The epicenter of American neoconservatism/warmongering (aside from Dick Cheney’s office) can be found at the American Enterprise Institute. The AEI is a so-called “think-tank” but is bought and paid for by corporate interests and heavily propagated with those who conflate the interests of America with those of an expansionist Israel. Much of Bush’s “foreign policy” (warmongering, basically) originates there (the Iraq war, for example).
The AEI has published a paper suggesting that the current round of saber-rattling and threats directed at Iran are part of a game of poker, and that the US is trying to influence Europe, as much as Iran. Notice that there is not a single mention of the war in Iraq or any influence that Iran might be having on that struggle, with some sort of IED components; it is clear that the IED issue is neither provable nor very important; it is simply going to be used as an excuse to get closer to war over the nuclear issue, which is itself is probably an excuse to simply extract some sort of revenge on Iran for its support of Hezbollah in and around Israel.
Do the Europeans really want to prevent a war between the US or Israel and Iran? If they had to choose between curtailing trade with the Islamic republic, or seeing either America or Israel preventatively strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, which would London, Paris and Berlin prefer?
Washington and Jerusalem clearly have no desire to attack Iran. But if the Europeans close down the option of boosting the soft-power of sanctions, the odds on military strikes will increase significantly.
The European hope is that the Americans and the Israelis will realise that an attack on Iran’s nuclear sites is unthinkable.
Here the prose lapses into the usual AEI fog of confusing syntax, unsupported and undocumented statements, half-truths, outright lies, and illogical conclusions. For example:
But what if the Americans or the Israelis do not see it that way? George W. Bush and many other Americans are not convinced that the theory of deterrence is either a moral or effective idea when used against a terrorist-supporting state. Is the US going to slaughter hundreds of thousands even millions of Iranians for an unclaimed nuclear terrorist strike? If Tehran launched a conventional terrorist attack on a US facility such as the one it is strongly suspected of having masterminded on the Khobar Towers complex in Saudi Arabia in 1996 would not Washington be even less likely to respond, knowing the other side has the bomb?
Much of the paper is like this. Very hard to even follow, and pretty much devoid of real truth. So I’ll skip down to the part where they may be tipping their hand as far as the current “plan”:
In 2003 when the British, French and Germans feared that Mr. Bush might attack another “axis of evil” member, European nuclear negotiations with Tehran began in earnest.
Proceeding with tougher sanctions is a real opportunity for transatlantic relations; conversely, failure to do so will only signal how great remains the divide in relations.
…..
Timing in a poker game is critical: if you do not know when to raise, you always lose. …The effect inside Iran of EU-imposed sanctions could be considerable, given the fragility of the Iranian economy and concerns among Iranians about the possible cascading effect of sanctions. Poker may well have been invented in Iran, but it came to the Americans via the Europeans. Do the Europeans still know how to play?
What to think….is Bush is playing poker, or chicken or is this article just a smoke screen, as Bush is positioning troops, ships, missiles and other assets in preparation for a massive air attack, or a support of an Israeli attack? The point is almost moot, because the closer we get, the more likely it is that some 19 year old on their side or ours is gonna make a mistake and the consequences will be horrendous. Or maybe the provocation will be pushed too far….is the American Enterprise Institute so foolish as to have forgotten how we got into Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonkin episode? or do they think we have forgotten? No, the closer we get to confronting Iran, the closer we get to war, regardless of what Bush, Cheney, or the AEI say about “…just kidding.” It’s dishonest, it’s irresponsible, and if we get into a war it will be criminal. The adolescents at the AEI are among America’s greatest enemies. Furthermore, the interests and tactics or Israel are not necessarily ones that America should embrace.
7 Comments
February 14, 2007 at 7:03 pm
Well some of these thing Bush said today in his press conference. So, watch it Europe. And watch it Iran!!!
February 14, 2007 at 7:17 pm
I wonder if they read my blog???
http://afterechoes.wordpress.com/2007/02/02/weekend-read-poker-in-the-sand/
February 14, 2007 at 7:24 pm
interesting post; I like your site.
I must say I was amazed by the small “bribe” that it took to get North Korea to sign on to some sort of agreement on their nuclear program. I mean, some fuel oil and food, on a scale that is not even very big by international standards.
February 14, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Kim Jong Il doesnt know the difference between millions and billions of American dollars I gues
February 14, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Kim Jong Il doesnt know the difference between millions and billions of American dollars I gues
February 15, 2007 at 5:49 pm
[...] Bush involves Stratcom in Iran war plan Jump to Comments Every day a new step toward war, or the appearance of a step toward [...]
February 23, 2007 at 3:30 am
[...] American Enterprise Institute is describing the preparations for war as “poker,” and “pressure.“ But if this is just poker, just pressure, just using the threat of [...]