"America is engaged in a great ideological struggle -- fighting Islamic extremists across the globe." --Bush in speech before American Legion 8/28/07
No other nations in the region have been more pernicious and destructive in their interference in Iraq as the U.S. and Britain. Yet, Bush has adopted the rhetoric of a true autocrat in arguing to continue defending the regime he installed behind the sacrifices of our soldiers and propped-up against Iraqi resistance; labeling all who would resist his strident military advance as "extremists."
“I want our fellow citizens to consider what would happen if these forces of radicalism and extremism were allowed to drive us out of the Middle East,” Bush told the audience at the American Legion in Nevada. “The region would be dramatically transformed in a way that could imperil the civilized world,” he warned.
Once again, evoking the images of 'mushroom clouds' and nuclear war, Bush warned the gathering of veterans about the prospect of Iran initiating a "nuclear holocaust" which he says would occur because of their "pursuit of technology which could lead to nuclear weapons."
"Iran's active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust," Bush said in the first in a series of speeches planned to defend his announced decision to brush past the anticipated September report and past any calls for him to end his Iraq occupation by a date certain.
"We will confront this danger before it is too late." he said.
No matter to Bush that his administration has proliferated U.S. nuclear technology to Iraq's neighbor, India. No contradiction in Bush's mind over his administration's insisting on restarting the nuclear arms race by angling for new, 'usable' mini-nukes which he's directed for use (for the first time in our nation's history) against countries which pose no nuclear threat.
It is the Bush administration who has been the aggressor against Iran, without one instance of Iran declaring ANY intention to confront the U.S. militarily outside of their own borders. The rhetorical case they're trying to make against Iran's alleged assistance to Iraqi resistance groups is void of the type of evidence of Iranian involvement that the Americans and the world community have a right to expect from this administration which deliberately and repeatedly lied our nation into codifying their aggression against Iraq.
Bush warns of some hostile takeover of Iraq by outside forces in the future as if his own American invasion and occupying forces were some unremarkable adjunct to the faltering regime. There is a similarity to the tyranny of the leaders who've assumed power in Iraq and in the U.S., in that Maliki himself lived in exile in Syria for twenty-one years, providing at least that one shared trait of alienation from Iraqis between the U.S. over-throwers and the Shiite usurpers to Saddam's U.S. assisted rule.
"I want our fellow citizens to consider what would happen if these forces of radicalism and extremism are allowed to drive us out of the Middle East," Bush told the veterans in Nevada.
"The region would be dramatically transformed in a way that could imperil the civilized world. Extremists of all strains would be emboldened by the knowledge that they forced America to retreat. Terrorists could have more safe havens to conduct attacks on Americans and our friends and allies. Iran could conclude that we were weak -- and could not stop them from gaining nuclear weapons. And once Iran had nuclear weapons, it would set off a nuclear arms race in the region," Bush warned.
"Extremists would control a key part of the world's energy supply, could blackmail and sabotage the global economy. They could use billions of dollars of oil revenues to buy weapons and pursue their deadly ambitions. Our allies in the region would be under greater siege by the enemies of freedom. Early movements toward democracy in the region would be violently reversed," he said.
Imagine, as Bush wondered aloud -- if the U.S. did manage to leave Iraq -- how the news of a U.S. withdrawal would be received by the terrorists who've enjoyed safe haven in the mountains of Afghanistan because of his diversion of the bulk of our military to Iraq. Predictably, they would label the withdrawal a defeat for our cause in Iraq. Yet, our soldiers have already achieved whatever military 'victory' in Iraq that they can reasonably be expected to accomplish with their overthrow of the Saddam regime. Indefinite defense of the puppet government is not an endeavor which can be properly measured as a 'victory' or even a 'success.'
It would, in fact, be a defeat for Bush's ambition to use Iraq as a permanent base of operations against Iran, Syria, and other countries in the region Bush that imagines dominating militarily. An exit from Iraq would also represent a defeat for the Bush cabal's ambition to control the flow and resource from the country's lucrative oil fields. Nothing could be more critical to this administration's imperialistic ambitions than to lose whatever leverage over the regional oil supply and market they imagine they've gained from their invasion and occupation of Iraq.
It is that very ambition of the Bush administration to control the flow and sales of the region's oil that has led to the obsession with Iran that the administration masks behind their inflated, unproved accusations of an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Their oil ambitions are clear and unambiguously presented along with their National Intelligence Estimates which regularly list Russia's investments in Iran's oil infrastructure and China's billion dollar oil deals with the most celebrated member of Bush's 'evil axis.'
It's not enough for the U.S. to illegally invade and occupy a sovereign nation in the face of Russian and Chinese objections, now the Bush regime is intent on pressing their aggression and military posturing against Russia and China's economic ally, Iran, to the point of destabilizing the balance of weaponry in Europe which had allowed the decades-old deescalation of tensions and relative peace to prevail. And, they want us to believe that the target of their own destabilizing aggression is the most pernicious threat.
Ron Fullwood, is an activist from Columbia, Md. and the author of the book 'Power of Mischief' : Military Industry Executives are Making Bush Policy and the Country is Paying the Price
After watching the National Geographic special on the war I kind of laughed at how many bombs it took to take out one masonry building filled with the enemy. I believe they call them smart bombs. If you want my advise I'd stop pouring money into those over priced and hyped bombs and go back to dropping tons of bombs and leveling everything.
by
drasile (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 77 comments)
on Wednesday, August 29, 2007 at 2:08:42 PM
Shouldn't someone tell the U.S. that its national security can be better protected by signing non aggression treaties and then verifying them rather than making an enemy of perhaps half the nations of the world? Why is the U.S. security the only security in the world that requires U.S. bases in over 100 countries? Don't you find that strange. Just as strange is the expenditure per year by the U.S. on armaments and "Defense" equal to the expenditure for the same things of all the other countries in the world combined. That points to a lot more than protection of so called national security. It smacks of out and out militarism of the most obscene kind. Please remember in all the prevaricating verbiage issuing from the Great Decider that only ONE country in history has ever used nuclear weapons on the civilian population of another country and that of course is the U.S. That same country is now declaring that it has the right to use nuclear weapons on any country they wish to even if that country does not have nuclear weapons itself. Need I say more? America has sunk to the level of a sewer. A sewer of proponents of nuclear devestation.
by
Archie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 942 comments)
on Wednesday, August 29, 2007 at 10:45:10 PM
The article states that Al Qaeda has an active plot to hit the West.
What's interesting is that I recently spoke with my neighbor who's brother-n-law is Iranian and now a US citizen, and who also has family in Los Angeles, CA. My neighbor also said there is a large Iranian community in CA. Putting two and two together, if this Newsweek article is correct and God forbid, there is some sort of attack in that part of the country, what if this administration were to then conveniently blame it on Iran?
Would someone please yell cut!!!! and put an end to this Bush, Cheney horror show!
by
Munich (0 articles, 52 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 726 comments)
on Wednesday, August 29, 2007 at 11:24:07 PM
Iraqis have a right to ask their neighbors for help
It's so amusing that the Decider says that Iran is not being helpful in Iraq, that they're destabilizing the region. And the US invasion was "helpful" and "stabilizing"?
I'm really upset that the US troops are getting killed, and I pray every day that the soldiers I personally know get out of there alive. But honestly, if some Iranians are helping Iraqis kick out the invaders (our troops), how is that different from how the frontline states in Africa helped the African National Congress fighters in their struggle against the apartheid regime?
Don't let Bush set the terms of the debate. If we put too much emphasis on the lack of proof of an Iranian source for x weapons, then we may lose the argument. What if they can prove the Iranian military is condoning or even aiding the insurgency? Then will we agree that it's OK to bomb the hell out of 70 million human beings across the border from Iraq?
Even if suddenly there's irrefutable proof that some officials in Iran (as contrasted with smugglers) have supplied weapons that were used against US soldiers, we in the US peace movement must refuse to be distracted. The point is that it's our responsibility to get our troops out of there and end the occupation. American soldiers wouldn't be targets if they weren't there, and they don't belong there.
by
Rosa Schmidt Azadi (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 50 comments)
on Monday, September 3, 2007 at 2:32:04 PM
