Current Events November 2007

The Times on October 17, 2007 printed an article by Tony Halpin headlined:

Vladimir Putin pledges to complete Iranian nuclear reactor

The article begins:

President Putin forged an alliance with Iran yesterday against any military action by the West and pledged to complete the controversial Iranian nuclear power plant at Bushehr.

A summit of Caspian Sea nations in Tehran agreed to bar foreign states from using their territory for military strikes against a member country. Mr. Putin, the first Kremlin leader to visit Iran since the Second World War, insisted that the use of force was unacceptable.

“It is important . . . that we not only not use any kind of force but also do not even think about the possibility of using force,” he told the leaders of Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan.

The declaration of the five states did not specify a particular threat. Rumours have long circulated, however, that the US is seeking Azerbaijan’s permission to use airfields for possible military action to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb.

In this context, it is important to remember that the US and Israel have vowed that Iran will not be allowed to make a nuclear weapon or even to possess the technology that would allow it to do so. If necessary, the US will take military action, and in June 2007, all the leading candidates for US president left the nuclear option on the table. Thus, with the US and Iran on a possibly nuclear collision course, Russia is on Iran’s side.
On September 28, Vladimir Isachenkov wrote for the Associated Press an article entitled:

Russia Warns Against Space Weapons

That article begins:

The chief of Russia's space forces on Thursday said Moscow would have to retaliate if others deploy weapons in space — a stern warning to the United States.

While Col.-Gen. Vladimir Popovkin did not name any specific country, he was clearly referring to U.S. plans for space-based weapons, which the Kremlin had vociferously opposed.

"We don't want to wage a war in space, we don't want to gain dominance in space, but we won't allow any other nation to dominate space," Popovkin said in televised remarks. "If any country deploys weapons in space, then the laws of warfare are such that retaliatory weapons are certain to appear."

President Vladimir Putin has criticized U.S. plans for space-based weapons, saying it could trigger a new arms race.

When China tested an anti-satellite missile in January, Putin said that the move was a response to U.S. plans for space-based weapons.

Russia and China have strongly pushed for an international agreement banning space weapons, but their proposals have been stymied by the United States.

In this context it is important to remember that the US has stated unequivocally that: “The two principal themes of the USSPACECOM Vision are dominating the space medium and integrating space power throughout military operations. Today, the United States is the preeminent military space power. Our Vision is one of maintaining that preeminence—providing a solid foundation for our national security.”

Another collision course:  Almost 20 years after the end of the Cold War, are the US and Russia squaring off for another Cold War? What will happen if the US actually bombs Iran?

A few months ago, I spoke to Mohsen Talaei, Iranian ambassador to Japan. I asked him what he thought about the possibility that the US might bomb Iran. He was not worried, saying, in effect, “Even the US would not be that stupid. The US has made many mistakes lately, and they know it. Bombing Iran would be a mistake from which they would not be able to recover.” He was referring to the economic cost of the turmoil that would ensue.

As I have reported previously, all the Iranians I have spoken to hold this opinion. I am not so sanguine. Most of the men who now control the US are directly related to the war and weapons industry. Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, one of the primary beneficiaries of the Iraq War. That war and those who gave it to us are profoundly unpopular now, so they will lose power in November 2008, and they know it. Given that certainty, what is the best way to ensure that, no matter who the next president is, the military industrial complex will continue to dominate the scene and make plenty of money? Use a nuclear weapon in Iran.

If a nuclear weapon is used in Iran, some sort of nuclear terrorist action will come back to the US, and the “endless war” will be ensured. I have reported previously on Al Qaeda’s “American Hiroshima” plan to kill 4 million Americans. If they come even close to killing that many Americans, the US will respond with nuclear weapons. Violence will multiply and escalate, and all hopes of graduating from the war culture to a culture of peace will go up in radioactive smoke. How do I know this? Because of Paul Tibbets.

Tibbets, who died on November 1, was the man who named a bomber for his mother (Enola Gay) and used that bomber to drop an atomic bomb whimsically named “Little Boy” on Hiroshima. When Tibbets met Akihiro Takahashi, an A-bomb survivor who was at the time director of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, he listened to Takahashi’s terrifying story about surviving the bombing. He looked at Takahashi’s deformed face and arm and, with hard-headed honesty declared, “If ordered, I would do it again tomorrow.”

I don’t mention this to criticize Tibbets’ honesty or devotion to his superiors. I am criticizing his cruelty. An interview Tibbets did with Studs Terkel reveals with crystal clarity the horror of war-culture thinking.

Studs Terkel: One big question.  Since September 11, what are your thoughts?  People talk about nukes, the hydrogen bomb.

Paul Tibbets: Let's put it this way.  I don't know any more about these terrorists than you do, I know nothing.  When they bombed the Trade Center I couldn't believe what was going on.  We've fought many enemies at different times.  But we knew who they were and where they were. These people, we don't know who they are or where they are. That's the point that bothers me.  Because they're gonna strike again, I'll put money on it.  And it's going to be damned dramatic.  But they're gonna do it in their own sweet time.  We've got to get into a position where we  can kill the bastards.  None of this business of taking them to court, the hell with that.  I wouldn't waste five seconds on them.

Studs Terkel: What about the bomb?  Einstein said the world has changed since the atom was split.

Paul Tibbets: That's right.  It has changed.

Studs Terkel: And Oppenheimer knew that.

Paul Tibbets: Oppenheimer is dead.  He did something for the world and people don't understand.  And it is a free world.

Studs Terkel: One last thing, when you hear people say, "Let's nuke 'em," "Let's nuke these people," what do you think?

Paul Tibbets: Oh, I wouldn't hesitate if I had the choice. I'd wipe 'em out.  You're gonna kill innocent people at the same time, but we've never fought a damn war anywhere in the world where they didn't kill innocent people.  If the newspapers would just cut out the shit: "You've killed so many civilians." That's their tough luck for being there.

For Tibbets and most warriors, the top priority is to kill the enemy. To hell with the law, courts and any civilians who get in the way. Paul Tibbets was an honest, open, honorable man who loved his country, obeyed orders, and did his duty as he saw it. He was also an excellent pilot and leader of men. However, the war-culture attitude he expresses so openly must die. If he and his atavistic, barbaric ilk continue to dominate our world, they will lead us to a paroxysm of violence, horror and misery that will make World War II look like a stroll in the park. Let’s hope more peaceful heads prevail.