence upon the enemy. The sorts of barbarisms that one is forced to exercise, and to experience, even in self-defence, can in no way be termed “holy”, except in Newspeak. Only the dead have seen the end of war (I think it's Plato's rendering - but also entirely self-evident). Perhaps that's why the dead are also the only ones at peace and deemed to be in “heaven” in all war mobilizations.

The living suffer through it both during, and afterwards. And a nuclear war, a DU decimation, being bombed into stone-age, will continue to inflict immeasurable suffering for eons to come – as in Iraq – even after the canons have gone silent. And that is the potential cataclysm facing Iran today. A self-defence against it – borrowing from your description of the previous war – will only be called "holy" in Newspeak, and all sides will indulge in it. But those suffering the aggression are not made automatically holy just because they are the victims! To be holy – i.e., in Realityspeak I imagine it means to be moral, fair, and just to most people – one has to act moral, fair and just in all circumstance. The test of it is daily, constant.

On that yardstick of non Newspeak, can you list what moral acts were undertaken by Iran in its self-defence which saw a million Muslims slaughtered on either side by Muslims, because of which one might non-propagandistically term that longest war holy?

A victimhood and holy-ness always seem to go together – just look at the pious Jews living it out daily in Zionistan.

The glorification of modern war as “holy” is exclusively the craftsmanship of war propagandists who are tasked to mobilize their people, on either side, whether ideologically as the aggressors often are, or with a paycheck as their paid shills and mercenaries always are. To wit: the War on Terror – now that's a "holy" war isn't it? Honest journalists are not state propagandists. They must expose its abhorrences, even despite self-defence being an inalienable existential imperative. So I ask you again, what was bloody “holy” in that grotesque internecine violence of brother killing brother and children sent to the front-lines as the jihadis awaiting heaven; entirely set up to partake of that holy evil by the same Hectoring Hegemons who are now ready to do it themselves directly to your country once again?

When well-intentioned journalists join in that effort of war glorification, they are called "embedded" journalists, or aren't you familiar with that term? The embedding is evidently ubiquitous, and occurs in all state-sponsorship. Awards received from state-power seem to have the uncanny power to corrupt and co-opt any commonsense. I admire that you and the majority of Iranian people and its leaders are not suffering from “Occidentosis” – the plague from the West which was prevalent during the Shah's insufferable regime, and which apparently still afflicts the tiny minority of Iranian “House Negroes” calling for “green revolution” and “regime change” – any longer. But to replace that with severe myopia is perhaps even more pathetic (and tragic).

Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
October 01, 2010

Comment for 'A defense which deserves being called Holy by Kourosh Ziabari'
 
October 01, 2010
Votes: +0

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org said:

0
propagandists who believe their own lies
Just for completeness of the tortuous empiricism noted in my comment above that "No modern war is holy, for its victims are always non-combatant civilians ", I quote the Israeli Military from their testimony in Rachel Corrie's court hearing:


"During war there are no civilians," that’s what “Yossi,” an Israeli military (IDF) training unit leader simply stated during a round of questioning on day two of the Rachel Corrie trials, held in Haifa’s District Court earlier this week. “When you write a [protocol] manual, that manual is for war,” he added.

- Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/i...65366.html


While the world is expressing its usual 15-seconds of shock at this cold admission, the world is also full of idle specators' ooos, aahs, and boos as the case may be. This is a case of the latter. That statement however is empirical - and only the Chutzpah of the 'chosen peoples' permitted them to brazenly admit in court what is already known to everyone that "During war there are no civilians," for they know that this isn't the Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, nor Adolf Eichmann's Trial in Jerusalem. The judge, jury, and executioners are all the same presiding over their own murderers - not victors over the vanquished.

But the empirical facts don't need the admission of the guilty, nor the verdict of the victor's court, to become fact.

The United States has itself killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, millions if we start counting from World War II and include the Allied fire-bombings of Japan and Germany culminating in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and tens of millions if we include all wars during the past 100 years, including the Iran-Iraq war, and now the war on terror, count-em - the dead are mostly innocent civilians. The wars themselves, all of them as a dispassionate study indicates, were set-up by third parties who first created the antagonists, and then got them to kill each other according to pre-planned agendas. Inextricably caught in those man-made evil agendas, the poor victims are not made holy, nor their efforts to survive become holy.

The fact that this Iranian journalist has tried to whitewash the destruction of an entire generation of his own Iranian peoples as "holy", and has not responded to my critique above, has left me no choice but to firmly conclude that he is indeed a state propagandist who, as Hitler had stated of every journalist in Mein Kampf (Vol. 1, Chapter X, gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt), is "fundamentally a rogue who sometimes speaks the truth" - nothing more. What a shame....

Iran can perhaps survive its many traitors and uncle toms - all the flag-waiving regime-changers - but surely not its handful of fools in key places (nor its propagandists who believe their own lies).

Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org


 
October 29, 2010
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top