http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2007/11/137_13287.html
11-07-2007 17:23
Iran and World War III
By Doug Bandow
Despite occasional professions of peaceful intent, President George W.
Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney appear ready for war against
Iran. It would be no cakewalk: Iran is a more formidable power than
was Iraq.
Concerns over a possible nuclear-armed Iran do not justify the kind of
irresponsible rhetoric tossed around by Bush and Cheney.
First, the vice president said the administration would not stand by
in the face of ``the Iranian regime's efforts to destabilize the
Middle East and to gain hegemonic power.''
Yet it has been more than two centuries since Iran attacked anyone.
The administration has most destabilized the Mideast by taking out
both of Iran's principal enemies: the Taliban in Afghanistan and
Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
Moreover, in 2003 Iran indicated its willingness to negotiate a
regional settlement on America's terms. The Bush administration, full
of hubris, rejected Tehran's initiative.
In any case it is unclear how Iran could gain ``hegemony.'' Tehran
can't supplant America as the globe's strongest power.
Last year the U.S. GDP was $13.2 trillion. Iran came in at number 31
with $212 billion, ranking just behind Argentina. America's military
edge is equally overwhelming. The U.S. spends around 100 times as much
as Iran on the military.
President Bush opined on the need ``to defend Europe against the
emerging Iranian threat.'' The Europeans had a collective GDP of $14.5
trillion last year and spend thirty-some times as much on the military
as does Iran. Moreover, France and Great Britain possess nuclear
weapons.
How about regional hegemony? Israel is by far the Mideast's strongest
military power, possessing upwards of 200 to 300 nuclear weapons. War
with Israel would yield suicide, not hegemony, for Iran.
Absent evidence of ill intent more substantial than a rabid speech by
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Tehran's presumed nuclear
program looks more like an effort at deterrence than aggression.
(Correctly translated, Ahmadinejad's famous threat against Israel
apparently meant something closer to regime change than national
destruction.)
Moreover, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has dismissed the frenzied
rhetoric about Iran posing an existential threat to Israel. Former
Mossad head Ephraim Halevy has voiced similar sentiments. As Trita
Parsi details in his book, ``Treacherous Alliance,'' shared regional
interests that have long bound Israel and Iran, even after the so-
called Islamic revolution.
Even more wildly, President Bush declared: ``If you're interested in
avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in
preventing [Iran] from having the knowledge necessary to make a
nuclear weapon.''
Norman Podhoretz, a foreign policy adviser to Rudy Giuliani, says
President Ahmadinejad is ``like Hitler'' in that the Iranian leader
wants to replace the international system with ``the religio-political
culture of Islamofascism.''
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) compared today's Iran to Nazi Germany: ``During
the run up to World War II, Europe failed to heed the warnings.''
Precisely how would Iranian knowledge of nuclear weapon technology
bring on World War III? Pakistan obviously knows. North Korea knows.
Iraq knew. Libya probably knew. But no war, let alone world war,
erupted.
Moreover, there's obviously a significant difference between knowing
how to make nuclear weapons and building or using them.
But even if Iran develops nuclear weapons, war is unlikely to result --
absent an American attack on Iran. There's no evidence that the
Iranian leadership is suicidal.
Nor is there any evidence that Ahmadinejad is a new Hitler. Does
anyone other than Norman Podhoretz, who attacked Ronald Reagan for
being an appeaser, believe that Ahmadinejad has the political support
and military power to overturn the international system?
There was something uniquely hideous and evil about Hitler and the
regime that he created. Moreover, he had the means to come
distressingly close to achieving his objective.
In contrast, Tehran's recent behavior has been eminently rational
despite the Islamic revolution. (Of course, that is not the same as
saying that the Iranian government is moral, legitimate, or
democratic.)
The Khomeini regime actually increased oil production after taking
power and maintained back-channel relations with Israel.
Finally, all we have are suspicions rather than solid evidence that
Tehran is developing nuclear weapons. Even in the worst case, the
regime appears to be years away from creating a usable weapon.
The best way to test the Iranian position is to negotiate seriously
with Tehran. The Bush administration should drop its foolish ``we
don't talk to mean people'' stance. Just as it did with North Korea.
There are rare occasions when war is necessary, but Iran today is not
one of those moments. It is Washington that risks triggering a much
larger conflict than it imagines possible.
Maybe that's what Bush really meant when he talked about World War
III.
Doug Bandow is the Robert A. Taft fellow at the American Conservative
Defense Alliance and the author of ``Foreign Follies: America's New
Global Empire'' (Xulon Press). He is a former special assistant to
President Ronald Reagan. He can be reached at ChessSet@aol.com.
==================
hooroo
uncle wally
----
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Morons Re: ***** IRAN & WORLD WAR III ***** |
08 Nov 2007 03:21:14 AM |
|
|
The Last 1800 Days -- HOOROO ! <stargatedecember2...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
click on the link & note the date:
http://tinyurl.com/3ytzkz
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.apocalypse/msg/5b18fe4deda446ac?dmode=source
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "UNCLE WALLY, YOUR FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD DOOMSDAY PROPHET & MOST EXCELLENT PARTY DUDE EXTRAORDINAIRE" |
|
| Title: Re: ***** IRAN & WORLD WAR III ***** |
08 Nov 2007 10:38:19 PM |
|
|
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article2827787.ece
From The Times
November 8, 2007
US fears Israeli strike against Iran over latest nuclear claim
Tom Baldwin in Washington, James Hider in Jerusalem and Francis
Elliott, Deputy Political Editor
A claim by President Ahmadinejad that Iran has 3,000 working uranium-
enriching centrifuges sent a tremor across the world yesterday amid
fears that Israel would respond by bombing the country's nuclear
facilities.
Military sources in Washington said that the existence of such a large
number could be a "tipping point", triggering an Israeli air strike.
The Pentagon is reluctant to take military action against Iran, but
officials say that Israel is a "different matter". Amid the
international uproar, British MPs who were to have toured the nuclear
facility were backing out of their Iran trip.
Even before President Ahmadinejad's announcement, a US defence
official told The Times yesterday: "Israel could do something when
they get to around 3,000 working centrifuges. The Pentagon is minded
to wait a little longer." US experts say 3,000 machines running for
long periods could make enough enriched uranium for an atomic bomb
within a year.
The US and Western allies believe that Iran is using its civilian
nuclear programme as a cover for weapon development. Tehran says that
it merely wants to generate electricity.
Concern about Israel's intentions has been heightened by its recent
air strike on a suspected nuclear plant in Syria. In 1981 Israel
destroyed Saddam Hussein's Iraqi nuclear reactor, and as the sole - if
undeclared - nuclear power in the region, it now considers Iran the
most serious threat to its security. Mr Ahmadinejad has called for
Israel to be "wiped off the map".
Efraim Inbar, of the Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies in Tel
Aviv, said that the figure of 3,000 centrifuges would signal the
ability of Israel's arch-foe to produce the nuclear material needed
for a warhead. "I wouldn't be surprised if we do something if the
international community leaves us alone," he said. "I think we
[Israel] are preparing for it. For Israel this is a critical
technological moment."
Tehran says it plans to expand its enrichment programme to up to
54,000 centrifuges at Natanz in central Iran, which would amount to
industrial-scale uranium enrichment.
Mr Ahmadinejad, speaking yesterday at a rally, said that UN sanctions
had failed to halt uranium enrichment. "The world must know that this
nation will not give up one iota of its nuclear rights . . . if they
think they can get concessions from this nation, they are badly
mistaken," he said. He has in the past claimed that Iran succeeded in
installing the 3,000 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment facility
but yesterday's speech was the first time he had said all of them were
now operational.
The International Atomic Energy Authority recently put the figure at
closer to 2,000, with another 650 being tested. The IAEA said
yesterday: "We will be publishing a report next week. We will not make
any comment about this until then." Javier Solana, the EU foreign
policy chief, is shortly to report on Iran's willingness to give up
uranium enrichment in exchange for political and trade incentives.
In London, at least five members of the Commons Foreign Affairs
Committee were refusing to take part in the planned trip to Iran,
arguing that it would hand the regime a propaganda coup. The visit, to
begin on Sunday, would be the first by a select committee since 15
British Service personnel were held in March. That incident and
evidence that the regime is supporting insurgencies in Afghanistan and
Iraq and planning to build a nuclear bomb has strained relations with
Britain.
About eight MPs, from all three main parties, are still planning to
spend four days in Iran next week.
Eric Illsley, a Labour MP who is one of those to have pulled out,
said: "I really don't fancy having pictures of me next to an Iranian
nuclear facility beamed around the world."
- Intelligence agencies have begun to vet all foreign postgraduates
applying to study sensitive scientific subjects in Britain. The aim is
to prevent Iranian students getting expertise in fields related to
producing weapons of mass destruction. Sixty Iranians have been
refused university places this year.
Have your say
Israel let their enemy get in a first strike at the Yom Kippur War in
October 1973. Barak, at least, understands that to do so this time is
unthinkable. It is bhard to imagine Israel acquiescing to an American
demand to allow their country to be irradiated for the next several
thousand generations. And it does not appear that the U.S. has any
intentions of making this demand now. Make your plans accordingly.
Jean Laffitte, Kalgoorlie, Australia
Nuke's are political weapons and are used for leverage in
international affairs. Just ask the newest members of the club:
Pakistan and India. Frankly, Iran would be crazy NOT to develop the
weapons in order to maintain some parity with it's neighbors.
Bombing Iran, if executed, will be the beginning of the end of the US
and Israel's special relationship for the past 7 years. Like the stock
market, that relationship is overleveraged (mutual paranoia) and needs
a correction.
Here are a few facts to remember consider while formulating an opinion
on US/Israeli relations:
*1967 Israeli attack on USS Liberty. 137 US sailors killed.
*1980's Jonathan Pollard delivered 1000 top secret documents to
Israel
*1990's Development of NEOCONS by prominent Jewish Americans.
*2000's AIPAC is caught receiving documents from Pentagon official
(also a neocon).
Coincidence? The Iranians aren't doing anything the US, or Israel, or
any other nation would do: protecting THEIR national interests.
Rhetorician, Philadelphia, USA
=======================
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
World War III **NEWZ** August 8th, 2006....U.S. AND ISRAEL ARE PLANNING JOINT ATTACK ON SYRIA AND IRAN
WORLD WAR III NEWS, SUNDAY, MARCH 12th, 2006 AD....Iran threatens to use oil as weapon
WORLD WAR III NEWZ 26/5/7..... US Wargames off Iran's Coast, Amphibious Landing Exercise in Kuwait
UNCLE WALLY 'S WORLD WAR III NEWZ FILEZ..4/10/6..Krauthammer: Attack on Iran Inevitable
World War III NEWS,Thursday, April 27th, 2006 AD.....Iran threatens global retaliation if US attacks
World War III NEWS, Saturday, April 29th, 2006 AD....Iran hurls defiance as UN braces itself for a nuclear showdown
World War III NEWS, Thursday, March 9th, 2006 AD.....NATO May Help US Airstrikes on Iran
Dumbo Blames His False Claim That Iran Might Launch World War III onIntel Agencies"
| World War III **NEWS** Thursday, 1st June, 2006.....ENDGAME IN IRAN
WORLD WAR III **NEWZ** 20/8/6...Egypt warns against any military strike on Iran
WORLD WAR III NEWS, Sunday, April 9th, 2006 AD........Report: U.S. plans air attack on Iran; IAEA inspectors in Tehran
World War III or Bust: Implications of a US Attack on Iran
World War III **NEWS ** Friday, August 15, 2003....US fears Israel may strike Iran's nukes
WORLD WAR III NEWS, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13TH, 2006...US WILL HIT IRAN IF TALKS FAIL
World War III ***NEWS*** Update 6/7/4........Iran's supreme leader warns US of global retaliation to any attack
|
|
|
