27 September, 2006

Bush to Nuke Iran?

Posted by alex in 'Middle East', Bush, Iran, Iraq, Israel, jewed foreign policy, Paul Craig Roberts at 3:18 pm | Permanent Link

Why Bush Will Nuke Iran
by Paul Craig Roberts

The neoconservative Bush administration will attack Iran with tactical nuclear weapons, because it is the only way the neocons believe they can rescue their goal of U.S. (and Israeli) hegemony in the Middle East.

The U.S. has lost the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Generals in both war theaters are stating their need for more troops. But there are no troops to send.

Bush has tried to pawn Afghanistan off on NATO, but Europe does not see any point in sacrificing its blood and money for the sake of American hegemony. The NATO troops in Afghanistan are experiencing substantial casualties from a revived Taliban, and European governments are not enthralled over providing cannon fodder for U.S. hegemony.

The “coalition of the willing” has evaporated. Indeed, it never existed. Bush’s “coalition” was assembled with bribes, threats, and intimidation. Pervez Musharraf, the American puppet ruler of Pakistan, let the cat out of the bag when he told CBS’ 60 Minutes on Sept. 24, 2006, that Pakistan had no choice about joining the “coalition.” Brute coercion was applied. Musharraf said Assistant Secretary of State Richard Armitage told the Pakistani intelligence director that “you are with us” or “be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age.” Armitage is trying to deny his threat, but Dawn Wire Service, reporting from Islamabad on Sept. 16, 2001, on the pressure Bush was putting on Musharraf to facilitate the U.S. attack on Afghanistan, stated: “‘Pakistan has the option to live in the 21st century or the Stone Age’ is roughly how U.S. officials are putting their case.”

That Musharraf would volunteer this information on American television is a good indication that Bush has lost the war. Musharraf can no longer withstand the anger he has created against himself by helping the U.S. slaughter his fellow Muslims in Bush’s attempt to exercise U.S. hegemony over the Muslim world. Bush cannot protect Musharraf from the wrath of Pakistanis, and so Musharraf has explained himself as having cooperated with Bush in order to prevent the U.S. destruction of Pakistan: “One has to think and take actions in the interest of the nation, and that’s what I did.” Nevertheless, he said, he refused Bush’s “ludicrous” demand that he arrest Pakistanis who publicly demonstrated against the U.S.: “If somebody’s expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views.”

Bush’s defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan and Israel’s defeat by Hezbollah in Lebanon have shown that the military firepower of the U.S. and Israeli armies, though effective against massed Arab armies, cannot defeat guerillas and insurgencies. The U.S. has battled in Iraq longer than it fought against Nazi Germany, and the situation in Iraq is out of control. The Taliban have regained half of Afghanistan. The king of Saudi Arabia has told Bush that the ground is shaking under his feet as unrest over the American/Israeli violence against Muslims builds to dangerous levels. Our Egyptian puppet sits atop 100 million Muslims who do not think that Egypt should be a lackey of U.S. hegemony. The king of Jordan understands that Israeli policy is to drive every Palestinian into Jordan.

Bush is incapable of recognizing his mistake. He can only escalate. Plans have long been made to attack Iran. The problem is that Iran can respond in effective ways to a conventional attack. Moreover, an American attack on another Muslim country could result in turmoil and rebellion throughout the Middle East. This is why the neocons have changed U.S. war doctrine to permit a nuclear strike on Iran.

Neocons believe that a nuclear attack on Iran would have intimidating force throughout the Middle East and beyond. Iran would not dare retaliate, neocons believe, against U.S. ships, U.S. troops in Iraq, or use their missiles against oil facilities in the Middle East.

Neocons have also concluded that a U.S. nuclear strike on Iran would show the entire Muslim world that it is useless to resist America’s will. Neocons say that even the most fanatical terrorists would realize the hopelessness of resisting U.S. hegemony. The vast multitude of Muslims would realize that they have no recourse but to accept their fate.

Revised U.S. war doctrine concludes that tactical or low-yield nuclear weapons cause relatively little “collateral damage” or civilian deaths, while achieving a powerful intimidating effect on the enemy. The “fear factor” disheartens the enemy and shortens the conflict.

University of California Professor Jorge Hirsch, an authority on nuclear doctrine, believes that an American nuclear attack on Iran will destroy the Nonproliferation Treaty and send countries in pell-mell pursuit of nuclear weapons. We will see powerful nuclear alliances, such as Russia/China, form against us. Japan could be so traumatized by an American nuclear attack on Iran that it would mean the end of Japan’s sycophantic relationship to the U.S.

There can be little doubt that the aggressive U.S. use of nukes in pursuit of hegemony would make America a pariah country, despised and distrusted by every other country. Neocons believe that diplomacy is feeble and useless, but that the unapologetic use of force brings forth cooperation in order to avoid destruction.

Neoconservatives say that America is the new Rome, only more powerful than Rome. Neoconservatives genuinely believe that no one can withstand the might of the United States and that America can rule by force alone.

Hirsch believes that the U.S. military’s opposition to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran has been overcome by the civilian neocon authorities in the Bush administration. Desperate to retrieve their drive toward hegemony from defeat in Iraq, the neocons are betting on the immense attraction to the American public of force plus success. It is possible that Bush will be blocked by Europe, Russia, and China, but there is no visible American opposition to Bush legitimizing the use of nuclear weapons at the behest of U.S. hegemony.

It is astounding that such dangerous fanatics have control of the U.S. government and have no organized opposition in American politics.

  • 7 Responses to “Bush to Nuke Iran?”

    1. alex Says:

      It is hardly astounding, Girl, when those who might resist them refuse to name the jew and denounce those who do as haters. Might as well be a jew yourself. Three-named WASPs have no solution to our current impasse; German nationalists do. PCR has come so far as to realize there’s a problem, but he still doesn’t grasp how deep the problem runs. The fact was, is, and will remain that there is NO WAY OUT BUT THROUGH THE JEWS.

    2. alex Says:

      We must name the jew – which means, in part, recognizing that there is no major problem in our country and in our relations with the world, that is not caused by jews. That is no overstatement. Our invasion from Mexico, and our criminal attack on Iraq and pending nuking of Iran can be laid directly at the feet of organized jewry, which is using our country against the interests of the descendants of the founders. That is Judah’s way. We cannot know who we are while we pretend, a la Girl, that jews are part of our nation. They are not. They are a predatory, alien intruders using us to further their own ends.

    3. alex Says:

      When you join the jews, as Girl does, in denouncing those who name the jew as “nazis” you are making it impossible for average people to understand that the nazis were the most effective resistance to neocons in history. That is why the nazis are demonized, you unthinking three-named Girlie Craig Roberts.

      GCR fights the only force capable of toppling the neocons he ostensibly opposes. Whether he realizes this or not, you can judge. The WASPs have a long tradition of hatred of things German and worship of things British. It’s a policy that has paid them rather poorly, but they’re not so interested in noticing this, the better to preserve their historical myths. While they suck cigars and swirl cognac and speak of Churchill, America and Britain sink into shit.

    4. alex Says:

      September 25, 2006
      Crisis Is Upon Us
      by Paul Craig Roberts

      A number of experts have concluded that despite the Bush administration’s desire to attack Iran, the aggression would be too rash and the consequences too dire even for the irrational Bush administration.

      Military experts point out that at a time when generals are calling for more troops for Afghanistan and Iraq, it would be ill-advised for Bush to add Iran to the war theater. Experts note that Iran is well armed with missiles capable of attacking U.S. ships and oil facilities throughout the Middle East and that Iran can direct its Shi’ite allies in Iraq to assault U.S. troops there and set in motion terrorist actions throughout the Middle East.

      Diplomatic experts point out that the U.S. is isolated in its desire for war with Iran and has no ally except Israel, thus validating Muslim claims that the U.S. is Israel’s instrument against Muslims in the Middle East. Experts note that military aggression is a war crime and that American violations of international law isolate the U.S. and destroy the soft power on which U.S. leadership has been based. An attack on Iran could be the last straw for Muslims chafing under the rule of U.S. puppet governments in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

      Economic experts point out that the impact on the price of oil would be severe and the economic consequences detrimental. With the U.S. housing bubble deflating, now is not the time for an oil shock.

      It is difficult to take exception to this expert analysis. Nevertheless, the Bush administration continues to send war signals. Credible news organizations have reported that U.S. naval attack groups have been given “prepare to deploy orders” that would put them on station off Iran by Oct. 21.

      How can Bush administration war plans be reconciled with expert opinion that the consequences would be too dire for the U.S.?

      Perhaps the answer is that what appears as irrationality to experts is rationality to neoconservatives. Neocons seek maximum chaos and instability in the Middle East in order to justify long-term U.S. occupation of the region. Following this line of thought, neocons would regard the loss of a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf as a way to solidify public support for the war. American anger at the Iranians could even result in support for a military draft in order to win “the war on terror.”

      The Bush administration could bring Congress around by announcing a “Gulf of Tonkin” incident or by orchestrating a “terrorist attack.” However, this is unnecessary as Bush has prepared the ground for bypassing Congress with his propagandistic allegations that Iran, by arming Iraqi insurgents, sponsoring terrorism, and building nuclear weapons, is a major part of the ongoing “war against terrorism.” Now that Iran is blamed for rising violence in Iraq, an attack on Iran follows as a matter of course. All Bush has to do is to continue with his lies in order to bring the American public to a new war hysteria.

      Bush’s attorney general has demonstrated that he has no qualms about validating any and all extralegal powers that the White House requires for violating the U.S. Constitution and international law. The congressional attempts to block illegal wiretapping and torture have failed. The Senate has refused to authorize torture, but the Senate has not prevented the administration from torturing detainees. The compromise leaves it to the White House to decide by executive order whether its interrogation practices are objectionable. In an editorial, the Washington Post concluded that “the abuse can continue.”

      Polls show that Bush administration propaganda has convinced a majority of inattentive Americans that Iran is making nuclear weapons. Polls show that a majority support an attack on Iran under this circumstance. The neoconservatives and their media allies have succeeded in causing the public to confuse Iran’s legal nuclear energy program with a weapons program.

      The International Atomic Energy Agency, whose inspectors pore over Iran’s nuclear energy program for signs of a weapons program, recently denounced a House Intelligence Committee report as “outrageous and dishonest.” Written by the neocon staff, the Republican report falsely alleges that Iran had enriched uranium to weapons-grade last April and that the IAEA had removed a senior safeguards inspector to keep the alleged breach of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Pact secret.

      Once again neoconservatives have shown that they will tell any and every lie to achieve their goal of attacking Iran. Jingoistic anti-UN Bush supporters will automatically believe the neocon lie and swallow right-wing talk radio claims that the UN is protecting Iran’s nuclear weapons program. As we learned from the Iraq hysteria, facts and experts are no impediment to the Bush administration’s lies.

      Rumsfeld’s neocon Pentagon has rewritten U.S. war doctrine to permit preemptive nuclear attack on non-nuclear countries. As the U.S. paid a huge public relations cost in terms of world opinion and distrust of the U.S. by endorsing the first use of nuclear weapons, the revision of U.S. war doctrine must have a purpose.

      Neocons claim that tactical nuclear weapons are necessary to destroy Iran’s underground facilities. However, the real reason for using nukes against Iran is to intimidate Iran from retaliating and to threaten the entire Muslim world with genocide unless Muslims bend to the neocons’ will and accept U.S. hegemony over their part of the world.

      In his speech to the United Nations, Hugo Chávez might not have been too deep into hyperbole when he described Bush as an example of demonic evil.

    5. Carpenter Says:

      The most important part of the article:

      Pervez Musharraf, the American puppet ruler of Pakistan, let the cat out of the bag when he told CBS’ 60 Minutes on Sept. 24, 2006, that Pakistan had no choice about joining the “coalition.” Brute coercion was applied. Musharraf said Assistant Secretary of State Richard Armitage told the Pakistani intelligence director that “you are with us” or “be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age.”

      As for Britain and Germany – I don’t know, both populations seem rather content to submit in slavery. The NSDAP was a fluke, before it there was the Weimar Republic, and after it there was no resistance to the occupation but instead millions of Germans who never, not even today, have voted for nationalism in more than precious small numbers. Just like in Britain.

      You can forget the vices and only look to the virtues of one country and not the other, sure – but you can do that with any White nation, it’s easy. Let’s face it, the situation is pretty much the same all over the West, we’re all under the thumb of Jew media power.

    6. Scipio Americanus Says:

      “Perhaps the answer is that what appears as irrationality to experts is rationality to neoconservatives.”

      There is your answer, Alex. In the minds of these power crazed lunatics, everything is upside down. It’s Bizarro World! Paul Craig Roberts was nothing more than a whore to the system for decades and now that his influence and career are waning, he has developed a bit of backbone and has come out against the neoconservatives. The problem for him is that as soon as he mentions the word “Jew”, his writing days are finished. Remember, the inmates are running the asylum — and he knows it.

      Given the catastrophic condition of our military coupled with the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan, tactical nuclear strikes are the only option for these war crazed fanatics. I still have a difficult time believing that they will be able to pull it off, but who knows? As I stated at another post, Lord Bushy is not popular and the Republican Congress is on the ropes. The administration can’t unilaterally fire off nukes without Congressional approval. He will need to instigate an attack by Iran or attempt to forge another incident to justify using them. Given all of the skepticism regarding 911, these neocons may simply have bit off more than they can chew. Hopefully, they will choke on it!

    7. Scipio Americanus Says:

      “When you join the jews, as Girl does, in denouncing those who name the jew as “nazis” you are making it impossible for average people to understand that the nazis were the most effective resistance to neocons in history.”

      Yes Alex, the term Nazi is used here as an ad hominem. This contraction, in today’s parlance, is essentially synonymous with word Evil. Given the extensive propaganda that has been employed since our involvement in that fratricidal war to destroy the West, it is nearly impossible for any rational, well informed man to relate this to the average “boob” American, especially given the Jews control of media programming with channels like the “Holocaust/History Channel” System whores like GCR do us no favors when employing the word.