Will you be offered a choice without an alternative
By now you must know that the Republican Party has been taken over by the neo-crazies,
hell-bent on establishing American Hegemony in the Middle East on behalf of
our "allies." But maybe you didn't realize that the Democratic Party
was taken over by the neo-crazies long ago.
How else to explain the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 – passed at the urging
of a Democrat president by overwhelming majorities of both parties –
which "expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of
the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi
regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that
How else to explain the passage in 2002 by overwhelming majorities of both
parties the "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of U.S. Armed Forces
How else to explain the passage this summer by overwhelming majorities of both
parties "A Concurrent Resolution Expressing the Concern of Congress over
Iran's Development of the Means to Produce Nuclear Weapons," which – among
things – condemns "the failure of the government of Iran for nearly two
decades to report material, facilities, and activities to the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in contravention of its obligations under its Safeguards
How else to explain a speech – excerpted below – made in New York City by
President Clinton to the World Jewish Congress on June 30, 1995?
"We have strengthened our efforts to act against groups like Hamas
and Hezbollah, and we are encouraging Chairman Arafat in his efforts to crack
down on arrests and prosecute those extremists who resort to violence.
"But individuals and extremist groups are not the only threat. Israel
shares the lands of the Middle East with nations who still seek to destroy the
peace – nations like Iran and Iraq and Libya.
"They aim to destabilize the region, they harbor terrorists within
their borders, they establish and support terrorist base camps in other lands,
they hunger for nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.
"Iran has presented a particular problem to the peace process of the
peoples of the Middle East. From the beginning of our administration, we have
moved to counter Iran's support of international terrorism, and in particular
its backing for violent opponents of peace in the Middle East.
"At the same time, we have tried to stop its quest to acquire weapons
of mass destruction, which would make it a threat not only to its neighbors,
but to the entire region and the world.
"The most recent reports of Russia's agreement to sell gas centrifuge
equipment to the Iranians and to train nuclear technicians from Tehran are disturbing
to me. Because Iran has more than enough oil to supply its energy needs, we
must assume that it seeks this technology in order to develop its capacity to
build nuclear weapons.
"The United States has an overwhelming interest in fighting the spread
of these weapons. And Russia, as a neighbor of Iran, has a particular interest
in the same goal. If Russia goes forward with the sale of nuclear reactors,
it will only undermine that objective. We have strenuously urged the Russians
to reverse these decisions, and I will make that case directly to President
Yeltsin when I visit Moscow in just a few days.
"I speak especially to you when I say that many people have argued
passionately that the best route to change Iranian behavior is by engaging the
country. Unfortunately, there is no evidence to support that argument.
"It would be wrong to do nothing. It would be wrong to do nothing as
Iran continues its pursuit of nuclear weapons. It would be wrong to stand pat
in the face of overwhelming evidence of Tehran's support for terrorism that
would threaten the dawn of peace."
If you substitute "Putin" for "Yeltsin," it's a speech
that Bush could easily give today. It is easy to imagine Bush saying that "engaging"
Iran isn't working.
Of course, engagement is working in Iran, just as it was working in
Iran has signed an Additional Protocol to its Safeguards Agreement, giving
the IAEA unrestricted access. The result? After months of searching, the IAEA
has found no "indication" that the Iranians have a nuclear weapons
Nevertheless, President Bush has just announced the sale of 500 "bunker-buster"
bombs to the Israelis. Will President Kerry allow the Israelis to use them?