Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
December 7, 2016 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

‘The Field of Fight’

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Email this item Print this item

Everyone Loses in a War With Iran

Posted on Mar 7, 2012
AP / Charles Dharapak

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, seen on screen, speaks before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) via satellite in Washington on Tuesday.

By Bill Boyarsky

On Super Tuesday, the most important matter facing the country was not who will win the Republican presidential nomination but whether Israel will drag the United States into a war with Iran.

Super Tuesday turned out to be inconclusive for the Republicans. Rick Santorum beat Mitt Romney in Tennessee, Oklahoma and North Dakota. Romney narrowly won in Ohio and carried Virginia, Massachusetts, Idaho, Alaska and Vermont. Newt Gingrich won his home state, Georgia. The race continues—as does the candidates’ drive for right-wing votes.

A major part of that drive is to portray President Barack Obama as a weakling on Iran and themselves as warriors, pandering to the conservative Jews and evangelical Christians who favor speaking loudly and brandishing a big stick. This, in turn, is pushing Obama toward increasingly fierce rhetoric.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu encouraged war fever Tuesday when he spoke to his U.S. fan club, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the big pro-Israel lobbying organization that, as it always does, cheered him with the blind loyalty AIPAC shows to Israel’s most hawkish elements.

After meeting with Obama earlier in the day, Netanyahu made clear his scorn for the president’s efforts to try diplomacy and sanctions before committing the United States to sending its fighting men and women, planes, ships and missiles in support of an Iranian war that would be a loser for everybody.


Square, Site wide

“For the last decade the international community has tried diplomacy,” Netanyahu said. “It hasn’t worked. For six years, the international community has tried sanctions. That hasn’t worked either. I appreciate President Obama’s recent efforts to impose even tougher sanctions against Iran. And those sanctions are hurting Iran’s economy. But unfortunately Iran’s nuclear program continues to march forward. Israel has waited, patiently waited. ... We’ve waited for diplomacy to work. We’ve waited for sanctions to work. None of us can afford to wait much longer. As prime minister of Israel I will never let my people live in the shadow of annihilation.”

Not all Israelis agree. In the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which is critical of the Netanyahu government, diplomatic correspondent Barak Ravid wrote, “Netanyahu does not believe that the international sanctions against Iran or the dialogue with Iran will prevent the country from procuring nuclear weapons, said a senior Israeli official Tuesday. That is why Netanyahu thinks the damage and casualties from a missile attack on Tel Aviv in response to an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities will be small change compared to the consequences of the Iranian government attaining nuclear capability.”

Another anti-Netanyahu journalist, Sefi Rachlevsky, commented in Haaretz that the pro-war Israeli military planners “who believe in an attack have one hope only—that the United States will be dragged in and complete the Israeli move. ... Sometime between early June and mid-August, just before the Republican nominating convention, will be the vital moment to drag the United States into war, the planners believe.”

The Republicans sounded as though they are ready and willing to be dragged.

In his speech to AIPAC, Romney said, “As president, I will be ready to engage in diplomacy. But I will be just as ready to engage our military might. Israel will know that America stands at its side, in all conditions and in all consequence.”

Santorum told AIPAC that the United States should give Iran an ultimatum: destroy its nuclear facilities or face a United States attack. “These are essentially irrational actors. We need to put that ultimatum in place, and we need to be prepared, if that ultimatum is not met to engage Prime Minister Netanyahu and the people of Israel in an effort to make sure that if they do not tear down those facilities, we will tear down them,” he said.

Gingrich pledged to “undermine and replace the Iranian dictatorship by every available method short of war.” Last year, when asked what he would do as president if Israel informed him of an imminent military strike against Iran, Gingrich said his reply would be “How can we help you?”

Obama walked a line between pledging support for Israel while discouraging talk of a pre-emptive strike against Iran. “Already, there is too much loose talk of war,” he told AIPAC. Two days later, he said at a news conference, “If some of these folks think that it’s time to launch a war, they should say so, and they should explain to the American people exactly why they would do that and what the consequences would be.” But Obama told Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic magazine last week, “I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don’t bluff. I also don’t, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments realize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say.”

Lost in all this are the words of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who said last month, “We are not seeking nuclear weapons because the Islamic Republic of Iran considers possession of nuclear weapons a sin ... and believes that holding such weapons is useless, harmful and dangerous.”

His words should be part of the dialogue as the nation considers how to deal with his tyrannical, unpredictable and divided country. The United States thoughtlessly rushed into war in Iraq and Afghanistan without considering the huge cost. We should not make the same mistake again in the heat of a presidential campaign. We should not permit Netanyahu and his hawkish supporters here and in Israel drag us into another war.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, March 14, 2012 at 11:25 am Link to this comment

Marshall, if that’s the best you can do in response to my comment I suggest you just apply for some kind of disability bailout, as you clearly are not hitting on all cyclinders.

Because I am anti-nuke does not mean that I am rooting for Iran to have some!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get it now?

Or are you just too far in denial and too obsessed with pimping for patriotism to function?

Time for you to take a literacy class at your local public library so that you can read Ward Churchill’s The Radioactive Colonization of Native America.  (I am one of the Atomic Farmgirls—victims of Hanford.)

Report this

By Marshall, March 13, 2012 at 11:14 pm Link to this comment

By moonraven, March 8 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

I didn’t decide who should have nukes - Iran’s public position is one of no
nukes.  The UN, IAEA, and virtually every world power happens to agree, which i
think makes you the outsider on this topic.  Not surprising I suppose from
someone who trusts Iran’s fascistic fundamentalist ideolog rulers that govern
Iran with an iron fist used to pummel the life out dissenters.  You must hate the
U.S mightily to choose Iranian judgement over ours.  But then these boards are
a magnet for self-loathing anti-americanism (though you’re apparently now an
ex-pat, you blend in with this group quite nicely).

So go ahead and argue out of both sides of your mouth; that you oppose all
nukes, but that *if* Iran just happened to whip some out of the back pocket of
its bulletproof burqa, you might give a chuckle or two at the slap in the face to
the good old great satan.  It’s a pretty sad logic and I dare say you’ll be
regretting the consequences if your desire for america’s comeuppance comes
true.  But then you seem to fancy yourself an expert on Iran from whatever time
you spent in the gulf so perhaps we should defer to your better judgement.  Or
maybe not.

Report this
Ray Joseph Cormier's avatar

By Ray Joseph Cormier, March 13, 2012 at 2:08 pm Link to this comment

Anyone remember John Aristotle Phillips the A-Bomb kid? In 1976, while attending Princeton University as a junior undergraduate, he designed a nuclear weapon using publicly-available books and papers. Any terrorist group determined enough to build one can without Iran.

The information is out there and the Genie cannot be put back in the bottle. Iran has been under attack by the US and the West since the peaceful, non-violent people’s revolution and break from the past and the American installed proxy Dictator the Shah. Democracy was not for the Iranian people when the US had the dominant influence, but only for American domestic consumption.

The last thing the international arms merchants want to see is peaceful non-violent revolutions happening in this world as it happened in Iran in ‘79. That would put them out of business. The US is the biggest arms merchant the world has ever produced. The more violent the revolution the better for business.

The Iranian people’s revolution of ‘79 was rekindled with the Arab Spring that morphed into the Global Occupy movement in 2011.
Why single out only Iran when Israel has nukes outside of the NPT and it is not questioned at all or held accountable? I applaud Iran for standing up against Western hypocrisy and double standards.

In 1976, The Kansas City Times, September 13, records the Vision God opened my eyes to see way back then when the Middle East was not on the people’s mind like it is Today.

The newspaper records in these express, explicit words, “there are 30 months before the Fate of the world will be sealed with either Universal Brotherhood or Destruction.” The September 13 article records expressly this figure is based on “a Treaty between Israel and Egypt.”

Not 29 or 31, but exactly 30 months later, the 1st Treaty between Israel and Egypt was signed, the Camp David Accord. This symbolized the possibility of the Universal Brotherhood part of the September 13 prophecy.

Personally at the Time, I was surprised the Kansas City Times printed and published these words:

“He came to town for the Republican National Convention and will stay until the election in November to do God’s bidding: To tell the world, from Kansas City, that this country has been found wanting and it’s days are numbered.”

For those who know/don’t know or grasp the significance Israel is a recreation from the Bible in this real, non-religious world, the words above are the 1st two parts of the 3 part Writing on the Wall story in Daniel 5.

The 3rd part describes the decline of the world’s superpower and the rise of Persia-Iran which also happened in 1979 in tandum with the hope of Universal Brotherhood implicit with the signing of The Camp David Accord OR the choice of War and Destruction.

As for the Writing on the Wall, the whole world saw it for the 1st Time at the same Time with the Global Financial Meltdown-Economic Pearl Harbour/Tsunami in September 2008. Global government deficit financing maintained the illusion of business as usual, but that illusion is quickly dissipating with hard core austerity on the way and everybody knows it, whether one believes in God or not.

The Destruction part in the September 13 prophecy is covered in the 2nd article The Kansas City Times published on ALL SOULS DAY, November 2, 1976. It’s taken all these years and it’s finally upon us if Israel attacks Iran.

What amazes me, when I post this link so anyone can see the proof and evidence for themselves, the stats tell me it is a very rare person with the courage or mental curiosity to expand on the original 1976 Kansas City Times Markers of Time to read and see for themselves in this link. There’s nothing I can do about that, but the historical facts are not changed one iota. Many are called, but few are chosen.

From the Revolutionary Spirit of ’76 to the Revolutionary Spirit of ’11

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, March 13, 2012 at 1:17 pm Link to this comment

A minority, by definition, cannot be racist.

Racism is employed by the dominant skin-colored (in this case, whites) as but one means of keeping down the uppity non-whites.

Ergo, the racist is YOU, meat-beater.

Didn’t your ole granny tell you that you were going to go blind?

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, March 13, 2012 at 2:13 am Link to this comment

I didn’t know there were earmarks on munitions.

I do know all weapons we sell (give) Israel are to be used in defense only.

A tricky little caveat which hinders Israel first strikes.

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 12, 2012 at 8:13 pm Link to this comment

moonie———I can’t help it if your ignorance outweighs even your loathsome

the bunker busters are for Lebanon should the fit hit the shan.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, March 11, 2012 at 10:26 am Link to this comment

Ah, hettie—as usual crwling around in his own private Idaho with his own exclusive info.

If the bunker busters are not for use against Iran, I would liuke to see a few going your way.

You are so fucking tiresome.

Report this

By Sodium-Na, March 10, 2012 at 4:51 pm Link to this comment

It is absurd to claim that Iran is building the bomb for attacking Israel.The Iranians are not a bunch of idiots to risk retaliation that brings them back to the Stone Age. Israel’s leaders and their supporters know this solid fact very well. Why then all the unhelpful and hysterical verbages for war against Iran by Netanyahu and his cohorts? To answer this question objectively,one must ask another question has to do with Iran,not Israel:

What is Iran’s purpose in building a nuclear weapon?

Paul Findly,a former U.S.Congressman,represented the State of Illinios for more than 20 years,wrote the following in The Washington Report” magazine recently,(issues March/April),as a result of his meeting in 1964 with then retired former President Dwight Eisenhower,in Eisenhower’s Gettysburg office:


He,(Eisenhower),said,“One way to keep European from fighting each other would be to supply an atomic,(nuclear),warhead to each head of government.” He was not joking. His point: nuclear weapons have only one military value,but it is an important one-to detter attack.


As it is well known that Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of all allies forces during WWII. He knew what he was talking about as a military man,(by the way,he is the “ONLY FIVE STARS GENERAL” in the entire military history of the United States of America. His honesty,integrity and moral authority were extremely admired by the vast majority of the people world wide.

Hence the purpose of Iran in building a nuclear weapon,if they really are diong so,is for DETTERRENCE,not to attack Israel or any other country. That has answer the question concerning Iran’s purpose,but did not answer the first question raised and it is worth repeating:

Why then all the unhelpful and hysterical verbages for war against Iran by Netanyahu and his cohorts?

Answer: there are three main reasons:

(1) Prevent Iran from joining,what some diplomats and politicians call,“The Immunity Club”. That is the club of those who already possess nuclear weapons. It is an exclusive club whose members are well known:

U.S.A.,Russia,Britain,France,India,Pakestan and Israel.

(2) Allowing Iran to possess a nuclear weapon means that the Equilibrium of Terror that terrorizes the whole Middle East will be,somehow,altered that Israel likes to monopolize forever,which makes the current leaders of Israel living in their own delusional world,refusing to recognize a fundamental and absolute two truths: life’s constant changes and death.

(3) Allowing Iran to possess a nuclear weapon will result in demographic changes inside Israel itself.Such demographic changes,most likely,will result in de-population,because most human beings do not like to live in an area or a country that is dangerous to take a risk and continue living in it,while the Iranian and Israeli nuclear weapons are aiming at each other throat,just in case. That is a characteristic all human beings have and the Israelis are no different. De-population of Israel from its citizens who adhere to the Judaic Faith is unacceptable by Israel’s leaders whether they were right wing Lukudists or non-Lukudists liberals.

Final words: Please consider the foregoing not as a defense of the Iranian leadership as much as adhering firmly to a sense of objectivity. I am not a good friend of theocratic government,whether it is Islamic,Christian or Judaic. I abhor them all.

Report this

By Quizzy, March 10, 2012 at 3:02 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Here’s my question:

If Iran wasn’t building a nuclear weapon, why are they putting their reactors deep inside mountains?

Report this

By Sodium-Na, March 10, 2012 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment

From his own mouth,one may be able to expose the husbara,(propaganda). From the article:


“For the last decay the international community has tried diplomacy” Netanyahu said. “It hasn’t worked. For 16 years,the international community has tried sanctions. That has not worked either.”



For the total of 16 years,meaning the last 16 years,you and your cohorts have pushed the U.S.through your AIPAC and its puppets in Congress to do your dirty works against Iran and so far NO single nuclear bomb has been built by Iran. On the other hand,you have at least 200 of them.

Two Questions:

(1) Why it is perfectly legitimate for you to have 200 horrible nuclear bombs but Iran must not be allowed to build just one? Why? Why? Why? Please do not try to tell me Israel can be trusted with the bombs,but Iran must not be trusted. That is an unacceptable answer,sir,since there is enough evidence that Israel was willing and ready to use the bombs against the advancing Egyptian and Syrian armies in the 1973 Yum Kupour War as the Israeli called it,or Ramadan War as the Egyptian called it,or the Tishreen War as the Syrian called it.

(2) Since Iran has failed,after 16 years of nuclear activities,in building just one nuclear bomb,as has indicated by all technically knowledgeable nuclear experts of the United Nations and it may take Iran another 16 years to even come close to building one,why then you want to rush the a war whose consequences would be a total disaster,at all different dimensional levels,for Israel,U.S.,Iran and the rest of the people of the world,at large? Just an honest answer,please. No “but” and “mut” and “if”. just an honest,straight answer.

There is one main reason,for me,to incline to believe that Iran’s nuclear activities to build the bomb,(if Iran is really after building the bomb),is not to attack any country for building the bomb,but for another important reason most people are,perhaps,unaware of. I shall try to expose those reasons shortly through other posts.

Netanyahu and his cohorts’s push for war against Iran must fail. Cheney/Bush and their advisors of neoconservatives have made the blunder in Iraq for the last eight years and bankrupted the country,in the process. That should be a monumental lesson to stop the endless arrogance and madness. Enough is Enough.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, March 10, 2012 at 7:39 am Link to this comment

The Issies will probably sell their old ‘bunker busters’ to our competition. 

They allready have a shitload of these unless they used them on the Palestinians recently. 

You hear so little in the press about the daily attacks and death against the Palestinians, one would think Ron Paul was over there.

Report this

By ardee, March 10, 2012 at 7:25 am Link to this comment

By heterochromatic, March 9 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment

RHONDA—- the bunker-busters for Israel are not for use against Iran.

Why? Because he says so, that’s why!

Report this
Arabian Sinbad's avatar

By Arabian Sinbad, March 9, 2012 at 9:35 pm Link to this comment

By heterochromatic, March 9 at 8:35 pm

“RHONDA—- the bunker-busters for Israel are not for use against Iran.”
When a “hater” of basic truths tells you that the bunker-busters given to Israel are not for use against Iran, then one might be confused as to what to make about this concise, yet seemingly authoritative rant!

It’s either, perhaps, “hater-in-chief” is an omniscient high-ranking Pentagon insider or the top US CIA Official who knows everything, or he is a confidant of the fascist Netanyahu who told him that bunker-busters are obtained by Israel just to adorn their arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, just for bullying purposes!

Or, perhaps, this resident Zionist scumbag troll is paid by the number of rants he posts!

I am just being sarcastic about the first possibility, but am sure that the second possibility is what applies!

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 9, 2012 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment

RHONDA—- the bunker-busters for Israel are not for use against Iran.

Report this

By RHONDA, March 9, 2012 at 2:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Well, having just read that our president promised
Netanyahu those 20,000 lb. bunker busting bombs and
refueling aircraft if he promises not to attack Iran
until after the election, all I can say is WTF! (I’m
in my sixties, so I don’t usually say that.)

That’s what happens when someone has more money than
sense.  Deplorable as our Mideast wars have been, why
do I get the intense feeling that attacking Iran will
be a whole other ballgame?

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 9, 2012 at 2:15 pm Link to this comment

isn’t it time that everybody joined the rest of

such a precious comment and so wise and warm with the
wisdom of the world.

Report this

By omygodnotagain, March 8, 2012 at 10:18 pm Link to this comment

Isn’t it time the Israelis joined the rest of mankind, got off their high horse and ended this sense of being special. They are not above international law.
So if Iran gets a nuclear weapon Israel would feel threatened. How do 300 million Arabs feel about the nutjobs and criminals with hundreds of nuclear missiles running Israel?

Report this
Arabian Sinbad's avatar

By Arabian Sinbad, March 8, 2012 at 5:38 pm Link to this comment

By moonraven, March 8 at 3:13 pm
Marian Griffith:

Actually, the model for Hitler’s treatment of the jews was the US government’s treatment of the indigenous population of North America.  Hitler said so himself. So he is one person who couldn’t say his model was based on Russia’s treatment of jews.
Great point, moonraven, worthy of being recorded in block, big letters in HISTORY’S BOOK OF BIG TRUTHS!

So, in a sense, the fascist Zionist model in Palestine is based on the big fascist early American model and by extension on the fascist Nazi model to a lesser extent. By extension, one can say that the early fascist American model is Zionist’s father, and the fascist Nazi model is its mother.

And that explains the organic affinity between White Political-Military America and Ashkenazim Political-Military Israel. It’s in a sense that big evils like to have company so that they would not be singled out as being the only big evil on record. 

The organic affinity between White Political-Military America and Ashkenazim Political-Military Israel could also be explained in light of the proverbial maxim of, “BIRDS OF FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER!”

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, March 8, 2012 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment


Some good points there.

And yes, somehow war is the biggest turn-on for our species.

read James Hillman’s A Terrible Love of War, folks.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, March 8, 2012 at 3:13 pm Link to this comment

Marian Griffith:

Actually, the model for Hitler’s treatment of the jews was the US government’s treatment of the indigenous population of North America.  Hitler said so himself. So he is one person who couldn’t say his model was based on Russia’s treatment of jews.

So let’s just not get too high-horsey here.  The jews have refused to accept that any other holocaust has occurred—despite the fact that, as just ONE example,  in this hemisphere 200 MILLION indigenous folks were exterminated. 

And don’t come at me with the old canard about infectious diseases, either.  How many jews died in concentration camps in central and eastern Europe from typhoid, typhus and other contagious diseases—yet were included in the holocaust numbers?

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, March 8, 2012 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment


Who gave YOU the right to decide who should have weapons of mass destruction?

If my knowledge of history has not failed me, YOUR government is to date the ONLY government on the planet to have USED nuclear weapons against an adversary.

That means that YOUR government should be tried in the WCC and should have to dispose of all of its weapons of mass destruction, as clearly any nation that would commit that horrendous crime is likely to do so again.

Being a victim of Hanford, along with many others in my generation of eastern Washington atomic farmgirls and farmboys, I am anti-nuclear—whether it’s for production of electricity or for weapons.

And as someone who has spent a chunk of time in the Gulf, I have to say that I’d trust Iran’s leaders more readily than I would trust those of the US.

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 8, 2012 at 2:03 pm Link to this comment

Skinkbard——rise above your faith and do the right thing.

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 8, 2012 at 2:01 pm Link to this comment

PH———no I don’t want to lead the attack 67 borders as part of a real peace deal
is fine with me.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, March 8, 2012 at 1:50 pm Link to this comment


The international was wanted Israel to return to the pre-67 borders.

Do you want to lead the attack?

Report this
Arabian Sinbad's avatar

By Arabian Sinbad, March 8, 2012 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment

By walterbard, March 8 at 5:39 am

“but whether Israel will drag the United States into a war with Iran.” Once again the leftists blame Israel for everything. The truth is Iran is already at war with America.

How many American soldiers were killed by Iranian proxies in Iraq? America according to the Islamofascist Iranian leaders is the big Satan. Israel is only the little Satan.
And world’s newest Neville Chamberlain, Obama, is now leading America——into disaster.
Your types, your ugly name and the evil partisans you support make me feel like throwing up. Sometimes I even feel like it would be a mercy to be dead so that I don’t have to see, hear or read about the scumbags that your types represent.

If it wasn’t that my faith considers suicide a great sin, I would have committed suicide!

Report this

By bramdruckman, March 8, 2012 at 11:21 am Link to this comment

Why Going To War With Iran will be so much fun

Let’s face it – Man loves war. As much as we spout the gooey-dooey mantra,
“Love one another”, most of us don’t love one another we despise one another.
We dislike everything about others from the color of their skin to the style of
their hair, their politics, religions, gods, music, even the way they dress. It’s
perfectly natural and human. We all think our way is the best and the other
person is wrong - I’m OK but you’re questionable. So we go to war to teach
them a lesson or get them out of our hair or take their resources or territory,
because, really, they don’t deserve it, do they? So we go to war to shoot, kill,
main, destroy. We have been doing it since the beginning of time and shall go
right on doing it until the next species comes along to replace us.

And yes, after every war there’s a stretch of calm where humans pledge never
to go to war again. Speeches are given. Books written, movies made.
International organizations urge people to settle their differences peacefully but
underneath the fires continue smoldering unhappily waiting for the chance to
flare again. Unhappy minorities smolder because they don’t have what they
think they’re entitled to. Generals smolder because they don’t have armies to
send into battle and victories to claim. The munitions-makers smolder terribly
because they’re not raking in tons of money – nor are their unhappy
shareholders. War is great business. Then there’s the rest of us, unhappy that
the other fellow’s nose is the wrong size or they don’t have the same
government or they keep stealing our women or sheep or refusing to give us
their natural resources and to set things right we must teach them a lesson.

So it’s off to war we’ll go to show those pesky Iranians that we can have the
bomb but not them. Never mind that India has one as do Pakistan (some friends
they are), the UK, N. Korea, Russia, (perhaps Israel) and most definitely us, the
U.S. – more nukes than any other country on planet earth. But let’s face it we’re
the rulers of the roost, our way is the only way while those others would, if they
could, destroy us (Disney Land included) turning all of us into blabbering
robots. Stopping the Iranians building the bomb is the only way to prevent that
and the only right and honorable way to do that is to bomb them into
blabbering robots first. The short of it is - we’re right and they’re not.

Report this

By SarcastiCanuck, March 8, 2012 at 10:58 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

No Bill,not everyone loses.The weapons makers will have record profits….once again.

Report this
Ray Joseph Cormier's avatar

By Ray Joseph Cormier, March 8, 2012 at 10:19 am Link to this comment

Because Israel can start WWII/Armageddon with a 1st strike on Iran starting war beyond words but that’s it. They cannot sustain it beyond the 1st strike.

If Israel can get the US to stop the justifiable retaliation for Israel’s act of war, they will go ahead and suck all Nations into a Global Holocaust II.

If the US says to Israel, you can start the war against Iran if you want to, but we won’t stop Iran’s justifiable retaliation, Israel won’t start WWIII/Aramagddon. It’s a choice as simple as that!

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 8, 2012 at 10:02 am Link to this comment

MeHere——not an imperial war but a hegemonic one.

Obama has made no commitment to war beyond saying that if Iran assembles
nuclear weapons, that might bring the US begin military operations against the
iranian regime.

the international community stands in opposition to iran’s weapons program, and
the international community doesn’t want a war…....... the international
community should get the first scrapped without recourse to the second…..

Report this

By MeHere, March 8, 2012 at 9:47 am Link to this comment

The author of this article says the important matter is “whether Israel will drag the US into a war with Iran.  “Drag”? Is that the word? Any war/invasion the US gets into is the whole responsibility of its leaders and the citizens who support them.

“Everyone loses in a war with Iran” is right, and the losers, besides Iran, the US. and Israel, are so many others in the Middle East who have already had their share of suffering.

There is no way to legitimize a war with Iran. It would strictly be an imperial war.  Following the imperial tradition, both Israel and the US don’t mind wasting more of their own people’s lives and resources. Obama’s lack of commitment to peace is an abomination and also his latest crime in the pursuit of his presidential ambitions.

The international community must stand in opposition to this madness.

Report this

By balkas, March 8, 2012 at 9:35 am Link to this comment

note please that when obama says “all options are on the table, and i mean what is say”, he includes in this options also the only
options of remaining the enemy of iranian people[s] and launching a military attack against iranian.
so, in fact, US entertains only two options: doing everything possible against iraqi people and at opportune time attack the land.
but, obviously, time for an attack is not yet, but with time and different tactics [including arming opposition inside iran] there may
arise an opportunity to attack iran and keeping own losses at a minimum.
it is just like iraq anywhen from ‘91 to early ‘03, invading iraq had always been the only option, but dressed with pretty dresses.
it seems that even a false flag military venture, which would ‘justify’ US attack on iran, is being tossed aside. looks like iran or
much of the world would not by into it!
so, ashkenazi [aipak] in US will have to wait for their hatred of the goyim to be sated. hopefully, it never happens!!! thanks

Report this

By American Lion, March 8, 2012 at 9:27 am Link to this comment

Maybe the tail can wag the dog, but I certainly hope not this time.

Report this

By WR Curley, March 8, 2012 at 8:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Lost in all of this is an awareness of the
fundamental policy doctrine established at the
inception of the age of nuclear terror, in the late
fifties, when this heavy sword was hung above the
peoples of the world.

It was termed MAD (wildly appropriate) for Mutually
Assured Destruction. It was assumed that parity among
belligerents in the deployment of doomsday weaponry
would guarantee no one could use them. Pretty
obvious, yes? Revisit “Strangelove”.

The arms policies of the major global powers are
predicated on this notion. This why they built the

(Frustrating though it must be for the flat-head
militarists on both sides, neither India and Pakistan can
get much beyond a little spear-chucking at the
borders for fear that the other might do something
truly stupid with the fat boys on the bench.)

Given that the single most pugnacious nation on the
planet, the tiny nascent state of Israel, has
apparently possessed itself of a stockpile of these
utterly useless excavation devices, it behooves its
neighbors - more or less by definition its
adversaries - to acquire the damned things too.

If this logic worked for the US and the USSR, to the
tune of some tens of thousands of multi-megaton
devices per each, aren’t the same rules valid in the

The Zionists are blind, of course. They know one
thing only. They cock about on their dusty little
roost, but it’s fear that drives them. They tell you
so openly, as Netanyahu does repeatedly on this
latest occasion. If “Gulam”, above, is to be
credited, they have earned the right to their fears.

I believe Achmedinajad when he declares that his
nation has no interest in nukes. Just one modern
bang-toy thrown in each direction would obviate any
further argument about the “peace process”. What’s
the point?

But here’s the thing, “Gulam”...If the Jews have such
a unique grasp of history, why are they forever
condemned to repeat it?

Report this

By Namro, March 8, 2012 at 5:51 am Link to this comment

There are only two legal reasons for war set out in international law: it is legal to go to war when enemy troops have crossed you borders requiring self-defence; and it is legal when the UN Security Council declares it legal.  Pre-emption is not legal!

This is just another set of Israeli lies designed to boost Netanyahu among fanatical,orthodox,zionists and hawks, as-well-as an attempt to keep the state dynamic in the face of internal squabbles by inventing a “great enemy bent on the destruction of Israel”.  It is also a deflection aimed at marginalizing the current Palestinian attempt for recognition by the United Nations.

The consequence of war would be horrific.  The US weould pay for a costly military venture with a further loss of credibility in the Middle East as an `honest broker` and add an enormous cost to the national debt.  Thousands of lives would be lost, and no stability would remain in that region.

Why does Israel not have to comply with international treaties dealing with nuclear arms!  What right does Israel have to posess these weapons of mass destruction!

Report this

By walterbard, March 8, 2012 at 5:39 am Link to this comment

‘Benjamin Netanyahu encouraged war fever”

Of course Ahmedinajad and Ayotollah Khamenei threats to annihilate Israel certainly doesn’t encourage war fever. Heaven forbid.

“Not all Israelis agree. In the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which is critical of the Netanyahu government .”

Ha’aretz has a circulation of less than six percent. It loses readers each year as it becomes clear that this leftist appeasement rag sheet’s policies are not only bankrupt but also dangerous. Yet all the anti Israel media, like truthdig,  often quote Ha’aretz
as proof that most Israelis favor a policy of suicidal appeasement to enemies sworn to destroy Israel. Ha’aretz is no more representative
of mainstream Israeli opinion than the Daily Worker was of American

“but whether Israel will drag the United States into a war with Iran.” Once again
the leftists blame Israel for everything. The truth is Iran is already at war with America.
How many American soldiers were killed by Iranian proxies in Iraq? America according
to the Islamofascist Iranian leaders is the big Satan. Israel is only the little Satan.
And world’s newest Neville Chamberlain, Obama, is now leading America——
into disaster.

Report this
David J. Cyr's avatar

By David J. Cyr, March 8, 2012 at 5:34 am Link to this comment

QUOTE, Barack Obama, from 03/02/12 Atlantic Monthly interview:

“At a time when there is not a lot of sympathy for Iran and its only real ally, [Syria,] is on the ropes, do we want a distraction in which suddenly Iran can portray itself as a victim?”

Yes, Obama doesn’t want Iran bombed until after the November elections, so his aggressor war policy doesn’t create an inconvenient “distraction” for his “Peace Prize” holding candidate’s campaign of massive (D)isinformation.

Jill Stein for President:

Voter Consent Wastes Dissent:

Report this

By ardee, March 8, 2012 at 4:17 am Link to this comment

Again, not a single comment on the right of the USA to order other nations to do its bidding, all the while owning the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on the planet. Absurd.

If that little man in a big job, Barack Obama, were serious about nuclear proliferation he might set an example by reducing our own ridiculously large stockpile of them. Likewise, if he were seriously in pursuit of peace he might tell Netanyahu, that bloody butcher, that his bellicose belligerence might cost his nation the six billion in aid we give them each year.

Everyone, or far too many it seems, has discounted the possibility that Iran actually is seeking electrical generating capacity rather than weaponry. I guess the way to ensure peace is to badger, browbeat and threaten Iran continually.

Report this

By balkas, March 8, 2012 at 4:08 am Link to this comment

so, ashkenazi see the writing on the wall: israel will be gone forever. but, being fiercely cultic, hateful
for all nonashkenazic peoples, separatistic [remember that even dead ashkenazi are separated from
dead goyim and no just the living ones] would even sacrifice america itself and, if for no other reason,
than that they are so full of self-importance, hate for everybody else.
so, don’t trust a living soul who calls self “jewish”. that includes many or all on the left. they all
approbate ashkenazi crimes and want to reward these criminals with a state of their own.
even on this site, half of the columnists are ashkenazi firsters and only much thereafter human.
recall please that some of them say that they are “half-jewish”. it seems they are not ever half english,
half german, half polish.
and even if s/he be 98% polish and looks polish more than average pole, but of the talmudic cult or
connected with s’mone with the cult, s/he’s still jewish or half-jewish. thanks

Report this

By balkas, March 8, 2012 at 3:34 am Link to this comment

had not europeans of talmudic and christian cult known in 1897 that a colonial state set up by
military means [which also included terrorism and expulsion of 800k palestinians, razing hundreds
of their villages, etc.] in palestina, would never be accepted, first of all by palestinians themselves, 
and by most or all ME arab states?
i think they knew!
so, existential threat to this colonial state thus existed the moment europeans wanted to destroy
recall please that the colonial states of afrika were always in danger of being wiped off the face of
the earth. it took more than hundred yrs to destroy them, but all were destroyed by late 20th
it may take decades or centuries to wipe the colonial state of israel off the map, but it will be
crocodile tears about existential threat to israel does not fool anyone. ashkenazi, having committed
enormous crimes against humanities, fully deserve to be driven to sea or back to europe.  thanks

Report this

By Marian Griffith, March 8, 2012 at 12:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)


Please do not try to blame the victims for the crime.
Also, please read up on your history.
Jews in Russia were prosecuted and murdered with impunity (and often as a form of appeasement to the peasants by the nobility) a long time before WW2. In fact you could say that the Russian treatment of Jews was the inspiration for Hitler’s atrocities.

And your claim that the holocaust did not come out of nowhere is only right in a tiny fraction. The Jews were used to be discriminated against, and the occasional riot-turned-massmurder-of-jews. That has been happeninig for the past 1000 years.
Turning that into a wholesale extermination campaign was something new, and unheard of on that scale. It certainly was impossible to predict.

Report this
Gulam's avatar

By Gulam, March 7, 2012 at 11:07 pm Link to this comment

The constant, if occasionally unspoken, theme behind the hysteria over Iran is
Israel’s supposed fear of another “Holocaust.” It is only fair to point out that this
now-famous genocide did not exactly come out of nowhere. The destruction of
both the first and second Temples was not, according to Jewish writers, a
tragedy arising from the black hearts of the Assyrians and Babylonians but the
inevitable fall-0ut from Israel’s arrogant, unwise, and negligent actions. When
Hitler came to power, the Germans had just seen a gang of secular Jews in
Russian take over and murder the entire upper class; Marx wrote the script and
Lenin led the fight. The control that Jews had over the banks, stock market,
press, and academia in Germany before the Second World War was very similar
to what we see now in the United States; more than 1200 of fewer than 1500
seats on the Berlin Stock Exchange when it crashed were in Jewish hands. The
reaction was certainly overkill, but the Germans had every right to be both
angry and afraid, and given their level of control, for many years it had been
impossible for intellectuals to discuss rising Jewish power in public before
things finally exploded and a demagogue was swept into power. Would we have
had the filth and on-going dangers of the nuclear industries polluting the
planet without Einstein, Teller, and Oppenheimer who built their bombs in
secret in order to drop them on Germany?

Does it not seem strange that over and over and over we hear about “The
Holocaust,” and how bad bad bad were those Germans, but we never hear a
word about the much larger murder of Chinese peasants by Mao, with whose
successors Americans are now in economic partnership. We are also seldom
reminded that it was the Shah of Iran, who sent the Jews back to Jerusalem,
ending their Babylonian captivity; according to the Torah, out of respect for the
Jews he paid to have them taken back and their kingdom restored. Secular Jews
like Netanyahu can play fast and lose like this with history only because Jews
are the only ones who really take history seriously; the gentiles live in a mythic,
timeless Valhalla where all that matters is what the herd thinks now. Nobody
remembers how threatened the United States was by the prospect of a
Communist South Vietnam, and nobody seemed to be embarrassed to find that
it did not much matter. Almost all traditional species survival strategies have
positive and negative characteristics, and many groups have hostile and
conflicted interactions, but we have seen this particular gentile-Jewish
interaction involving a financial bubble play itself out before. Unless dramatic
and unlikely steps are taken to change course, when the dollar crashes Jews in
America and Israel are likely to fall on very hard times, again. Netanyahu will
have made it worse.

Report this

By Marshall, March 7, 2012 at 11:00 pm Link to this comment

War with Iran is a bad idea.  Iran with a bomb is a worse idea.  Whether or not you
believe war is the answer, the goal of preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear
weapons is critical.  Diplomacy?  Great.  Sanctions?  Great.  Unfortunately, Obama
has increased the likelihood of war by dragging his feet on sanctions - which
should have been stinging Iran’s oil economy two years ago instead of just
recently.  So now we’re facing the prospect of military confrontation in a region
that thrives on it.  Guess we’d better bring those troops home from Afghanistan
cause we’re gonna need them out of harms way in the coming conflagration.

Report this
mrfreeze's avatar

By mrfreeze, March 7, 2012 at 8:31 pm Link to this comment

When Willard was going on his “war with Iran” rampage the other day I was reminded of being in college in UT in 1979 when the revolution happened in Iran, when the hostages were taken, when America did what it always does: blame the victims of it’s incessant meddling for a crisis that we essentially helped create. I’m reminded of all the racial slurs and hatred spewed out against my many Iranian friends who were attending the University of Utah (where there was/is a large Middle-East Study Center). Many of my friends were and still are Iranians who keep me informed about the situation in that country. I’m reminded of how few Americans (surprisingly few even at the top levels of our government) know virtually NOTHING about Iran, its history, its people, its culture….....nada, niente, nichts…..And to listen to the likes of Willard and Rick and Newt and all the rest of those dickless wonders makes me very sad that we can’t get past our differences with Iran.

I’m truly saddened that the Media and our leaders can’t quit fixating on 1979, when I believe most people think Iranian/American history started…...I’ve written this before here on TD and on other blogs: we have far more in common with Iran than we do with the Arabs and even the Israelis. We should not be enemies today….but of course when the U.S. can’t get past its bullshit with Cuba after all these years, why would we expect anyone to be rational at the top?

By the way, I’m not praising the lunatics that run Iran…not at all…..but I believe our lunatics are just as absurd and scary as theirs.

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 7, 2012 at 8:17 pm Link to this comment

St Davy——

Chinese military personnel serving as human shields
for nuclear weapons facilities in Iran??????


I hope that it’s only yourself talking that level of
ultra-stupid and silly and Jill Stein doesn’t get
wind of your brainfart.

she might have to exile you.

Report this
David J. Cyr's avatar

By David J. Cyr, March 7, 2012 at 7:34 pm Link to this comment

QUOTE, Bill Boyarsky:

“[Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s] words should be part of the dialogue as the nation considers how to deal with his tyrannical, unpredictable and divided country.”

... with “the nation” being Khamenei’s Iran, and “his tyrannical, unpredictable and divided country” being Obamanation… except that there was never anything unpredictable about Obama not providing any change.

Now is the time for China to step up to its global power status, and offer Iran battalions of unarmed uniformed Chinese military personnel to be stationed as human shields around Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Terrorist Production for Bomb Destruction:

Jill Stein for President:

Report this
Blueokie's avatar

By Blueokie, March 7, 2012 at 7:32 pm Link to this comment

The idea that war with Iran would be bad is painful and obvious and, indeed, painfully obvious.

One question for BB, in the last paragraph you described a country that was “tyrannical, unpredictable, and divided”, I got a little confused, is that the U.S., Israel, or whoever the bad guys are this time?

hetero - Turn that mouse down, its hurting my ears!  Thanks for the lol.

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 7, 2012 at 6:49 pm Link to this comment

Brilliant——- the Duchy of Grand Fenwick did OK in
their war.

Report this

By BrilliantBill, March 7, 2012 at 6:35 pm Link to this comment

Everyone loses in EVERY war.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, March 7, 2012 at 5:38 pm Link to this comment

War with Iran.

Check the source first.

Report this

By jimmmmmy, March 7, 2012 at 5:17 pm Link to this comment

i’m with you in thinking war with iran is a very bad idea. however i don’t believe its going to happen. its election season and this is a great fund raising issue for both sides. have the cia sell iran a couple of small nukes put the info around and presto, israel stands down. and on to the next crisis, it worked before in india/pakistan in the 70s. like global warmings dire predictions this to will pass.

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 7, 2012 at 5:02 pm Link to this comment

yes, here you are…...

something about not trusting that asswipe of an
Ayatollah’s words proves hatred?

or are you simply braying like a donkey down a well?

Report this
Arabian Sinbad's avatar

By Arabian Sinbad, March 7, 2012 at 4:50 pm Link to this comment

Here goes the resident scumbag hater, as always spewing his ignorant and filthy none sense!

Do you realize how overbearing, ignorant and irrelevant your hated propaganda is?!

Report this

By heterochromatic, March 7, 2012 at 3:34 pm Link to this comment

war with Iran——not food.

taking Khamenei’s words at face value—- not good.

Report this
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Like Truthdig on Facebook