Thus, not only has America created national law, but it has fueled the creation of an international law.
The case for a strike against Iran does seem frail. On the other hand, the case for a strike against the U.S. by Iran does not seem flimsy at all. The Iranian parliament has a long list of grievances including a “CIA-backed coup in 1953 that overthrew democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and put Pahlavi back on the throne.” However, is it in Iran's national interest to attack the U.S.?
To clarify this situation even further and put into perspective how flawed Hillary’s logic or reasoning is, Gravel cited Jim Webb who said “in the Senate, the United States has never before designated the military services of a sovereign state a terrorist group.”
Hillary aided and is now supporting a dangerous precedent. The idea of a designation being necessary for sanctions to be imposed is not just dangerous but irrational.
German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said, "according to Spiegel Magazine, that American companies are violating existing U.S. sanctions by surreptitiously doing business with Iran through front companies in Dubai.”
Therefore, the US doesn’t really want to follow the sanctions entirely. The US is willing to let the corporations interfere with military, diplomatic, and international affairs as much as they want to. And this symbolic move by the Iranian parliament should lead Americans to believe the Iranian government will respond by trying to freeze out U.S. corporations in the future if we continue to antagonize them.
On top of this folly involving sanctions, the U.S. has not had a diplomatic relationship with Iran in 28 years. The diplomatic relationship ended when “Iranian students took American diplomats hostage in Tehran following the 1979 overthrow of U.S.-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.”
Few leaders are speaking out and saying that this lack of diplomacy is deplorable and our country must have a diplomatic relationship with Iran before we can consider going to war, but it is our responsibility as a nation to conduct diplomacy with other countries. Diplomatic meetings are necessary to steer our foreign policy in regards to Iran, and if we do not talk with the leaders, America will be pulled into another open-ended war that lacks planning for events during the war and reconstruction afterwards.
The “War on Terrorism” has now advanced to include government groups and is no longer a war fought by Americans attacking terrorists. With two armies at odds with each other, America stands on the brink of a real war and not some tiny skirmish where America takes over a country in three weeks. A threat against our nation is posed if Iran believes it should go after the CIA and our own military. This game with sanctions is a Russian roulette game that is hellishly surreal.
As Dennis Kucinich said in regards to diplomacy being a responsibility on the Ed Schultz Show last Thursday, “People are toying with the possibility of a Third World War based on their own neoconservative nightmares.” A "course of aggression against Iran" has been set and as far as the assertions of the government go, thus far, Dennis Kucinich believes the administration has not made their point.
On the other hand, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards, are not averse to leaving all options on the table. Candidates and leaders appear to be getting swept up again into putting together a plan based on this idea of “Let’s Get ‘Em!” devoid of reality just like they did in the run up to the Iraq War, which Dennis Kucinich tried to stop with his “October 2002 Analysis" on the case for war.
These assertions on Iran that are being made should not be accepted at face value. Our nation is weaker after going to war with Iraq and is becoming weaker by setting the stage for Iran. Iran has a real army and will not be like Iraq. And with conflicts being fought by our military in Afghanistan and Iraq, can we even afford another war?
Dennis Kucinich’s “October 2002 Analysis” in regards to the case being made for war in Iraq detailed how the Iraq War was going to be waged on false pretenses. He tried to prevent authorization of the Iraq War and secured over a 100 votes in the House. If the administration has not already found a way to say authorization has been given for strikes, Americans should expect another analysis made with the hopes of stopping our nation from continuing down a perilous path. Will these leaders be caught up in waging another “neoconservative nightmare” or will they listen to the wisdom of people like Gravel, Kucinich, and Webb?
While Barack Obama preaches how he is not opposed to all war but rejects dumb and rash wars, while Hillary Clinton votes for advancements of bills that supposedly just give us opportunities to “address” situations, while John Edwards tries to distance himself from a speech made earlier this year, and while Dodd and Biden have secured a vote against this bill even though they have voted for other measures antagonizing Iran, it is up to the American people to ask questions while this politicking occurs and request that leaders join Mike, Dennis, and Jim in rejecting war as an instrument of policy.
What will America gain from another war? How long will this take? How much money? How many casualties? How much depleted uranium will be used? How many Iranians will be killed? How much will this affect peace in the Middle East region? What effect will this have on oil? Are we going to continue to sell off Iraq’s oil reserves to corporations and if so, does that mean we will be trying to sell of Iran’s natural resources too? Will mercenary contractors be allowed in to bring chaos to Iran as troops attempt to secure it? Will looting be allowed? Is the UN going to be involved or will this be another “go-it-alone” strategy that we pursue? Why should we “go-it-alone”? Why aren’t we creating a diplomatic relationship that is fair? Why are we looking to insult and defame Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with every chance we get? How can we overcome our differences if we do not respect each other?
If your leader (favorite presidential candidate, congressman, senator, state representative, etc.) cannot entertain those questions, guess what? He or she does not deserve another term in office.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
