An article by Stefan Simanowitz, founder and coordinator
of the Iraq Human Shield
Movement who helped Reg Keys'
from 'GreenWorld ‑ Green Party Mag'.
about Iran and Iraq, and the so‑called
'nuclear dispute', suggests compelling reasons for believing that the 'dispute'
is just an excuse for the USA to commence
bombing Iran pre‑emptively.
The 'preemptively' epithet applies both to the
notion that attack would prevent Iran pursuing malign policies ‑ as Bush
& Co claim ‑ and to the advantage of acting so swiftly that public
opposition and the peace movement would have no time to organize and demonstrably
that, although Iraq is now
clearly in chaos and the supposed mission to "bring democracy and
freedom" in tatters, a tactical advantage has resulted because the oil‑flow
is accessible and Iraq can't be a
significant political force whilst chaos and disunity persist. Advocates of the
proclaimed a range of benefits that would result yet only toppling Saddam was
achieved; and the cause of terrorism has actually advanced! A downside to
emasculating Iraqi political potency is the removal of a potential counter to
increasing Iranian influence.
increasingly ratchets up the hate rhetoric, branding Iran the pariah
stat‑e on grounds of freedom, democracy, human rights and weapons. This
is perverted logic since the USA has itself
an appalling human rights record, as does ally Saudi
Arabia, for example, which
also represses free speech, woman's rights and democracy. The USA is the
ultimate offender on every count of weapons and weapons' misuse. It looks
increasingly like a quick‑fix attempt to prepare opinion for early
attack, seizing the advantages of preparedness and positioning which the
present US presence in
the area affords. The Iraq example
shows that the UN would be circumvented or ignored.
parallels between Iraq, which
had to prove it had no weapons to avoid attack, and Iran which now
has to prove it hasn't nuclear weapons' ambitions. And the logic of attacking
early is that Iran would be an
easier conquest before nuclear weapons than after. Stefan warns that the anti‑war
movement shouldn't be lulled into a false sense of security by the image of Iraq disaster'.
He quotes a saying: "Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me."
12 Mwb, 2006