Don’t believe Hillary Clinton or the New York Times, not when it comes to nuclear threats in the Middle East. Even Hillary doesn’t believe Hillary’s hype about Iran, as Juan Cole points out:
The announcement of the Iranian government that it will activate its Fordow nuclear enrichment site has predictably drawn forth a new round of war propaganda from the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In contrast, the Chinese media accurately report Iran’s affirmation that the new site will be subject to UN inspections and so is perfectly legal.
Ironically, what Clinton says is diametrically opposite from the repeated assurances given by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, that Iran is not trying to construct a nuclear warhead. True, he put it in a misleading way, saying that Iran “is not yet building a bomb,” as though it is only a matter of time. But in order to build a bomb, Iran would have to deny access to UN inspectors and, well, initiate a program to build a bomb. That it has not done so is covered up in mainstream US political and journalistic discourse, to the point where the NYT had to apologize for stating (contrary to Panetta) that Iran has a nuclear weapons program (it does not, as far as anyone can tell).
And now, it turns out, the Obama administration is even willing to admit the truth. The sanctions regime on Iran is not even primarily about the civilian nuclear enrichment program (to which Iran has a right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty), but about causing the regime to collapse. (Apparently the appearance in print with its admission of illegal motives provoked a sharp set of phone calls and a revision of the statement to merely a collapse of the nuclear program. I believe WaPo got it right the first time.)
I think blockading a civilian population for the purpose of instituting regime change in a state toward which no authorization of force has been issued by the UN Security Council may well be a war crime. Even advocating a war crime can under some circumstances be punishable, as happened at the Nuremberg trials.
Yep. I’m so old, I remember the Bushies screaming relentlessly that Iran was close to having a bomb… (heavy sigh)– they are only now beginning enrichment. All the rhetoric is just ridiculous.
The sanctions, on the other hand, seem to be working even better than expected. Hyper-inflation is on the rise in Tehran. If anything, this will be what triggers Iran to get froggy: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/hyperinflation-comes-iran
An EA source reports that a relative in Tehran ordered a washing machine for 400,000 Toman (about $240) this week. When he went to the shop the next day, he was told that — amidst the currency crisis and rising import costs — the price was now 800,000 Toman (about $480). Another EA source says that the price of an item of software for a laptop computer has tripled from 50,000 Toman to 150,000 Toman within days.
First of all Hillary is a Zionist war-hawk. So whatever comes out of her mouth is first approved by Netanyahu and not by Obama. But more importantly, Iran is holding parliamentary elections in March. So what the Zionists in the State Department are trying to do is to impact those elections. Interfere in the Iranian political process. By ceating inflationary pressures, stoping Iranian oil exports, devaluing Iranian currency, infiltrating the internet and planting phoney propaganda pieces, blowing up nuclear scientists, and so on. Hillary, Netanyahu and the rest of the warmongering Zionists hope that those moves will create civil unrest in Iran ahead of the elections in March. Panetta is Obama’s man and refuses to play Hillary’s games.
You guys are still in the system-think. Okey dokie , then.