Is Iran the Next US Target?

Could Western leaders pursue other options? What could they be, and why don't Western leaders seek to prevent or reduce international conflict?

Here we go again.

As they seek to wind things down to a manageable simmer of daily death in the streets of Iraq, the attention of those in power in the US is now turning toward Iran because of their nuclear development, their anti-US and anti-Israel stances and their influence in the region and their closeness to China and Russia. All things that make those in DC quake.

Israel may soon bomb Isfahan, site of a major Iranian nuclear power plant that can produce materials that can be made into weapons grade material, anyway if we don't do something first. So to protect Israel and to expand its control of the region, the US will do what it did with Iraq, lie to convince Americans that there is an imminent threat to us, then bring things to a crisis point then bomb and/or invade.

Here below, Rumsfeld states that they know for certain that bombs in Iraq are from Iran. Remember, they were certain about Iraq WMD too, and that turned out to be false. We should be cautious and suspicious of these people. They have not earned our trust.

These conflicts result from the win-lose perspective that those who dominate our culture view all relationships through. Whether in business, society at large, or in international relations, instead of first seeking ways that all sides can be safe and prosperous, challenges are seen as threats and responded to with threats in return.

Dominance is the goal, not a better world. This is the problem.

For example, China recently sought to buy a US oil company and was rebuffed. They will now go elsewhere, like South America or Asia to get the energy sources they require to fuel their growth. This is a lost opportunity for the US and another event that heightens tension rather than decreases it. Instead, the US could have acted with foresight and wisdom and worked to establish an energy sharing consortium with China, who we need to cooperate with so they will keep buying our debt to keep our economy going (until we get some fiscal sanity once again.) We could have begun working together to find and distribute energy in ways that all sides win. Instead, our leaders sow the seeds of future conflict.

Fear of the US and Israel is why Iran is seeking nukes. Instead of treating Iran as part of an "axis of evil" we should be trying to work with them to help them feel safe. What to do? We should leave Iraq, including all "enduring bases." If we meant to free Iraq, then do so now. Our presence there is perceived as a threat by Iran. The US should begin treating both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian issue with equality. This will send a positive message to the region and reduce tension for all, including Israel. The US should stop its current efforts to develop "tactical nuclear weapons" and re-commit to non-proliferation for all, not just those the US doesn't favor. The US should reach out to Iran diplomatically and with exchange of citizens to seek the fostering of a positive relationship with that nation so that it doesn't feel threatened and doesn't feel the need to develop nukes.

This is how the US could lower the threat without going to war, but our leaders think war is normal and that exercising power is how things get done. It is these beliefs which are basic assumptions which our leaders ascribe to and which support aggressive responses rather than wise responses. We have options, but our leaders are not open to them. Even the so-called "opposition" in the US political system is unable to see such possibilities. They behave is if they are two wings of the same party.

Imagine that your perspective is one that assumes war is normal and that war is just "the way it is," then making these boneheaded moves seems logical. Imagine that you own a defense contracting company that makes weapons or other materials of war, then finding a solution that would prevent later conflict with China or Iran would seem bad for business. Now imagine that war is seen as abnormal and considered a failure of leadership. From this perspective the US's shortsighted response to China's need for oil seems foolish and the response we are seeing with Iran looks like ignorant folly.

In a similar way, the US and other Western powers need to begin seeing international relations from a fresh perspective, a way that seeks win-win solutions rather than win-lose outcomes as we currently suffer through daily.

This is the change in values America must make if it is to survive. If our leaders are not open to these ideas, then we need new leaders. To achieve that, we need informed citizens who understand the benefits of seeking win-win solutions.

This rush toward global military dominance and empire is national suicide. We cannot bear the cost physically or financially. The negative effects are not worth the power gained, if it's you or your loved ones who must actually fight the fight in the streets of the Middle East, that is.

Keep on the lookout. Here comes another trumped up conflict that is avoidable, but our leaders don't seem much interested in avoiding them. Why should they, they are empowered and enriched through war.

Universal

Rumsfeld: Iraq bombs 'clearly from Iran'

Tehran denies involvement

Wednesday, August 10, 2005; Posted: 10:35 a.m. EDT (14:35 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/10/iran.iraq/

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Tuesday that weapons recently confiscated in Iraq were "clearly, unambiguously from Iran" and admonished Tehran for allowing the explosives to cross the border.


Iran's defense minister denied the claims in a report carried by the state-run news agency IRNA.

According to Ali Shamkhani, Iran is playing no role in Iraqi affairs, including "its alleged involvement in bomb explosions."

The shipment of sophisticated bombs was confiscated in the past two weeks by U.S. and Iraqi troops in southern Iraq, senior U.S. officials said Monday.

Although he would not comment on whether the Iranian government was directly involved, Rumsfeld said, "it's notably unhelpful for the Iranians to be allowing weapons of those types to be crossing the border."

"What you do know of certain knowledge is the Iranians did not stop it from coming in," he said.

Rumsfeld said the weapons create problems for the Iraqi government, coalition forces and the international community.

"And ultimately, it's a problem for Iran," he added.

When asked if that was a threat of possible retaliation, Rumsfeld replied, "I don't imply threats. You know that."

"They (the Iranians) live in the neighborhood. The people in that region want this situation stabilized with the exception of Iran and Syria," he said.

The U.S. officials said the weapons were more lethal and more sophisticated than the bombs typically used by Iraqi insurgents.

After examining the truckload of weapons, intelligence analysts said the explosive parts are similar to those used by Iran's Revolutionary Guard.

While there is no evidence Iran's government sanctioned the weapons shipment, the analysts said it may indicate a rogue element inside Iran is making the weapons and trying to ship them to Iraq's insurgents.

Troops found the bombs inside crates seized near a border crossing on the Iraqi side, the officials said.

Three senior U.S. officials told CNN the weapons were made in such a way that their blast would have been focused in a single direction, thereby increasing their lethality.

One official said the shipment included "tens" of bombs.

Barbara Starr contributed to this report.

Related links:
http://news.google.com/?ncl=http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2005/08/10/afx2177173.html&hl=en