EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- One American Who Isn't For Sale
- Transcript: Today's Live Q&A With NSA Leaker, Edward Snowden
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
- Obama Cans Regulator Who Crossed Wall Street
- Pentagon Bracing for Public Dissent Over Climate and Energy Shocks
Popular content
Today's Top News
Resolution Green-Lighting Israeli Strikes on Iran Introduced by House Republicans
Republicans in the House of Representatives have introduced a measure that would green-light an Israeli bombing campaign against Iran. The resolution, H.Res. 1553 (in full below), provides explicit support for military strikes against Iran, stating that Congress supports Israel's use of "all means necessary" against Iran "including the use of military force". US military leaders have warned that strikes could be catastrophic to US national security interests and could engulf the Middle East in a "calamitous" regional war.
Nearly a third of House Republicans have signed onto the resolution, which has been publicly discussed and circulated by its lead sponsor, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), for months. The National Iranian American Council is leading calls to oppose the measure, urging those concerned to demand that House Republican Leader John Boehner denounce the resolution.
The introduction of the measure coincides with a pattern of renewed calls for military strikes that have escalated since President Obama signed "crippling" Congressional Iran sanctions into law. Neoconservatives who were instrumental in orchestrating the Iraq War, such as Bill Kristol, and Reuel Marc Gerecht, have led the stepped up calls for military action.
Hawkish former Bush Administration official John Bolton recently laid out the game plan to prod Israel into attacking Iran, arguing that outsiders can "create broad support" for a strike by framing it as an issue of Israel's right to self defense. Supporters for military strikes, Bolton says, should "defend the specific tactic of pre-emptive attacks" against Iran. He urges that Congress can "make it clear" that it supports such strikes and that "having visible congressional support in place at the outset will reassure the Israeli government, which is legitimately concerned about Mr. Obama's likely negative reaction to such an attack."
In spite of enthusiasm from the neocons, top US military leaders have warned of the many dangers of military strikes against Iran. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has argued, "Another war in the Middle East is the last thing we need. In fact, I believe it would be disastrous on a number of levels." Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has expressed his own serious reservations about an attack, stating, "Iran getting a nuclear weapon would be incredibly destabilizing. Attacking them would also create the same kind of outcome. In an area that's so unstable right now, we just don't need more of that." General David Petraeus has warned that a strike on Iran would be utilized by the Iranian government to unite it's otherwise divided populace.
Simulations have been conducted over the past year to assess the outcome of a preemptive military strike against Iran. One such simulation, by the Brookings Institution's Saban Center, found that strikes would draw the US into the conflict that would engulf the region into war, and would enable Iran to use the attacks as an opportunity to unite the Iranian people and dismantle its opposition. The simulation also found that the strikes could not destroy Iran's nuclear program but merely set it back a few years.
An Oxford Research Group report released recently reinforced those findings and also warned that an Israeli attack would be disastrous and would be unlikely to stop Iran's nuclear program. Instead, the report concluded attacks could convince Iran to withdraw from the international Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and to aggressively seek to develop nuclear weapons.
Iranian activists have urged that even raising the specter of war undercuts the opposition in Iran. "The mere fact that Obama didn't make military threats made the Green Movement possible," noted Akbar Ganji. "A military attack would destroy all of that."
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
76 Comments so far
Show AllFrom the article:
"Send your letter demanding that House Republican Leader John Boehner denounce the Iran War Resolution"
And why would John Boehner listen to me? As much as I agree with the point of view of the article, this looks more like list-building than effective political action.
Effective political action is a nice notion, however, when you're up against rabid neocon's, in both Israel & the US, political action is moot against patriot missiles.
The beast has no limit to how much blood it's fed.
Might be a good time to get out of the stock market if this thing passes. Get back in the day after Israel's attack when the Dow is below 8000. But don't go all in that day because what follows could bring it down below 6000 for a period of time.
Don't worry. If there's a nuclear war, the DOW will go to infinity, because nobody will be selling.
Vacuous posts out of CommonDreams NOW!
Republicans are certifiably insane.
The Republican political elite is composed of the evil and the stupid. They do a very good imitation of insanity but they're just stupid and evil.
They're stupid, evil and cowardly. Don't leave out cowardly.
They are calling for another country to start the next war.
Republicans, cowardly lyin's with no brains, no hearts and no courage.
and that distinguishes them from the Democrats . . . how again?
Knowing what a political scavenger and dumpster diver Obama is and how his vaunted Af-ganef-stan strategy has totally disintegrated, I can easily see him supporting this resolution. The man is deliriously desperate to be a Hero and achieve military victory against the "terrorists". In for a penny, in for a pound. In fact, that should be his 2012 campaign theme - BARACK OBAMA: IN FOR A PENNY, IN FOR A POUND. Although he'll probably choose something like: BARACK OBAMA: BLUE SKY THINKING.
I'm lost for words
Legislation advocating the commission of a gross Crime Against Humanity, the Crime of Aggression, STATE TERRORISM.
These people are worse than insane. They are diabolical murderers, and that includes Obama. Do they have no conception of how advocating the above will be seen by the rest of the world? It seems they are as blind as Hitler was.
Make no mistake, the people advocating this are terrorists and deserve to be taken out by whatever means are at hand as they are clearly not satisfied with the millions they have killed, wounded and displaced over the past decade. They are enemies of ALL the planet's people except for the small flock who are as bloodthirsty as they are.
Resolution 1553 is behind the curve, I fear. An effective (non-nuclear) attack on Iran is almost certainly beyond Israel's military capability at present. So they're already making noises about attacking southern Lebanon again, where (they claim) Hizbollah have thousands of shiny new Iranian-made missiles aimed at Israel.
Of course, if they do want to bash Iran, the Israelis will need to neutralise Hizbollah either first, or at least at the same time. A war on two fronts, then. Not that that has deterred people before, of course. But it does tend to lead to defeat.
Have you read this, http://www.counterpunch.org/amiri07232010.html
Do note the timing mentioned--early September.
Don't worry. There is a HUGE joint US-Israel military base. Our best and brightest will fight side by side with the IDF to defend mother Israel if things get really bad. Encourage all young people you know to join the US military in order to defend Israel. Ignore their constant espionage against the US. Ignore the fact that Israelis were found cheering and dancing at the fall of the twin towers. Israel first! The defense of Israel is prime, above all other considerations. Never Again!
That guy John Bolton is a certifiable lunatic.
Congress loves to start wars, but is Israel suicidal enough to do it?
To be or not to be, that is the gamble.
"In spite of enthusiasm from the neocons, top US military leaders have warned of the many dangers of military strikes against Iran."
I seem to recall the military making similar noises in the early build-up to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Might we soon see Gates, McMullen, Petreus and other nay-sayers shown the door, and compliant (yes-sir! yes-sir!) leaders taking their place?
Woops! Petreus has already been "demoted".
It would be pure lunacy for Israel to attack Iran.
Israel has a population of around 6 million Jews (the rest are Arab - Israel could possibly burn from within), with around 200,000 active career military and 400,000 reserves. Israel annually spends around US$19B on defense.
(http://www.globalfirepower.com/)
Iran has over 65 million people, with over 450,000 active in the career military, and another 400,000 active in volunteer militias. Even though Iran spends around US$7B annually on defense, it has a highly respected Navy and extensive ballistic missile inventory. Rule the air Iran would not, but it could level Tel Aviv in several days.
Before Tel Aviv is burnt to the ground and Israel selects its nuclear option in retaliation, the Strait of Hormuz would be closed indefinitely, reducing oil supplies to Europe by 50%, and sending the Euro into a panic that would probably isolate the USD and close the door on our markets in the East. The US would be dragged into the war "in order to stop the fighting". You fill in the details.
Our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were "jolly little wars". This next one is in another league.
A minor quibble, Iran's navy is composed of speedboats. Their larger ships are antiques, I doubt they'd be able to leave port safely given their age and the lack of port facilities and parts.
That being said, it's still possible for speedboats to close the Straits of Hormuz. Or just drop a few mines, mounted with missiles and/or torpedoes they would have a chance at sinking anything that floats. (including those very large targets known as aircraft carriers)
Anyhow, a war with Iran also has the potential of drawing in larger nations to fight on behalf of the 'damsel in distress'. A classic example is how the Brits joined WWI when Belgium's neutrality was violated by the German army in 1914.
Just because no one's been willing to stand up to the warmongering usa and isreal so far, doesn't mean that those nations might not be forced to stand up to the warmongerers, especially if they perceive that it's in their national interest to do so.
I hope that if the us/israel warlords do decide to attack Iran, Canada won't be sucked into the atrocity. But given the damn yankee wannabe who runs Canada right now, we're going to be just as fucked as you are.
Lunacy is the right word for the actions of the government. It's the same sort of lunacy that has stuck many governments and peoples in the past. It's always led to disaster for the common men and women.
Don't knock speedboats. The Iranian Navy learned during Operation Preying Mantis in 1988 that a traditional blue-water navy cannot go mano-a-mano against the US Navy. Iran subsequently changed it's strategic and tactical response.
The US Navy is rightfully terrified of the Iranian Speedboat Navy after the Millennium Challenge virtual wargames in 2002 that sent 2/3s of the participating US fleet to the bottom (several times). To this day, the blue-water US Navy has no adequate response. It would be like the US Navy trying to run an operation in Chesapeake Bay against a highly determined DelMarVa population.
Iran has already mined the Strait, with the mines waiting to be armed by an acoustic signal. Everything is already in place.
Another telling example of hubris as per the presumption that too big means, too big to fail and never having to admit the potential for failure.
The UK was "drawn in" to WW1 by extensive treaty commitments and the fact that an occupied Belgium was always considered "a gun held to the heart of London" (check the location on a map). Moreover, the same treaty obligations ensured that both France and Russia would join the UK against Germany, as would the "Old Dominions" of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa. I don't know what treaties Iran has other than a pretty vapid "entente" with Russia but I doubt any other country would be likely to go up against the USA, even if they weren't all paid-off--which they are, anyway.
The treaty that guaranteed the neutrality of Belgium was signed by the Brits, the French, and the Germans who invaded that nation. The dominions didn't have the right to make their own foreign policy, after 1918 they did. The treaties were a tangled mess alright. But it was the idiocy of the rulers in Germany and Austria (the later of which launched one of the first 'wars on terror') that brought about that war.
But that's besides the point I made. Eventually, the usa and/or israel will just go too far. They are addicted to invading or launching wars and in time that will force the other nations to bring you down. No treaty is required for a war in Iran to draw in the rest of the world against the warlords of the usa. The pay-offs will work for a time, but eventually your 'elite' will do something so stupid that the world will have to say "enough". God help us all when that happens...
Two messages from a trance medium, delivered in 2004:
1. "Many want oblivion, an end to it all." I take this to represent the millions who pretty much are "dreaming" Armageddon into actuality. Note the convergence between the military mindset (M.A.D = mutually assured destruction), and those who have been led to believe that it's God's will, that a giant war-like inferno take place (to fulfill prophecy, which itself is anything but easily defined) in the Middle East.
2. "And your land will be attacked." I was NOT given the date on this.
Since I believe the law of karma will not be mocked ... the tragic fact that the US has continued its martial footprint, regardless of murdering a million senselessly in Iraq, only now to bring murder, mayhem, and misery to Afghanistan... means any rumblings towards Iran represent the THIRD strike.
America has been wounded by a symbolic fall on her own sword. With so much money being leaked into military campaigns and criminal banker bailouts, the quality of life, along with so much of the nation's domestic infrastructure, is crumbling. That, added to expensive/dangerous weather events AND the Gulf of Mexico bubbling up endless gallons of black deadly crude, show that karmic impacts are already underway.
Let each heart offer its own penance, and each of us do what acts we can to offset the dark legacy of modern America. Our nation must fall, if ever it is to rise again and be rebuilt on the basis of genuine ideals.
I guess you are right. We have allot of catching up on our Karma. We built this Country on the blood of the people that lived here for thousands of years, and then on our own immigrant population, and now killing everybody we can in two illigal unwinable wars. The Religious nut wings want the End of Days so their idiot rantings can come true.
I prefer to think of a Star Trek type future where we all get along. Oh Well....
Iran would be well beyond the third strike.
"Our nation must fall, if ever it is to rise again and be rebuilt on the basis of genuine ideals."
I agree except that I disput the notion that the USA is "our nation." IMO, it ceased to be "our nation" in 1943 when the Merchants of Death were given the reins to the government by FDR when he announced the death of "Dr. New Deal" and the birth of "Dr. Win the War." Just as Obama was selected in 2008, Truman was selected in 1944, by essentially the same people/forces for the same reason.
KARLOF: You know more about history than I do; although as a result of input from this forum and expanding my reading list, I am catching up! I look more to prophetic teachings. So while I am quite aware that the U.S. has engendered far more than 2 wars of aggression... the three strikes analogy had a certain ring to it. I might have used a different metaphor, but the ultimate outcome remains the same. First comes the ashes before the Phoenix can rise. Most in this forum would argue that the current paradigm is a stinking success only for the new pharaohs, and a disaster for the rest of U.S. I believe in the ultimate Law of Universal Justice to which no nation stands immune. The reckless disregard shown by America's martial-law loving leaders is inexcusable, and in fact courts the boomerang of karma in the manner idiot-boy Bush said (in his flight suit), "Bring it on." A Hollywood moment for all the nation to soon stand ashamed of.
Hi Siouxrose. Actually, your Third Strike was a good way to put it. The powers of the planet cannot be fought by puny human technologies, and by 2050 I expect those remaining alive within the current borders of the USA will be well aware of their plight, but with little means to do anything about it.
I bemoan the fact that there are too few civilized people on the planet marooned in a sea of Barbarism, and I cling to the idea that the demise of industrial capitalism will drag that Barbarism down with it. Unfortunately, if history is to be any sort of guide, the inherent barbarity within humans will not evolve any time soon, which is to say the future still remains dark. But perhaps in 1,000 years, the gross barbarism and deprivation caused by Overshoot will spur the emergence of a new civility that heretofore hasn't existed.
The only thing worse than a nuclear winter I can imagine is the continuation of the US Empire and the destruction it will create for humanity.
KARLOF: Everything seems the same until the moment that SHIFT takes place.
I often muse about the citizens on their way to market, like every other day, when volcanic ash left them frozen into that moment of time. (Pompeii with a karmic lesson still on display.)
It went similarly the day Krakatoa blew, or when the tsunami hit the beach resort in Thailand.
Although previous historical accounts had the luxury of time unfolding in a relatively stable manner, a number of systems, esoteric and mundane, are about to hit critical mass all at once. The odds of systems remaining on their prior courses in my view are slim to none. And when major paradigmatic impetuses occur, all bets are off because such times pose the greatest chance for new invention, innovation, and spontaneous discovery. Evolution sometimes advances as a result of such radical interims. I believe we are on the cusp of one.
What degree of arrogance and selfishness does it take for an "end of times" person to be willing to start world war III just so that they can be the only people in history to not have to die and still be able to go to heaven? These are some very, very mentally screwed up people.
They really really believe in the magical sky god. And think if they believe hard enough, then reality will become their imagination. They're nuts, but not seen as nuts because they buy into the 'gawd' delusion.
The last two times I went to court (as a witness and as a prospective juror) I refused to swear on the bible. Both times I could see that my testimony, or value as a juror, was instantly dismissed because I refused to publicly profess that I believed in the Santa Claus for grown-ups. I live in Canada. But the good news for you all is that if you want out of jury duty, the best way I've found is to request that instead of swearing on the bible, you ask for Grimm's Fairy tales instead. Brownie points if you also tell them Grimm's is better written and far more credible than the 'wholy babble'.
I'll be happy to swear on their bible as long as they acknowledge that I am no more bound by that particular oath than if I had sworn on last week's issue of Newsweek.
Everyday there is a new reason to hate this Country, that I used to love so much.I want to get these assholes out of running our Country. Why can't we stop them ? Voting is a joke, so we need to do something else.
In addition to many good comments already:
Last I checked, the Ds had significant majorities in both Houses and the White House. If anything becomes of this resolution, no matter who instroduced it, it will the the doing of the DEMOCRATS.
Also, if Pelosi, Obama et al. would not have issued a de-facto pardon ("off the table") to the treasonous war criminals of the last regime (administration), we would not be seeing this resolution in the first place.
Mr. Abdi and many folks at FluffPost assume we don't know basic 8th grade civics? (even after watching the old Schoolhouse Rock cartoon short "Im just a Bill sittin on Capitol Hill").
The article is not only insulting it is one-sided and a thinly veiled partisan fluff piece.
If folks are really concerned about the resolution gaining traction, they ought not bother with Rs, they need to target the Ds and Pres. Obama.
This a direct violation of the Geneva conventions on warfare.
The United States of America is the most belligerent nation in the world. They are trying to manufacture wars the world over all the while claiming to seek peace.
No nation in the world comes close in its love of Warfare. North Korea is no threat to world peace. Nor is Iran. Nor is China or Russia or Burma or Zimbabwe.
The two nations that are the greatest threats to world peace are The United States of America, and Israel and any nation that follows the lead of these two countries, be it Canada, Or Britain , or France or Colombia , can not claim "world peace" as its goal.
True, has there ever been an nation so prolific at bombing the evil doers that has never actually experienced being bombed?
Many Merikans seem so incapable of imagining what they're dispensing.
1) Allegiance to Israel - Once again, US Congressmen are publically showing their allegiance to Israel. It has only been a month since the majority of our Congressmen signed letters supporting Israel's illegal actions on the Gaza Flotilla.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/06/29-3
2) No Declaration of War - The US giving Israel verbal support to go to war while providing Israel military support to wage war appears to be a way for Congress and Obama to circumvent the US having to formally declare war on Iran. The US will have effectively committed acts of war whether or not the US actually hits the weapons fire button.
By supporting Jundallah and imposing sanctions, the US Empire is already waging war on Iran. Indeed, throughout the Shah's reign, then using Saddam as proxy, and the above mentioned sanctions that started during the "hostage crisis," The US Empire has waged war on the Iranian people since 1953--57 years--and is now seeking the escalation of its State Terrorism.
Followup on the Allegiance to Israel comment:
I'd like to see a website or book be put together starting with all the resolutions/letters and Congressmen's names followed by articles and photos of Israel's atrocities , Human Rights Reports, UN Resolutions broken... The idea is to put the Congressmen's names next to reality.
The idea has merit. One should also be done for the USA's actions since 1944.
We should do that for every issue these bastards are signing , while destroying our Country ! I do not trust one Politician, not one. They are all crooked and Evil. Why is Public Service so distorted ? Why aren't there ANY people that really just want to help Society achieve it's goals, safely, and with good Health ?
"Why aren't there ANY people that really just want to help Society achieve it's goals, safely, and with good Health?"
Because they get weeded out by the corruption inherent in the system. True philanthropists are a threat to the capitalist profit motive.
Non Serviam - I will not serve.
Israel has used the US political machine as it's stalking horse in order to carry out another illegal attack and an outright criminal violation of the Geneva Conventions.
The US is using Israel as a proxy agent to start yet another war in the (rapidly depleting) oil producing region known as the Middle East.
Iran has said repeatedly that an attack on it's national sovereignty by the US - OR ANY OF IT'S PROXYS - will result in the immediate closure of the strategic Straights of Hormuz, crippling world oil supplies.
Such actions will cause OPEC to cut all oil supplies to the US, causing an immediate catastrophic economic collapse.
As I have stated numerous times before, if the leadership of the US is imbecilic enough to actually carry out such an act, then any consequences tat result are richly deserved.
Non Serviam - I will not serve.
Galenwainwright, the possibility of Iran sinking a couple of oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz is indeed a possiblity. Just imagine though, if they went two steps further, and were to sink a number of oil tankers at the entrance to the Suez Canal and the Strait of Bab el Mandeb between Djibouti and Yemen. Such a move would cut off the world from it's three main oil reserves, Sadui Arabia, Iraq and Iran. The world's finacial markets would crash in a matter of hours. As for Mr. Bolton, Mr. Kristol along with all of the Republicans that sign that House Resolution I hope they suffer greatly at the hands of our military personnel who have already put in four and five deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan and would have to fight a new war because of right wing chicken hawks!
Iran has several hundred Russian made 'Sunburn' anti-ship missiles and launchers. These beauties travel at three times the speed of sound (about 2300 mph) at just over wave height.
The Straights of Hormuz are only 29 miles wide at the narrowest point, which lies within Iranian territorial waters. That's little more than 18 seconds flight time from launch to impact.
Iran has stated point blank that any substantial attack on it's territory will result in the immediate sinking of any and all shipping, up to and including US Navy vessels. The primary targets however, will be oil tankers and container shipping, with the intent to cripple commercial shipping and sea lanes in the Straights. The vast majority of shipping will have no defense, and no way to evade missile impact. US Navy ships are equipped with 'Phalanx' CIWS for anti ship missile defense, but with a sufficient number of launches, their ammunition will be quickly depleted leaving the ships (carriers, cruisers, tenders, etc.) vulnerable.
A collapse of the oil supply will have an immediate effect on the world economies, as panicked populations attempt to withdraw their savings from banks and financial institutions. No nation has more than a very small fraction of it's 'money' in actual currency. Withdrawing the cash will collapse the international banking system, as nearly happened two years ago in England. A bank run there came within three hours of collapsing the Bank Of England.
In any case the US dollar will become worthless as it is abandoned as the world reserve currency.
Non Serviam - I will not serve.
I will not serve either. I guess when our Leaders complete their takeover of this Country, with their Corporate Partners, people that write on sites like this will be among the first to go ! Lists are already being made.
Well, I guess that's one of the good points about living in Canada. We will see what's happening and run for the hills.
It's too bad that progressives in the US will be the canaries in the coal mine for the rest of us.
Non Serviam - I will not serve.
The tail wags the dog - the US isn't using Israel, but at Netanyahu said, it is Israel that is using, and bankrupting, the US.
In yesterday's article "Will House Dems Oppose a Jobless War Supplemental?" by Robert Naiman, Naiman wonders whether Dems will support a supplemental appropriation even if it fails to meet their "demands" for a withdrawal timetable and/or a jobs-creating provision.
As comments to that article reveal, it's painfully obvious that "war" is trumps-- that any legislation to fund and further the Global War on Terror (can't remember the present alias) gets an automatic pass from our Congressional Elected Misrepresentatives, albeit with a few perfunctory and impotent dissenting grumbles.
So my guess is that the Dems will indeed vote for a Naked War Appropriation, albeit with a few extra-shrill disclaimers-- they'll bluster and draw some fake lines in the sand for Next Time, knowing that said lines will be trodden upon, and their last traces blown away by the wind long before the issue resurfaces.
Remember, the two most important precepts uttered by victorious Democratic leaders upon their triumphant electoral resurgence in 2006 were Gorgon Pelosi's unequivocal announcement that Impeachment is Off the Table, and "Give 'em Hell" Harry Reid's assurance that The President Will Get All the War Funding He Wants.
Zionist Israel is another Congressional trump card made inextricable from the GWOT. Thus, our depraved Congress cheered "Operation Cast Lead", Israel's terrorist-state assault on Gaza; it reprehensibly discredited, smeared, and slandered Judge Goldstone for daring to publish a report critical of Zionist Israel; it denounced supporters of the Freedom Flotilla.
So expect the same result here if push comes to shove. I'm curious to see how the fitfully progressive House Democrats like Grayson and Wiener come down on this one.
PS: Only a Consummate Ass-- or "major-league asshole" in the Bush League vulgar tongue-- and rank instigator like John Bolton would attempt to make a silk diplomatic pouch from the threadbare and redolent sow's ear of "Let's you and him fight!"
[minor edits]