March to war

Sy Hersh, addressing last week's annual meeting of the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies, had some terrifying things to say about the prospects of a US attack on Iran. If you've read Hersh's recent pieces in the New Yorker, you know most of it: he's been repeatedly warning of a buildup to go get Iran. But Hersh said he's more convinced than ever ]that W. believes he's the only leader on either side of the aisle with the fortitude to attack Iran, and Hersh says that in spite of near-universal resistance from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he believes there's a pretty good chance Bush will take a shot at Iran before the end of his term. Scary shit.

What B.S.! So, by offering the Iranians a long opportunity to reconsider their folly, the Administration is now guilty of "crying wolf"?? Clearly, Bush, like every single Western government, is simply giving all other venues the necessary time. Military intervention is a last resort, but it will be exercised if need be. Of course, if a strike had occurred any earlier, these same pundits would attack Bush for failing to allow the necessary time. What a neurotic, no-win proposition from our media "elite"! And the NIE indicating that Iran had at one time suspended their nuclear ambitions is now widely dismissed (since nuclear development, if it ever was suspended, has now resumed -- WITH A VENGEANCE!). The West has always done its utmost to prevent proliferation, even amongst trusted friends (e.g. Australia). By what stroke of delusion should we now believe that the West's greatest enemy, the arch-supporter of terrorism, should now be trusted with WMD? And, NO, the current situation is not comparable to the (ultimately incorrect) accusations of Iraqi WMD's. In this case, we know that Iran has a program for nuclear power. Iran proudly says so. With the global oil situation, there is no reason on earth for Iran to seek nuclear know-how. Will Iran take the next step to nuclear refinement sufficient for bombs? If they have no fear of a Western response, the answer must be an unreserved YES. Clearly, Iran will respond to any attack on its nuclear sites. But it would be short-sighted IN THE EXTREME if the world allowed Iran to develop WMD's simply because we feared the counter-attack. If Churchill and Eisenhower thought that way, I'd be writing this response in German or Japanese! And, by the same logic, nobody would stand-up to gangs for fear of retribution! How pathetic! How weak!