Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Nuclear War, Here We Come

Expand Messages
  • World View
    Israel, Iran, and the US: Nuclear War, Here We Come by Jorge Hirsch Wednesday, October 19 2005 http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=7649 The stage
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Israel, Iran, and the US: Nuclear War, Here We Come
      by Jorge Hirsch
      Wednesday, October 19 2005

      The stage is set for a chain of events that could lead to nuclear war
      over chemical weapons in the immediate future. If these events unfold,
      the trigger will be Israel, the target Iran, the nuclear aggressor the
      U.S. These are the reasons:

      The U.S. State Department determined in August 2005 that "Iran is in
      violation of its CWC [Chemical Weapons Convention] obligations because
      Iran is acting to retain and modernize key elements of its CW
      infrastructure to include an offensive CW R&D capability and dispersed
      mobilization facilities."

      According to the CIA, "Iran likely has already stockpiled blister,
      blood, choking, and probably nerve agents – and the bombs and
      artillery shells to deliver them – which it previously had manufactured."

      According to (then undersecretary for arms control and international
      security, now U.S. ambassador to the UN) John Bolton's testimony to
      the House of Representatives (June 24, 2004), "We believe Iran has a
      covert program to develop and stockpile chemical weapons," and on
      Iran's ballistic missiles, "Iran continues its extensive efforts to
      develop the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction," and "The
      1,300-km range Shahab-3 missile is a direct threat to Israel, Turkey,
      U.S. forces in the region, and U.S. friends and allies."

      In the IAEA resolution of Sept. 24 [.pdf], Iran was found to be in
      "noncompliance" with its NPT safeguards agreements.

      Members of the Israeli parliament from across the political spectrum
      are urging the United States to stop Iran's nuclear programs, or
      Israel will "act unilaterally." Statements of grave concern about
      Iran's nuclear program have been made by Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz,
      Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, and Mossad chief Meir Dagan (Iran
      poses an "existential threat" to Israel). Shin Bet chief Avi Dichter
      accuses Iran of plotting relentlessly to attack Israeli targets.
      According to the head of the Russian Atomic Energy Organization,
      Alexander Rumyantsev, Russia will ship the first cargo of nuclear fuel
      for Iran's Bushehr's reactor at the end of 2005 or early 2006.
      Israel bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor (which was under IAEA
      supervision) in 1981 just before nuclear fuel was loaded into it (to
      prevent nuclear fallout).

      President Bush has said that "all options are on the table" if
      diplomacy fails to halt Iran's nuclear program.

      The U.S. House of Representatives on May 6, 2004, by a vote of 376-3,
      called on the United States to use all appropriate means to deter,
      dissuade, and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
      In the recently released draft document "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear
      Operations" [.pdf], the Pentagon states that it will respond to the
      threat of WMD (which includes chemical and biological weapons) with
      nuclear weapons.

      Conclusion: according to Israel, the U.S. administration, and 99.2
      percent of the U.S. House of Representatives, Iran will not be allowed
      to have access to any nuclear technology. No diplomatic options to
      achieve that goal will remain when Russia and China veto Security
      Council sanctions, or if the IAEA refuses on Nov. 24 to refer Iran to
      the Security Council. Military action will occur before Russia ships
      uranium fuel to Iran, and will inevitably lead to the use of nuclear
      weapons by the U.S. against Iran.

      How will it all get started? No matter how much Bush and Cheney want
      it, the U.S. Senate is unlikely to authorize the bombing of Iranian
      installations out of the blue. Unless there is some major disturbance
      in Iraq that can be blamed on Iran, Israel is likely to pull the
      trigger. It knows how to and has every motivation to do so.

      Once Israel drops the first bomb on an Iranian nuclear facility, as it
      did with Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981, there is no return. Bushehr is
      likely to be the first target; other installations will follow.

      Iran will respond – how can it not? At a minimum, it will shoot
      missiles at Israel. It may or may not shoot at U.S. forces in Iraq
      initially, but given the U.S.-Israel "special relationship," there is
      no way the U.S. will stay out of the conflict. Many of Iran's targeted
      facilities are underground, and U.S. bombs will be needed to destroy
      them all.

      Once the U.S. enters the conflict, 150,000 U.S. troops in Iraq will be
      at risk of Iranian missiles with chemical warheads, or of being
      overrun by Iran's conventional forces streaming into Iraq. According
      to the Pentagon planning [.pdf], nuclear weapons will be used:

      "To demonstrate U.S. intent and capability to use nuclear weapons to
      deter adversary use of WMD."

      "Against an adversary using or intending to use WMD against U.S.,
      multinational, or alliance forces or civilian populations…"
      "[O]n adversary installations including WMD, deep, hardened bunkers
      containing chemical or biological weapons or the C2 infrastructure
      required for the adversary to execute a WMD attack against the United
      States or its friends and allies"

      "[T]o counter potentially overwhelming adversary conventional forces…"
      "For rapid and favorable war termination on U.S. terms…"
      "To ensure success of U.S. and multinational operations…"
      That makes six independent reasons for nuking Iran.

      The first nuclear bomb used in an act of war after "Little Boy" and
      "Fat Man" should be code-named "Demo" – for "demonstration" that we
      can do it, don't mess with us, for "democracy" on the rise in the
      Middle East, and for the "Democrats" in Congress who will go along
      with the program. As with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we will be told it
      saved lives, ours and theirs. You know the script.

      The upshot: a nuclear superpower will have nuked a non-nuclear state
      that is an NPT signatory and is cooperating with the IAEA, at the
      instigation of a state that is not an NPT signatory, that reportedly
      has over 100 nuclear bombs of its own, and that initiated hostilities
      with an unprovoked act of military aggression.

      Given these prospects, the U.S. government should be doing its utmost
      to restrain Israel, yet it is doing exactly the opposite. It should be
      trying to achieve a diplomatic solution, but it refuses to even talk
      to Iran. The ongoing diplomatic effort by the EU is simply designed to
      provide cover for the planned military action, just as in the case of
      Iraq. How many times must Bush play the same game before the EU
      finally learns it is being used?

      And how many times will it take for the U.S. citizenry to learn? The
      U.S. public and its representatives in Congress, preoccupied with the
      deception and subsequent disaster of the Iraq invasion, are blind to
      the enormously bigger deception and disaster unfolding just before
      their eyes. Do the majority of American citizens, from whom the
      authority of the administration is derived, really want to be drawn by
      Israel into a nuclear conflict? Is this really in the United States'
      best interest?

      The sane world needs to tell the U.S. and Israeli governments to back
      off. And the United States needs to tell Israel, in no uncertain
      terms, that it will not allow (American-supplied) Israeli bombers
      carrying (American supplied) bunker-busting bombs over Iraqi airspace,
      and that it will not aid, abet, or condone such an attack. By not
      demanding this of the Bush administration, the U.S. Congress is
      complicit in what is about to happen and is betraying the trust of the
      people it represents.

      There is a rational way to avoid this disaster.

      Let Iran pursue a civilian nuclear program. Over 30 countries have
      civilian nuclear programs, while only nine have nuclear weapons. Let
      the Nobel-prize winning IAEA and Mohamed ElBaradei do their job!
      The U.S. can guarantee Israel's safety by assuring Israel that any
      threat to its existence from a non-nuclear nation will be met with the
      full force of U.S. conventional forces, and any threat from a nuclear
      nation will be met with U.S. nuclear forces.

      If Iran were to withdraw from the NPT and not allow international
      supervision of its programs, it would still take several years for it
      to acquire a nuclear weapon. There would still be plenty of time to act.

      Otherwise? Welcome to the new world order, where the U.S. can nuke any
      non-nuclear country at will. Refrain from having a nuclear deterrent
      at your own risk. All nations that can will become nuclear, others on
      their way will be nuked, and all-out nuclear war will become an
      absolute certainty. Bye-bye, world.



      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.