Monday, February 20, 2006


I really don’t know where to start on this one.

It’s not that the neocons, after what everyone else sees as an incredible failure in Iraq, still want to attack Iran. I’d long ago realized just how oblivious to human suffering they were, and how once they were fixated on something, they would aggressively pursue it regardless of circumstances. And the plan always was to go into Iran : "Anyone can go to Baghdad. Real men go to Tehran." – how cute. So there’s no surprise there.

What is shocking is just how on board everyone else is with this. The Democrats are positioning themselves somewhat to the right of the war-mongering administration, Europe is playing along sycophantically as if regretting they weren’t involved in that fun Iraq escapade, and the media is cooperating far more than they did for the Iraq build-up, even after just having castigated itself for that mistake.

There is an almost uniform, consistent message coming out:

  • Iran is defying the world and trying to build a nuclear device.

  • If they get one, they’ll certainly attack Israel (thanks, Ahmadinejad) and – look at those circles of destruction showing the range of their missiles – are likely to attack anyone else they feel like.

  • We’ll try real hard to settle this diplomatically. And there is really no military solution. Unless there is.

Of course, it’s not hard to see the next step. Darn, diplomacy just isn’t working on those irrational Iranians. Shock and Awe II, maybe with mini-nukes added. And, to safeguard the Iraqi border, we’ll simply have to occupy oil-rich Khuzestan.

I feel sympathetic with Heather Wokusch’s analogy: “Witnessing the Bush administration’s drive for an attack on Iran is like being a passenger in a car with a raving drunk at the wheel.” But the part of all this that I find mind-boggling is how widespread the support for it is. It doesn’t take a whole lot to see how the IAEA and UN are being used simply so the US gets to say that “diplomacy failed”, since we just went through that experience with Iraq, and yet it’s difficult, if not impossible, to find a mainstream media outlet that makes this point. Quite the opposite, they’re all right on board, emphasizing how “Iran is different – really – they must be stopped”.

Ron Paul remains one of the few honest voices in congress. But there is no reason to think his message will spread.

And it’s truly sad when Pat Buchanan sounds like a beacon of sanity when compared with the NY Times, which is trumpeting the dangers of Tehran along with the rest of the media.

But that seems to be where we are.


Post a Comment

<< Home