i don't know whether i agree with the author of the article below or not on his speculations about the imminent bombing of Iran ... of course, if you believe bush wants to bomb Iran and you realize it will become much harder to do this as the 2006 elections get closer, it's certainly a possibility ... and if Democrats take back Congress, such insanity would become all but impossible ... so, bombing Iran in two weeks remains a possibility ...
but that's just a tangent in this article ... the central theme is the broader battle for corporate control of the Middle East ... this is an area commonly referred to as Centcom ... the battle for oil and the race for resources against a rapidly emerging China and India sit at the core of the US strategy ...
as the article explains, the war on terror is nothing but a smokescreen for Centcom ... it's goal is to do nothing more than to provide a justification for US occupation in the region ... shame on the Democrats who believe we're in Iraq to help the Iraqis; it's just not true ... and now we're being sold all the stories about the dangers of Iran's advanced nuclear program; it's crap ... and Darfur and all those poor starving people? it's US oil policies that are driving them into barren lands just as we are bankrupting and stranding the Sunnis in central Iraq ...
in the end, my friends, the US desperately needs a real opposition party to stand up to this imperialism ... either we are a country that respects the rule of law and the sovereignty of other nations or we are an outlaw nation seeking only to serve our own greedy objectives ... when those on the "far left" argue that there is no difference between the parties, they see a symbiosis between republicans and Democrats to support US imperialism ... they see both parties as complicit in this game of exploitation ... are they right? i hope you know the answer; i really don't ...
if the US is going to take whatever it is able to take from foreign countries to fuel our domestic needs and pad the pockets of our country's wealthiest stockholders, an honest debate about this policy is sorely needed ... those who support such exploitation in the shadowy backhalls of government without public consent should be beheaded ...
source:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mike_whi_060319_centcom_2c_the_central.htm CENTCOM, the central battlefield in the global resource warIt’s impossible to understand the goals of the Bush administration without looking at a map.
The entire Middle East and Central Asia is referred to in military parlance as CENTCOM; the central battlefield in the global resource war. This region extends from Sudan in the south to Kazakhstan to the north; from Egypt in the west to Pakistan in the east.
This is where the vast majority of the world’s remaining resources lie and it will continue to be the primary area of focus for American foreign policy throughout the century.Once we observe the sharp black outline of America’s newest battlefield, the illusions of the “war on terror” are quickly dispelled. This is the geographic reality of the present conflict. The war on terror is merely public relations fluff. A careful look at the region illustrates the crucial importance of integrating Iran into the overall plan.
American industry must dominate this area if it hopes to maintain its edge on competitors in China and Europe. Iran and Syria are the unfortunate obstacles to that plan. Most of the other countries are either clients of the United States or are willing to comply without major resistance. Sudan may be the exception to this rule, but a strategy is already materializing (pushed by Ambassador John Bolton) at the UN to send in “Peacekeepers” who will carry out Washington’s orders. This will place Sudan’s oil and natural gas reserves under western control and divide the resources among the former colonial powers.
Those who believe that “humanitarian intervention” in Sudan will reduce the suffering of the people in Darfur are sadly mistaken. We only need to look at the “liberation” of Iraq or the “Marshall Plan” in Afghanistan to realize that no attempt will be made to establish security in the hinterland. “Humanitarian intervention” is a tragic ruse invoked to disguise aggression and exploitation. <skip>
An attack on Iran involves great risk and there is the real prospect that escalation might lead to nuclear war. As the increasingly inflammatory rhetoric indicates, however, the plan is going forward and will not be derailed by the reluctance of Congress, the thousands of protestors on the streets, or the ineffective braying at United Nations.
Those who dismiss the likelihood of an attack on Iran as “madness”, fail to appreciate the true nature of fanaticism. The Bush administration is less guided by reason than it is by moral rectitude; neither plays any role in their decision-making process.
The bombing of Iran could take place some time as early as in the next two weeks or, as Condoleezza Rice likes to say, “At a time of our choosing.”
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
