Dangerous, Ignorant Warmongers
- The article below appeared on the Internet. The question that arises
immediately is, how much does anybody REALLY know and how much of that
actually ever reaches the public at large? It is a given that much of this
is propaganda and the actual truth (or "facts") lies somewhere in-between.
We've seen propaganda talks before the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq
started. It is to be hoped that the public will finally become aware of all
that "talk" and the lying that is being used to create mass-hysteria. We've
been there before. But when will "we, the people" finally wake up and begin
to think critically? Our educational systems need urgent upgrading!------
By Leslie H. Gelb, The Daily Beast
09 March 12
I'm not supposed to tell you this. I'm violating the code. I'm giving away
the deepest, darkest secret of the foreign policy clan: even though we sound
like we know everything, we know very little, especially about the
intentions of bad guys and the consequences of war. But since the media
keeps treating us like sages and keeps ignoring our horrendous mistakes, we
carry on with our game, and do a lot of damage. Let me give you of few of
the more recent examples of how ignorant and dangerous we are, and why you
should be wary of any flat out “truths” and certainties uttered by my
Take Iran. Those who can't wait to start a war with Iran tell us that Tehran
is within three seconds, three months, or a year of developing a nuclear
weapon. I promise you they don't know this for anything near a fact. They're
trying to push Israel and the United States into a military attack against
Here's all we do know for sure: Iran is enriching uranium and has the
capacity to enrich enough of it to a level of purity sufficient to make
nukes - maybe, perhaps, in a year or two or more. Iran may have or may be
developing related capacities to place this uranium into explosive form in a
bomb or missile warhead. We have suspicions about the latter based on
various kinds of imaging and listening intelligence.
Now, are these activities something to worry about? Absolutely! But it is
not a basis for going to war now or soon. It is a basis for Americans,
Israelis, and others to find out more as quickly as possible through better
intelligence and diplomacy. Yes, diplomacy, because we can argue forever
about exactly what the Iranians have and intend, but making diplomatic
proposals allows us to test our hypotheses. If Tehran rejects reasonable
proposals, then there are grounds for raising suspicions and waving the war
By the way, this isn't just my view. It is the consensus position of U.S.
intelligence agencies. Equally telling, it is what retired senior Israeli
intelligence chiefs and military officers have been shouting from the
rooftops publicly, totally contrary to the code of silence on these matters.
Israeli and American hawks are also proclaiming that we need not worry about
the consequences of an attack on Iran, that the Iranians could not or would
not do anything that should trouble us deeply. Hold on to your wallet here.
How do they know if Tehran will strike back at, say, Saudi or Iraqi oil
fields and drive oil prices into the stratosphere, or launch terrorist
attacks against American, Israelis, and others worldwide? Of course, I don't
know either. But these are real risks that we must accept and reckon with
before attacking Iran.
Take Syria. The war twins, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, along
with the usual cohort of neoconservatives and humanitarian interventionists,
are urging military action. They want airstrikes and arms for the Syrian
rebels, no-fly zones, and so forth. They can't stand President Bashar
al-Assad killing his people. None of us can. But why are the neocons so
riled up about several thousand Syrian deaths, when they are practically mum
about the millions killed and being killed in Africa? Why don't they
advocate arming the Tibetans? Well, we know why they don't want war with
China. For the time being, all they desire is to beef up U.S. military
spending and presence in Asia. Then, we'll see.
So, one might suspect that their passion for Washington "to lead" on Syria
and get into another war there turns on something other than saving lives.
Try Iran. They want to weaken Iran's position in the Arab world, with its
great Syrian ally, and with Iranian-backed extremists like Hezbollah in
Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. It is a noble goal.
But again what of the consequences, or better, the risks? The
interventionists, for example, plead to arm Syrian rebels. But who are those
rebels exactly? Oh, former Syrian soldiers. Oh, people fighting against
Assad's tyranny. That's fine. But who else are they? Are there major al
Qaeda elements among them, or other Muslim extremists? Would they be a
bigger threat to Israel and to Arab neighbors like Jordan than Assad
himself? The warmongers say not to worry, but they don't know the answers to
any of these questions. Nor do they have any idea what these "freedom
fighters" would do with Assad's chemical weapons. Nor have the
interventionists begun to explain how they would conduct air operations over
Syria, and what more they'd be prepared to do if those air attacks failed to
stop Assad's killings.
There's an even longer list of questions that the war humanitarians should
be made to answer before any president lifts his sword. Americans need
protection from these snake-oil salesmen, and that protection depends almost
entirely on Congress and the media. They have got to be much tougher with
the experts, pin them down on what they know and don't know and what facts
their views are based on. They've got to demand real answers, and not let
the experts escape with slogans like "lead" and "take action," or "that will
all work out." But it is the rarest of occasions when legislators or
journalists bear down on the experts. If the questioners don't do their job
once again, as with Iraq and Afghanistan, then we'll be in wars once again.
And once again, we'll be very sorry. But the interventionists won't be. They
never are. They'll just want to keep fighting every war forever until we
[end of quoted article...]
Think about it.
H. E. (Ernie) Schreiber
EUNACOM Secular Journal: http://eunacom.net
Discussion List Server at: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]