“THE IRAN WAR: THE TOP TEN QUESTIONS AND TALKING WITH GOD” 

Author’s Note.  As I have been noting for the last few weeks (and will stop doing shortly, much to the relief of most readers, I am sure) from now through the balance of this year and possibly into 2008, on TPJ we will be publishing an original SJ column for the most part every third week.  For the second of each three week cycle we will be publishing, in re-run, the set of columns written since the outset of my appearance on TPJ in 2004 that focus on George Bush.  In the third week of the cycle, for the most part we will be re-running a column or two of mine from BuzzFlash [www.buzzflash.com].  This column, made up of two BuzzFlash pieces plus some original commentary, is the second of those efforts. 

I have been writing about the potential for a BushCheney attack on Iran for some time now, as have many other observers much more intimately informed about the possibility than I.  A couple of weeks ago, I thought that indeed the increasing number of forewarnings of imminent war were indeed true.  It looked indeed that BushCheney were on their way to manufacturing one or more fake “incidents” with Iran, like those the Japanese set up to start the invasions, respectively, of Chinese-controlled Manchuria in 1931 and China proper in 1937, respectively “The Kwantung [Guandong] Incident” and the “Marco Polo Bridge Incident.”   

Several weeks ago there occurred the abduction of the Iranian diplomats in Kurdistan and the claims of “direct Iranian involvement” in the “killing of American service personnel” (supported only by indirect evidence as it turned out) and other, similar efforts and claims.  In response, there has apparently been an enormous mobilization of power elites in various countries around the world, including that of the US, and of putative American allied nations like Saudi Arabia (and France as well among the non-American-allied Western powers) to prevent this from happening, most of it occurring behind the scenes.  It is particularly interesting to see and infer the moves being made by the power elite in Iran, among both the clerical over-seers and major business interests, to rein in their seemingly impetuous President. 

Even those hand-picked military commanders that Bush put in place in Iran may be balking.  His general-on-the-ground has already said that the “surge” is too big.  Surely, there is much complaining from lower-level commanders who forces are being over-stretched even to meet the commitments required by the “surge.”  The Admiral put in charge of all theatre-forces, supposedly chosen because he knows how to handle naval air campaigns (Iran, anyone?), may now find himself chosen only because he knows how to let go an anchor, in Iraq.  (Note that that’s “let go the anchor,” in naval parlance, not the landlubber’s “drop the anchor.”  Doing the latter, especially from above a deck, something the totally untrained Bush might do, can easily puncture it.)  He would at least have a sandy bottom.   

Then there is the Democratic Congress, moving (and here I disagree with many of my colleagues on the Left) at just about the right pace in mobilizing the opposition both to the Iraq War and to any further expansions, such as Iran.  And so, I have recently come to the conclusion that with their massive mobilization of naval and naval-air forces in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf. BushCheney will in the end have accomplished nothing more than wasting yet more billions of US taxpayer dollars.  I think that the time for such an attack, which I am certain from all of the evidence that I have seen in the active planning stage up to very recently, has come and gone.  (I am sure we all hope that I will not be proved wrong.)  Nevertheless, just to hedge my bet just a bit, if the threat from BushCheney does appear on the table, I would like to share with you selections from a piece I published on BuzzFlash on January 24, 2007.  It was called “Iran - The Top Ten Questions.” 

Even though the threat seems to be receding, desperate men take desperate measures, and BushCheney are increasingly desperate men.  Therefore it might be a good idea for, at some time in the reasonable future, the Democrats to start hearings, in the Armed Services, Foreign Relations, and Appropriations Committees of both Houses. The media should also be asking questions of Snow, et al (you won't see Bush at a press conference for a very long time, if ever again).  In aid of such an effort, here are 10 of the myriad of questions that could be asked (admittedly not all of which would be asked by any reporter with a White House press pass or member of Congress). 

1.   The whole world knows, in some detail even of your plans to attack Iran with a massive aerial assault that may include nuclear weapons delivered by the U.S. or the Israelis. When are you going to let the American public in on the matter? 

2.   You say that you are very concerned about the prospect of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. There already is a "Muslim Bomb" in a country you may have heard of, our sometimes ally, Pakistan. It happens to share a common border with Iran. Pakistan is one bullet in Pervez Musharraf's head away from becoming an "Islamic Republic," which would be only too happy to share its bomb with Iran. So why bother bombing Iran when they don’t even have The Bomb yet and may be as much as 10 years away from getting one? 

3.   How are you planning to pay for the war? Which taxes are you proposing to raise? 

4.   Why have you failed to enter into diplomatic discussion with Iran to solve the problems you have with that nation, before attempting to bomb it to smithereens? 

5.   North Korea (apparently) already has The Bomb. You are negotiating with it. Why not with Iran? 

6.   Our armed forces are already stretched to the breaking point in Iraq. Exactly which land forces are you planning to use in Iran, or are your air war plans of such magnitude that you figure land forces will not be necessary? 

7.   You did an atrocious job of post-war planning for Iraq. How have you dealt with those catastrophic failures to make sure that nothing similar happens after you achieve "victory" in Iran? 

8.   And speaking of "victory," while you define it for us clearly for Iran, would you mind also doing that for Iraq? 

9.   When are you planning to reintroduce the draft, just in case your air war just doesn't go as planned? 

10. Could you please share with us now the details of your "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" equivalent for the Persian Gulf, so that we can be prepared for it? And while you're at it, giving some advance warning of the next 9/11 you likely have up your sleeves would help protect American citizens, a task that you have so often told us is number one for you. 

11. And an extra: is your primary reason for nuking Iran to solve the global warming problem, which some members even of your administration are beginning to publicly recognize as real, by creating a Nuclear Winter? 

Now, if such efforts seem to be leading nowhere, perhaps the following, published on BuzzFlash on February 2, 2007, could be tried.  It was entitled “Pres. Ahmadinejad and Pres. Bush: Connecting through God,” and it read: 

“Both U.S. President Bush and Iranian President Ahmadinejad are shooting off their respective mouths at each other and each other's nations. Major elements of their respective power elites are more and more nervous that such shooting off may lead to real shooting between the two countries, in the worst interests of both. There is common ground between the countries. First and foremost, a shooting war between them would bring immense harm to both. Further, it would have the potential for bringing even more immense harm to the world at large, especially should the U.S. use nuclear weapons, an idea that apparently has been bruited about, at least, it is rumored, about the office of the U.S. Vice President. 

“I have a suggestion for cooling off the situation: let the two presidents meet and jointly explore the lines of connection they have both told us they have to God. Surely in such a meeting of the minds, He or She should be able to help them sort things out, don’t you think?

“Back in 2004, then Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas reported on a very interesting conversation he had with George Bush. Referring to the ‘War on Terrorism,’ Bush told Abbas that: ‘God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the U.S. elections will come and I will have to focus on them.’ On October 19, 2006, President Ahmadinejad told us that: ‘I Have a Connection with God, Since God Said That the Infidels Will Have No Way to Harm the Believers (MEMRI, Special Dispatch - Iran, as reported by Iran News, 10-19-06).’ " 

“And so there we have it, a solution to the ‘Iran Crisis.’ Both national leaders talk with the one God. Hopefully, the one God they talk to is the same one. Hopefully He/She will now tell both of them: ‘Cool it, brothers. You have got to talk this thing out.’  And then hopefully, since Bush will now know that he and Ahmadinejad both talk with God, following that meeting, Bush will say to Ahmadinejad, ‘You know, after our latest conversation with the almighty, I now know that we must talk first, bomb later, rather than the other way round. How about lunch?’  Alternatively, after having heard of this scenario, their respective power elites will remove them from office or at least from power, and the world can then move on to finding a peaceful solution to the Middle East Crisis, including that in Israel/Palestine, a la, for example, the Report of the Iraq Study Group.”