« Only Hillary can bring up RFK's assassination and claim she's the real victim | tpmgary's Blog | Hillary communicates with her loyal supporters better than Obama does with his. »
Beware the great simplifiers.
I'm listening to a speech being given by John McCain about, what else, war, enemies and fear. The familiar rhetoric is brought out--democrats want to surrender--some people think we can just sit down and talk to our enemies and make nice--and you know the rest.
Obama has done a good job at calling McCain out on these empty arguments.
Every reporter and blogger and American citizen should poke through the warmongering talking points and ask the questions that render them senseless.
This week, the administration has drummed up the rhetoric about war with Iran. There was a report issued by the IAEA that Iran isn't cooperating in answering questions about their nuclear programs.
Today, McCain is trotting out Iran's alleged non-compliance as something that can't be tolerated.
I've read the IAEA report, and while I'm no expert, Iran has in fact, been cooperative. Yes, there are still questions. But the U.S. tends to trump them up. Right before U.N. meetings to determine sanctions come up, the U.S. presents some new questionable evidence of Iran's commitment to build a nuclear weapon. Iran has no time to address it, and further sanctions are made.
Iran has a civil nuclear energy program, and that is their right. They enrich uranium for this peaceful energy process, as does every country that has the same kind of program.
They can't be forced to give this up yet that is exactly what the U.S. is insisting they do.
The U.S. arrogantly claims that Iran has no need for nuclear energy because they have oil.
I don't need to explain how specious an argument that is.
They say that other countries will ship nuclear fuel in, so Iran has no need to make it themselves.
Iran is a free country, I'm not sure the U.S. can dictate how other countries in the world create energy.
Iran is a dangerous actor in the world. I don't deny that. I also don't deny that the U.S. in many ways can be a dangerous actor in the world.
I don't know how to reconcile all this. I do know that the policies of the last eight years have made everything worse. And now that I hear McCain, another great simplifier beating the war drums, I just want to make sureit doesn't go unquestioned.
Obama has done a good job at calling McCain out on these empty arguments.
Every reporter and blogger and American citizen should poke through the warmongering talking points and ask the questions that render them senseless.
This week, the administration has drummed up the rhetoric about war with Iran. There was a report issued by the IAEA that Iran isn't cooperating in answering questions about their nuclear programs.
Today, McCain is trotting out Iran's alleged non-compliance as something that can't be tolerated.
I've read the IAEA report, and while I'm no expert, Iran has in fact, been cooperative. Yes, there are still questions. But the U.S. tends to trump them up. Right before U.N. meetings to determine sanctions come up, the U.S. presents some new questionable evidence of Iran's commitment to build a nuclear weapon. Iran has no time to address it, and further sanctions are made.
Iran has a civil nuclear energy program, and that is their right. They enrich uranium for this peaceful energy process, as does every country that has the same kind of program.
They can't be forced to give this up yet that is exactly what the U.S. is insisting they do.
The U.S. arrogantly claims that Iran has no need for nuclear energy because they have oil.
I don't need to explain how specious an argument that is.
They say that other countries will ship nuclear fuel in, so Iran has no need to make it themselves.
Iran is a free country, I'm not sure the U.S. can dictate how other countries in the world create energy.
Iran is a dangerous actor in the world. I don't deny that. I also don't deny that the U.S. in many ways can be a dangerous actor in the world.
I don't know how to reconcile all this. I do know that the policies of the last eight years have made everything worse. And now that I hear McCain, another great simplifier beating the war drums, I just want to make sureit doesn't go unquestioned.
Advertisement
Gary, your article shows your clarity as well as your command of issues. That said, there can be no doubt that an attack on Iraq will be launched before President Bush's term is over. If not. it will be launched within the first two years of John McCain's term if he wins the presidency. War-mongering and sabre-rattlting is the only thing left for Republican who have been discredited through and through. Because they have an edge or war issues, they desperately want to put the United States of a permanent state of war. They believe they have everything to gain politically if the country is constantly mired in a war-psycosis.
May 27, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for your comment. I think you mean there will be an attack on "Iran".
I understand why the war path is being pursued. I think most of us do. I think it helps to keep track of how it's being pursued, when the rhetoric dies down and when it starts up, what events or meetings come ahead, during or after the rhetoric.
I'm not a student of foreign policy or nuclear issues. I'm just going that extra mile to find a balance of evidence from points of view other than the administration.
I've heard from many that we won't attack Iran, not to worry about it. That it doesn't make sense to attack Iran. We don't have the forces, it would make things worse, etc.
I just like to remind them that nothing about this administration's foreign policy has made sense. If they want to pursue something, nothing will get in their way.
They won't even let logic dictate their actions.
May 27, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd point you to:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JE28Ak01.html
...for a good look at some informed commentary on our impending attack on Iran, and who the Senators are that are reacting to the disclosures.
May 27, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink