Saturday, September 02, 2006

In Order For Diplomacy To Work, You Actually Have To Use It

Kathy at Stone Soup Musings posted a link to Lie By Lie:Chronicle of a war foretold over at Mother Jones that lists every lie told by the Bush administration about Iraq, as well as every contrary piece of intelligence that turned out to be the truth.It's a fascinating database that shows that although the Bush administration said they were doing everything to avoid war with Iraq, they were actually doing everything in their power to take us to war with Iraq.
History repeats itself.
In an interview with CNN, UN Ambassador John Bolton said,"We’re exercising a lot of diplomatic activity to try and resolve this peacefully." Of course the Bush administration has refused to meet or negotiate with anyone from Teheran to try to resolve this, so how they think they are using diplomacy is beyond me.
On March 3, 2003, George Bush said,"We are doing everything we can to avoid war with Iraq."
Weapons inspectors in Iran found no evidence Iran has a weapons program. On January 9, 2003, Hans Blix appeared before the UN, and stated the same thing.
To those who think the Bush regime won't start another war, Bolton said,"No President charged with defending the American people takes the military option off the table."
To those who think our forces are stretched too thin now, there is a draft resolution in committee right now. But there are others who feel we can take Iran with out putting a single "boot on the ground".
Part of this summer's war in Lebanon was an effort to disarm Hizb-Ullah, so it can not retaliate against Israel when the nukes are dropped. The destruction of the Lebanese infrastructure was to prevent the Iranians from using Lebanon as a place to launch military initiatives against Israel when Iran is nuked. The rhetoric is amping up,and it's not a matter of if, but of when.
Iran has repeatedly offered to suspend it's uranium enrichment in exchange for security guarantees, guarantees the US will not take military action against it, guarantees the US will not give. So this war is not about Iran's nuclear ambitions at all, any more than the war in Iraq was about 9/11 or WMD. It's all about the neofascist plan for a new American century, and it doesn't matter how many Americans oppose it, the Bush regime will take on Iran. The diplomacy ruse, like so many other words spilling from their mouths, is just another lie.

13 comments:

Pekka said...

I been "here" before in another blog and I'll roughly repeat the allegory I used there.

This Administration remains me of a man who has a big toolbox full of hammers. He is obviously looking for a chance to use hammers and hammers only. He is not interested in putting things together by glueing or screwing but goes around and hammers away.

Peacechick Mary said...

This is definitely food for thought. It makes me wonder if the objective is actually to destroy the U.S. and be as mean spirited as possible along the way. Thanks for the Lie by Lie link.

karena said...

Lew, There is nothing to indicate that we are not reliving the same march to war as we did in Iraq. The infrastructure of Lebanon that they thought would allow Syria and Iran to move weapons to fight has been destroyed and they are waiting for the right time to go in by air for the real shock and awe. There is a story floating around now that the IAEA found new evidence of highly enriched Uranium. Bushco. wants to get it on. They will struggle to keep the house so they can get unfettered access to the money they will want but after that, it's bombs away, and I pray I am so wrong. I will gladly admit it, just let it be so.

PTCruiser said...

Love Pekka's analogy on this. Spot on. I'm worried about how we're going to "undo" all this crap after the moron is out of the White House.

Blogenfreude said...

Pekka - when all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

romunov said...

In case you missed the last episode on Iraq in 2003, see the rerun in 2007.

pekka said...

Blogenfreude - nail that sticks out gets hammered down (Japanese adage warmly ebraced by Shrub&Co).

Rex Kramer, Danger Seeker said...

As an avid woodworker (and I don't mean that in some kind of West Hollywood way,) I own approximately 72 different kind of hammers. Each, I should point out, has a specific use...much like those in the "Toolbox of Patriotism.) The hammer used in Iraq was much like a "jeweler's hammer," used for small, delicate projects. I submit that, when it comes time to "fix" Iran, something like a (nuclear) sledge hammer might be in order.

Kvatch said...

I agree with Karena. In fact the timeline and administration rhetoric are stunningly similar.

Cartledge did a post recently on Iranian acquisition of missiles and the fact that Tony Blair's government has had the information for a while but kept it quiet. That only makes sense if you assume that Bu$hCo wants to use the information at the opportune moment--just before they start bombing Iran.

Kathy said...

Thanks for the link, Lew. I have only one tiny bit of optimism in this whole scenario. I think Congress will make it much harder for Bush to take military action this time around - at least I hope so.

pissed off patricia said...

They are like vampires, they live off blood and war. They need it to survive.

azgoddess said...

this is all driven by money and power...

the bush family has been in bed with oil since before the sha's overthrow...didn't he get ousted because he wouldn't play with them anymore?

http://www.themiddleeastnow.com/articles/shaofiraninterview.html

this might explain things a bit

Left of Center said...

Hammers and lipservice. I had said that lebanon was about cleaning up Israels backside so they could hit Iranian nuke sites. It's suicidal but wel within parametres for these ansane assholes.