Lieberman didn't mince words about America's position on Iran's nuclear program, saying that the recent U.S. sanctions against Iran was only the beginning, and that they served as a propaganda stunt to try to convince the world that America's intentions are to peacefully make Iran "negotiate the end of their nuclear program and re-entry into the civilized world, if that is possible. But if not, they should know that when Congress says it is unacceptable to get nuclear weapons, we mean it. We hope economic and diplomatic power will work, but if we must use force, that must remain a very active option.”
President Obama also reassured Israel through an interview with Israeli television that his administration is moving forward against Iran with all options on the table; "I assure you that I have not taken options off the table," (Washington Post). Even options under the table have not been removed by high-level U.S. warmongers, like a false flag operation to force Iran to play its hand, and retaliate against a staged military provocation by the U.S. and Israel.
Ideas about how to manipulate the Iranian regime into starting a military conflict have been thrown around by U.S. officials for the better part of the last decade. In July 2008, Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker that a former U.S. official told him that Dick Cheney was manufacturing war scenarios with Iran in the Vice-President's office in order to "create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington." Nothing came from Cheney's table talk, but the removal of the Bush administration has not deterred the government's appetite for war. The empire's course towards Ahmadgeddon is automatic, Obama is merely serving as the dummy in the Presidential driving seat. Like Bush, he had his very own "Mission Accomplished" moment on Monday, August 2, when he prematurely declared an end to the Iraq war. Obviously, Obama does not believe this, but someone has to appease the American public these days, and that job often falls on the Scammer-in-Chief.
Obama's rhetoric aside, America is not leaving any Middle East country in the immediate future. An invasion by U.S. troops into Iran is more likely to happen than the departure of U.S. troops from Iraq. America will sing, "This is the End, My Only Friend, The End," after the first nukes drop in the Middle East, or, if it doesn't reach that horrific point, then after the first heads roll in America.
To be clear, I want to see the end of the Islamic regime in Iran. Also, the most powerful, and extremist Mullahs should be hanged for their trespasses against the God-given rights of the Iranian people. So I am in a bit of a bind. A war is the worse thing that could happen, but a violent uprising against the Revolutionary Guard is next to impossible. So what should be done to the Iranian regime? Further sanctions? Further intimidation by the corrupt rulers of America and Israel? No. That must be prevented at all costs. Rather, civil society in all countries around the world must get actively involved to help reform the regimes in America, Israel, and Iran. All three regimes pose a danger to the progress of civilization, and the freedoms of humanity.
Not all three regimes are alike, however, America and Israel are more guilty than Iran for the crisis that has been staring down mankind in this so far dark century. Israeli and American leaders, along with AIPAC, and the neoconservatives, are the real menace to human civilization.
Israel has long terrorized, and oppressed the Palestinian people, and they are in the process of totally removing them from what remains of their ancient land. And America, in partnership with Israel's most irrational leaders, has waged an illegal war on terrorism for over nine years, during which it has attacked two innocent countries, and killed over a million human beings who did not deserve to die. Both immoral regimes are responsible for massive war crimes, and their arrogant leaders must face justice before they launch an attack on Iran.
Most polls about American public opinion towards Iran suggest that only a slight minority will support an attack. It is tough to calculate the success of the propaganda onslaught by the U.S. media to rouse Americans against Iran, and build a bipartisan consensus for a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. Not until the first strikes occur will we see the full backlash by the American people against their political leaders. Will millions of people march on Washington D.C.? Will the U.S. government take precautions prior to striking Iran, and publicly enact Martial Law? All that remains to be seen. What we can say definitively is that a U.S. war with Iran is coming sooner or later. It is not a matter of if, but when. Dr. Alan Sabrosky, a Marine Corps Veteran, highlighted the real reasons behind U.S. sanctions against Iran in his article, "The Hidden Face of Sanctions":
"The real purpose of sanctions is not to affect the policies of the Iranian government, because nothing it does will affect the sanctions. It is to prepare the US public for an attack against Iran, almost certainly in conjunction with Israel, to destroy Israel's last remaining competitor in the region and to provide a cover for Israel's expulsion of the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, into Jordan and the Sinai respectively."The mentality of "crisis" that steers decision-making in the highest chambers of Zionist-controlled Israel, and the Zionist-controlled Congress, is not reflective of reality. U.S. and Israeli war-makers are not interested in pursuing peaceful engagement with the Muslim world, and bringing the idea of the "clash of civilizations" to an end. They desire a century of permanent conflict, and endless staged crises; dividing nations, races, religions, and people with shared histories.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, who served as the National Security Adviser to the Carter administration, and partly behind the U.S. policy in the 1980's to fund the Taliban, and other Muslim warriors to weaken the Soviet Union, told the French magazine 'Le Nouvel Observateur' in 1998 that Islamic fundamentalism does not represent any great danger to Western civilization because it is fractionalized, and that the West should extend the arm of reason to leaders of the Muslim world:
Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?What Brzezinski wisely said in 1998 also held true on September 12, 2001. The majority of the Muslim world, including the people of Iran, reacted sympathetically to America's suffering, and criticized the evil-doers who committed the attacks. Muslim-American organizations also condemned the attacks:Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
"American Muslims utterly condemn the vicious and cowardly acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. We join with all Americans in calling for the swift apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators. No political cause could ever be assisted by such immoral acts."Soon after, the Bush administration squandered the Muslim support for America by invading Afghanistan, and Iraq without providing any proof that either country was responsible for 9/11. In fact, the true perpetrators of the attacks are still unnamed, and unpunished, but the likely organizations that they work for are Mossad, and the CIA-within-the-CIA.
Like millions of Americans, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the 9/11 attacks a "big fabrication," that is used to justify U.S. aggression in the Middle East. Also, Pakistan's General Hamid Gul, a former director of the ISI, and whose ties with Afghan insurgents are evident in the release of the WikiLeaks war logs, said that, "Mossad and its American associates," were responsible for 9/11 days after the attacks. Speaking to Arnaud de Borchgrave of United Press International in September 2001, Gen. Gul said:
"Mossad and its American associates are the obvious culprits. Who benefits from the crime? The attacks against the twin towers started at 8:45 a.m. and four flights are diverted from their assigned air space and no air traffic controller sounds the alarm. And no Air Force jets scramble until 10 a.m. That also smacks of a small scale Air Force rebellion, a coup against the Pentagon perhaps? Radars are jammed, transponders fail. No IFF -- friend or foe identification -- challenge. In Pakistan, if there is no response to IFF, jets are instantly scrambled and the aircraft is shot down with no further questions asked. This was clearly an inside job."The censorship about 9/11 evidence in the Western media is likely to last until the last bombs drop on Iran.
Whether or not the Iranian regime is in pursuit of nuclear technology to make a nuclear bomb, or to increase energy output in Iran is not the most critical question to ask. What is of greater importance is why must America and Israel have nuclear weapons, but not Iran? The current leaders of America, and Israel do not represent the enlightenment values of Western civilization, they are deformed monsters that have invaded the Western psyche, and masked their own brutality with the language of Jefferson, Mill, Locke, and the other great representatives of Western civilization.
In the last nine years, Iran has witnessed its nuclear-less neighbors attacked by America, and is constantly threatened by U.S. military ships in its waters. Any sensible country would seek to acquire nuclear weapons under the existential threat that Iran faces every day. What country wouldn't? Iran's nuclear program is not a matter of backward Mullahs eying the destruction of Israel, although some religious extremists in Iran do want that to happen, but of Iranian national interest. Iran's Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi said that Iran's missile system will only be activated for purposes of self-defense, and that Iran will not attack any country. "Experience shows the US is not interested in peace and security," Gen. Vahidi said, "nor does it respect the interests of other countries."
Iran's attainment of nuclear weapons would not signal the end of the world, but merely the end of American hegemony and Israeli aggression in the Middle East, which is not a bad thing at all. The balance of power must be shared by all impressive and strong nations in the Middle East. One nation cannot be allowed to rule the rest in any region of the world. So far, America's corrupt rulers have not learned that important lesson, as they have not yet been humbled by their defeats in Afghanistan, and Iraq.
Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett sum up the dangers of a war with Iran in their article, "Who Will be Blamed For A U.S. Attack on Iran?" The ultimate blame, they say, will be laid at the feet of the extremists in Israel, and America, "if Washington initiates war with Iran over the nuclear issue, it will be primarily in response to pressure from Israel and the more Likudnik parts of the pro-Israel community in the United States. And those actors will bear a significant share of the blame for the consequences of that war."
A month ago, a report by the Oxford Research Group called, "Military Action Against Iran: Impact and Effects," warned of the regional and global consequences of a U.S. or Israeli military attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. The report recommends that U.S. and global leaders engage in rational dialogue, and pursue peaceful relations with Iran's regime:
“The consequences of a military attack on Iran are so serious that they should not be encouraged in any shape or form. However difficult, other ways must be found to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis.”One way to resolve the "Iranian nuclear crisis" is to stop viewing it as a crisis, and begin to approach it as a normal rational response by Iran to U.S. aggression in the Middle East. The crazies are not the guys who are trying to picking up the gun, they are the guys with the gun who are threatening to blow up the guys who are trying to pick up the gun. A Western-style showdown with nukes in the Middle East can be prevented if we just stop viewing foreign policy through a Hollywood-lens, and start to see the point of view of the other. Citizens of the world, including the sane military minds in the United States, must come together to denounce Israel's paranoia about the Iranian threat, and put a stop to America and Israel's aggression in the Middle East.
