Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (1 comment)

Fool me twice

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (2 fans)   -- Page 1 of 1 page(s)

opednews.com

In a Haaretz interview published today and titled "Is an attack on Iran a big Risk?" Patrick Clawson seems to weigh the possible outcome scenarios of a hostile attack on Iran in the same cavalier and careless manner a prospective violator would consider speeding his vehicle down a freeway.

Of course many of us unsheltered souls, who happen not to have spent the last six years under a rock watching rerun episodes of "Fox Reality" shows on TV, are painfully familiar with this type of "expert" risk-benefit analysis.

The 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq was preceded, facilitated, and followed by one of the largest propaganda campaigns in which the public were subjected to a barrage of misinformation, lies, fear mongering, and mass deception.

Following the 9/11/01 terror attacks, Iraq was made into a WMD menace that had to be dealt with before it would attack Israel, its neighbors or even Europe and the United States. Yet Saddam had just fought a bloody eight-year war against Iran with full support of the U.S. and the Europeans and like those currently in charge of Iran, was fully mindful of the mad notion of attacking Israel given that country's clear military superiority and hundreds of nuclear weapons.

Non-existence of the WMDs aside, some may argue that Saddam's aggressive behavior displayed in attacking both his neighbors Iran and Kuwait was reason enough to remove him although many have already begun to question that wisdom given the hefty price tag.

While nothing we do now can ever reverse the colossal mistake that has manifested itself into the current fiasco in Iraq, there is a lot that can be done to stop a repeat of the same blunder on a far larger scale with respect to Iran. If countries can be bombed in violation of international law solely based on some perceived threat or improper rhetoric uttered by their leaders, then there will be nothing left but mayhem and global disorder.

When a violator is caught speeding down a freeway, the driver is the sole loser; but when one nation unilaterally imposes a war of aggression against another in violation of the U.N. Charter, we are all losers.

 

Daniel M Pourkesali is an Engineer with an Aerospace company in Northern Virginia specializing in development and manufacturing of flight dynamics, engineering and control systems.

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Fool by Archie on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 10:36:37 AM