"Bush-Speak" and the Pending War in Iran

“Clear Skies”, “Healthy Forests”, “USA Patriot Act”, such is the backward speak of the Bush Administration. As I posted here, they have even begun to re-draw world maps. In the latest set of talking points to emphasize their version of the truth in the Middle East, it should come as no surprise that they are painting Iran as the aggressor in that region. This comes from an Associated Press story as presented by MSNBC:

” DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - A second U.S. aircraft carrier strike group now steaming toward the Middle East is Washington’s way of warning Iran to back down in its attempts to dominate the region, a top U.S. diplomat said here Tuesday.” ““The Middle East isn’t a region to be dominated by Iran. The Gulf isn’t a body of water to be controlled by Iran. That’s why we’ve seen the United States station two carrier battle groups in the region,” (U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs, Nicholas) Burns said in an address to the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center, an influential think-tank.”(Emphasis TLS)

So let’s see if we have this right. In March of 2003, the United States, at the direction of George W. Bush and with the overt approval of the US Congress, initiated a war of aggression against the sovereign country of Iraq. In May of that year, after declaring the end of “major combat”, the United States became an occupying force in that Muslim country in the center of the Middle East. Because there was no true plan for leaving that country (in fact Bush has recently announced a plan to increase the number of American forces in Iraq), a power vacuum was created and a civil war between the various religious sects has festered to the point that over 1,000 Iraqis are being killed each month. Indeed some estimates suggest that over 600,000 Iraqis have died as a direct result of the unprovoked US invasion of Iraq. Yet, today the Bush Administration labels Iran the aggressor with intentions to “dominate the region.”

And on what does the Bush Administration base it claims about Iran? It seems the United States is concerned about Iran’s plans to move toward nuclear energy and start a uranium enrichment program. In fact, the Bush Administration is convinced the Iran wants a nuclear bomb. Again, I say let’s see if we have this right.

In what must be the world’s worst kept secret, the country of Israel, a staunch ally of the United States and protagonist of Iran, was the first country in the Middle East to have a nuclear bomb. Indeed, Iraq was certainly in the beginning stages of developing a nuclear weapon right up to the point of the Gulf War in 1991. We know this because the United States almost certainly provided some of the technical capability for this program during the time we were supporting Iraq in its war with Iran during the late seventies and eighties. Then, of course, there are India and Pakistan; both countries with ongoing nuclear programs that are not only accepted by the United States but actually equipped by us to help further those programs. This in spite of the fact that India has yet to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and Pakistan, a country known to have sold nuclear plans and materials to countries throughout the Middle East, is certainly the current base of operations for Osama bin Laden and Al Qaida. So while the Bush Administration is happy to openly support and supply the known nuclear weapons programs of regional neighbors, we draw the line with Iran – because?? Maybe we believe that there isn't room for more than one "aggressor" in the region? Don’t get me wrong. I am not supportive of any proliferation of nuclear weaponry. However, diplomacy through hypocrisy cannot produce any result other than hostility; which brings us back to the crux of the argument.

Peace through War – the Bush Doctrine.

Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue