Green Party Presidential candidate Jill Stein is disturbed by the ever-escalating efforts of Obama and members of Congress to launch a war with Iran.
She asserted today:
“A hallmark of a Stein administration will be respect for international law and a rejection of the Bush doctrine of preemptive war that Obama and his party have come to embrace. The interests of the American people are not served by illegal attacks on other nations based on hypothetical future transgressions. Yet President Obama is threatening Iran with attack by saying that 'all options are on the table'. It’s a terrible replay of Bush's run-up to the invasion of Iraq over the mythical weapons of mass destruction.”
“Hypothetical future transgressions.” She spells out very well Obama’s, Israel’s, the politicians', the media's and the profiteering one percenters’ SHAMELESS, not to mention INSANELY HOLLOW, justification for launching war against 80 million innocent people. A craven, manipulative and hypocritical justification. More savage devastation of human beings engineered by a pathetic, recycled Bush war playbook! How could we not have learned our lesson from Iraq?
Dr. Stein grieves that thirty two members of the US Senate were CAPABLE of introducing a plan of military action against Iran because Iran MAY be capable of ONE DAY producing nuclear weapons.
It’s really not a deep intellectual or emotional plunge to appreciate the insanity of such reasoning.
Dr. Stein makes the not insignificant point that Iran is in general compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Iran has allowed inspections. She also points out that a recent NY Times story reported that sixteen intelligence agencies agree "there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb."
But “hypothetical future transgressions” is declared justification for war, not by sane and humane people, but opportunistic war profiteers and politicians who will do anything, even attack 80 million innocent people, to win an election, turn massive profits, promote devastation for self-aggrandizing power, etc. After all, in post-morality America “MIGHT MAKES RIGHT” to those presuming to steer our country. You notice all those killing sprees so far, imperialism bloodbaths, are no serious skin off THEIR noses.
Patrick Martin writes that Obama’s speech to AIPAC made it clear what exactly Obama is willing to PUT ON THE TABLE concerning the situation with Iran:
“Obama said that his administration was committed to “use all elements of American power to pressure Iran and prevent it from acquiring a nuclear weapon.” This formulation has an ominously open-ended character. “All elements” necessarily include not only economic sanctions and terrorist attacks in the streets of Tehran—a feature of the past three years—but also special ops forces, air strikes, ground troops and even nuclear weapons.”
Special ops forces, air strikes, ground troops and EVEN NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
Ah. The US MAY USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS against a country that MAY BE CAPABLE OF BUILDING A NUCLEAR WEAPON ONE DAY. Which country is supposedly wearing the “white hat”? This is what is passing for leadership these days?
INSANE leadership. But once again, the lesser of TWO INSANE LEADERSHIPS.
As for the Green Party’s Dr. Jill Stein, what is she willing to put on her table?
Real diplomacy. A quest for peace. For partnership and cooperation. Stein’s proposal is to call for a “regional agreement to ban weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East, including nuclear weapons, that was called for by a UN General Assembly resolution back in 1974.”
You know, a U.S. diplomacy toolbox that holds more than just a hammer would be more than refreshing. Don’t you think?
Stein:
"A U.S. or Israeli airstrike on Iraq would have severe repercussions for the American people. It would produce a global oil supply crisis that would send our entire economy into a tailspin. And it could lead to retaliatory attacks on Israeli and American citizens. We need to take a clear stand against nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, but preemptive attacks, especially for a problem that is not even in evidence, are counterproductive and must not be on the table. The mindset that every problem requires a military response has gotten us into trouble again and again, and its disappointing to see the Obama Administration going down that road yet again.”
Did you catch the wisdom and sensibleness of Jill Stein once again? “Pre-emptive attacks, especially for a problem THAT IS NOT EVEN IN EVIDENCE”? Back to her point about those “hypothetical future trangressions.” The dysfunctional "mindset" she calls out, that every problem "requires a military response."
The strident stenographer-media's rationalizations for war with Iran have all the substance of cotton candy. RANCID cotton candy.
I prefer what Jill Stein as a statesperson of integrity and moral vision is putting on her “table” over what desperate gamesman Obama, with so obviously a malleable, amoral political vision, is putting onto his.
In case you think Dr. Stein is in an eccentric, disenfranchised, unpragmatic LIBERAL minority THINK AGAIN. Do you REALLY think the MAJORITY of Americans are behind a war with Iran?
Consider that the MAJORITY of Americans WERE NOT BEHIND A WAR WITH IRAQ. Until the lying pols and the lying BIG MEDIA launched their amoral, effective manufacture of consent for power and profit. Obscene degrees of power and profit.
Anybody in this country still naive about the dark motives for the launching of the Iraq War?
Who honestly believes a war with Iran would be for any higher motives? Seriously.
Patrick Martin confirms that most Americans are assuredly NOT clamoring for war with Iran. He writes:
Even more remarkable is the Pew Research Center poll in February that found a narrow majority believing the United States should remain neutral in a war between Iran and Israel. Less than 40 percent said the United States should side with Israel, an astonishing figure given that 100 percent of the corporate-controlled media and almost 100 percent of the Democratic and Republican politicians would back the US joining Israel in such a war.
When will the majority of the citizenry stop settling for “evil” or “lesser evilism” (AT BEST?) and instead quest proactively for world peace and partnership? For global and domestic RECOVERY!
It is time for us to recognize the difference between the dangerous, profoundly full-out savage war-making for self-aggrandizement and profit by the soulless 1 percent pols and oligarchs, and the sanity and humanity of a Green Party candidate walking a path to peace AND prosperity FOR ALL.
Come on! Choose sanity and humanity!
Is it really such a tough stretch?
[cross-posted on correntewire and sacramento for democracy]
------------------
The "hypothetical future transgressions" statement is frightening, Libby. Let us hope and pray our country does not engage in yet another illegitimate war.
In case you think Dr. Stein is in an eccentric, disenfranchised, unpragmatic LIBERAL minority THINK AGAIN. Do you REALLY think the MAJORITY of Americans are behind a war with Iran?
I do not want to see another unnecessary war, but to suppose Jill Stein can be trusted to handle national security is like supposing Manny, Moe, or Shep could have.
We’ll see what a MAJORITY of the American voting public actually thinks about this issue by determining how many of them vote for the two tickets you say promote the war…and how many vote for the very peaceful Jill Stein.
I’ll go out on a limb here, Libby, and guess the Democratic and Republican candidates combined will get more than Stein. Probably much more.
That might help answer the question you proposed.
I do not want to see another unnecessary war, but to suppose Jill Stein can be trusted to handle national security is like supposing Manny, Moe, or Shep could have.
We’ll see what a MAJORITY of the American voting public actually thinks about this issue by determining how many of them vote for the two tickets you say promote the war…and how many vote for the very peaceful Jill Stein.
I’ll go out on a limb here, Libby, and guess the Democratic and Republican candidates combined will get more than Stein. Probably much more.
That might help answer the question you proposed.
If Obama thought for one moment - assuming he can think - that a war with Iran would cost him re-election I can guarantee you not so much as a feather would land on Iran and none of this irresponsible talk would be happening.
Unfortunately, it's not just Bush/Obama who are war criminals, but the American public as a whole. We have proven we don't mind being lied to and will hold on one accountable for it, therefore it's just going to keep happening over and over again.
This much I can tell you, anyone who votes for Romney or Obama votes for war. Why anyone would want that blood on their hands I don't know.
Unfortunately, it's not just Bush/Obama who are war criminals, but the American public as a whole. We have proven we don't mind being lied to and will hold on one accountable for it, therefore it's just going to keep happening over and over again.
This much I can tell you, anyone who votes for Romney or Obama votes for war. Why anyone would want that blood on their hands I don't know.
L, same old, same old, same old. Obama is using everything in his power to get reelected, including beating the war drums.
Jill Stein sounds like she is much more reasonable than the currant batch of politicians on both sides of the aisle which might explain why the mass media isn't giving her any attention at all. Only those that support the agenda of the corporations that control the media and other institutions are allowed any attention when it comes to national office unless it is through the real grass roots level.
I'll have to add it to the list of things to look closer at that the mas media isn't informing me about. thanks.
BTW supposing Barack Obama or Mitt Romney can be trusted to handle national security is like supposing Moe, Curly or Shep could have been.
I'll have to add it to the list of things to look closer at that the mas media isn't informing me about. thanks.
BTW supposing Barack Obama or Mitt Romney can be trusted to handle national security is like supposing Moe, Curly or Shep could have been.
The dominant American political leaders of today want war.....
The dominant economic leaders of the world want war......
The dominant religious leaders on all sides want war......
What makes you think that Jill, or anyone else, can prevent a war?!
.
The dominant economic leaders of the world want war......
The dominant religious leaders on all sides want war......
What makes you think that Jill, or anyone else, can prevent a war?!
.
This lady sounds dangerous.
"MAY BE CAPABLE OF BUILDING A NUCLEAR WEAPON ONE DAY. " "hypothetical future transgressions"
According to Iran it's a done deal. They can do it. They will do it and it will take them 9 minutes to wipe out Israel. Which they have also pledged to do. So how do you figure it's "a problem THAT IS NOT EVEN IN EVIDENCE”
Do you wait until the first missile is in the air to decide what you want to do? Once the genie is out of the bottle you can't put it back in. You do understand that you don't have to use nuclear material to make a bomb that goes boom? What would happen if someone took a few pounds of the stuff to the top of a very tall building in someplace like NYC with enough explosive to put it into the air. With a half life of 10's of thousands of years you don't send someone out with a dust pan and a broom to sweep it up.
'all options are on the table'
In public statements, of course they are. What do you think we are going to tell them what we will and won't do? When you are playing chess do you look at the person you are playing and say this is the opening and this is the defense I'm going to use? I don't think so. Also things change. President Obama can sit in his secure briefing room and say that nuclear weapons are off the table...unless. I would be upset if he said anything else.
I do not agree with President Obama on most all things and I will not vote for him. However, in this case he is right. You cannot allow a mad man who has stated that the mission of his government is to wipe out Israel and promised to follow through with it to get the tools he needs to make it happen. At any cost.
"MAY BE CAPABLE OF BUILDING A NUCLEAR WEAPON ONE DAY. " "hypothetical future transgressions"
According to Iran it's a done deal. They can do it. They will do it and it will take them 9 minutes to wipe out Israel. Which they have also pledged to do. So how do you figure it's "a problem THAT IS NOT EVEN IN EVIDENCE”
Do you wait until the first missile is in the air to decide what you want to do? Once the genie is out of the bottle you can't put it back in. You do understand that you don't have to use nuclear material to make a bomb that goes boom? What would happen if someone took a few pounds of the stuff to the top of a very tall building in someplace like NYC with enough explosive to put it into the air. With a half life of 10's of thousands of years you don't send someone out with a dust pan and a broom to sweep it up.
'all options are on the table'
In public statements, of course they are. What do you think we are going to tell them what we will and won't do? When you are playing chess do you look at the person you are playing and say this is the opening and this is the defense I'm going to use? I don't think so. Also things change. President Obama can sit in his secure briefing room and say that nuclear weapons are off the table...unless. I would be upset if he said anything else.
I do not agree with President Obama on most all things and I will not vote for him. However, in this case he is right. You cannot allow a mad man who has stated that the mission of his government is to wipe out Israel and promised to follow through with it to get the tools he needs to make it happen. At any cost.
Amazing how some people can predict the future.
Thanks, Erica! It feels like we are all being goose-stepped to yet another war, when the other wars are still bloodbaths no matter what administration or media tell us. I fear there is a special place in hell for us complacent americans who are watching it happen over and over and not committed to stopping it!!! libby
I think you or I could do a better job than Obama or the Republican clowns, Frank, especially when it comes to foreign policy ... no wait .. either domestic or policy. And I believe Dr. Stein could do a better job than us. The probability that the citizenry will stay in a stupor is high Frank, but I will do all I can to raise consciousness out of respect for my own conscience and the sanctity of human life.
Someone once blogged that the Bush administration was like a bunch of drunkards knocking over furniture in terms of international policy. Obama has left the drunken killing USWarMachine going, kinda on automatic pilot. no turn off button. I heard obama on the news tonight act holier than thou, "this is not a game" he said referring to potential war with Iran. ya got any mirrors around ya Barack, because they don't get gamier than you! If Obama is the voice of restraint, do and say anything out of political opportunism Obama, we are in serious trouble.
libby
I think you or I could do a better job than Obama or the Republican clowns, Frank, especially when it comes to foreign policy ... no wait .. either domestic or policy. And I believe Dr. Stein could do a better job than us. The probability that the citizenry will stay in a stupor is high Frank, but I will do all I can to raise consciousness out of respect for my own conscience and the sanctity of human life.
Someone once blogged that the Bush administration was like a bunch of drunkards knocking over furniture in terms of international policy. Obama has left the drunken killing USWarMachine going, kinda on automatic pilot. no turn off button. I heard obama on the news tonight act holier than thou, "this is not a game" he said referring to potential war with Iran. ya got any mirrors around ya Barack, because they don't get gamier than you! If Obama is the voice of restraint, do and say anything out of political opportunism Obama, we are in serious trouble.
libby
toritto, as they say in the Green Party about the Green Party, it is not the alternative, it is the imperative. I think fretting about not getting the majority right now is a luxury problem though I hear you. I remember seeing how cruel the media and legacy parties were about keeping Nader out of debates. He would have swept the floor with everybody so they wouldn't give him a mic or a spec of coverage. I think we need to ripple out the truth and sanity about how bad the rat bastards are and get more and more citizens conscious, for God's sake. it really horrifies me but I lived in denial myself for years, an authoritarian follower. people always want to believe things are being done for the best. look at where that blind trust has gotten us all. thanks for your comment, my friend! libby
Harry, yes. The national anthem should have a replacement song entitled "Lie to Me". It does seem to be the spirit of the majority of the citizenry. the VAST majority, but not as many as the media or administration would have us think. It is that hypnosis like what Martin talks about above (the "everybody does it" technique of advertising), framing it to the listener as if EVERYONE wants war. That it is a given. Such bullshit. When 40% at most are on that page, and after years and years of media and political badgering!!! You know that joke about why Israel would never become a state? Because then it would only have 2 senators not 100!!!! That is such a factor, too. Israel is ferociously badgering for war with Iran or any pro-Palestinian country. Obama or Romney and the other cowards and appeasers ... NOT STATESMAN, dangerous gamesman, and when you are addicted to the game and your own ego-aggrandizement, the fate of billions has no impact on the conscience. thanks for commenting!!! libby
Peter, I so agree. Having Obama at the helm inspires NO CONFIDENCE. Obama shoots out a nuanced posture of concern and the Obamacrats celebrate we are in responsible hands instead of ones of an adept but soulless actor and are ready to doom us to more war savagery being supercilious about their pragmatism at the same time. Considering the horrible roster of leaders in America, how many people would sacrifice literally millions of lives to secure a job with glory? Where is my vomit bucket!!! libby
zachd, thanks for the visit! yes dr. stein sounds promising and of course not a peep out of the Big Media about her. I hope the ripple effect will work at least with word of mouth. her stances illuminate so brightly how craven the war-mongers are in the administration, running for office, or in our Congress. and the media so clearly are stenographers simply softening up the country for more global bloodbaths as domestically we suffer more and more dismantling of safety nets!!! Yes, the stooges are definitely NOT in the Green Party!!! libby
sky, because it is the right thing to do. thanks for comment.
Catnlion, the woman who wants to, in this present situation, save 80 million people in Iran from violent death or maiming or displacement or exploitation by using diplomacy is the dangerous one in your mind?
Catnlion, the woman who wants to, in this present situation, save 80 million people in Iran from violent death or maiming or displacement or exploitation by using diplomacy is the dangerous one in your mind?
Dangerous? Yes, but not as dangerous as the man who has made it the mission of his country to attack Israel and blow them up in just 9 short minutes. BTW, if he launches a nuclear weapon at Israel how many people is he going to kill not only there but Gaza, Egypt and other places the fallout will reach?
C- I repeat asking about 80 million innocent people -- that they should be in jeopardy, their lives ended or devastated, because some sociopathic and amorally opportunistic authoritarians are flaming xenophobia, jingoism and American exceptionalism among the citizenry? It's okay if THEY die if we have a whiff of doubt about them (THEM?) as told to us by those who have a track record for sociopathy and lying, either the media or the one percenters. Do you not care about the welfare of non-Americans just simply as a human being with a heart and conscience? libby
from wsws bill van auken about the NY Times:
"“Israelis have every right to be fearful and frustrated,” the editorial continues. “For too long the world ignored Iran’s misdeeds and shrugged off Israel’s alarms.”
Here reality is turned upside down. What Iranian misdeeds the world has ignored, the Times does not bother to specify. The reader must accept them as given, along with Israel’s “right” to be fearful, frustrated and alarmed.
One would never suppose that it is Israel that has stockpiled hundreds of nuclear weapons in complete defiance of the international nuclear regulatory system. Unlike Iran, Tel Aviv has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has never allowed IAEA inspectors access to Israeli nuclear sites.
As for the world ignoring misdeeds, it is Israel that has waged war against every one of its neighbors, slaughtering thousands of civilians, most recently in its invasion of Lebanon in 2006 and the siege of the Gaza Strip in 2008-2009. It continues its illegal occupation of the West Bank, subjecting its Palestinian population to relentless repression. Israel’s principal concern in confronting Iran is to preserve its regional monopoly on nuclear weapons, which has played no small role in allowing it to attack with impunity.
While counseling a modicum of patience in pursuing what amounts to an economic blockade designed to pressure Tehran by destroying the living standards of average Iranians, the Times assures its readers that Obama and the newspaper itself will not shy from launching yet another war of aggression.
“What if sanctions and diplomacy are not enough?” the editorial reads. “Mr. Obama has long said that all options are on the table. In recent days his language has become more pointed—urged on, undoubtedly, by Israel’s threats to act alone.” Neither Israel nor Iran, it adds, should “doubt this president’s mettle.”
If anyone should experience a sense of déjà vu in the face of such rhetoric—which combines assertions of an “undeniable” foreign threat with militarist bluster—it is for good reason.
The Times is reprising the role it played a decade ago in the run-up to the US war on Iraq, when it made the case for an “undeniable” threat posed by Baghdad’s “weapons of mass destruction,” which proved non-existent.
The stench from that journalistic travesty has still not left the offices of the Times. Judith Miller, a senior Times correspondent, produced article after article citing unnamed US intelligence and military officials supposedly verifying that Baghdad was pursuing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs. The Bush administration in turn quoted these “scoops” as justification for its policy.
Meanwhile, the Times foreign affairs columnist, Thomas Friedman, penned numerous columns embracing what he acknowledged as a “war of choice” against Iraq, justifying such an act of aggression in the name of human rights, democracy and oil.
The coverage by this “newspaper of record” set the tone for the entire US media, thereby saturating the American public with false propaganda and providing indispensable assistance to the Bush administration in launching a war based upon lies.
Then, as now, the newspaper provided not a hint that the war could involve motives other than the lies repeated by the administration and amplified by the Times itself.
Having waged two wars over the past decade in Afghanistan and Iraq, the countries on Iran’s eastern and western flanks, US imperialism is now preparing for war against Iran itself. Washington’s principal war aim is to assert US hegemony over the energy rich and geo-strategically critical regions of the Persian Gulf and Central Asia. Once again, it invokes “weapons of mass destruction” and “terrorism” as pretexts, and once again the Times acts as a faithful organ of war propaganda."
"“Israelis have every right to be fearful and frustrated,” the editorial continues. “For too long the world ignored Iran’s misdeeds and shrugged off Israel’s alarms.”
Here reality is turned upside down. What Iranian misdeeds the world has ignored, the Times does not bother to specify. The reader must accept them as given, along with Israel’s “right” to be fearful, frustrated and alarmed.
One would never suppose that it is Israel that has stockpiled hundreds of nuclear weapons in complete defiance of the international nuclear regulatory system. Unlike Iran, Tel Aviv has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has never allowed IAEA inspectors access to Israeli nuclear sites.
As for the world ignoring misdeeds, it is Israel that has waged war against every one of its neighbors, slaughtering thousands of civilians, most recently in its invasion of Lebanon in 2006 and the siege of the Gaza Strip in 2008-2009. It continues its illegal occupation of the West Bank, subjecting its Palestinian population to relentless repression. Israel’s principal concern in confronting Iran is to preserve its regional monopoly on nuclear weapons, which has played no small role in allowing it to attack with impunity.
While counseling a modicum of patience in pursuing what amounts to an economic blockade designed to pressure Tehran by destroying the living standards of average Iranians, the Times assures its readers that Obama and the newspaper itself will not shy from launching yet another war of aggression.
“What if sanctions and diplomacy are not enough?” the editorial reads. “Mr. Obama has long said that all options are on the table. In recent days his language has become more pointed—urged on, undoubtedly, by Israel’s threats to act alone.” Neither Israel nor Iran, it adds, should “doubt this president’s mettle.”
If anyone should experience a sense of déjà vu in the face of such rhetoric—which combines assertions of an “undeniable” foreign threat with militarist bluster—it is for good reason.
The Times is reprising the role it played a decade ago in the run-up to the US war on Iraq, when it made the case for an “undeniable” threat posed by Baghdad’s “weapons of mass destruction,” which proved non-existent.
The stench from that journalistic travesty has still not left the offices of the Times. Judith Miller, a senior Times correspondent, produced article after article citing unnamed US intelligence and military officials supposedly verifying that Baghdad was pursuing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs. The Bush administration in turn quoted these “scoops” as justification for its policy.
Meanwhile, the Times foreign affairs columnist, Thomas Friedman, penned numerous columns embracing what he acknowledged as a “war of choice” against Iraq, justifying such an act of aggression in the name of human rights, democracy and oil.
The coverage by this “newspaper of record” set the tone for the entire US media, thereby saturating the American public with false propaganda and providing indispensable assistance to the Bush administration in launching a war based upon lies.
Then, as now, the newspaper provided not a hint that the war could involve motives other than the lies repeated by the administration and amplified by the Times itself.
Having waged two wars over the past decade in Afghanistan and Iraq, the countries on Iran’s eastern and western flanks, US imperialism is now preparing for war against Iran itself. Washington’s principal war aim is to assert US hegemony over the energy rich and geo-strategically critical regions of the Persian Gulf and Central Asia. Once again, it invokes “weapons of mass destruction” and “terrorism” as pretexts, and once again the Times acts as a faithful organ of war propaganda."
Hypothetical future transgressions smells like dead people to me.
At the height of its power, the Roman Empire nonetheless constantly and endlessly felt threatened and besieged no matter what. There were endless enemies everywhere. When some are defeated, others must be found or invented. Sounds familiar. [r]
80 million there or here and Israel? I vote for there.
It's their madman leaders who have the ball in their court. When their people, and military leaders, realize the madmen go or we all die, and they will be gone.
It's their madman leaders who have the ball in their court. When their people, and military leaders, realize the madmen go or we all die, and they will be gone.
Obusha war crimes allowing 9/11 to happen, not pursuing bin Laden in Afghanistan 2002 but planning endless polluter oil wars in Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Syria and now Iran...Obombney is no choice at all, to save lives & stop ecocide VOTE DR JILL STEIN @JillStein2012 www.jillstein.org
No comments:
Post a Comment