Iran: Good Cop, Bad Cop

 

 

"Military Action Against Iran Still Possible, Says Israeli Official »

AP  |  ALON BERNSTEIN  |  April 06, 2015 at 01:42 PM

JERUSALEM (AP) — A senior Israeli government minister on Monday warned that taking military action against Iran's nuclear program is still an option — despite last week's framework deal between world powers and the Islamic Republic."

With the framework agreement reached between the U.S., et al, and Iran regarding nuclear weapons, is it possible that there has been set in motion a good cop, bad cop scenario between the U.S., Israel, and Iran? Is it possible that either overtly, or covertly, a carrot and stick script is being played out so that Iran does, indeed, keep to any agreements reached?

Despite the public rift between President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is this really part of the plan, and will GOP meddling in the process possibly mess up the works? Just thinking out loud.

False Hope or a Changing World?

At this point it would appear that the U.S. will not bomb Syria. And today, Iran promises it will never build a nuclear weapon. There is no saber rattling in Israel. China is quiet with its demands in Asia.  And, while Putin is a loose screw, there are no current threats from Russia. Is this a world moving toward peace? A sign that perhaps humanity is turning a corner?

Then we have Republicans who really seem to have it in for the sick, elderly, and the hungry. Businesses are raking in the cash, banks are whistling Dixie, all the while the middle class is shrinking and the poor are getting poorer.

Certainly these are interesting times; a period of transition. The environment is on a precipice, and yet we have the technology to alter its course. There is feast and famine; abundance and perceived scarcity; war and rumors of peace.

If there was ever a time to try to influence decisions, this would be it.

IS IRAN PAYING HAMAS TO GET ISRAEL OFF THEIR BACKS?

We know that Hamas used Iranian rockets to strike Tel Aviv and that Iran is supplying arms to Islamic militants. Given that life is a low valued commodity in the Middle East, I believe that Iran is paying Hamas to strike Israel in order to give Iran more time to develop its nuclear capability, or, at least, to further delay any Israeli assault on the Iranian nuclear program. Whatever Israel has to use to defend itself will temporarily deplete some of its defensive munitions and may forestall any near term action against Iran.

It would also not be surprising that arms dealers are fueling the fires as they will gain massive profits from this conflict. Further, if a full blown war erupts, there will be a lot less attention on the global economic crisis, climate change and things like regulatory reforms. Yes, this is a conspiracy theory, but analyze the facts and decode for yourself.

IRAN, ISRAEL, SOLAR AND MORE

Azerbaijan grants Israel right to use bases. What do you thinks that's about?

China watches US military

The winds of war are but a breeze--at the moment. But with the way things are going, they could become a maelstrom. If you can visualize peace, please do so now, and ever day!

A TIME TO RANT

Time to rant a little!
Why is it that Congress can give banks $800 billion in only a few days but then take months to help people get health care? Our insurance is through my job. However, I will have to work 8 years beyond my retirement age to keep my wife insured-she is 8 years younger. I will have to wait until she can get medicare. Sorry, that is wrong. We can give OUR money to banks, who then give out bonuses but we can't provide an alternate insurance program that ensures all are covered? I am not an avid supporter of big government, but health care is not an option.

We have totally blown our chance to alter climate shift. It is always about money. Yup, some inroads are being made but it is too slow and too little. Who cares about why, the fact is that it is happening now. get off the blame kick and get to work at solutions-now. WE DO NOT have 30 years! The tipping point has or is near being reached. My God people, put the money into clean energy now and create millions of jobs. It is bs that it cannot be done. There are now climate refugees. What will happen in a couple of years? Are we planning for the disaster? Well, if Katrina is any indication, you best be relying on yourself. When it hits, it will hit hard and fast.

Israel need to back off this whole settlement thing. Perhaps the divisions are so deep there will never be peace-but we will not know unless Israel ends the West bank issue and stops new settlements. if that does not help, then the terrorists will be exposed for what they are and we can think again.

North Korea-shut them down.
Iran-power to the people!

if you think that the economy is getting better, think again. We have just seen the tip of the iceberg. It has a fundamental flaw that money will just not fix. We can no longer rely on wasteful consumer spending and it will never-good thing-go back the way it was.

These are just a few rants on topics that have been eating at the mind. Be prepared, the rough ride has not even started yet.

GUNS FOR PEACE?

More weapons will help bring peace? When in the course of human history has building stocks of weapons ever led to a more peaceful world? The recent announcement by U.S. Secretary of State Rice to send more military aid to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Middle Eastern countries defies all logic and reason.
Our growing fear of Iran is used as the excuse to send more than $50 billion in military assistance and weapons in order to “stabilize” Iraq. They say that if we bolster the forces of moderation in the region that it will serve as a hedge against al Qaeda and Hezbollah. One cannot ask the obvious question as to where these more militant groups get their weapons and what is to prevent them from getting even more?

If history is any lesson this move must be labeled absurd. We gave the Taliban weapons to fight the former Soviet Union. We gave weapons to Panama’s Noriega. Many U.S weapons are killing people in Darfur. Probably half of the arms in Africa are American made. What ever happened to the weapons we gave to the former Shah of Iran? The build up of weapons has never, in the long term, stabilized any place on the planet.

Iran is not particularly happy over the weapons increase and Israel, even though their military assistance from the U.S. will reach record numbers, is not particularly thrilled with the arms deals either. What is to prevent any of the nations to which weapons are being given from turning those weapons on the U.S.? Will the Saudi Monarchy last forever? Is Egypt really that politically stable? It would seem a much wiser course of action to try to eliminate the shipment of all arms to the Middle East rather then to add more ammunition, literally, to the most politically unstable place on the planet.

Much of the weapons package must be approved by the U.S. Congress. It will certainly be interesting to see the reaction from this Democrat controlled institution. Will they buy into the Bush Administration approach of guns, guns and more guns? Is it even remotely possible that the Congress might decide to use funding that would go to the crazed Middle East to help the victims from Hurricane Katrina? Victims that are little better off than they were several years ago. Instead of guns, is the Congress willing to invest in food aid, housing, better jobs and health care for all? How about using some of that money towards improving our capability to respond to future environmental disasters? In my new book, RAPING LOUISIANA: A DIARY OF DECEIT (to be released by Cambridge Books late fall), a first hand account is given of the overall government ineptitude in handling responses to large scale catastrophes. Given now accepted climate change scenarios, can any of this money for more bombs and missiles be used instead to reduce greenhouse gasses and support non-polluting and renewable energy?

The end result of building and supplying more weapons has historically been the use of those weapons. Oftentimes, they are used against the supplier. If Congress approves all of these arms deals, then perhaps we deserve the fruits of our labor.

PRESIDENT BUSH'S POLICIES OF ALIENATION

What is wrong with President Bush? Does he want his legacy to be “the man that rekindled the cold war?” According to Vladimir Putin the Russian test-firing of new missiles was in response to the U.S. plans to build missile defense sites across Eastern Europe. Why would we do that? What is the secret Bush agenda?

According to White house officials the purpose of the missile defense system in Eastern Europe is to defend the area against rogue states such as Iran and North Korea. I am no military strategists but this makes no sense. If North Korea were to launch missiles at the U.S. why would they send them over China, across Russia, over Europe and across the Atlantic to the U.S.? Do they even have the capability to do that? Would it not make more sense to shoot them at Hawaii or California? They are a lot closer.

The same goes for Iran. If the shortest distance for a missile to fly is a straight line, I do not think that they would first go over Poland to reach the U.S. Again, do they have ICBMs? And, for the sake of argument, why does the U.S. have to defend Eastern Europe? If they are so concerned about Iran, which any intelligent being would doubt, then let them do something about it. Certainly we are a member of NATO but we simply cannot continue to put more bases and more missiles around the globe because we fear Iran and North Korea.
According to a May 31st AP report,
“He (Putin) assailed the United States and other members for failing to ratify an amended version of the 1990 Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which limits the deployment of heavy non-nuclear weapons around the continent.
"We have signed and ratified the CFE and are fully implementing it. We have pulled out all our heavy weapons from the European part of Russia to (locations) behind the Ural Mountains and cut our military by 300,000 men," Putin said.
"And what about our partners? They are filling Eastern Europe with new weapons. A new base in Bulgaria, another one in Romania, a (missile defense) site in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic," he said. "What we are supposed to do? We can't just sit back and look at that."
Putin and other Russian officials have repeatedly rejected U.S. assurances that the planned missile defense installations are meant to counter a potential threat from nations such as Iran and pose no danger to Russia.”

I am not sure that I blame Putin. The reasoning put forward by the Bush Administration makes no sense. There is no doubt that Russia is beginning to flex its new economic and military muscles and that Putin is moving away from democratic reform towards greater central authority. He certainly deserves to be watched but it seems that we are purposely antagonizing Russia. The question is, why?

The Bush Administration has lost international credibility. We found that it lied about Iraq and now is offering lame reasons to further extend our military capabilities. Once this Presidency is over, it is anyone’s guess what other lies may come to light but one thing is certain, our foreign policy is one of alienation and not one of peace.