COLUMNIST
Is the United States really planning to go to
war with Iran? Could it happen? The president says no, but look at
the language coming out of the Pentagon. The possibility is "remote." It
is "problematic." Nowhere is there a flat denial. In fact,
one former senior Pentagon official says, "The strike plans
have been in place for some time." Another official admits,
"These are operational plans."
Would George Bush really do it? Would he issue orders to bomb Iran
in order to stop their nuclear program? Quite possibly. He has already
gone to war with one nation based on the mere suspicion of a nuclear
weapon program.
Former Pentagon officials are even more blunt: "This
White House believes the only way to solve the problem (Iran's nuclear
ambitions) is to change the power structure in Iran, and that means
war."
In other words, we are talking about regime change again. Apparently
Bush believes that bombing people, deposing their leaders and occupying
their country is the way to win hearts and minds.
Mr. Bush was told
the Iraqis would welcome us with flowers when we marched into Baghdad.
Even now as the insurgency grows, he still says our actions liberated
the Iraqi people and that American presence is "promoting democracy" in
the region.
There is another mindset operating within the administration:
good old Texas machismo. The word "wimp" is bandied around
when they talk about the present nuclear standoff. According to Patrick
Clawson, an Iran expert and a supporter of President Bush, Iranian
President Ahmadinejad "... sees the West as wimps ... (who) will
eventually cave in." These are fighting words if you are from
Texas.
Could the president actually initiate another disastrous war
rather than risk being called a wimp? Right now the only voices of
authority willing to criticize U.S. military policy in Middle East
are a handful of retired generals. Congress is too busy playing politics,
and the public has its mind of other things.
The generals who have
publicly expressed discontent with the conduct of the war understand
what others don't want to face. There is simply no way to wipe out
all vestiges of Iran's uranium enrichment technology without the use
of tactical nuclear weapons. A war with Iran will be nuclear.
The moral
consequences of such a move by the United States would be staggering,
and blame for allowing it to happen will fall on every one of us. The
legacy of an aggressive nuclear attack will follow our children for
generations. If the moral aspect doesn't bother you, consider the other
consequences. A nuclear attack on Iran would ratchet up international
terrorism far beyond anything we have experienced so far.
Personally,
I don't believe we can stop Iran's nuclear program short of war. They
are trying to build a nuclear bomb, and eventually they'll succeed.
Yet I am not nearly as worried about what they will do with their bomb
as I am about we will do with ours.
I saw a wonderful bumper sticker
the other day that read,
"Frightened people do stupid things." Nothing could be more
true, and today Bush is a frightened man. For all his bluster, he knows
the war is going badly. His poll numbers are down. His control is slipping.
To lose face now, to be defeated in his effort to control Iran's nuclear
ambitions, is unthinkable.
Most of the quotes in this column come from
unnamed individuals. These are people within the administration who
cannot speak out publicly. What they do now, whether they resign their
position so they can speak or keep quiet and hope for the best, depends
a lot on what the American public does. If we expect them to put their
careers on the line, we need to give them the courage and cover to
do so by speaking out ourselves.
A nuclear bomb in the hands of a radical
Islamic leader is not a pleasant thought, but we have faced a nuclear
armed enemy before. Frightened people do stupid things, so our best
defenses is to stop frightening people.
I have no trouble imagining
how the Iranian people must feel, caught as they are between what they
see as American aggression and the inflated rhetoric of their own leaders.
This is where we have to start if we want to defuse this situation.
Stop threatening people, and stop giving into fear ourselves.
© Originally published Tuesday, April 25, 2006
--
|