There’s no doubt that if the war in Iraq had been the “cakewalk” the neocons predicted, Marines would be unfurling “Old Glory” in downtown Teheran right now. Bush has never wavered in his plan to topple the Mullahs or to put Iran’s vast petroleum reserves under American control. In fact, the administration’s own policy papers, including the National Security Strategy (NSS) assert that the United States has the right to take these resources if it is in our national interests.
Everyone knows Bush’s plans for the Middle East, so why are the IAEA and Security Council pretending that it has anything to do with Iran’s fictitious nuclear weapons program?
Haven’t we seen this charade before?
The nuclear issue is purely a pretext for war. Bush has telegraphed his intentions at every opportunity; he even announced to the Iranian people that his hostility is not directed at them, but at their government.
What gall.
Bush’s appeal to the Iranian people was meant to enlist them in the effort to topple their own government. How crazy is that?
No matter how much one dislikes the Bush administration, we would still fight to defend our own country if invaded. It’s absurd to think the Iranians would behave differently.
Besides, are the Iranians so simple-minded that they don’t know that the Shah’s son is still living in New York and has met regularly with leading figures in the Bush administration?
Iran languished for 25 years under the most brutal regime in the Middle East, the American-installed Shah. They have no illusions that the “Great Satan” would love to restore someone similar in his place.
Still, that hasn’t stopped congress from providing $75 million to build “pro-democracy” groups within Iran to foment revolution. Imagine a similar situation where Iran was funding organizations inside the US to overthrow Bush and co; they’d be trundled off to Guantanamo in the blink of an eye. This type of meddling is tantamount to an act of war and yet the American people shrug it off as “business as usual”.
No one in the Middle East is blind to America’s machinations. The landscape is loaded with clients, toadies, and venal monarchs all acting on Washington’s behalf. If Bush was serious about fighting terrorism he’d focus his attention on Riyadh not Tehran. And, if the IAEA was serious about nuclear proliferation, they’d be challenging the Bush administration’s upcoming tests of “Divine Strake”; the Pentagon’s attempt to create a new regime of low-yield, bunker-busting nuclear weapons. According to Defense Dept documents, Divine Strake is intended to “develop a planning tool to improve the warfighters confidence in selecting the smallest proper nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities while minimizing collateral damage.”
That’s right; the Washington warlords are planning to use nuclear weapons in an offensive attack.
So, why is ElBaradei dithering with Iran while this much graver threat is materializing in front of the whole world?
Why is the Security Council wasting time with imaginary weapons programs when the REAL danger is plain to see?
The international agencies have persisted with their clownish kowtowing to Washington while the administration edges closer towards nuclear Armageddon.
The primary responsibility of the United Nations is to stop wars of aggression. The UN maintained its moral legitimacy by opposing the invasion of Iraq even though it failed to stop the bloody sanctions-regime that killed 500,000 Iraqis. Now, it has capitulated to Bush by recognizing the American military as an “international force”; providing legal justification for the ongoing occupation.
The UN should reexamine its position and condemn the US presence in Iraq calling for the immediate withdrawal of all allied forces. By ignoring its obligations and devoting its energy to hectoring a peaceful nation that has operated within the requirements of international law and it’s clearly stated treaty rights, the UN has publicly disgraced itself and undermined its raison d’etre.
Similarly, the IAEA has failed to seriously address the issues for which it was formed. How can ElBaradei support a process that penalizes countries that follow the rules when neighboring Israel has secretly stockpiled 200 nuclear warheads and is threatening to attack Iran without any evidence of wrongdoing and without approval of the international community?
This is madness.
And, why hasn’t ElBaradei condemned Bush’s “dirty bombs” in Iraq which have poisoned the land and groundwater with toxic depleted uranium (DU) creating an enduring legacy of thyroid cancer, birth defects and other malignant sarcoma?
Nuclear weapons are being used in Iraq. It is ElBaradei’s job to stop it.
Hugo Chavez was right a few months ago when he said that the United Nations had outlived its usefulness and was only serving the interests of the powerful nations. The “alleged” standoff with Iran proves that the UN has degenerated into a rubber stamp for US aggression. Its main purpose now is to provide international cover for American plans to redraw the map of the Middle East and integrate dissident states into the neoliberal economic system.
When the bombing begins in Iran, the UN can finally board-up its doors and send the diplomats home; there’ll be no reason to maintain the pretense of a world that is governed by laws. An attack on Iranian facilities will signal a period of global realignment where states either submit to the Washington axis or join the growing resistance. In either event, we won’t need the UN to keep the warring parties apart.
We’re moving quickly moving towards Bush’s dream of a world that is divided into “us against them”.
God help us.
Mike is a freelance writer living in Washington state.
I sure hope your children toe the mark, fella, cause Id sure hate to see your solution to their foibles.
Does it bother you to be in the company of the far right who hate what the UN stands for with great passion?
Are your notings of the weaknesses of the ability of the UN to deal with violations by the great powers false? Why no indeed they are right on the mark.
Do you fail abysmally to note the very many great things accomplished by the UN in your passionate call for the disbanding of that agency, uh yup.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Sunday, April 30, 2006 at 2:51:28 PM
I don't want to labour the issue and only like to say---if the UN had any balls, it would have sent a army-blazing with fire power againist the terroist Israelies. Where is the UN to protect the Palestinians?-under the skirt of Israel.
Reminder--USA formed the UN for the sole reason to create a homeland for the Jews in 1947. Even if the child is a monster eating it's mother--she(USA) is still loving the abortion!
by
george arch (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 25 comments)
on Monday, May 1, 2006 at 8:59:02 PM
The purpose of the UN, created from the League of Nations, not from any USA driven desire to create an Israeli homeland, is primarily to prevent wars not start them.
The State of Israel came from the Balfour declaration, as England offered a place for the Holocaust survivors, which they immediately regretted, leading to their arming of the indigenous Arab population in the hope that the ensuing bloodbath would create world wide desire for them to retake their former colony to secure peace and safety.
It would seem that silly threads calling for the disbanding of the UN bring out equally uninformed commentary from people with no knowledge of the subject and only hatred to offer.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Tuesday, May 2, 2006 at 7:27:00 AM
3 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
