CommunityMy FDLSeminal

Goldberg Redux

Tick, tick, tick… That clock’s a’tocking away…!

In March of ’02, Israeli Chamber of Commerce spokesmodel Jeffrey Goldberg, in the New Yorker, screamed at the top of his lungs…

The Great Terror
In northern Iraq, there is new evidence of Saddam Hussein’s genocidal war on the Kurds—and of his possible ties to Al Qaeda.

…Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction clearly are not meant solely for domestic use. Several years ago in Baghdad, Richard Butler, who was then the chairman of UNSCOM, fell into conversation with Tariq Aziz, Saddam’s confidant and Iraq’s deputy Prime Minister. Butler asked Aziz to explain the rationale for Iraq’s biological-weapons project, and he recalled Aziz’s answer: “He said, ‘We made bioweapons in order to deal with the Persians and the Jews.’ “

Iraqi dissidents agree that Iraq’s programs to build weapons of mass destruction are focussed on Israel. “Israel is the whole game,” Ahmad Chalabi, the leader of the Iraqi National Congress, told me. “Saddam is always saying publicly, ‘Who is going to fire the fortieth missile?’ “—a reference to the thirty-nine Scud missiles he fired at Israel during the Gulf War. “He thinks he can kill one hundred thousand Israelis in a day with biological weapons.” Chalabi added, “This is the only way he can be Saladin”—the Muslim hero who defeated the Crusaders. Students of Iraq and its government generally agree that Saddam would like to project himself as a leader of all the Arabs, and that the one sure way to do that is by confronting Israel…

And, later on in October of ’02, in Slate, Goldberg famously answered the question…

Should the U.S. Invade Iraq?

…So: Saddam Hussein is uniquely evil, the only ruler in power today—and the first one since Hitler—to commit chemical genocide. Is that enough of a reason to remove him from power? I would say yes, if "never again" is in fact actually to mean "never again."

‘Never Again’, indeed… According to him, today, we’ve already reached…

The Point of No Return

…For the Obama administration, the prospect of a nuclearized Iran is dismal to contemplate— it would create major new national-security challenges and crush the president’s dream of ending nuclear proliferation. But the view from Jerusalem is still more dire: a nuclearized Iran represents, among other things, a threat to Israel’s very existence. In the gap between Washington’s and Jerusalem’s views of Iran lies the question: who, if anyone, will stop Iran before it goes nuclear, and how? As Washington and Jerusalem study each other intensely, here’s an inside look at the strategic calculations on both sides—and at how, if things remain on the current course, an Israeli air strike will unfold.

Wtf…? Cue up the Beach Boys, in 3… 2… 1…!

Jeffrey Goldberg Probes Israel’s Iran Strike Option: Is Netanyahu a "Bomber Boy"?

…Today, there is a new US President, more Iranian centrifuges, and a different Israeli Prime Minister – and Bibi Netanyahu seems closer to a Curtis LeMay, John Bolton or Frank Gaffney than he does to the more containment-oriented Eisenhowers and George Kennans who in their day forged a global equilibrium out of superpower rivalry and hatred.

Goldberg, after conducting dozens of interviews with senior members of Israel’s national security establishment as well as many top personalities in the Obama White House, concludes in his must-read piece that the likelihood of Israel unilaterally bombing Iran to curtail a potential nuclear weapon breakout capacity is north of 50-50.

In short, Goldberg paints a picture that despite the likelihood of very high cost blowback from Iran in the wake of a unilateral strike by Israel, or a coordinated attack with the US, there are numerous tilts toward bombing embedded in the current political orders in both Jerusalem and Washington.

Ironically, one of Goldberg’s central tenets… The notion that most of the Arab League members support an airstrike on Iran to disable their Nuke programme, was recently obliterated by a Brookings Institution report…

…This year’s poll surveyed 3,976 people in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan, Lebanon, and the United Arab Emirates, during the period of June 29–July 20, 2010.

Among the key poll findings are:

* A substantial change in the assessment of President Obama, both as president of the United States and of Obama personally.
* Remarkably stable views on the Arab-Israeli conflict and the prospects of its resolution.
* A majority of the Arab public now see a nuclear-armed Iran as being better for the Middle East.

*heh* Even the unwashed masses of Arabs realize that ObamaRahma ain’t producing…! Fancy that…!

But nobody seems to be cluing in here in the West, as Steve Hynd noted recently…

…I think the international community are making a mistake if they believe Hillary Clinton is trying to solve the Iran nuclear problem. She has been consistently hawkish, truculent and obstructive to diplomacy with Tehran. "Madame AIPAC" has been an all-round disaster as a SecState so far, with gaffes and diplomatic suicide bombs from Russia to the Falkland Islands…

It is rather sad when the last two mainstream candidates for the Dem ticket are both AIPAC tools…

As Hillary stated shortly after she was installed at the helm of the Ship of State…

…Iran’s pursuit of the nuclear weapon is deeply troubling to not only the U.S. but many people throughout the world," Clinton said.

"We’re at the beginning of this process of putting enormous pressure on Iran from all kinds of different angles in order to persuade them or prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons," Clinton added later.

The ‘sanctions’ are creating the very conditions they were designed specifically to stop…

Iran sanctions strengthen Ahmadinejad regime – Karroubi

…Punitive international sanctions imposed on Iran have strengthened Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government and assisted its post-election crackdown on the opposition Green movement, the leading reformist politician and former presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi has told the Guardian.

In his first interview with a British newspaper since widespread unrest erupted after Ahmadinejad’s disputed re-election as president last June, Karroubi blamed the US and Britain for adopting counterproductive policies to combat Iran’s suspect nuclear programme, describing sanctions as a gift to the Iranian regime.

"These sanctions have given an excuse to the Iranian government to suppress the opposition by blaming them for the unstable situation of the country," Karroubi said in email responses to the Guardian.

So let’s bomb them and have them really rally around the Regime, and, even force them to accelerate their Nuke program, with no IAEA inspectors around, whatsoever…!

The Stupid…! It Burns…! 8-(

Previous post

Watercooler - Only 1/3 Of Americans Know Bush Started Bank Bailouts

Next post

Pew: Dems, GOP Even on Generic Ballot; Highly Disengaged Youth Vote “Leads” Unenthused Electorate

CTuttle

CTuttle

13 Comments