Thursday, February 2, 2012

War With Iran?

A review of the newspaper headlines is incredibly troubling.  Despite the International Atomic Energy Agency's recent inspection and the follow up inspection planned for the end of February, and despite there being no objective proof that Iran is anywhere close to having nuclear weapons, Israel is putting out propaganda stating that Iran already has the ability to produce four nuclear weapons.  It has consistently pushed for attacks on Iran and is becoming frustrated at the slow pace of American aggression under Obama.  Apparently the current sanctions which are causing untold suffering to the Iranian people aren't enough.

As we speak, Israel has over 200 nuclear weapons.  Even if Iran had a nuclear bomb, it wouldn't use them because doing so would be suicide.  The consequence would be mutually assured destruction.  The purpose of Iran having them would probably stabilize the region, not destabilize it because the balance of power in the region is now focused on Israel with its military might and nuclear weapons.  The deterrent factor of Iran being able to defend itself would stabilize the region.  But Israel doesn't want this because it likes being number 1.

A recent inquiry into the Republican candidates for president is telling.  Sheldon Adelson, casino mogul and hard core Zionist, has given 10 million dollars to a Super PAC for Newt Gingrich.  Gingrich has since taken a  very hard line stance in support of Israel against everyone in the region.  Mitt Romney's campaign has 15 of 22 former Bush administration advisors who supported the Iraq invasion in an attempt to privatize the crude oil market and set the floor for crude oil.  Now they want another shot with Iran.

America cannot afford another war.  War has already cost this country a fortune in blood and money.  The deficit is out of control from unfunded foreign wars and enough people have died.  Further, a war with Iran could lead to a full scale war throughout the Middle East.  Unlike Iraq, Iran is more than willing to defend itself.  Tired from the sanctions and indirect violence committed by the West, Iran would be no cake walk to dominate.  It's amazing how Republicans say there is no money for Social Security, Medicare, to repair roads, or for public education, yet at the same time give billions of dollars in tax breaks to the rich and support never ending foreign wars.  The money is burrowed from China to pay for these wars.  Apparently there is money for the things they want, but no money to help the old, the sick, and the poor.  

A war with Iraq would also have the effect of driving short term oil prices through the roof.  Iran is a very oil rich country and a major supplier of crude oil.  A war would interrupt this pattern and send gas prices soaring.  While Big Oil and speculators may love this option, the real victims would be the average American worker, including truck drivers, rural commuters, and farmers.  This would be just another incidence of the rich taking advantage of the poor.


  1. Dennis: At the risk of appearing exceeding cynical, it would appear that US political process has reached a point at which selecting politicians based on genuine political merit is no longer achievable. The candidates are not truthful regarding their priorities, they have more interest in representing (secret) donors than their constituants, and the mechanisms put in place to drive accountability (judicial oversight, we the people petitions, etc.) are toothless.

    Given that, why not select politicians based on predictability? That is, I might not like war with Iran, but I don't really know what second term Obama might do about it. I pretty much know what Gengrich would do. Isn't that as much as any voter can hope for? Vote GOP and buy oil futures...

  2. I wish I could say you are wrong, but I can't. The electoral process has indeed become a sham.