THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Sunday, June 29, 2008


As the window of opportunity for an attack against Iran by the Israelis and the US steadily closes as the George W. Bush presidency comes to an end so the likelihood of such an attack looms ever larger.

Those pushing for war argue, despite the total lack of any evidence to support their claims, that Iran has a nuclear weapons program and that they will use their nuclear weapons, once they have them, against Israel. Their allegations are reinforced by what they say are President Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric about ‘wiping Israel off the map’.

All of this is merely propaganda and neither Israel nor the US or even the International Atomic Energy Authority, the UNs nuclear watchdog, can produce any evidence whatsoever to support Israeli and US claims about Iran’s so-called nuclear weapons program.

The reality is this: Israel and their supporters have been carrying on about Iran’s nuclear ambitions for years and threats to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities were being made long before Ahmadinejad became President of Iran in August, 2005. Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric has merely been a reaction to Israel’s bellicose stance towards Iran and, with a little careful massaging of translations of his speeches by the neoconservative think tank, MEMRI, has provided much fodder for the Israel/neocon propaganda machine. However, the real reason Israel wants to attack Iran is not because of Iran’s ‘nuclear weapons program’ – it simply doesn’t have one – nor is it because Ahmadinejad has said he wants to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ – he never said any such thing – it is because Iran supports both Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories and Syria who are seeking to have the Golan Heights returned to them. What Israel and the US and their neoconservative allies really want is ‘regime change’ in Iran. They want an Iran that has an Israel and US friendly government so that Israel can continue in its quest to create a Greater Israel without having to worry about Iran supporting those that are resisting Israeli expansionism.

In the event of Israel and the US attacking Iran, one can expect to see not just Iran’s nuclear facilities destroyed, indeed, that will be just a minor part of the operation, but there will also be major attacks against Iranian military targets including air bases, missile storage areas, barracks, etc. Iran’s communications systems and government buildings will also likely be targeted. In short, the Iranian government would be bombed into capitulation.

One can also expect Israel to launch an attack, probably simultaneously with the assault on Iran, against Hamas in the Gaza and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Israel may also attack Syria pre-emptively on the basis that Syria has a mutual assistance treaty with Iran. The resulting conflict could have a devastating effect both on the region and around the world. As well as bringing death and destruction to countless Iranians, Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians, many Israelis may also die as Iran launches missiles in a counter attack against Israel, a move that could escalate rapidly if Israel decided to its use nuclear weapons against Iran in retaliation to an Iranian counter attack.

The economic consequences for the rest of the world could also be catastrophic. Oil prices, already at record levels due to the uncertainties prevailing in the region, would play havoc with economies world wide.

Then there are the unknowns. How, for example, will Russia, a supplier of nuclear equipment to Iran, and China, a customer of Iran’s resources, react to such an attack? How will the UN handle a pre-emptive assault against Iran? How will the governments of the other Arab states react? How will the peoples of the other Arab states react? What will happen in Iraq, already destroyed by over half a decade of fighting?

The world, somehow, is not reacting to the prospect of war in the same way as it did during the build-up to the invasion of Iraq. The reason for that is; the world knew the invasion of Iraq was coming, but this time around there is no overt preparations for war against Iran in the way that there was against Iraq. There is even a feeling that the US simply wouldn’t be stupid enough to do it again after the disaster of Iraq. The problem is, however, that the extreme right-wing of the US and Israel are convinced of their own self-righteousness and that all will go according to their plans.

It’s a frightening scenario. The Middle East could erupt into catastrophic war at any tick of the clock but the world doesn’t seem to think its going to happen.

How many times has it thought that before?!


Anonymous said...

Israel is not going to fair well if they Do,IRAQ wont,Afghan wont,The USA wont,Oil Prices will ,I mena WIll PLUNGE US into a DEPRESSION,Bansk will close,Martial Law will be put into action,I dont dont want to say what else Will Happen..By the Time ANY country Tries Iran They will launch everything they GOT,Then Unleash the Underground all over THE WORLD

Anonymous said...

You think a war with Iran would be 'catastrophic.' Personally, I think such a war would be 'apocalyptic,' at least for the American Empire and the Iranian people. I could almost see it all coming to a head on a battlefield near Megiddo, Israel. The U.S. is certainly on the side of Satan in this conflict.

michael said...

The jews believe in their own invincibility and as they can't imagine themselves being wiped out in successful counterstrikes they are pushing recklessly for an assault on Iran.

Probably this invincibility comes from the Old Testament or Torah, as they call it, and in particular they would like Deuteronomy 7:16 And thou shalt consume all the people which the Lord thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity on them; ( . .), and;

Deuteronomy 7:22 And the Lord thy God will put out those nations before thee by little and little: thou mayest not consume them at once, lest the beasts of the field increase upon thee, and;

Deuteronomy 7:23 But the Lord thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they are destroyed, and;

Deuteronomy 7:24 And he shall deliver their kings into thine hand, and thou shalt destroy their name from under heaven: there shall no man be able to stand before thee, until thou have destroyed them.

They can't imagine a serious counterstrike, nuclear or otherwise, as, well, God wouldn't allow that. Right there is the religiosity induced insanity, continually renewed by their Rabbis with supplementation from their secret texts, which produces this recklessness which makes the rest of the world understandably incredulous at the scenario unfolding, as the rest of the world is looking for cassus belli, and there isn't any, but were they to turn over the rock in their backyard they would get a glimpse of these seething Stone Age Old Testament undischarged instructions, in a word - to go smite the `enemy`, because you can.

I say again, no reason, just because you can.

This kill-because-you-can-theology never belonged in this world, not 2500yrs ago, not now.

Anonymous said...

"... and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they are destroyed ..."

Anyone else reckon this God, whom they say spoke the three sermons of Deuteronomy [Devarim - "the word"], probably should have first dictated the thesaurus so that Moses could describe the "destruction" in some more revelatory detail?

Now seriously, a question I've really been pondering is in what order events would run if the strike orders were issued. Would we see what you've suggested Damien; simultaneous Israeli attacks on three or four fronts? Or would we first see Israeli attacks in Gaza, then Southern Lebanon, undertaken to test new tactics against Hamas, then Hezbollah, before any attack on Iran?

Damian Lataan said...

Craig, I think the rhetoric coming from the Israelis and the US now indicates that the casus belli for war will simply be ‘Iran has a nuclear weapons program’. Based on that, I think any scenario of events will happen very quickly. For example, if Israel attacked Hezbollah in Lebanon or Hamas in the Gaza, events will quickly escalate to the point where Iran gets put in the frame and attacked – literally within hours or a day at most. But I think it is has now reached a point where the attacks will be simultaneous.

Anonymous said...

I see this was shown on (live television from Jerusalem):

"Pentagon officials fear that Israel may attack Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of this year, a move they say that will have enormous security and economic repercussions for the United States and the rest of the world, The ABC television network quoted a Pentagon official saying chances of an Israeli attack on Iran are rapidly increasing."

Anonymous said...

Noticed also DEBKAfile's propaganda loaded story on the Israeli's "overriding considerations", which they'd like people to believe are:

"... whether to strike before George W. Bush’s exit, whether Iran’s strategic ties with Syria and the Palestinian Hamas can be severed in advance and what prime minister is chosen to manage the war."

They're also shopping this timing:

"There is a preference in Jerusalem for a date straight after the America’s [sic] November 4 presidential election - except that military experts warn that weather and lunar conditions at that time of the year are unfavorable."

"If Israel does opt for an attack, August and September would be better, they say - or else hold off until March-April 2009."

I wonder why there's all this 'telegraphing-punches' going on right now.

It's probably a bit about domestic politics and ramping up the 'fear' in election years, both in the United States and in Israel.

Sy Hersh is saying that the American's choice of President will be a key criterion. He's seeing the risk of an attack on Iran this year increasing if Obama is elected, but his concern is based on Bush's position not Obama's. For Hersh is worried by this braggadacio from Bush: "I don't care what people think about me. I'm going to do the right thing."