Comments on: War with Iran foregone conclusion? http://deepblade.net/journal/2007/02/war-with-iran-foregone-conclusion.html Cutting through the effects of the US empire Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:02:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Owl http://deepblade.net/journal/2007/02/war-with-iran-foregone-conclusion.html#comment-699 Owl Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:15:47 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2007/02/war-with-iran-foregone-conclusion.html#comment-699 I agree that we need a new way of dealing with Israel, but how will that happen? I sure don't have the answer. I think that what I said about Iran part and parcel applies to the Palestinians--there is really no aspect of US imperial policy in the Middle East that possibly could be conceded, from the point of view of the mandarins, that is. So what you get are absurd "negotiating" postures--to Iran: Stand down your uranium refinement and we'll "give" you a fuel cycle that we control; to Palestine: Agree to live in discontinuous cantons surrounded by walls you can't cross and highways you can't use and we'll let you watch us take your productive land and divert most of your water. I'm not sure that US elites are entirely unhappy with what they have achieved in Iraq--a note Cheney let's slip every once in a while. Some degree of chaos insures that Iraq will never present a threat to develop independently according to the will of its people. It's just like the Iran-Iraq war, the US was satisfied as long as nobody was winning. Why not replay that movie now and conflate Iran into the mix? I suppose at some point they will want to start pumping more oil. But here is where I agree with Greg Palast, for now the oil is more valuable staying put, in the sense of it's future value. I agree that we need a new way of dealing with Israel, but how will that happen? I sure don’t have the answer. I think that what I said about Iran part and parcel applies to the Palestinians–there is really no aspect of US imperial policy in the Middle East that possibly could be conceded, from the point of view of the mandarins, that is. So what you get are absurd “negotiating” postures–to Iran: Stand down your uranium refinement and we’ll “give” you a fuel cycle that we control; to Palestine: Agree to live in discontinuous cantons surrounded by walls you can’t cross and highways you can’t use and we’ll let you watch us take your productive land and divert most of your water.

I’m not sure that US elites are entirely unhappy with what they have achieved in Iraq–a note Cheney let’s slip every once in a while. Some degree of chaos insures that Iraq will never present a threat to develop independently according to the will of its people. It’s just like the Iran-Iraq war, the US was satisfied as long as nobody was winning. Why not replay that movie now and conflate Iran into the mix?

I suppose at some point they will want to start pumping more oil. But here is where I agree with Greg Palast, for now the oil is more valuable staying put, in the sense of it’s future value.

]]> By: Jim http://deepblade.net/journal/2007/02/war-with-iran-foregone-conclusion.html#comment-698 Jim Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:57:53 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2007/02/war-with-iran-foregone-conclusion.html#comment-698 Thanks for that--a nice, cogent piece of writing on a difficult and potentially nuanced issue. I say "potentially" becuase I don't think we're going to get to the point of actually engaging the nuances of the situation for some time yet. My prediction is that we'll be involved militarily with Iran before the end of summer, if not sooner. I'm working on a fuller exposition of my thoughts for my own site, but it basically takes off from Greenwald's point about "he generic warmongering, militarism and oil-driven expansionism represented by Dick Cheney." There's more force and complexity there than Glenn hints at with the phrase (and I think he knows it-I'm off to read his piece next). Basically, I think the DNA of the invasion of Iraq compels force against Iran since Iraq is a failure. I don't think Edwards, Clinton, et al are ever going to get to address it until the Dems get into the White House (if they do). But to be more directly on your point: what we really need from any new Presidential administration is a brand new way of coping with Israel. I lean toward establishing a firm comitment to an Israeli boundary that is non-negotiable and an equally firm commitment to a 2-state solution that honors the needs of a Palestinian state for resources and access to shipping. Persians and Arabs see Israel as a momentary rash on the facade of an all-arab middle east. But both peoples are Semetic and both have a claim on statehood. The trouble is that a large segment of the American Jewish lobby have made their careers on fear-mongering and guilt-trips. Time for Isreal to grow up, and our Israeli policy with it. Thanks for that–a nice, cogent piece of writing on a difficult and potentially nuanced issue.

I say “potentially” becuase I don’t think we’re going to get to the point of actually engaging the nuances of the situation for some time yet. My prediction is that we’ll be involved militarily with Iran before the end of summer, if not sooner. I’m working on a fuller exposition of my thoughts for my own site, but it basically takes off from Greenwald’s point about “he generic warmongering, militarism and oil-driven expansionism represented by Dick Cheney.” There’s more force and complexity there than Glenn hints at with the phrase (and I think he knows it-I’m off to read his piece next).

Basically, I think the DNA of the invasion of Iraq compels force against Iran since Iraq is a failure. I don’t think Edwards, Clinton, et al are ever going to get to address it until the Dems get into the White House (if they do).

But to be more directly on your point: what we really need from any new Presidential administration is a brand new way of coping with Israel. I lean toward establishing a firm comitment to an Israeli boundary that is non-negotiable and an equally firm commitment to a 2-state solution that honors the needs of a Palestinian state for resources and access to shipping.

Persians and Arabs see Israel as a momentary rash on the facade of an all-arab middle east. But both peoples are Semetic and both have a claim on statehood. The trouble is that a large segment of the American Jewish lobby have made their careers on fear-mongering and guilt-trips. Time for Isreal to grow up, and our Israeli policy with it.

]]>