Blood and Oil, Ira(q,n)
September 17th, 2007Bush and the Pentagon have set two thousand targets for attack in Iran. This means one of two things: America has decided to go to war in Iran or America has a plan in case we go to war with Iran. The article I linked to alleges that the White House has decided upon a war in Iran. I disagree, as the Pentagon had war plans against Iran just in case during the 1990s. Will we attack Iran? I don’t know. Will we invade Iran? Probably not. Has Bush decided? I don’t think so, but if he does attack Iran, it’ll be foolish at this stage, because the Israelis have the responsibility of disabling middle eastern nuclear weapons, not us, and the President is a lame duck with little international credibility so any attack by George W. Bush would strengthen the Iranian regime. Unless he absolutely destroyed it, which he wouldn’t. However, the situation isn’t as simple as “Bush opposes Iran, might attack, likely won’t,” because this story complicates matters greatly.
THE world should “prepare for war” with Iran, the French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, said on Sunday, escalating tensions over the country’s nuclear program. Mr Kouchner said that while “we must negotiate right to the end” with Iran, if Tehran possessed an atomic weapon it would represent “a real danger for the whole world” and the world should “prepare for the worst … which is war”. His comments came after the US reminded Iran that “all options were on the table” in confronting its nuclear policy, which many Western officials believe has the ultimate aim of arming a nuclear warhead, despite Iran’s claim that it is for civilian purposes.
The Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said yesterday that Iran had mastered nuclear technology and would never yield to international pressure over its atomic drive. “Of course we will not step back,” Mr Ahmadinejad said in reply to a question on Iranian television. “We have mastered the technology to enrich uranium and we have arrived at an industrial stage. “The West are talking about imposing sanctions on us but they cannot do this.”
Iran’s official media accused France of pandering to the US. “The new occupants of the Elysee [presidential palace] want to copy the White House,” the state-owned IRNA news agency said in an editorial. It accused the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, of taking on “an American skin” and said “the French people will never forget the era when a non-European moved into the Elysee”.
The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council - Britain, China, France, Russia and the US - plus Germany, are due to meet this week to discuss a new draft UN resolution on sanctions against Iran.
This is a dangerous situation. I’ve told people all along that Ahmaniac! was Hitler II and it seems that the Germans, the French and the Americans all agree and understand that his declared threats are legitimate and he must be confronted.
If you remember, I quoted Greenspan’s comments about Iraq last night. He’s “clarified” them to be, I think, more accurate. “Saddam has to go for a variety of reasons, economics and oil are on that list but don’t define it.” That’s better, Mr. Greenspan, although I do wonder if you were forced to by your angry insider friends or if you mean it. I mean, I believe in what he’s saying now over the idea that we went into Iraq to control the oil supplies, but it’s nice to hear him say.
I’ll bet the reaction he got from his friends in the GOP was similar to the one this Swiss artist has received from Muslims after drawing Mohammed as a dog.
Now if you’ll excuse me, Dear Reader, I’d like to end this post by mentioning how much I love Sally Field. It’s a lot.