|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cover story of government mouthpiece Time Magazine's September 25 issue "What Would War Look Like?" is virtually promising the bombing of Iran. MIM advises readers to discount the story only because it could underestimate what imperialists plan on account of elections.
For every president of the television era, the strategy after early September but before election day in November is not to have major new international events if possible. The strategy is to make things look like they are under control and thus stay on messages that Amerikkkans understand concretely without reference to countries and people they do not know.
For the average Amerikkkan, bombing Iran is a comforting thought, one where no troops occupy a country and face a long battle. Bombing has a sterile image in the Amerikkkan mass murdering psyche. It helps Bush right now along with the decline in gas prices by 20% to a third.
Bush would like an endorsement of sorts from Osama Bin Laden, but it would be unusual for a president to seek a military confrontation in days leading up to elections. Bush has ordered Navy ships to face Iran, including territory where Iranians could likely blow up the ships according to the Nation Magazine.
The Nation Magazine gives good petty-bourgeois reasons to oppose the war. Iran could retaliate in Lebanon, in Iran itself by shutting down oil and by closing the Persian Gulf. Oddly, the attack on Iran would also possibly generate an exit from Iraq, because it is unlikely that Amerikans could afford to stay there any longer after upsetting Iran. Nonetheless, this is all very predictably costly, no matter what the long-range outcome.
The imperialists are all foaming about Iran's tough stance against I$rael; yet now we learn from Pakistan that Iran is not the only one to take such a stance. The united $tates itself threatened to bomb Pakistan "into the Stone Age." Now these imperialists have no basis for trying to appear high-minded in opposition to Iran's stand against I$rael. The United $tates has said worse to Pakistan than what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said about I$rael.
MIM is opposed to this war and stands with Iran's allies in Lebanon. Hezbollah held a defiant rally of 800,000 people September 22nd in Beirut to celebrate their victory over I$rael. That's pretty amazing considering that Lebanon has less than 4 million people total according to the CIA.
We wish that Maoists had led the battle. They did not, so we have to give credit where credit is due. Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, plans to attack Iran and now we hear that Pakistan received threats of an attack--MIM's Central Committee was right when it said May 17: "Overall, MIM finds the likelihood of anti-Islamic war higher than the likelihood of imperialist occupation of countries of our ex-comrades. The Islamic countries are at this moment tying down more imperialist troops than our ex-comrades are. Some of our ex-comrades have tolerated a party that formed on the basis of opposition to seeing the principal contradiction between imperialism and the oppressed nations. These ex- comrades stupidly tied themselves to a tool of anti-Islamic chauvinism."
Note:
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/09/22/lebanon.rally.reut/