Barnett Rubin follows up his earlier post on the grim outlook for Cheney launching a war on Iraq in Saturday, Rollout to War with Iran: An Update Informed Comment Global Affairs blog 09/01/07.One post he cites there is this one from reporter and Iraq War supporter George Packer, Test Marketing Interesting Times blog 08/31/07:
If there were a threat level on the possibility of war with Iran, it might have just gone up to orange. ...Packer picks his words carefully, apparently so that no one will think he's so wild-eyed liberal as to actually oppose the launching of another preventive war that is even more likely to be a disaster than the Iraq War he supports. But he does recognize that our "press corps" should be aggressively pursuing the real questions on this. They aren't doing it so far.
It follows the pattern of the P.R. campaign that started around this time in 2002 and led to the Iraq war. The President’s rhetoric on Iran has been nothing short of bellicose lately, warning of “the shadow of a nuclear holocaust." ... When tensions are this high between two countries and powerful factions in both act as if hostilities are in their interest, war is likely to follow.
In his new post, Rubin points out an interesting little fact about one of the hard right's very favorite sayings, usually sourced (if at all) to Niccolò Macchiavelli:
"Let them hate us, so long as they fear us," comes not from Macchiavelli, but from the insane Roman Emperor Caligula.On this topic, see also Do We Have the Courage to Stop War with Iran? by Ray McGovern, CommonDreams.org 09/02/07
Bush Puts Iran in Crosshairs by Ray McGovern, Antiwar.com 08/31/07.
Will President Bush bomb Iran? by Tim Shipman Daily Telegraph 02/09/2007.
For what it's worth, the Rupert Murdoch-owned Times of London, which regularly and wrongly reports that Israel is on the verge of attacking Iran, is also running this story, Pentagon 'three-day blitz' plan for Iran by Sarah Baxter 09/02/07.
[09/11/07: I'm glad I expressed caution about that source. Baxter's source for the headline claim was Alexis Debat of the Nixon Center, about whom seriously credibility questions have been raised. A fake interview with Barack Obama in a french well-regarded review by Pascal Riché Rue89 07.09.07 and Laura Rozen's War and Piece blog 07/11/07.]
Then there's this from AP, Iran reportedly bombs villages in northern Iraq MSNBC.com 09/01/07.
It is always possible that, despite their past record, that the Cheney-Bush administration is executed a finely-tuned high-wire balancing act combined military threats with diplomatic pressure to persuade Iran to cooperate with the administration's goal of no nuclear weapons production capability for Iran. For this administration to pull something like that off, there would have to be an explosion of competence unprecedented in the last seven years. But it's always theoretically possible.
Tags: cheney, dick cheney, iran war
2 comments:
"Let them hate us, so long as they fear us"
My introduction to this idea came from the infamous Harvey C- Mansfield, when I (naively) took his Moral Reasoning 13 class at Harvard College. In a curious way, it proved to be the beginning of my education.
One brutal irony of the Iraq war and occupation is that no one fears the US any longer.
Just look at the movies. In 2002 'The Bourne Identity' was a documentary of the CIA's ability to keep tabs on everyone and everything; in 2007 'The Bourne Ultimatum' was an over-the-top comedy.
Certainly, our forces have the capability to kill a great many people - but that counts for little on the chessboard of international strategy.
When the fear is gone, nothing is left but the hate. That is the failure of American policy after September 11, 2001.
Alain, you're right. The US has stretched our army to the limit in Iraq - and lost. It's hard for the rest of the world to miss that, even if our Republicans can't see it.
I heard a news report today about the British reducing their role in Basra to near-zero. After the two world wars and the loss of the French and British colonial empires, it seems like the Europeans find it easier to accept that when a war has gone bad and is irretrievable at any remotely acceptable cost, it's time to fold the tents and come home. Britain managed to lose all of what's now India, Pakistan and Bagladesh. And their civilization didn't collapse. They weren't invaded because everyone thought they were too weak to defend the Homeland, as we call it these days.
On the other hand, no one worried about, say, France trying again after they had left Vietnam and Algeria. Somehow, I don't think many French voters regret not having made a new attempt to take over those countries.
But everyone also knows that the US is in no position to pull another complete takeover on the scale of the Iraq War. Pulling out of Iraq and thereby recognizing reality - I'm sure we can find some way to claim it's a "victory" - would help to restore American credibility. I'm not sure who the Republicans think it enhances our credibility to continue with a war this disastrous.
Post a Comment