Wednesday 19 August 2015

What's So Bad About Iran And The Bomb?



It is obvious that at all costs, even the cost of our launching a nuclear attack on them, Iran must be stopped from getting the bomb. This is because Iranians, unlike Americans and Israelis, are not moral enough to have such weapons. Iran is part of the U.S.-identified axis of evil - they are not rational actors, do not have any legitimate self-interests (like, for instance, protecting  themselves from the U.S. and Israel, who both do have nuclear weapons), are fanatical, maniacal, radical death-cultists, unfazed by the certainty of own retaliatory destruction, religiously driven (if a real god like Jesus can tell George W. Bush to invade Iraq, heaven only knows what a false god like Allah could tell Iran to do).

If Iran became a nuclear power it would destabilize the region (it was different when Israel got nuclear weapons, that stabilized the region, because...well, be fair, Israel is the Judaeo in Judaeo-Christian). An example of how it would destabilize the mid-east is that America wouldn't have been able to invade Iraq and Afghanistan which both border on Iran and are universally recognized as two wars which made the region oh so much more stable then it was. Vice President Cheney could not talk openly about launching a nuclear first strike on a non-nuclear Iran because, hey, Iran wouldn't be non-nuclear. You could image how much less stable that would make things. Iran must not be allowed to do anything that limits our ability to attack, bomb, threaten, ignore, or insult them. If the west has to take Iranian interests into consideration, it will be a humiliation of America unlike anything since the failure of the invasion of Canada in 1812.

We need third world or developing nations to remain third world or developing nations so that we are able to do what we need to do to them militarily, to protect our interests. What if Ronald Reagan had let Grenada get the bomb? He would have been unable to invade the island and the US would still be living under the shadow of failure in Vietnam. Do we really want to jeopardize the U.S militarist ego like that? Who will protect us from Iran then?

War is never the first choice but there is a whole private-public, media, political, infrastructure to ensure it will always be the easiest. To start, anyway. Everyone is against war once it's started, but for it before it begins. As soon as a politician has declared war he or she starts talking about how they are bringing the war to a close. Before war starts no one wants to talk about avoiding it. This is because we in the west (and this includes Israel) really do like war. We go out if our way to have them, we rise to power through them, we profit by them, we build economies around them, we are proud of being at war. The fear I have is what if the Iranians turn out to be just as territorially greedy and power obsessed as we are? What if the Islamic state actually turns out (they haven't invaded anyone in 700 years) to be just a nuclear warhead away from being like us. We act like Iranians have some genetic, ethnic, religious, cultural tic that makes them so different from us that they can't be trusted with the weapons France and China and Israel and the U.S. have...but what if they turn out to be just like us?

No comments:

Post a Comment