I have read many articles and listened to many interviews lately that try to analyze, critique, contextualize, or otherwise explain the meaning and significance of the recent “Iran has no nukes” NIE report. Almost all of them are interesting and informative, but many continue chugging along the tracks, right past the turnoff to The Point.
The Point is that most of the neocons who call the shots in the US government want regime change in Iran, believing strongly that American interests should prevail in all places at all times, (no matter the cost to other people) and that the best way to further these interests is the use of military force. But due to the pesky remnants of democracy trailing raggedly from the halls of power, these neocons always attempt to win public support first. Knowing full well that Americans would never agree to a war for something as selfish as control over the world’s energy supply, the neocons need to find a reason that Americans would feel justifies a war. What those reasons are, whether or not they are true, and whether or not these reasons remain consistent are totally, completely, utterly irrelevant.
I’m sure you all understand, but I feel that I have to say it again. The Bush administration did not receive intelligence about Iran, weigh the information, and then come up with an action plan. They decided on their course of action first, based on their simplistic, ignorant assumptions, and their almost childlike faith in the power and invincibility of the American military.
Which is why whether or not Iran has a nuclear weapons program is not The Point.
The Point is that powerful people want conquest, and little things like truth, common sense, morality and law aren’t going to stand in their way. The reason that Iran invasion plans aren’t going full steam already seems to be that some of the members of the Bush administration no longer think that an invasion will achieve their goals, and that top-ranking military members are strongly opposed to the invasion, with some apparently threatening to resign before carrying out these battle plans.
I am pleased that this NIE seems to seriously undermine this particular rationale that the necons were using to try to win the American people to their bloody cause, but all the talk about it by anti-war folks is reminding me of the “let the inspectors back in” movement before the Iraq war. Well-meaning people argued that rather than bomb Iraq, we should give weapons inspectors more time to determine whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But since the neocons were never actually concerned about WMDs, such plans were futile from the start.
The only discussion that is important at this point is to expose the warmongers’ methods to the American people, and figure out how to stop them from launching their insane plans.
1 Comment »
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>