"Israel has been saying for years an Iranian bomb is months away. Where is the proof? Where is the evidence to justify a new U.S. war in the Middle East to destroy weapons of mass destruction that may not exist in Iran, as they did not exist in Iraq?"
This column appeared four years ago. Nothing has changed except the date. Israel continues to cry nuclear wolf. The U.S. consistently indulges Israel in its desire to make Iran a pariah among nations.
This indulgence could start to change this week when, and if, President Obama meets with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. The two leaders are scheduled to speak to the United Nations General Assembly Tuesday.
There are strong signs they will meet somewhere at the UN. The meeting could be serious, or it could just be accidentally on purpose. But it will happen.
President Rouhani set his agenda for a serious meeting by asserting, "the world has changed," in a column published in the Washington Post.
CNN reported on the column:
"Iranian President Hassan Rouhani made his case Thursday to the American people and the world for 'a constructive approach' to contentious issues including his nation's nuclear program, arguing that failing to engage 'leads to everyone's loss.'
"'We must work together to end the unhealthy rivalries and interferences that fuel violence and drive us apart,' Rouhani said in an op-ed published Thursday evening on the Washington Post's website."
Letters had earlier been exchanged between Washington and Teheran, a correspondence Israel has greeted with its customary cries of dismay, followed by a call to action by Israel's U.S. political/media troops.
This effort by Israel to arouse U.S. public opinion against Rouhani appears certain to bring a second defeat to Israel and its U.S. hardline backers. The first defeat came when the U.S. chose diplomacy over a military assault on Syria's chemical weapons sites.
Assuming any sort of Rouhani-Obama meeting does take place, score this round: Diplomacy, two wins, War, zero wins.
Diplomacy as the better of the two options was highlighted in a recent interview on the Bill Moyers weekly television broadcast, September 6.
This interview was taped on the weekend before a joint U.S.-Russia diplomatic agreement postponed and hopefully derailed, any U.S. cruise missile strikes against Syria.
In this Moyers segment, which may be seen in its entirety by clicking above, guest host Phil Donahue interviewed historian and military scholar Andrew Bacevich about America's role in the world and the possible repercussions of our current relationship to Syria.
In the interview, Bacevich tells Donahue...
"[T[ick off the number of military enterprises that we have been engaged in that part of the world, large and small, you know, Beirut, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia -- and on and on, and ask yourself, 'What have we got done? What have we achieved? Is the region becoming more stable? Is it becoming more Democratic? Are we enhancing America's standing in the eyes of the people of the Islamic world? The answers are, 'No, no, and no.' "
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).