Summary: Since 9/11 our leaders have become increasingly militant, urging America to attack an even invade an ever-growing list of nations for flimsy or imaginary reasons. We’re powerful but not omnipotent. War is a game that cannot be played forever with painful consequences. Eventually we’ll attack someone (a nation or group) who either retaliates irrationally but severely, or we’ll spark growth of a coalition of nations determined to restrain our military adventures. Our leaders work to make such disasters happen. A little bad luck and they will get their way. {2nd of 2 posts today.}
An op-ed in today’s New York Times shows what might be the greatest threat to America: “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran” by John R. Bolton. It’s another volley in the well-funded multi-decade propaganda campaign to involve America in an endless series of foreign wars, a program that no series of failures and revealed lies can derail. Let’s review the high points.
… the president’s own director of National Intelligence testified in 2014 that they had not stopped Iran’s progressing its nuclear program. There is now widespread acknowledgment that the rosy 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, which judged that Iran’s weapons program was halted in 2003, was an embarrassment, little more than wishful thinking. Even absent palpable proof, like a nuclear test, Iran’s steady progress toward nuclear weapons has long been evident.
Bolton’s acknowledgement that there is no proof is the only fact in this essay. He offers no evidence of the “widespread acknowledgement” about the 2007 NIE. Bolton’s statement about Clapper’s testimony is incorrect since he does not say that Iran has a “nuclear weapons program”, let alone that it’s “progressing” (international agreements allow Iran — like other nations — to have a civilian nuclear program). Clapper said:
We continue to assess that Iran’s overarching strategic goals of enhancing its security, prestige, and regional influence have led it to pursue capabilities to meet its civilian goals and give it the ability to build missile-deliverable nuclear weapons, if it chooses to do so. … we judge that Iran is trying to balance conflicting objectives. It wants to improve its nuclear and missile capabilities while avoiding severe repercussions — such as a military strike or regime-threatening sanctions. We do not know if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.
Tehran has made technical progress in a number of areas — including uranium enrichment, nuclear reactors, and ballistic missiles — from which it could draw if it decided to build missile-deliverable nuclear weapons. These technical advancements strengthen our assessment that Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to eventually produce nuclear weapons. This makes the central issue its political will to do so.
Bolton then doubles down with outright deceit. He says that “the arms race has begun” and nations “are moving forward” — but cites no evidence. Instead he says the Saudi Princes have “capabilities”, and speculates about what might happen if Iran builds a bomb.
Now the arms race has begun: Neighboring countries are moving forward, driven by fears that Mr. Obama’s diplomacy is fostering a nuclear Iran. Saudi Arabia, keystone of the oil-producing monarchies, has long been expected to move first. No way would the Sunni Saudis allow the Shiite Persians to outpace them in the quest for dominance within Islam and Middle Eastern geopolitical hegemony. Because of reports of early Saudi funding, analysts have long believed that Saudi Arabia has an option to obtain nuclear weapons from Pakistan, allowing it to become a nuclear-weapons state overnight. Egypt and Turkey, both with imperial legacies and modern aspirations, and similarly distrustful of Tehran, would be right behind.
… Saudi, Egyptian and Turkish interests are complex and conflicting, but faced with Iran’s threat, all have concluded that nuclear weapons are essential. … The former Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Turki al-Faisal, said recently, “whatever comes out of these talks, we will want the same.” He added, “if Iran has the ability to enrich uranium to whatever level, it’s not just Saudi Arabia that’s going to ask for that.”
That last statement is especially deceitful. Everybody has the right to enrichment for civilian purposes, and Iran’s known capabilities are consistent with those goals. Even Israeli officials have often said that there is little evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program, as in this from January 2012 reported by Haartz: ‘The intelligence assessment Israeli officials will present later this week to Dempsey {Chairman, Joint Chiefs} indicates that Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb.” There are reports of this interview with Defense Minister Ehud Barak that he explicitly stated that Iran nuclear weapons program was not running.
No country has developed a nuclear weapon while under the UN inspection regime. Kicking out the UN inspectors would cross a clear red line, justifying action. Plus these claims that Iran will have the bomb in a few years have been made frequently — always falsely — during the past 30 years. He relies on our amnesia and ignorance to conceal the absurdity of his claims.
Bolton then continues by confidently making things up — for which he cites not a shred of evidence — then concludes that only war will suffice:
The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel’s 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required. Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed.
The United States could do a thorough job of destruction, but Israel alone can do what’s necessary. Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran’s opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran.
Update: The Intercept makes a great catch! Bolton cites as a successful example Israel’s atttack on the Iraq’s reactor halted Saddam’s nuclear weapons program. In fact that evidence shows that the reactor was in fact for civilian use only, not configured to produce weapons-grade material. Better yet, the link Bolton goes to a Washington Post article explaining this in detail: “An Israeli attack against Iran would backfire — just like Israel’s 1981 strike on Iraq“.
There are many such voices, well-funded and loud
“War with Iran is probably our best option“, Joshua Murachik (fellow at John Hopkins), op-ed in the Washington Post, 13 March 2015 — Closing paragraph:
Yes, there are risks to military action. But Iran’s nuclear program and vaunting ambitions have made the world a more dangerous place. Its achievement of a bomb would magnify that danger manyfold. Alas, sanctions and deals will not prevent this.
This is quite delusional. The “vaunting ambitions” in the US are those of the US, which has invaded and occupied two nations, seeks to overthrow the government of 2 more, and has established a chair of powerful military bases throughout the region. Iran’s efforts to expand its influence — largely to survive against the unrelenting US pressure since the 1979 revolution — are small by comparison.
An extreme scenario
Thirty years ago (when the first stories of Iran’s nukes appeared) the great science fiction writer David Gerrold published his series about the invasion of the Chtorr (still unfinished, 4 books out, the first 2 are excellent
I can imagine this happening — either we nuke someone or inflict equivalent damage through convention bombing, as an our of control escalation in response to retaliation by a nation or non-state group. It would be another first for America, following our first use of nukes in war and first strike at Iran in an undeclared cyberwar, plus our many invasions of other nations.
Conclusions
It’s vital to realize the danger people like Bolton pose to America, as their well-funded programs push to militarize not just our foreign policy but our society. War is the among the most uncertain of human activities, and often the most costly. Starting wars wagers everything we have and everything we are. Repeatedly doing so fecklessly, with so little evidence, shows the irresponsibility of our national leaders, and the danger of allowing them to run America while we doze in front of our TVs.
America has power relative to the rest of the world of a degree seldom seen in history — combining size, economic and technological vitality, plus strong social cohesion — making us existentially vulnerable to only one danger: our recklessness and imprudence. These are foes that can destroy the most powerful of nations.
We have given the reins of America over to the 1% and their servants, finding the burden of self-government too heavy to bear. The Republic’s political machinery lies idle, as we increasingly neither volunteer money or time to make it run — or even vote. But America’s citizens retain full responsibility for its actions, and will justly suffer from its fall.
“Sooner or later, everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences.”
— attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson.
As we become an increasingly militant nation, we need a more appropriate god:
A warning from Homer: In the Iliad Athena, Goddess of Wisdom, meets Ares (Mars) twice on the battlefield. She kicked his butt both times.
For More Information
If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. Click here to see all posts about the US-Israel war with Iran. Of special relevance are these posts about Iran’s nukes (history shows that so much of what we are told is false):
- Iran will have the bomb in 5 years (again) — Forecasts of an Iranian bomb really soon, going back to 1984.
- What do we know about Iran’s nuclear ambitions? — US intelligence officials are clear: we don’t know as much as the news media implies.
- What does the IAEA know about Iran’s nuclear program? — Their reports bear little resemblance to reports in the news media.
- What happens when a nation gets nukes? Sixty years of history gives an answer.
- What happens if Iran gets nukes? Not what we’ve been told.
Also see Is Iran dangerous, or a paper tiger? , Have Iran’s leaders vowed to destroy Israel? and Is Killing Iranian Nuclear Scientists Terrorism?
Today’s op-ed by Bolton was brought to you by the Department of Fear
Follow their great work on Twitter at @FearDept.
