Iran and the Bomb
P. Schultz
March 1, 2012
Here is an exchange I
had on Facebook with a friend from high school.
George: So... are you comfortable with Iran having
the "BOMB"?
Peter Schultz Two responses: (a) As comfortable as I am with
Israel, Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, and India having nukes, and (b) all of
these countries except N. Korea lie in proximity to Iran so that if I were
Iranian I would want nukes. I would be most comfortable if these countries,
plus the US, had no nukes. Reagan had an idea like that. One of his best. But
the "realists" said no.
Besides, the real project is not Iran's nukes but its regime. That's what the imperialists in D.C. and Israel want to change. They don't like the Islamic republic. A Christian republic? A Jewish state? Fine with us, but no Islamic states allowed. Just as in Iraq, they are using the nuke issue [WMDS] as a cover for regime change. Gee, we already did that in Iran and look where we are today. [Why do our "realists" fail so often? And why given this failure rate do we still call them "realists?"]
But my point here was: Attack Iran or let Israel attack Iran, because they could not and would not do it without our approval, and then when the Iranians attack back, one way or the other, don't go around playing the victim of "mad Mullahs." What goes around, comes around. And we in the US go about the world, "projecting our power" everywhere, and then when the shit hits the fan, as it always does, we think: "Oh, they hate us. Poor us. Why are they attacking us? We are so good!" 9/11 did not come out of the blue......"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves."
Besides, the real project is not Iran's nukes but its regime. That's what the imperialists in D.C. and Israel want to change. They don't like the Islamic republic. A Christian republic? A Jewish state? Fine with us, but no Islamic states allowed. Just as in Iraq, they are using the nuke issue [WMDS] as a cover for regime change. Gee, we already did that in Iran and look where we are today. [Why do our "realists" fail so often? And why given this failure rate do we still call them "realists?"]
But my point here was: Attack Iran or let Israel attack Iran, because they could not and would not do it without our approval, and then when the Iranians attack back, one way or the other, don't go around playing the victim of "mad Mullahs." What goes around, comes around. And we in the US go about the world, "projecting our power" everywhere, and then when the shit hits the fan, as it always does, we think: "Oh, they hate us. Poor us. Why are they attacking us? We are so good!" 9/11 did not come out of the blue......"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves."
No comments:
Post a Comment