Saturday, March 03, 2007

The Military Thinks It's Crazy

Back to Iran. Given the insanity of the Bush Administration and the various idiotic comments about Iran made by Democrats (like John Edwards or Hillary Clinton), an attack on Iran looks all too likely from where we sit. However, it is worth noting that, as Noam Chomsky pointed out in an interview I've already linked to and quoted from twice, "the military in the United States thinks it's [the idea of an attack on Iran] crazy. And from whatever leaks we have from intelligence, the intelligence community thinks it's outlandish, but not impossible." And later in the interview:
Shank: In the 2008 presidential election, how will the candidates approach Iran? Do you think Iran will be a deciding factor in the elections?

Chomsky: What they're saying so far is not encouraging. I still think, despite everything, that the US is very unlikely to attack Iran. It could be a huge catastrophe; nobody knows what the consequences would be. I imagine that only an administration that's really desperate would resort to that. But if the Democratic candidates are on the verge of winning the election, the administration is going to be desperate. It still has the problem of Iraq: can't stay in, and can't get out.
So how desperate will the Bush Administration be? Is it possible that the military and the ruling class, generally, "won't let" Bush attack Iran? It is, certainly. Bush has surely become a liability for the empire--just as Nixon was before he was forced to resign. And there have been reports that certain high-ranking military officers "will resign" were Bush to order an attack on Iran, that "[t]here is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible."

So there are some encouraging signs.


Andrew said...

The genuinely homicidal natuure of these people and their agendas cannot be underestimated. Here some words from Richard Perle, one of the great neo-con minds:

If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely, and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy but just wage a total war, our children will sing great songs about us years from now.

Which begs the question, what exactly is this vision? I don't see how this quote would differ in any way from what would expect from a Himmler, to use the much used but unfortunately justified Nazi comparison. And as a tool in the enactment of this vision, a little clue into the War on Terror:

Dictators must have enemies. They must have internal enemies to justify their secret police and external enemies to justify their military forces.

Though lets not forget the strange words of Tony Blair regarding this vision:
"This is a moment to seize. The kaleidoscope has been shaken, the pieces are in flux, soon they will settle again.
Before they do, let us reorder this world around us."

Very odd language.

Andrew said...

Should have made clear the dictators must have enemies also a Perle quote.