LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
2010 Webby Award Winner for Best Political Blog
 
May 27, 2012
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     robert scheer     barack obama     gay marriage     ndaa     chris hedges
Most Read

Say 'Hi-Ho!' as They Strip-Search You

TED: 'A Money-Soaked Orgy of Self-Congratulatory Futurism'

I Can't Hear Myself Think

A Rare Admission That Money Trumps Everything Else

Children Slaughtered in Government Attack on Syrian Town

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
Why Bain Questions Matter
OSHA Struggles When Tower Climbers Die

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Better Than We Found It
The Good-Natured Dictator

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar
PAPERS ON WAR

PAPERS ON WAR

By Daniel Ellsberg

more items

 
Reports

The Iran Trap

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   

Posted on Jun 8, 2008
Barack Obama
AP photo / Alex Brandon

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama on screen receives applause during his address before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference 2008 in Washington.

By Chris Hedges

The failure by Barack Obama to chart another course in the Middle East, to defy the Israel lobby and to denounce the Bush administration’s inexorable march toward a conflict with Iran is a failure to challenge the collective insanity that has gripped the political leadership in the United States and Israel. 

Obama, in a miscalculation that will have grave consequences, has given his blessing to the widening circle of violence and abuse of the Palestinians by Israel and, most dangerously, to those in the Bush White House and Jerusalem now plotting a war against Iran. He illustrates how the lust for power is morally corrosive. And while he may win the White House, by the time he takes power he will be trapped in George Bush’s alternative reality.

 

We need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to stay the hand of Israel, which is building more settlements—including a new plan to put 800 housing units in occupied East Jerusalem—and imposing draconian measures to physically break the 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza. We need, most of all, to prevent a war with Iran. 

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, in a letter to President Bush on May 8, threatened to open impeachment proceedings if Bush attacked Iran. The letter is a signal that planning for strikes on Iran is under way and pronounced.

Advertisement

“Our concerns in this area have been heightened by more recent events,” Conyers wrote. “The resignation in mid-March of Admiral William J. ‘Fox’ Fallon from the head of U.S. Central Command, which was reportedly linked to a magazine article that portrayed him as the only person who might stop your Administration from waging preemptive war against Iran, has renewed widespread concerns that your Administration is unilaterally planning for military action against that country. This is despite the fact that the December 2007 National Intelligence Estimate concluded that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, a stark reversal of previous Administration assessments.”

The administration, in rhetoric that is eerily similar to that used to build the case for a war against Iraq, asserts that the Iranian Quds Force is arming anti-American groups in Iraq and providing them with high-tech roadside bombs and sophisticated rockets. It dismisses the National Intelligence Estimate conclusion that Iran suspended its nuclear weapons program. The White House has not provided evidence to back up its claims. I suspect it never will. And when Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz tells the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth an attack on Iran is “unavoidable” if Tehran does not halt its alleged nuclear weapons program, what he is really telling us is we should prepare for war. 

Conyers’ threat is too little too late, especially if the Bush White House, possibly assisted by Israel, launches airstrikes on some or all of 1,000 selected Iranian targets in the final weeks of the administration. But it is an effort. Conyers tried. 

This is more than we can say for the presumptive Democratic nominee. Obama went before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) on Wednesday and said he will stand with the right-wing Israeli government, even if this means backing an attack on Iran. 

“As president I will use all elements of American power to pressure Iran,” he said.  “I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything.”

Obama went on to blame the Palestinians for the conflict, although the ratio of Palestinians to Israelis killed in 2007 was 40 to 1. This is an increase from 30 to 1 in 2006 and 4 to 1 in 2000-2005.

“I will bring to the White House an unshakable commitment to Israel’s security. That starts with ensuring Israel’s qualitative military advantage, ...” Obama told AIPAC.  “I will ensure Israel can defend itself from any threat, from Gaza to Tehran. ...”

Obama spoke about Israelis whose houses were damaged by the crude rockets, most made out of old pipes, fired from Gaza on Israeli towns. He never mentioned the Israeli siege of Gaza, the world’s largest open-air prison, or that Israel was deploying fighter jets and helicopters to attack densely crowded refugee camps with missiles and iron fragmentation bombs or that it had cut off food and fuel. He ignored the steady expansion of Jewish settlements on Palestinian land. He called for Jerusalem to become the “undivided capital” of the Jewish state, erasing Arab East Jerusalem from the map in contravention of international law. East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are internationally recognized as occupied Palestinian territories, which Israel took over in 1967. Obama’s stance is the moral equivalent of assuring the Johannesburg government during the apartheid era that one would support their repressive efforts to punish the restive blacks in the townships. 

The deterioration of the conflict in Israel, which would be accelerated by airstrikes on Iran and an ensuring regional war, will propel us into the Armageddon-type scenario in the Middle East relished by the lunatic fringes of the radical Christian right. And so, with Obama’s enthusiastic endorsement, we barrel toward a Dr. Strangelove self-immolation. No one will be able to say we did not go out with a spectacular show of firepower, gore and death. Our European and Middle Eastern allies, who are numb with consternation over our death spiral, are frantically trying to reach out to Tehran diplomatically. 

The instant we attack Iran, oil prices will double, perhaps triple. This price increase will devastate the American economy. The ensuing retaliatory strikes by Iran on Israel, as well as on American military installations in Iraq, will leave hundreds, maybe thousands, of dead. The Shiites in the region, from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, will see an attack on Iran as a war against Shiism. They will turn with rage and violence on us and our allies. Hezbollah will renew attacks on northern Israel. And the localized war in Iraq will become a long, messy and protracted regional war that, by the time it is done, will most likely end the American empire and leave in its wake mounds of corpses and smoldering ruins. 

The Israeli leadership, like the Bush White House, is increasingly bellicose and threatening. The Israeli prime minister, after a 90-minute meeting with Bush in the White House on Wednesday, said the two leaders were of one mind. “We reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat,” Ehud Olmert said. “I left with a lot less questions marks [than] I had entered with regarding the means, the timetable restrictions and American resoluteness to deal with the problem. George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it and intends to act on the matter before the end of his term in the White House.”

This time around, unlike about the war with Iraq, the Washington bureaucracy, loathed by the Bush White House, did not remain silent and complicit. The National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program released last Dec. 3 distinguished Iran’s enrichment of uranium at Natanz and Arak from its formal nuclear weapons program, which it said had halted in 2003 after the American invasion of Iraq. Adm. Fallon, who put his country and his integrity before his career, spoke out against a war with Iran, tried to stop it and lost his job as the head of CENTCOM. He has been replaced with Gen. David H. Petraeus, whose devotion to his career admits no such moral impediments. 

” ... There is no greater threat to Israel or peace than Iran,” Obama assured AIPAC. “This audience is made up of both Republicans and Democrats. And the enemies of Israel should have no doubt that regardless of party, Americans stand shoulder to shoulder in support of Israel’s security. ... The Iran regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race and ... its president denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. ... [M]y goal will be to eliminate this threat.”

Barack Obama, when we need sane leadership the most, has proved feckless and weak. He, and the Democratic leadership, is as morally bankrupt as those preparing to ignite our funeral pyre in the Middle East.


New and Improved Comments

We are launching a major overhaul of our comments section.

In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.

Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.

Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.

Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page.

By Carl Rogers, June 9, 2008 at 6:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Obama is an empty suit. Expect nothing from him, and hope he doesn’t disappoint you. In 1967, after Israel attacked Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, Bobby Kennedy advocated more jets and military supplies for Israel. Nothing changes with US politicos.

Report this

By Sullen Susy, Proud Member of ARMY-M, June 9, 2008 at 6:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To argue that making a statement to the AIPAC will in some way bind Barack Obama to act in a certain manner while in the white house is grossly overestimating the resonation of the comment. For starters since when did making a speech on the campaign trail create a set of new laws that one must abide by. If that were the case, we would be living in a Utopia after all of the promises made to us by various people running for political office. Barack Obama is capable and intelligent enough to make decisions on international affairs based upon facts as they pertain to the benefit of the American people. There are likely two ways to look at the comments he made. First it can be seen as a way to try and garner favor from the AIPAC away from Joe Lieberman (the turncoat supporting McCain). Lieberman spoke to the AIPAC on March 17, 2007 at which time he towed a ridiculously hawkish line throughout the whole of his speech. It is also important to note the differences between both of their speeches. Obama admitted that much of the problems in the Middle East, even those that plague Isreal, has much to do with failed American policies in the region.I only bring this up because the GOP and Lieberman are attacking Obama for saying this, making him left of center on their policy no matter what. Another way to look at the comment is that Barack wanted to let the AIPAC know that in spite of all of his policy ideas that will differ with the needs and desires of the AIPAC Barack is still willing to come to the table with them.  I can see no better way of creating sustainable peace than bringing rogue nations like Iran and extreme zionist groups like AIPAC to the table.

Ultimately what Barack said there will likely have little impact on the way he runs the nation. However with that being said, I do agree that if his comments were not merely part of a larger political dance, then the president that they set could cause our country a whole lot of grief.

Report this

By eli, June 9, 2008 at 6:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I will always love Chris Hedges, appreciate him, and roll my eyes at him.  It is called pandering and anyone who is to be president of the US can and must do it.  It sucks, it leaves acrid burn in the throats of progressives, hopefully Obama’s too, but it is political reality.  Let’s hope that he’s not stupid enough to move beyond words and actually take actions that would further enable Israel’s hazardous behavior.

Report this

By kelstermcgil, June 9, 2008 at 5:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

McKinney..? another waste of a vote…

Obama will set things straight. This writer seems like another “end-of-the worlder…”

Report this
G.Anderson's avatar

By G.Anderson, June 9, 2008 at 5:42 am Link to this comment

At this point in time realitively few American’s know what or who AIPAC is.

Nor do they understand AIPAC’s role in the current economic collapse of America, and the undermining of our political system.

American’s need to be educated on this subject.

Report this

By Grousefeather, June 9, 2008 at 4:49 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s the money stupid!

Report this

By Ed Harges, June 9, 2008 at 4:31 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Some of Obama’s defenders are saying, “This pandering is only pretense. Don’t worry, he’s just saying what he has to say. When he’s elected, he’ll do the right thing.”

Well, folks, that’s what they said about Hillary. Once she embraced Arafat’s wife, and she caught hell from the Israel lobby for doing that. So, like Obama, she started pandering to Israel like crazy.

And her liberal supporters said, “This pandering is only pretense. Don’t worry, she’s just saying what she has to say. When she’s elected, she’ll do the right thing.”

And then she got into the Senate, and she voted on every single issue like Ariel Sharon on crack.

Report this

By Alexander Baldal, June 9, 2008 at 2:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Horrible leaders of the “manageable numbers” world politics, members of “Skull and Bones” are willing to unleash the catastrophe, have no doubt. Stock up on essentials, the dollar will become worthless. Make no children, save the unborn!

Report this

By Jaded Prole, June 9, 2008 at 2:34 am Link to this comment

It’s called pandering. Obama has had a problem among Jewish voters and those driven by irrational fears as he was pandering to AIPAC to out-Zionist McCain and assure these voters he is a safe bet. It’s the same reason he spoke to the Florida Guzanos. He is trying to undermine the right’s electoral weaponry. It a game and he’s being a “smart player.”

Still, I may vote for Cynthia McKinney . . .

Report this

By AB, June 9, 2008 at 2:15 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The kill ratio is the fault of the Palestinians! How many times have they said they choose the option of violence and ‘resistance’? How many times have they said that they wish to be ‘martyred’? How many times have they said they will spill every drop of Palestinian blood in the name of their cause? In the good times to come, that ratio will rise like the price of oil, unless of course they decide to opt for peace, but that is unlikely.

Report this

By wmmbb, June 9, 2008 at 12:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Prior to the invasion and occupation of Iraq people in large numbers took to the streets in cities and towns across the world. It is time to take the initiative again before the planned Iranian holocaust.

This time let’s insist that the war crimes tribunals be established and the indictments sent without excuse and exception for all those, in particular the principle players, who have transgressed the Nuremberg Principles.

Report this

Page 3 of 3 pages  <  1 2 3

Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox


 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.