Home | About | Donate

If War Breaks Out with Iran, It Won’t Be an Accident

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/07/01/if-war-breaks-out-iran-it-wont-be-accident

2 Likes

The war-lobby corporate criminals tried to sell a direct war with Iran to the banking mafia

My headline: WAR WILL BREAK OUT IN IRAN AS SOON AS TRUMP NEEDS IT IN 2020.

2 Likes

If someone was starving and strangling your whole family, wouldn’t you try to kill “that someone” before that someone was successful?

1 Like

From my perspective, they have already sold their war with Iran to the Mafiaocracy, but Trump, the mafia Don, is just waiting for the time when he needs it to be reelected.

1 Like

My speculation is that military leaders realize that a war with Iran would be long and bloody and Trump’s advisers told him that a war, now, would hurt his chances for re-election. A war right before the election, however, is a completely different story. But the truth is that it hard to know what is actually transpiring in the Trump administration.

Regardless, its clear that progressives can not let up in organizing anti-war efforts.

4 Likes

Though war may still break out with Iran, any other president (i.e. HRC) would have attacked a long time ago. It sounds weird, but Trump has been the only president in awhile who hasn’t been “weak on peace”. From Reagan to Obama, all of the leaders have been weak on Peace waging wars, supporting ruthless coups and imposing sanctions on countries around the world all in fear of being called ironically “weak on Defence” as if aggressive bombing campaigns has anything to do with defence of the U.S. Unfortunately though Trump has had the same pressure applied to him by the MIC as all of his predecessors and may eventually crumble, but then again his incredible ego has prevented him so far from going to war with Venezuela, North Korea or anyone else that corporate America has deemed a threat to unregulated capitalism. This is driving both pro corporate Democrats and Republicans alike crazy as they had all anticipated endless war from the tough talking Trump from day one thereby benefitting that very tiny segment of the population that manufacture weapons of mass destruction and all of the supporting aspects that a warring nation requires.
When election time comes around and assuming that Trump has not given in to his cabal of sociopaths, the Democratic presidential candidate (unless it is Bernie sanders by some miracle) will not recognize Trump as being strong on peace, but in fact will call him weak on defence yet again for his inability or unwillingness to bomb millions of brown people half way around the world.
Obama and Hilary took great pride in waging their war of aggression against Libya as they lived up to their promise of “bombing Libya into the Stone Age” as endless sorties transformed Africa’s most prosperous country in a failed Sate with over 5 million people plunged into poverty and the creation of yet another refugee crisis for Europe and Libya’s neighbours. Similarly Obama and Clinton were thrilled at their support for the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Honduras which spawned the current refugee problem (migrant caravan at the Mexican U.S. border) as many Hondurans have joined the exodus from similarly destroyed Central American countries north to escape the U.S. sponsored violence there.
A truly representative U.S. government (a government by the people, for the people. etc.) would immediately end all sanctions against Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba and a host of other countries, enter into “mutual” nuclear disarmament treaties with any and all nuclear powers (especially Israel) and eliminate the sales of weapons to everyone. But alas, every politician that has entered the final stage of any presidential race in the last couple of generations has been clearly … “Weak on Peace”!

6 Likes

BINGO! What could be better for Trumps reelection?

1 Like

You are spot on. It’s bizarre that a racist con artist with obvious brain damage is the most pro-peace POTUS in 30 years.

2 Likes

Bennis’ observation that there’s no hotline to Tehran is salient, however. Things are on a hair trigger. At this point, if Iran’s demands for relief from cowardly Europe continue to be ignored, Iran might decide the economic strangulation has gone far enough, and that it’s time to take this to the next level. (I’m not saying it’s likely, but if I were Iran, I would be capable of that.)

So the goddam war, heaven forfend, might start sooner than the devilish thought-engineers of 2020 would prefer.

Bennis (whom I infinitely admire) closes on an somewhat odd note:

the threat of war right now is rooted in Washington walking away from the Iran nuclear deal two years ago

My only quibble is with concluding on that emphasis. Bennis of course knows that all this is more deeply rooted in the 1953 CIA-engineered coup to oust “the Iranian George Washington” – this is how many Iranians remember him, secular democrat Mohammad Mosaddegh. We specialize in forgetting here in USA, not so much in Iran. They are prepared. Noboby knew until a little bit ago that Iran could shoot down a stealth drone.

The most cogent observation I’ve read about all this is: you’ll know USA is truly preparing to bomb Iran when they move their armada well away from that Strait of Hormuz. Those aircraft carriers are bloody expensive.

4 Likes

… It Won’t Be an Accident

eh…Tell me, what was the last war we had, that started by accident?

I cant think of ONE

3 Likes

So an improvement for a the headline would be something like:

“Preparations for WAR with Iran started in 1953”
(afterall the Korean War was winding down in 1953)

4 Likes

Thanks for your reply, good point!

1 Like

Not bad

2 Likes

Great points. Thx.

1 Like

Read Gil Maguire’s new novel, “The Exodus Betrayal: A President Confronts Israel,” for a consideration of a an attack on Iran by Israel. Similar, unexpected and regrettable “chaos” could result from a US attack on Iran. But there is no good reason for ANYONE to attack Iran. Let’s all live in peace and cooperation not combat .

3 Likes

Rumor has it that Israel is planning a massive attack on Lebanon soon, ostensibly to
eliminate Hezbollah’s power as an Iranian proxy. It is unfortunately a possibility that
American troops now stationed in Israel might also be involved, should an American
soldier be killed the most likely response from Secretary Pompous would be a call
for war.

3 Likes

Only problem with the assessment is that

  1. Debt is money [sacrifice is DNA of military] and re-building one of those represents “growth”
  2. Timing and skewing, feinting and ducking riding on slime mold is the Trump MO

Remember Israel bombing the Liberty

True that. Historically our government has no problem allowing Americans (soldiers etal ) to get slaughtered to generate an excuse to go to war, again