portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

imperialism & war

If Any State Nukes Iran--It means war with all humanity

Bush's "troop surge" is just a false tactic leading to WAR WITH IRAN.

The goal is, and has always been, control of all of the Middle East's oil -- not just to grab Iraq's.
Personally, I see one thing clearly: An unprovoked nuclear attack on Iran by Israel or anyone else would mean that a STATE OF WAR exists between the state making the attack and THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD. Nuclear war is forever -- it sets intolerable precedents worse than Hiroshima and makes large land masses uninhabitable essentially forever. Any state commiting nuclear aggression has declared war on all humanity, deserves all-out war in return.

Attacks of any nature against the state of Israel, Israeli interests, and Zionist advocates anywhere in the world (with the exceptions listed below) would be justified -- and I do mean "of any nature." The commission of "terrorism" to recompense a nuclear attack would not be possible -- by definition, attacks against a nuclear aggressor, of any nature, would be justified and certainly not terrorism.

The same thing goes for any client state of Israel aiding and abetting a nuclear attack on Iran. Turkey, for example, if it allowed the overflight of Israeli aircraft in a nuclear attack, would lay itself open to attacks of any nature by anyone having a grievance against the attacks and attackers -- and that includes not just the world's one billion Muslims but all humanity.

A LEGAL CAVEAT

Now as an American, I do not and can not support or advocate "terrorism." I do not advocate violence of any kind against Americans, American interests, or on American-controlled soil. I do not advocate anyone supporting "terrorist" groups that are illegal to support according to the U.S. Government, nor do I advocate violation of any United States laws.

However, I say again, that if any state launches a nuclear attack against Iran or aids such an attack, that A STATE OF WAR EXISTS between the government of the state and the people of the world. This transcends one's duties to one's own country.

The unprovoked use of nuclear weapons is that serious. It is a breach of ancient social mores of the entire world. It is an unprecedented breach that must be punished in ways that will ensure it will not be repeated for many years.

SEDITION

I urge all concerned -- decent -- people in the world to join in a commitment to punish a nuclear attack by any and all means. One must protect one's self, of course. Citizens should ensure that they are not liable to prosecution by their governments for crimes such as sedition. Learn the laws and obey the laws, at least so you can continue the fight.

A CALL TO ARMS

So this is a call to the people of the world to take up arms against those who would use nuclear weapons in a military aggression. There is no such thing as "terrorism" in responding to a nuclear-bomb attack. No one need have any ethical qualms in this unprecedented situation, either.

THE IRAQ WAR AND IT'S ESCALATION

Sad to say, but President Bush's concept of victory in Iraq is not in the interest of the American people or their future.

The war in Iraq is lost already. It is out of American hands. It is in the hands of the two sides of a civil war (about to become at least three sides, if you include the Kurds). It was based on lies by President Bush in his State of the Union Address and lies in the United Nations by the ridiculous, disgraced Colin Powell.

So what if the United States sends in 20,000 or even 40,000 more troops for 6 months. All that those in Iraq opposing this action must do is what guerillas are trained to do: pull back and melt into the general population. And bide their time and refresh. The surge troops eventually will leave. So will the 140,000 now there, and the insurgents know all this. The American people want out, and their getting out is only a matter of months.

The only reason the Iraq War lost in the November U.S. elections, the only reason the American people want out, is the mounting cost in U.S. casualties and money. The American people did not care when Iraqi civilian deaths were estimated in Lancet (British medical journal) at 40,000 and they do not care now that the civilian toll is estimated at 425,000 people. American hides are all that they care about. Be honest: How many Americans have you heard complain about the civilian toll, or say that it is much worse (40,000 to 3000, or 425,000 to 3000) than the American toll? I am afraid that to Americans, foreign lives are cheap; only American lives are dear.

MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION

In the face of an unprovoked nuclear attack, each person the world over must make his or her own decisions about what is the higher law and which authority they will obey, and whether they are still members of the human race.

IT IS NOT IN THE INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SURGE TO SUCCEED

Here we are in another Vietnam. It took us decades to recover from the last one. This one challenges our republican (elected) form of government and our basic humanity the way the Second World War challenged Germans' humanity. If this surge succeeds, we will only be drawn fully into another Vietnam and setting the stage for future Vietnams in Iran and elsewhere.

A lesson needs to be learned in Iraq, by the United States of America: no more military aggression.

Clayton Hallmark
thinking always of war 13.Jan.2007 21:21

88

The Frightening Face Of America
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCkYfYa8ePI

Good enough 14.Jan.2007 21:35

reader 2

This is a good analysis of the Iraq/Iran situation.

But there are a couple of minor points to be made around the edges.

For example:

"The goal is, and has always been, control of all of the Middle East's oil -- not just to grab Iraq's."

Maybe, in the long run, that was true -- certainly that can be implied from the PNAC document. But many people believe that the goal in 2003 wasn't so much to gain control of any oil at all -as it was to disrupt the flow of oil from Iraq so as to increase the value of BushCo holdings (leases) in the Gulf of Mexico as well as to relieve the desperate financial condition of the Saudis at that time.

But the point about the potential for a World War III is well taken.