The author of the piece, who shall remain nameless, warns of an apocalyptic like scenario if the Iranian theocracy get their dirty hands on nukes, but, and here is the funny part, he doesn't mean to "advocate war." Isn't that nice of him?
Here is the crux of the piece, which is filled with cliff-hanging notes, and reads like a bad doom-saying pitch to a public who has heard it all before. Apparently, this guy has been asleep this past decade and does not know that the same fear tactics have already been used on a Middle Eastern county. At least, perfect your fear pitch and add a new twist.
Anyways, here is a small passage in full:
Why is civil unrest in a distant theocratic nation a concern to us? Well, two reasons. First and foremost the Iranian theocracy is a prime sponsor of Shia based terrorist groups, including Hezbollah (largely based in southern Lebanon) and therefore an overthrow of that regime would be a welcome blow to the finances and infrastructure of a large number of Muslim extremists worldwide. Secondly, and far more importantly, Iran has been and continues to try to acquire nuclear arms. If it succeeds in doing so, the entire world will live at the pleasure of Shia extremists. I hope I do not seem melodramatic when I write that. The Shia Theocracy in Iran is just that: a Theocracy. It believes that the hidden Imam has been hiding in a well for nine hundred years and will only return in a period of enormous bloodshed. If Iran acquires a nuclear weapon we will have the coincidence of the very thing that all thinking people have been dreading all their lives: the merging of a messianic regime with apocalyptic weaponry. In other words, a group of extremists with an apocalyptic vision of the future will control the means to carry out their desires. A regime that does not understand deterrence, that does not understand détente, and that does not understand (or care) about self-preservation will have the means to impose suicide murder on a scale never before seen. It is frustrating that so many people do not know, care to acknowledge or understand this simple truth. Those who look at the world today and do not see a nuclear Iran as the gravest threat to humanity simply do not understand the concept of what a true threat is even as it glares them in the face.Okay, this guy is insane, riiight? Not so fast. I don't like describing anyone as insane, even this guy who probably calls people who question the official narrative of 9/11 insane.
The excavation begins, the first claim:
Why is civil unrest in a distant theocratic nation a concern to us? Well, two reasons. First and foremost the Iranian theocracy is a prime sponsor of Shia based terrorist groups, including Hezbollah (largely based in southern Lebanon) and therefore an overthrow of that regime would be a welcome blow to the finances and infrastructure of a large number of Muslim extremists worldwide.Does the author provide any concrete evidence for this claim? Other than war hungry Washington think tanks and their Israeli counterparts, level-headed commentators cannot unequivocally say that Hamas is a proxy for Iran. Does Iran want Hamas to succeed? Sure, in the same way America wants its interests in Latin America to succeed. But Iran is severely limited to lend support that could counteract Israel's constant provocations in Gaza. Former foreign service officer Hillary Mann Leverett appeared on NPR in January 2009 to dismiss Matthew Levitt's airy accusations about the extensive Iranian-Hamas ties. She said "the idea that Iran can somehow - by air, by sea, by land, through Egypt - get large, sophisticated weapons there, it's not plausible."
That is not to say there is no ties between the two camps, but they're not joined at the hip. After all, Hamas is an Arab political organization who is fighting for a state, and their success is due more to the grievances of Palestinians than the political wizardry of Iranian state officials. Leverett pointed to the Iranian state's weakness to extend their financial resources to Hamas. They can lend political weight, but not much else. "The Iranians," she said, "I think, would like to give Hamas a lot more money. They just don't have a real way of doing so clearly. The Iranian banking system itself has come under a lot of scrutiny and has been closed off in many ways, and of course, there's no functioning banking system inside of Gaza for Hamas to be able to get money."
The author of the passage above likes to blow things out of proportion and persuade us not to pay any attention to the real grizzlies in the room, America and Israel.
Let's break down another allegation the author makes:
Secondly, and far more importantly, Iran has been and continues to try to acquire nuclear arms. If it succeeds in doing so, the entire world will live at the pleasure of Shia extremists. I hope I do not seem melodramatic when I write that.You do sound melodramatic. At least I admit it when I sound melodramatic, because well, we live in melodramatic times. People like you lose their heads and would like the rest of us to lose our lives. You want the world to live at the pleasure of American and Israeli extremists, and you are hardly the complete opposite of Shia hardliners in Iran. It is highly plausible that Iran is acquiring a nuclear arsenal, but it is not an existential threat. You like us to forget that these mullahs are human. That is the easy way out, and only cry babies resort to such antics.
Humankind's greatest division, civilization and savagery, is once again being put to use in this mythic narrative. America, Israel and the West are the benevolent civilizers of Muslim barbarians. America, the great sacker of ancient cities, wants us to believe that it is exporting modern civilization. Very charming, if it weren't for the blood slowly creaking beneath their feet.
And, finally, the last part of the fairy tale:
The Shia Theocracy in Iran is just that: a Theocracy. It believes that the hidden Imam has been hiding in a well for nine hundred years and will only return in a period of enormous bloodshed. If Iran acquires a nuclear weapon we will have the coincidence of the very thing that all thinking people have been dreading all their lives: the merging of a messianic regime with apocalyptic weaponry. In other words, a group of extremists with an apocalyptic vision of the future will control the means to carry out their desires. A regime that does not understand deterrence, that does not understand détente, and that does not understand (or care) about self-preservation will have the means to impose suicide murder on a scale never before seen. It is frustrating that so many people do not know, care to acknowledge or understand this simple truth. Those who look at the world today and do not see a nuclear Iran as the gravest threat to humanity simply do not understand the concept of what a true threat is even as it glares them in the face.I'll just pretend that the guy is actually talking about the Bush administration and it's Christian extremist backing in the first section. The apocalyptic weaponry, the stockpiles of nuclear weapons, and a reckless regime that pursuits its ends regardless of logic, it all seems so fitting. Except, we just lived that nightmare. The guy must have been asleep, and had a bad nightmare in which Iranian clerics are rubbing their newly possessed nuclear head, and now that he's woken up he wants to warn the rest of the world. It's all very heroic and sweet, but someone needs to tell him that while he was asleep the Muslim world just lived that nightmare, some metaphorically, and others, very literally. Frankly, this guy is freaking us all out and who knows, his nightmare might actually become a reality, if he keeps on insisting that it is real. But regardless if he sees dead people, the strangest fact is that we can see him all too much. It is time we stop paying attention to those demons. If only the Kristols of the world could go away and voice their overblown fears in SecondLife or some kind of reality matrix. They need to be unplugged because their causing damage to our reality tunnel by their constant threats and use of fear. Are we forgetting that One Million Iraqis have died in this century! Where civilization began, that is where civilization is ending.
II.
Iran and fundamentalist Islam are definitely not an existential threat to civilization. But is Israel? Or America? I'm not entirely sure. I am clear, however, that the battle is not between good and evil. Or Religion vs Secular. "Tragedy," Charles Segal writes, "deals with situations where the division between civilization and savagery no longer seems to apply. Where this division is disturbed, so is the very nature of man and his humanity." The angry jackals in suits like the William Kirstols of the world, who have eyed war for a long time, are not rational actors. Their entire frame of reference is deeply flawed. The mythic narrative they've constructed is all consuming and through propaganda a large part of American society has come to accept this narrative, although sometimes reluctantly, especially in 2006 when the popularity of the Iraq War was at an all time low.
These men who see danger in every corner of the world are dangerous to our security and prosperity. They don't want dialogue because they've aggressively committed themselves to this version of events: that Islam is threatening the West, and Iranian mullahs will devastate Israel soon. And they don't want to debate so the outside world has no way to reach them. The people who see Iran as a threat need to be put in exile, on an island somewhere because they're not just any regular conspiracy theorists anymore. They are conspiracy theorists with power. And they are bringing doom to the world.
Once again, Segal says that tragedy "recognizes the ultimate failure of the logical model, the elusiveness and ambiguity of reality even as we grasp it and because we grasp it." I can't really grasp that statement, but like reality, I kind of get it, so I quoted him.
I don't know if a geopolitical artifice is being set up on purpose, because the Kristols of the world have nothing better to do. But if Iran is really a threat, it is because they are the only nation on the world stage to challenge the insanely criminal actions that Israel and America have jointly committed in Palestine. If Iranian mullahs were silent all these years, they could have all the nuclear toys.
Chris Floyd highlighted the "civil" American policy towards Iran for what it actually is: United States is the top dog, and Iranian mullahs will have to go quietly or violently, but they will have to go one way or the other.
Again, let us not forget that America's vast covert forces are sponsoring deadly terrorist attacks inside Iran -- an ongoing provocation that is guaranteed to rouse hardliner ire, undermine all genuine, independent reform movements, and make a mockery of Obama's ludicrous rhetoric about "dialogue." The Iranians -- scraping the bodies of their policemen, and the inevitable "collaterals," from the streets after yet another terrorist attack -- know full well that the Americans are not sincere about "dialogue" and "negotiations." They know the only negotiations the Americans are interested in are terms ofAmerican and Israeli extremists want to stand between gods and men, and not ground themselves, kind of like Michael Jackson standing between boyhood and manhood. These type of individuals have never learned the civilized codes of behavior, which as Segal describes, is what Greek civilization was all about . The warmongers of the world perceive the public as strange when we point out that a middle ground needs to be taken. If they are not put in exile, then our civilization could very well be destroyed. And by exile I mean not giving them any media or political attention and also by putting them in jail. If I sound melodramatic, I wouldn't know. If I sound repetitive, I don't care.
