Analyzing the new "WMD's found in Iraq" storyline:
By C. William Boyer
I think these sudden (and bogus) revelations of WMD's being found in Iraq are cause for GREAT concern. What it appears to me, in touting pre-'91 weapons that were unusable, is the administration is 'fixing' it's earlier claims for invading Iraq, the ones subsequently proven false. Why is that important, beyond simple political points? Because it's NECESSARY for invading Iran. They are heading off the critics at the past, saying, "See, see, we were right all along. That's why, despite everyone's claims to the contrary, you've got to believe us when we say Iran's about to get a nuke and we must stop them." Of course, the VAST majority of world intelligence organizations believe Iran is 5-10 years away, whereas North Korea has multiple nukes and is testing a delivery system to reach America. There are no reports of Iran having a delivery system, though there is some speculation they could buy systems from North Korea.
Why Iran and not North Korea?
Bush and Co. desperately want to invade/attack Iran because they want better control/access of the Caspian Sea Basin, home of some the biggest and most unrealized oil reserves in the world (get out a map and check Iran's location in relation to the CSB and you'll see). And the administration believes if the Iranian regime is struck, it will topple like a house of cards due to the popular sentiment against the regime. But given this administration's record for getting predictions correct (rarely/never), I'd be hard-pressed to believe them. In fact, if past is prologue, we will get VERY SERIOUS blowback from an Iran attack, implications firmly plunging us into a bold, dark new chapter of world history.
Watch it unfold. This is SERIOUS stuff.
PS An aside is how the 'NEWLY FOUND WMD' story is being released: they're letting Republican talking heads like Rick Santorum (who desperately needs re-election help in PA) and Pete Hoekstra release the info on FoxNews and such, these guys coming out and saying, "Look at what we found, WMD." Then, in order to 'vet' the info and make the sudden revelations believable, they're saying, 'We want to know why the Administration kept this secret.' A classic diversionary tactic. If the issue can be framed, "Why was it kept secret?" rather than "Are the WMD revelations valid?" the administration may get what it needs to justify an Iranian attack.
I think these sudden (and bogus) revelations of WMD's being found in Iraq are cause for GREAT concern. What it appears to me, in touting pre-'91 weapons that were unusable, is the administration is 'fixing' it's earlier claims for invading Iraq, the ones subsequently proven false. Why is that important, beyond simple political points? Because it's NECESSARY for invading Iran. They are heading off the critics at the past, saying, "See, see, we were right all along. That's why, despite everyone's claims to the contrary, you've got to believe us when we say Iran's about to get a nuke and we must stop them." Of course, the VAST majority of world intelligence organizations believe Iran is 5-10 years away, whereas North Korea has multiple nukes and is testing a delivery system to reach America. There are no reports of Iran having a delivery system, though there is some speculation they could buy systems from North Korea.
Why Iran and not North Korea?
Bush and Co. desperately want to invade/attack Iran because they want better control/access of the Caspian Sea Basin, home of some the biggest and most unrealized oil reserves in the world (get out a map and check Iran's location in relation to the CSB and you'll see). And the administration believes if the Iranian regime is struck, it will topple like a house of cards due to the popular sentiment against the regime. But given this administration's record for getting predictions correct (rarely/never), I'd be hard-pressed to believe them. In fact, if past is prologue, we will get VERY SERIOUS blowback from an Iran attack, implications firmly plunging us into a bold, dark new chapter of world history.
Watch it unfold. This is SERIOUS stuff.
PS An aside is how the 'NEWLY FOUND WMD' story is being released: they're letting Republican talking heads like Rick Santorum (who desperately needs re-election help in PA) and Pete Hoekstra release the info on FoxNews and such, these guys coming out and saying, "Look at what we found, WMD." Then, in order to 'vet' the info and make the sudden revelations believable, they're saying, 'We want to know why the Administration kept this secret.' A classic diversionary tactic. If the issue can be framed, "Why was it kept secret?" rather than "Are the WMD revelations valid?" the administration may get what it needs to justify an Iranian attack.
posted by C. William Boyer at 9:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home