Friday Iran Talking Points

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for November 12th, 2010:

Commentary: Commentary Magazine executive editor Jonathan S. Tobin, hits back against a column by Alon Pinkas, Israel’s former consul general in New York. Pinkas wrote on Politico that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s pro-Republican leanings, yet again illustrated by Bibi’s remarks at the General Assembly of North American Jewish Federations, undermined bipartisanship, including his callfor the U.S. to assert a threat of force against Iran. Tobin says that “such arguments are nonsense” and “by decrying the claim of some Republicans that some Democrats have been unsupportive of Israel, all Pinkas is doing is demonstrating that he dislikes the GOP and sympathizes with the Democrats.” Tobin contend both Democrats and Republicans have made pledges that Iran will never acquire nuclear weapons, and “[c]ontrary to Pinkas’s assertion, accountability is the one thing all friends of Israel should welcome.”

The National Interest: Heritage Foundation fellow Ariel Cohen has an NI piece opposing ratification of the New START treaty. He argues that restrictions on ballistic missile defense (alleged), ambiguous language, and a “significant degradation of the START verification regime” will “ limit U.S. defense options not vis-à-vis Russia, but North Korea, China, and in the future, Iran.” Cohen asserts that New START is a result of “Obama’s vision of a world without nuclear weapons,” and “there is a significant probability that if Obama allows Iran to acquire a nuclear-weapons capability, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and possibly Turkey will develop their own nuclear weapons.” Cohen has advised the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), a neoconservative organization that helped distribute the Clarion Fund’s Islamophobic “Obsession” film.

Foreign Policy: Former AIPAC spokesperson Josh Block writes: “The rise of Iranian influence in Lebanon is particularly dangerous at this moment, when moderate Arab countries are desperately looking for the United States to contain Iran.” The Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), a court set up by agreement between the UN Security Council and the Lebanese government, is investigating the assassination of Rafik Hariri and is expected to indict members of Hezbollah. Block warns that “Hezbollah will stop at nothing to prevent indictments from being handed down.” Block urges the the United States to “ensure that the Special Tribunal goes forward, prosecuting those it indicts.” as well as supportg pro-democracy civil society and media. He concludes: “[T]he administration must make a clear public signal that the United States will not sit on the sidelines while Iran, through its satraps Syria and Hezbollah, successfully exports the Iranian revolution to Lebanon.”

The Washington Times: Shaun Waterman reports on how the incoming Republican-led House Foreign Affairs Committee will pressure the Obama administration on the implementation of sanctions against Iran, thus underminng Obama’s attempts at diplomatic outreach to Tehran. Waterman quotes Foundation for Defense of Democracies‘ Mark Dubowitz, who predicts “we can expect a very relentless and determined focus on holding the administration’s feet to the fire.” Dubowitz adds: “It is useful for the administration to have Congress play the bad cop” in its dealings with Iran.

Thursday Iran Talking Points

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for November 11th, 2010:

National Review Online: Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) fellow Benjamin Weinthal blogs that while U.S. President Barack Obama used his trip to Indonesia to scold Israel for new settlement construction in east Jerusalem, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper “found the right language this week” by defending Israel against its critics. “Obama lacks a singleness of purpose when it comes to stopping Iran’s drive to go nuclear,” writes Weinthal. “One hopes that Act III of Obama’s foreign policy toward the Middle East will focus not on housing units in Jerusalem but on compelling Iran to stop its drive to go nuclear,” he concludes.

World Politics Review: WPR senior editor and Hudson Institute senior fellow Richard Weitz examines the issue of whether a ballistic missile defense (BMD) should become a NATO alliance-wide mission, noting that Washington would like to see NATO leaders offer a collective commitment to BMD. Weitz writes both the Obama administration and NATO leaders “share American concerns about Iran’s emerging potential to launch ballistic missiles, perhaps armed with a nuclear warhead, against European targets.”

Dubya was right??

From film-maker Oliver Stone’s interview with former Argentine President Nestor Kirchner, we discover:

Oliver Stone: "Were there any eye-to-eye moments with President Bush that day, that night?"

Nestor Kirchner: "…I said that a solution to the problems right now, I told Bush, is a Marshall Plan. …He said the best way to revitalize the economy is war and that the United States has grown stronger with war."

Stone: "War. He said that?"

Kirchner: "He said that. Those were his exact words."

Stone: "Was he suggesting that South America go to war?"

Kirchner: "Well, he was talking about the United States. …All of the economic growth of the United States has been encouraged by the various wars. He said it very clearly. –Fmr. Argentine President Kirchner Dies of Heart Attack, Democracy Now!, Oct. 28, 2010

So, WAS Dubya right?

"War" [1] is indeed a key part of the U.S. economy. Some folks call this "military keynesianism."

Consider: Despite one of the most defensible geographic situations on earth — unless you fear the Canadians — the U.S. Government spends more on "defense" than almost the rest of the world combined. AND, not surprisingly, U.S.A. is the biggest arms merchant in the world.

So, Mr. Bush was exactly right.

If you’re a U.S. Citizen, approximately 43% of your income taxes go to pay for wars, past and present. And that’s before Uncle Sam is forced, kicking and screaming, into officially admitting PTSD is nearly universal in combat veterans, lasts a lifetime, and is expensive to treat. According to former IMF Chief Economist and Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz, the two current "wars" will eventually cost U.S. taxpayers between four and six trillion dollars. That’s trillion. With a "T."

And don’t fret about the militaryindustrial budget. While Mr. Obama isn’t yet responsible for killing as many men, women and children as Mr. Bush — and hasn’t spent as much doing so, give him a chance — he’s not even two years into his presidency and he’s already sent at least 60,000 new U.S. troops into Afghanistan and has plans to escalate the U.S. presence in Pakistan, and the largely ignoredU.S. presence in Yemen too.

With these kinds of numbers — that 43% of your income tax spent for “wars” for example — maybe a bit of money invested in antiwar.com to stop them might be a good investment, not only for you, but for your kids, grand kids and the yet unborn. What do you say?

Notes:

[1] The U.S. Government hasn’t been at war according to its Constitution since the end of World War II. That would require the U.S. House of Representatives to vote for war, which it hasn’t done. This means the so-called "wars" — the Korean "War," the Vietnam "War," The Iraq "Wars," the "War" in Afghanistan, etc. — must be something else. Or, since they insist on calling them "wars" anyway, unconstitutional. But as George W. Bush is reported to have claimed, "The constitution is just a damned piece of paper." So, who cares? return

Wednesday Iran Talking Points

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for November 10th, 2010:

The Jewish Week: James D. Besser analyzes the impact of the midterm election on the Obama administration’s Iran strategy and concludes it “may indirectly lead to greater U.S. flexibility on the issue of Israeli military action to stop [Iran’s] nuclear program.” Shoshana Bryen, director of strategic policy for the hardline neoconservative Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) told Besser, “If you’re talking about the military option, you’re not talking about a single strike. If you want to go to war against Iran, that’s a choice, but I don’t think there will be a lot of support for that in the U.S. military, which is already involved in two wars.” Besser considers it unlikely that the GOP leadership would push for a strike as long as the Pentagon remains opposed to the action. Even David Harris of the American Jewish Committee says “outsourcing responsibility for Iran” to Israel would be “an abdication of U.S. responsibility.”

National Public Radio: Alan Greenblatt examines how 100 new Republican members of Congress will impact on U.S. foreign policy. In examining the Obama administration’s Iran policy, Greenblatt interviews Danielle Pletka, vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the hawkish American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and reports, “Pletka predicts that Republicans in Congress will push back if Obama continues his policy of seeking diplomatic engagement with Iran, as that nation continues to pursue its nuclear ambitions.”

WINEP Policy Watch: In a briefing from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), Ehud Yarri discusses the conjoining of Iranian Shia Islamism with that of Sunni Hamas in the Occupied Palestinian Territories through a booklet being circulated in Gaza. Writes Yarri, “Titled The Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic Revolution in Iran, this new publication represents the most important attempt to date to connect the growing cooperation between Hamas and its Iranian mentors to religious affinities, rather than political expediency.” He cites the booklet as a PR effort aimed at showing the two groups as “natural partner(s)” despite the usually deep-cutting sectarian divide between Shia and Sunni Muslims.

Bradley Manning Support Activist Raided by FBI

From the Bradley Manning Support Network:

Washington, DC, November 10, 2010 – Last week, David House, a developer working with the Bradley Manning Support Network, was detained and had his computer seized by the FBI when returning from a vacation in Mexico. He committed no crime, nor was he ever alleged to have committed a crime. He was questioned extensively about his support for alleged WikiLeaks whistleblower Bradley Manning, who has been imprisoned at Quantico for over 160 days.

This invasive search is of great concern to all Americans who value the Constitutionally-protected rights to free speech and free assembly. The campaign to free Bradley Manning – which has garnered the support of tens of thousands of individuals from across the United States and the world – is rooted in a belief that government transparency is key to a healthy democracy. Our network stands firm in support of alleged WikiLeaks whistleblower Bradley Manning and has raised over $80,000 for his defense. If he is a source for documents published by WikiLeaks illuminating the campaign of disinformation about US foreign wars, then Manning deserves the gratitude of the entire nation.

House sent an email to the Network describing his detainment, saying that, “My computer, video camera, and flash drive were confiscated, leaving me in a tough spot in terms of research obligations; the reason for the seizure, said the officials, was ‘border search.'”

The FBI denied House’s requests to have a copy of his research data. This seems to be part of a disturbing trend of intimidation and property seizure being carried out against activists critical of US policies, including the detainment and laptop seizure of activist Jacob Applebaum in July and the September 24th FBI raids against antiwar and social justice activists.

House has not been charged with a crime.

“I try to be as even-handed as possible, but based on the subject of the search I can’t help but feel that this constitutes a form of intimidation,” wrote House in an email to the Network, “I feel as though the DHS has turned to harassing the friends and supporters of Bradley Manning in a potential attempt to disrupt our abilities to run a legal defense network.”

The Bradley Manning Support Network denounces this recent attempt by the FBI to intimidate its supporters. Blowing the whistle on war crimes is not a crime, and neither is standing up for Bradley Manning.

MEDIA:
Mike Gogulski, Steering Committee, Bradley Manning Support Network
press@bradleymanning.org
(202) 640-4388

Better Bush Book Cover?

The Washington Post had a giant version of the cover of Bush’s DECISION POINT in its Style section yesterday. Bush is trying to look solemn but I suspect he is going to a baseball game.

I think this photo I took at a January 2007 antiwar DC demo would have provided a much more captivating cover. And it would have boosted the book’s sales to the kind of folks I know.

The sign – “What’s good for the goose….. gandar” – refers to the recent hanging of Saddam Hussein had been hung after a kangaroo trial. (Saddam was guilty as hell of many things, but the trial process was a disgrace to the United States and to Iraq). The Bush administration was in such a sweat to use the Saddam trial to influence the US congressional midterm elections that the Iraqi government announced Hussein’s sentence – death by hanging – even before they had officially released the sentence (which was not released until after the US election).

The artist’s representation of George Bush could have been better, but so could the photograph itself.