Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Cheney Sabotages Talks with Tehran
Leave it to Dick Cheney to dash hopes for any cooler heads to prevail between Washington and Tehran.
Remember, it was Cheney who did everything in his power to hype the Iraq War and scuttle any possibility of a diplomatic solution prior to that conflict.
Now he's doing the same with Iran.
Even as the State Department and the National Security Council are at least exploring the possibility of talking with Tehran, the Vice President of the United States, in typical fashion, is sabotaging that effort.
On Friday, aboard an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf, Cheney rattled a saber at Ahmedinejad.
Cheney said: "With two carrier strike groups in the Gulf, we're sending clear messages to friends and adversaries alike."
In case anyone missed what he was referring to, Cheney spelled it out: "We'll stand with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region."
By "with others," Cheney was referring to Israel, which has already threatened to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. Back in January 2005, Cheney sympathized with Israel's desire to attack Iran first:
"One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked, that if in fact the Israelis became convinced the Iranians had a significant nuclear capability, given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of the state of Israel, that the Israelis might well decide to act first."
Cheney also may have been referring to Saudi Arabia, which doesn't want to see an ascendant Shiite Iran across the gulf.
In any event, Cheney's message got through.
Ahmedinejad, who thrives on rhetorical clashes with Washington, warned that Iran would retaliate if the United States attacked it.
And that's no idle threat, either.
If Bush and Cheney are crazy enough to bomb Iran, and there's no reason to suspect they're not, Iran would make life even more miserable for the United States in Iraq, and it could also destabilize the world oil markets, with devastating consequences for our economy.
But Bush and Cheney have shown us already that they don't consider the consequences.
Prior to the Iraq War, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt warned that toppling Saddam would create "100 bin Ladens."
Mubarak just warned Cheney again, this time saying that a war with Iran would have "grave repercussions on the region."
This warning may have as little impact as the last.
Matthew Rothschild is editor of The Progressive.
© 2007 The Progressive. All Rights Reserved.
18 Comments so far
Show AllCheney has no time in the service, yet his lives caused over 3000 us deaths and tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths. He wants to do the same with Iran.
I find it interesting that the US declares war on World terrorism and the Bush administration is the biggest terrorist's on the planet nad the US people believe it.
"Cheney Sabotages Talks with Tehran"
How thoughtful!
Meanwhile, Iran is solidifying alliances with Russia and China and Venezuela. "China proposes to help Iran modernize its petroleum industry and the wider Iranian economy with industrial technology, capital, engineering services and nuclear technology."
Will the U.S. attempt to invade those countries?
Gail,
Bush and Cheney are not limited by principle or compassion or concern for human welfare, because they have none. But they are limited by their own boundless incompetence, thank goodness.
You guys all think that Cheney works for the American people. He just moonlights as our VP. His real job is chairman of the board of the military-industrial-media complex. Ike had Cheney in mind when he warned us 50 years ago. We should have listened.
Hoa binh
namvet67,
I think most of us here believe that Cheney works very hard against the interests of the great majority of the American people. He lines his pockets with the blood, sweat, and tears of others.
They are not called the "Bush Crime Family" with any love attached to it what so ever! They will ruin anything they touch or pay others to touch.
Don't you just love it that five-deferment Dick had to get on the aircraft carrier before he could bad-mouth the Iranians?
Cheney said: "With two carrier strike groups in the Gulf, we're sending clear messages to friends and adversaries alike."
Is the "clear message" that Admiral Fallon wouldn't let you play with a third one?
Or maybe that you are down from the 5 you had previously?
Scott Ritter wrote an entire book, in 2006, on the subject of America's virtually inevitable attack upon Iran.The book is ironically entitled "Target Iran". In it he meticulously spells out, based upon information from first-hand sources in the Middle East, in the Pentagon, and elsewhere, the machinations which will result in this coming disaster. He is claiming that a small group inside the government of Israel are the sole proponents and prime movers behind the push for war. He names names and knows the principals personally.
Cheney's dutiful speeches to AIPAC (along with virtually every politician running for president, both Democrat and Republican) make crystal clear that he fully intends to attack Iran unless it complies with his command to cease and desist from the manufacture of nuclear weapons. There is not a hint of reluctance in any of their voices. Yet, there is no credible expert who believes that Iran is within years of producing a nuclear weapon, and there is no definitive evidence that the production of nuclear weaponry is their intention. Notwithstanding this, the destabilization of the Middle East and the systematic slaughter of Israel's enemies MUST continue. All else is conversation. And so the project stealthily moves forward while we are lulled into indifference by a complete media blackout of the issue.
The consequences of the attack, according to Mr. Ritter, will be extraordinary. Nuclear fallout, attacks upon Israel, increased danger to American troops in Iraq, massive Middle Eastern destabilization, a spike in global terrorism, astronomical oil prices, financial disaster on a global scale, destitution for our grandchildren. In other words, the results are so stunning in scale, that you, the reader, will have no strong reaction to his description because your brain will simply not allow itself to believe it. And all will remain quiet right through the current planning phase into the attack phase at which point we will once again be told, we must protect our troops, we must finish the job, it will only be a barrage of surgical airstrikes, our allies need us to stay, etc. etc.
This all seems somehow very unlikely, some would even say crazy. But crazy does not disqualify anything in Bushworld, nor even reduce it's liklihood. Being wrong about this would be the greatest gift ever.
Injector-
I don't get it. Please elaborate. Thanks
fd32 May 15th, 2007 7:23 pm
"Re: Attack on Iran....
This all seems somehow very unlikely, some would even say crazy. But crazy does not disqualify anything in Bushworld, nor even reduce it's liklihood. Being wrong about this would be the greatest gift ever."
Bush just appointed a "War Czar" instead of appointing a "Peace Czar". That in itself tells us how distorted the minds of these people are! I wouldn't put anything past these war mongers, but agree that being wrong about the level of their insanity would be a great gift.
20-3-1963
23-7-1963
14-10-1964
1-11-1965
19-1-1966
If on only one of these dates, the medical staff had been more proficient, we might not have had to deal with Dodgy Dick in his present corporal corruption.
Hao Binh as usual is right on target. Trickie Dickie is making hands over fist out of the chaos in the ME. You think he wants to stop that????
kivals, can you elaborate how they are limited by their boundless incompetence? It seems to me that's the problem, not the solution.
BobQD: With injector's permission, let me elaborate on those dates. I think those dates refer to the times when Dick Cheyne had operations performed on his ailing ticker. I've heard that wherever he goes an ambulance with the latest medical equipment as well as a cardiologist follows him around just in case. Having said that, I think Dick--what an appropriate name— is more in need of a brain surgeon and a shrink.
I don't think they would attack Iran. They could attack and change a dictator, but they won't attack a revolution. Besides, some in Iran may be pissed off at the mullahs, but they would be fighting mad at an aggressor bombing their civilian infrastructures.
After bombing, what then? Who will be the replacement? The son of the venal Shah whom people made a revolution to kick out? Not a chance.
kathyodat,
Remember, the Bush criminal gang had hinted they would go on to Iran and Syria after Iraq. But their gross incompetence, in large part because of their arrogance and incredible ignorance of Iraq, has delayed and possibly even thwarted their grand plans. The military brass is resisting the push to start any more wars for a variety of reasons, at least in part because they have exhausted their troop and material resources and because the Bush gang has demonstrated they have no idea what they are doing (see CommonDreams article on Admiral Fallon's resistance -- "CENTCOM Commander's Veto...").
I fear a smart and capable ruthless predator far more than an ignorant and incompetent one, and the former can do so much more damage to the US and the world. We should never forget that their goals never had anything to do with the welfare of the great majority of Americans or Iraqis, but were part of their general pattern of enriching the few at the expense of the many.
"I don't get it. Please elaborate. Thanks"
The Dick's Ducking Draft Deferment Dates.
If he hadn't been given a pass five times, he could have contributed in Vietnam, and could have given the Vietnameses the opportunity to assist in his education.