Don't Miss Out!
Get a free weekly digest of FPJ's latest delivered straight to your inbox.

You can unsubscribe at any time, and FPJ values your privacy. Your email will never be sold or shared with third parties.

Will Iran Be Attacked?

Washington has made tremendous preparations for a military assault on Iran. There is speculation that Washington has called off its two longest running wars—Iraq and Afghanistan—in order to deploy forces against Iran. Two of Washington’s fleets have been assigned to the Persian Gulf along with NATO warships. Missiles have been spread amongst Washington’s Oil Emirate and Middle Eastern puppet states. US troops have been deployed in Israel and Kuwait.

Defence Secretary Leon Panetta (US Navy)

Defence Secretary Leon Panetta (US Navy)

Washington has presented Israel a gift from the hard-pressed American taxpayers of an expensive missile defense system, money spent for Israel when millions of unassisted Americans have lost their homes. As no one expects Iran to attack Israel, except in retaliation for an Israeli attack on Iran, the purpose of the missile defense system is to protect Israel from an Iranian response to Israeli aggression against Iran.

Juan Cole has posted on his blog a map showing 44 U.S. military bases surrounding Iran.

In addition to the massive military preparations, there is the propaganda war against Iran that has been ongoing since 1979, when Washington’s puppet, the Shah of Iran, was overthrown by the Iranian revolution. Iran is surrounded, but Washington and Israeli propaganda portray Iran as a threatening aggressor nation. In fact, the aggressors are the Washington and Tel Aviv governments which constantly threaten Iran with military attack.

Neocon warmongers, such as David Goldman, compare the Iranian president to Hitler and declare that only war can stop him.

Washington’s top military officials have created the impression that an act of Israeli aggression against Iran is a done deal.  On February 2, the Washington Post reported that Pentagon chief Leon Panetta believes that Israel is likely to attack Iran in two to four months.

Also on February 2, Gareth Porter reported that General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, informed the Israeli government that the US would not join Israel’s aggression against Iran unless Washington had given prior approval for the attack.

Porter interprets Dempsey’s warning as a strong move by President Obama to deter an attack that would involve Washington in a regional conflagration with Iran. A different way to read Dempsey’s warning is that Obama wants to hold off on attacking Iran until polls show him losing the presidential election. It has generally been the case that the patriotic electorate does not turn out a president who is at war.

On February 5, President Obama canceled Dempsey’s warning to Israel when Obama declared that he was in “lockstep” with the Israeli government. Obama is in lockstep with Israel despite the fact that Obama told NBC that “we don’t see any evidence that they [Iran] have those intentions [attacks on the U.S.] or capabilities.” By being in lockstep with Israel and simultaneously calling for a “diplomatic solution,” Obama appeased both the Israel Lobby and Democratic peace groups, thus upping his vote.

As I wrote previously, this spring is a prime time for attacking Iran, because there is a good chance that Russia will be in turmoil because of its March election. The Russian opposition to Putin is financed by Washington and encouraged by Washington’s statements, especially those of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Whether Putin wins or there is an indecisive result and a run-off election, Washington’s money will put tens of thousands of Russians into the streets, just as Washington’s money created the “Green Revolution” in Iran to protest the presidential elections there.

On February 4, the former left-wing British newspaper, The Guardian, reported a pre-election protest by 120,000 anti-Putin demonstrators marching in Moscow and demanding “fair elections.”  In other words, Washington already has its minions declaring that a win by Putin in March can only signify a stolen election. The problem for Obama is that this spring is too early to tell whether his re-election is threatened by a Republican candidate. Going to war prematurely, especially if the result is a stiff rise in oil prices, is not an aid to re-election.

The willingness of peoples around the world to be Washington’s puppets instead of loyal citizens of their own countries is why the West has been able to dominate the world during the modern era. There seems to be an infinite supply of foreign leaders who prefer Washington’s money and favor to loyalty to their own country’s interests.

As Karl Marx said, money turns everything into a commodity that can be bought and sold.  All other values are defeated—honor, integrity, truth, justice, loyalty, even blood kin. Nothing remains but filthy lucre. Money certainly turned U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair into a political commodity.

The power of money was brought home to me many years ago.  My Ph.D. dissertation chairman found himself in the Nixon administration as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security affairs. He asked if I would go to Vietnam to administer the aid programs. I was flattered that he thought I had the strength of character to stand up to the corruption that usually defeats the purpose of aid programs, but I declined the assignment.

The conversation was one I will never forget. Warren Nutter was an intelligent person of integrity. He thought, regardless of whether the war was necessary, that we had been led into it by deception. He thought democracy could not live with deception, and he objected to government officials who were not honest with the American people. Nutter’s position was that a democratic government had to rely on persuasion, not on trickery. Otherwise, the outcomes were not democratic.

As Nutter saw it, we were in a war, and we had involved the South Vietnamese.  Therefore, we had obligations to them.  If we proved to be feckless, the consequence would be to undermine commitments we had made to other countries in our effort to contain the Soviet Empire. The Soviet Union, unlike the “terrorist threat” had the potential of being a real threat. People who have come of age after the collapse of the Soviet Union don’t understand the cold war era.

In the course of the conversation I asked how Washington got so many other governments to do its bidding.  He answered, “Money.”

I asked, “You mean foreign aid?”

He said, “No, bags of money. We buy the leaders.”

He didn’t approve of it, but there was nothing he could do about it.

Purchasing the leadership of their enemies or of potential threats was the Roman way. Timothy H. Parsons in his book, The Rule of Empires, describes the Romans as “deft practitioners of soft power.”  Rome preferred to rule the conquered and the potentially hostile through “semiautonomous client kings which the Senate euphemistically termed ‘friends of the Roman people.’ Romans helped cooperative monarchs remain in power with direct payments of coins and material goods. Acceptance of these subsidies signified that an ally deferred to imperial authority, and the Romans interpreted any defiance of their will as an overt revolt. They also intervened freely in local succession disputes to replace unsuitable clients.”

This is the way Washington rules. Washington’s way of ruling other countries is why there is no “Egyptian Spring,” but a military dictatorship as a replacement for Washington’s discarded puppet Hosni Mubarak, and why European puppet states are fighting Washington’s wars of hegemony in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia.

Washington’s National Endowment for Democracy funds non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. It is through the operations of NGOs that Washington added the former Soviet Republic of Georgia to Washington’s empire, along with the Baltic States, and Eastern European countries.

Because of the hostility of many Russians to their Soviet past, Russia is vulnerable to Washington’s machinations.

As long as the dollar rules, Washington’s power will rule.

As Rome debased its silver denarius into lead, Rome’s power to purchase compliance faded away. If “Helicopter Ben” Bernanke inflates away the purchasing power of the dollar, Washington’s power will melt away also.

This article was originally published at PaulCraigRoberts.org and has been used here with permission.


About the Author

Paul Craig Roberts

Homepage
Paul Craig Roberts
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan Administration. He was associate editor and columnist with the Wall Street Journal, columnist for Business Week, and the Scripps Howard News Service. He has had numerous university appointments. He is the author of numerous books, including his most recent, How America Was Lost: From 9/11 to the Police/Warfare State
  • Shane

    Very good article!

  • http://YAHOO rALPHIE THE bUFFALO

    wHY DON’T YOU GO LIVE IN IRAN, FELLOW….AND tell us how much fun that place is…you arabic loving ill-repute.

    • Zoe

      You are so ignorant, Iran is not an Arb country. Why dont you go and educate yourself ?

  • Siavash

    I’m from Iran and absolutely do not believe that was American money that brought people to the streets after fradulant election.

    • Zoe

      Siavash, I am many who came out against Mosadeqq in 1952 also said the same as you did that money did not bring them out! it is few who will get paid and many who will come out. But two days before the election in Iran Washington Post printed a result of a survey done in main cities in Iran and they predicted Ahmadi Nejad will win 2 to 1 vote.

  • savewhitie

    great story

  • Ramin

    I wish to avoid war
    The war is Bad

  • Ramin

    I am from Iran and I wish to avoid war
    The war is Bad

  • Ramin Mohammadian

    Im From Iran
    I love all people of the world and I Do not like The War I love peace.

  • pedro

    What a fantastic article, the media is so biased now days it’s hard to find people like yourself that dare to look at the situation from another prospective. Thanks

  • Edward

    In this article you are absolutely correct. When you see the leaves coming on the trees you know that Summer is near. So anyone who does not see what is coming does not want to se what is coming.
    But the Phoenix rose from the ashes. So the past which this generation hoped to forget, or thought was beneath its contempt, will again rise again from the ashes of the destruction of its most cherished illusions.

  • Arunprasad from India

    All talk about attacking Iran is total bunkus or BS. It is the world’s biggest bluff in centuries. Imagine a situation when Iran feels cornered due to sanctions. It actually goes and blocks Hormuz. The aircraft carrier in Persian Gulf sends a barrage of aircrafts to bomb the ships causing the blockade. Then Iran manages to torpedo the aircraft carrier. Yes, the country actually can do it. 6000 vital brave US human lives will instantly plunge to their graves into the sea. Along with it, billions of dollars of hard earned american taxpayer’s money. Then US declares a formal war on Iran to ‘flatten’ the country, as many journalists love to flaunt the word ‘flatten’. What does ‘flatten’ mean anyway ? The warmonger will say we will destroy the defense systems, airports, infrastructure, dams, agriculture blah blah blah. O yeah ? Do you know what will happen if you ‘flatten’ the country ? Iran will become the WORLD’S BIGGEST ACTUAL TERRORIST COUNTRY FOR DECADES TO COME which America will not be able to afford. Middle East oil will be history. The terrorists will make sure that that will be the case. Forget terrorists, the shipping insurance companies will close down the ME insurance business, which pretty much puts the plug on ME oil. Yes Russia has the replacement oil, but at a ‘reasonable’ price of 500$. They will get incredibly rich at the cost to the already financially stressed west. There are many other terrible things that could happen (Pakistan transferring large consignment of nuclear bombs to Iran in sympathy), but suffice to say that the western strategists are very very very well aware of the impending consequences, and hence will back off from war threats in the very near future. Summarizing, all talks of an attack on Iran is PURE BLUFF and the west needs to realize that the common man on the street is also getting to realize the same.

    • Edward

      That is not how modern warfare is conducted.
      Obviously from what we see in Libya and Syria modern warfare is conducted by creating division, terror, chaos, and mindless death and destruction. None of these need “boots on the ground” or sinking aircraft carriers, yet achieve their aim of robbery – It seems the Americans now believe they have mastered the art and I am sure they have governments-in-waiting for Syria, Iran and Russia.
      But any tactic only works so many times and I am sure the Russians and Chinese are only all-too-well aware of what is going on.

  • Zoe

    Edward you are so right. These plans were drawn up years ago, before Afghanistan invasion. They have to stop and think what did they achieve? except eroding any goodwill amongs people. Politicians are fogetting we live in a different era, with fast communications and exchanges. Judging from weekly demonstration the Egyptian spring is not even started yet, if USA think they can keep their puppet government running the countries, well they better think again. Do they really think if they attack Iran, they can install their own servants there? highly unlikely!

  • Eddie

    If not Western dominance, what? Nazism, Communism, Fascism, terrorism, caliphate. I think not.

    • Zoe

      that is the colonial mentality. Do the world needs dominance of one system or another? Let every nation decide for themselves, and lets get rid of UN and create a more just organization.

  • flint

    iran with a nuke = hamas and others with a nuke.yes iran will be attack.
    sadly this could have been avoided in the early ninties, many people saw a window in the 90′s to have open talks that would have resulted in a good understanding of each others request , but bush and cheney sealed the fate of iran. who will attack first is the big question ? however it starts it will not be a long drawn out theater. no nation building. it will happen without warning.

  • angry vietnamese

    The only way to have peace in this world is for the US/EU/Israel to experience fire and brimstone on it’s soil. Only when it’s citizens actually experience exploding bombs coming from nowhere and see their loved ones dying in bits and pieces, when they see their lifestyle crumbling, only then will they pressure their government to stop creating enemies and starting wars.

    • Paul M.

      “AV”. You are absolutely right. These poeople saying it is the best option have no experience or even vague idea about the real horror and on-going effects of war.