< HOME  Monday, October 02, 2006

'Bring it On' - why Iran can't lose and the US and Israel can't win

By now, many of you already know why Iran can't lose, which by the way, is not the same as saying that Iran can win. Yesterday, the Sunday Times made it crystal clear that US intelligence officials, if not the Bush administration, have already figured that much out, as have a number of other commentators.

Gary North, for example, made an especially convincing argument in his January piece titled 'Bring it On': Why Dr. Ahmedinejad Is Not Worrying - well worth reading in full to understand the complex dynamics involved at this crucial juncture. But, the following sums it up nicely:

An unprovoked American attack on Iran will instantly and permanently de-legitimize every American client state in the Middle East. If the United States bombs Iran, the Bush Administration might as well send that "Mission Accomplished" banner to Al Qaeda headquarters.
Emphasis mine because he does not say that the US can't risk a provoked attack. But, that's a different story that entails a wild card and is strictly a matter of strategy. Let's stick to underlying goals, for now.

What he didn't mention, and what the Sunday Times left unexplored, was the likelihood of Israel doing what the US dare not - and the invariable consequences it entails. However, North did include in his analysis of why the US can't win an interesting reference to an important book written by an Israeli military expert.

The crucial issue here is political legitimacy of the nation-state. This is the supreme political issue of our day, as the great Israeli military historian Martin Van Creveld has argued in his book, The Rise and Decline of the State (Cambridge University Press, 1999). It is also the supreme strategic issue of fourth-generation warfare, the warfare of the rest of this century.
Now, for my take on this exceedingly dangerous path that the US and Israeli governments are treading, because make no mistake, any military strike against Iran by Israel is not only condoned but actively supported by those in control of the US government - just as it was in Lebanon.

However, any attack by Israel against Iran, even a nuclear one, would be suicidal on Israel's part. But, here's the catch - that's the plan.

The nation-state of Israel is a failed project that those in control of most of the world's resources are willing to sacrifice. There's really nothing much left to give up - Israel is a failed state, morally, politically - even economically, despite their ardent protestations.

The corporate interests who control the world's resources can only gain from a dramatic, and more importantly - very destructive - end to the Israeli problem. Only it will not be the end, but just the beginning.

The problem is not simply Israel "the nation-state", but the evil concept behind Israel and those who espouse it - the idea that some people on earth are more deserving of freedom and prosperity than others. And to reach that goal, they are willing to subjugate or destroy everything in sight.

The destruction of Israel and every other nation-state in the Middle East will give the surviving corporate interests the opportunity they need to seize control of the remainder of the world's resources. Such an attack will throw the world's economies into a tail spin, enabling the money masters to assume total control of the world.

This is it - folks. The one world government we've been hearing about all these years is a mercantile one, headed by the world's high priests of finance.

The thesis is that the nation state as we've known it is a modern invention and a thorough failure, ever more costly and intrusive and unworkable. It is in the process of being supplanted by other institutions less formal and hence more functional to serve the member's goals.

On the plus side, we see the emergence of a decentralized but global market order and the emergence of micro-political communities. On the negative side, there is the development of guerilla armies that act secretively and elude defeat in conventional military terms. The nation state, once the leviathan bestriding the global and ruling all before it, is being reduced in its size because it is being outsmarted and outrun. No longer can it command loyalty and no longer does it have a credible claim to be superior to its alternatives.

Iran can't lose, but neither can it win, and neither will the US or Israel. An attack on Iran will mark the beginning of the end of nation-states as we know it. All that will remain connecting interests together will be finance.


At Monday, October 02, 2006, Blogger Akber said...

Very very nicely written! These are indeed the issues.

At Monday, October 02, 2006, Blogger erlenda said...

The way to this goal will lead over millions of dead bodies.
One guy of those "financial interests", A Lord Weidenfeld from London said in the German paper "die Welt" that this coming war might have as many casualties as WW II (60 million), but it would be worth it, since it would be worse, if the "islamists" would win.
I guess what he means is, that the Islamic banking system allows for profits from investments but forbids the taking of interest.
Of course Lord Weidenfeld and his friends would see this as far worse than any kind of human sacrifice.

At Monday, October 02, 2006, Blogger nolocontendere said...

Our overlords realize all this, of course, and are perfectly willing to go down this insane path because their end game needs a final huge explosion to be set in motion. Nothing else will do as people need ultimate trauma to be willing to submit to what they have in store.
My only question is who's in on this agenda? Putin? Ahmadinejad? Olmert? The people certainly aren't privy to it but what's coming might be some sort of stage play, albeit a gruesomely bloody one.

At Tuesday, October 03, 2006, Blogger quasimodo said...

The very idea of Israel actually self-destructing or being dismantled by some "corporate" entity is quite enticing indeed. My take on that ever happening is just about zip. More wishful thinking... more pie in the sky. The chance of it morphing into some other alien form appears to already be quite good though, however. Perhaps 'Greater PaleStein' will be a politically appropriate shingle to hang on Eretz Israel when they finish it off. Who does anyone think these overlord corporate clucks are anyway, but just another gang of Zionist Jews with more money and bombs to throw around ? Ever heard of ISRAEL CORP.? Probably the biggest industrial corporation in Israel, beside the massive military entity that it fully supports. Does anyone think these clowns will ever budge an inch, or even cut and run, while there is a huge fortune to be made from extracting minerals from the Dead Sea ? What about all that juicy OIL they're already sucking out of Iraq ? The pipeline is heading straight for Haifa. Dream on.

At Tuesday, October 03, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

quasi, I am not trying to absolve Israel of its sins. I'm just pointing out that to focus on the people running the israeli government or in Israel is to miss the point entirely - those in control don't just control Israel. They control most of the world's corporate wealth.

And yes, you're dead right about the dead sea.

At Tuesday, October 03, 2006, Blogger Alan Cabal said...

Welcome to Helter Skelter. Please move promptly to your assigned seats. No flash photographs, please.

At Tuesday, October 03, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

But, to be clear - No, I don't think that one race or religion has a monopoly on all this madness.

For certain, there are a number of competing factions out there, but together it's them against US in this world. It is, as it has always been - 'the haves' against 'the have nots' (because they conspired to take it away from us).

At Tuesday, October 03, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The haves will, in the end, have not, and the have nots will have not. So the end of it is not. Sad, eh?

At Tuesday, October 03, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent post, by the way. Well wirtten and succinct in my opinon.

Thank you. Peace.

At Wednesday, October 04, 2006, Blogger LanceThruster said...

It's interesting to see that the concept of the non-state entity wreaking havoc through the ability to present a less than clearly defined target serves to describe the other side as well. I also think that qrswave is right in that it is no single element that gets you into the inner circle, but at least on some level, certain traits can keep you out. That being said, opposing factions can still be Macheivelian enough to do business with the other side (covertly), as long as they perceive some sort of gain, usually in terms of connecting with their base. Therefore, Bush and whoever gets notice from the other side (real or patsy), can play off each other with expectations of coming out ahead.

At Wednesday, October 04, 2006, Blogger quasimodo said...

qrswave and company, (inc. ?),(pretty sexy shingle, eh ?) Sure hope you're right about that. Fortunately, a rather full-blown disputation I just hammered out was inadvertently deleted. You have all luckily missed my lengthiest and most bombastic foray to date. Go ahead, heave a collective sigh of relief. All I can muster after that herculean effort is the following, in passing. Our greatly revered hack, Old Man Papa Ernest Hemingway, once penned an unabashed pulp novel entitled "To Have and Have Not". I believe he had some considerable qualms about publishing it, and rightly so, I dare say. Until a film director named Howard Hawks got involved, and read it, and told Hemingway to his face it was junk, but he would like to make a movie of it. So he promptly ordered him to rewrite most of it and put in a call to central casting. And lo and behold, who should have appeared but the original Bogie and Bacall, with Walter Brennan and Hoagy Carmichael ( who almost stole it from Bogie ) in supporting roles. How could he go wrong ? Hawks went on to launch the career of cheesecake Lauren Bacall, and succeeded in making ( from pulp trash ) what I must abashedly admit is my favorite movie of all time. Of course the great 'Hoagie' almost stole the whole show with his "Hong Kong Blues", but what really nailed me was a duet he did with Bacall, entitled "How Little We Know" which, you guessed it, eventually became my favorite Carmichael song of all time. So if I may attempt to find a moral in this little story, ( without being shot by Mark Twain ) it would be this: Whenever I might be tempted to rattle on at too great a length on too weighty of a subject, I always remember that little tune...for in truth, HOW LITTLE WE KNOW !

At Thursday, October 05, 2006, Blogger Michael Price said...

Anyway, it's good to see a world leader like Ahmedinajad standing up to the Zionists and their American lackeys. All it takes is courage and determination - Fidel Castro never let the Americans push him around, and he's been in power for about 45 years.
Resistance is NOT futile.

At Thursday, November 01, 2007, Blogger Adam Abeles said...



Hillary Clinton, a wishy-washy Pseudo-Republican who masquerades around Washington as a Democrat,learns to Stop worrying about Bill and starts LOVING the BOMB. Loving the Bomb for a war with IRAN.


STOP THE BOMB- www.gravel2008.us

At Sunday, November 04, 2007, Blogger Meg said...

Sorry to disappoint you but that won't happen either.

None of it will happen.

The world will be just fine...you'll see.

And....the world will also be more muslim.

See how that works! It is called Good News and you'd be amazed at how contagious good news is.


At Friday, March 21, 2008, Blogger BTM said...

Let's be honest about this issue for a minute. Iran's government is a full of far-right, Bush-like, propaganda pigs. Unlike the Bush administration, they push for war, they antagonize the US and Israel and push to pursue a violent weapon. Do I blame them? Not really, if their worst most hated enemies have nukes, I'm sure it makes them want them even more.

The people of Iran are disconnected and totally unlike the government. Imagine a United States run by religious zealots and far-right church nuts. Not only would prohibition still be in effect, but condoms would be banned, women in the workplace would be banned, sexism would run even more rampant than it does now.

However, the leaders wish to protect women and respect them, which is noble and understandable. The problem is that they impose their way of life on all of their population. If the people of Iran had any say in their own lives, they would revolt against these Old-school hardliners.

In addition, Iran suffers from a problem that the world suffers from and this is their secret police, just like some...some assholes in the CIA (like the Bourne Ultimatum) and the KGB. These people are actually the ones who run the world. The "New World Order" that George Bush spoke of is indeed one run not by corporations(but they do benefit), but the stakeholders that ultimately benefit, such as the oil conglomerates, the ex-KGB, the politicians, the wealthy, and those with the weapons.

But their is a difference about that fact in the USA. The media, the you-tubers, the everyday man, and local governments will expose these people, if given the chance.

"The US is the greatest good for peace in the world." John McCain nailed it. McCain has probably become one of the most powerful men in America. I agree with him that we must succeed in Iraq, not because of the corporate lobbyists, or the corporate stakeholders, but because of the brain-washed morons who are in jihad and killing young women children and men who don't yield to their ways. This is evident in "Tears of the Sun", where Bruce Willis' character does something to protect people.

"The strong should protect the weak." Protect those that can't protect themselves, and that is exactly what our boys in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing. No matter what Bush did to fuck it up, if it was wrong or not, we owe it to those kids to help make their homes somewhere free from radical assholes who will impose their thought and hurt the education. An example of those who push their thoughts on kids: Gangs, Neo-nazis like in American History X, etc.

Vote McCain 2008


Post a Comment

<< Home