We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran!

[miamike]

Funny how people say the Iraq conflict was a false flag war, Iran was the one claiming Iraq had chemical weapons. Iraq used nerve gas against Iran civilians and Iran celebrated the removal of the mass murder named Sadam.

Now if Iran quit pledging to destroy Israel every other day other countries would have no problem in an non nuke country like Iran. Til they get nukes anyways, that might mean the end of Europe and the rest of the free world.

[Daniel Alpha]

Historically, over probably the last two centuries, Iran has not attacked any other nation - - Maybe longer. I understood Israel's fear of Iraq, because Saddam constantly fired missiles into their confiscated territory and acted on his words. But to date, Iran has not attacked Israel directly. So, this panic attack over several mistranslated comments coming from the President of Iran is just a ruse.
In all honesty, taking a birds-eye look at things, Israel has been the aggressor against Iran, covertly and overtly ... and last I checked, they are the one's with nuclear weapons.

Mahmoud described Israel as a “fake regime and must be wiped off the map”.

He has called Zionists the most detested people in all humanity and called the Holocaust 'a myth.'

All these statements were heard around the world and don't you say here that he was misquoted.

What your dear president failed to mentioned was his disputed re-election in June 2009 when Iranian security forces crushed opposition protests, the internal political turmoil that has sharply diminished his power.

[Drunken Cat]

I'd rather stick to my "morals", as stupid as that may sound.

I am not voting. Not because of this article (it was brought to my attention after I determined I wouldn't vote), but this article sums up some of my views on the matter pretty well.

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publis...le_65061.shtml

United States
Don’t Vote For Evil. A Case for
Abstention in the US Presidential Election
Printer friendly page Print This ShareThis
By Paul Craig Roberts. Axis of Logic commentary
PCR
Monday, Oct 15, 2012

Editor's Comment: Since we first launched Axis of Logic, we have consistently boycotted every national election in the United States. Some have reacted, citing that their "vote is sacred." Others have responded by saying that the electorate should vote for alternative candidates outside the two leading parties and still others have argued that voters should "write in" their choices. Voting for the "lessor of two evils," a cynical approach often promoted by the government/corporate media, is anything but a "sacred" action. Moreover, anyone voting for a candidate outside the two political parties knows deep down that their vote is meaningless, exept for lending weight to a corrupt process. We think that any of these alternatives still amounts to a vote for a corrupt, undemocratic system, allowing the US their false claim of being a democracy. Abstention is the most powerful act afforded to a US citizen within their electoral system - and it is powerful. It demonstrates the people's lack of confidence in the existing leadership and in the system in which they are trapped. The last thing the US government wants in any election is for the masses to stay home on election day, exposing the US corporate dictatorship for what it is.

- Les Blough, a Non-Voting US Citizen



Back during the George W. Bush neocon regime, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela in his UN speech summed up George W. Bush for the world. I am quoting Chavez from memory, not verbatim. “Yesterday standing at this same podium was Satan himself, speaking as if he owned the world. You can still smell the sulfur.”

Chavez is one of the American right-wing’s favorite bogyman, because Chavez helps the people instead of bleeding them for the rich, which is Washington’s way. While Washington has driven all but the one percent into the ground, Chavez cut poverty in half, doubled university enrollment, and provided health care and old age pensions to millions of Venezuelans for the first time.

Little wonder he was elected to a fourth term as president despite the many millions of dollars Washington poured into the election campaign of Chavez’s opponent.

While Washington and the EU preach neoliberalism--the supremacy of capital over labor--South American politicians who reject Washington’s way are being elected and reelected in Venezuela, Ecuador, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Bolivia.

It was the Ecuadoran government, not Washington, that had the moral integrity to grant political asylum to WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange. The only time Washington grants asylum is when it can be used to embarrass an opponent.

In contrast to the leadership that is emerging in South America as more governments there reject the traditional hegemony of Washington, the US political elite, whether Republican or Democrat, are aligned with the rich against the American people.

The Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, has promised to cut taxes on the rich, taxes which are already rock bottom, to block any regulation of the gangsters in the financial arena, and to privatize Social Security and Medicare.

Privatizing Social Security and Medicare means to divert the people’s tax dollars to the profits of private corporations. In Republican hands, privatization means only one thing: to cut the people’s benefits and to use the people’s tax dollars to increase the profits in the private sector. Romney’s policy is just another policy that sacrifices the people to the one percent.

Unfortunately, the Democrats, if a lessor evil, are still an evil. There is no reason to vote for the reelection of a president who codified into law the Bush regime’s destruction of the US Constitution, who went one step further and asserted the power to murder US citizens without due process of law, and who has done nothing to stop the exploitation of the American people by the one percent.

As Gerald Celente says in the Autumn Issue of the Trends Journal, when confronted with the choice between two evils, you don’t vote for the lessor evil. You boycott the election and do not vote. “Lessor or greater, evil is evil.”

If Americans had any sense, no one would vote in the November election. Whoever wins the November election, it will be a defeat for the American people.

An Obama or Romney win stands in stark contrast with Chavez’s win. Here is how Lula da Silva, the popular former president of Brazil summed it up: “Chavez’s victory is a victory for all the peoples of Latin America. It is another blow against imperialism.” Washington, making full use of the almighty dollar, was unable to buy the Venezuelan election.

How will a Romney or Obama win be summed up? The answer will be in terms of which candidate is best for Israel’s interest; which is best for Wall Street’s interest, which is best for agribusiness; which is most likely to attack Iran; which is most likely to subject economic and war protesters to indefinite detention as domestic extremists.

The only people who will benefit from the election of either Romney or Obama are those associated with the private oligarchies that rule America.

[Drunken Cat]

This is obviously an Alex Jones-ian Inside job. This guy is one of Alex Jones' shills. He planted him to say this so that he can run a story about it and get more ratings.

Pictures of Alex Jones and this guy having dinner coming.

Now that is some conspiracy theory.

[Drunken Cat]

War would suck. But a nuclear Iran would be dangerous across the entire GME.

Decisions, decisions.

Iran is a signatory to the IAEA.

I am opposed to nuclear power, period. But based on the conventions of international law, Iran is permitted to develop nuclear energy capabilities.

There has been no definitive evidence that Iran is even pursuing a nuclear weapon. Until such evidence is presented, people who would generally be opposed of war merely for the sake of war have no ground to stand on if they advocate war with Iran.

[Drunken Cat]

No they wouldn't. They would not be stupid enough to use them if they got them. They want them for nuclear deterrence.

Plus, who are we to tell them what they can and can't have? We're not the world's police. Plus, let's not forget that only one nation in the history of mankind has ever used a nuclear weapon.

Well said, and my views are the same.

But people who argue that war is better than a nuclear armed Iran in fact have no evidence that Iran is even developing a nuclear weapon.

[Drunken Cat]

For conspiracy nuts, what is the reason Israel wants to instigate a war?

It's not an exercise in conspiracy-theorizing. Rather, the correct phraseology would be engagement in analysis of geopolitics and international relations.

The reasoning in my estimation has to do with the state of the balance of power in the region. Israel is the only nuclear power in the region. Nuclear weapons are political tools mostly. If we assume that Iran is developing nuclear technology (the manufacture of a weapon not being a necessary assumption--nuclear energy technology transfers into military capacity as well, see Japan which is considered to be a 'de facto nuclear power' due to the advanced state of nuclear technological development in this country), it is a threat to Israel's geopolitical superiority in the region.

[Drunken Cat]

For what?? May I ask ....

Iran has done nothing but attempt to bring nuclear power to their nation. Sure, it can be stated that they sponsor terrorism through Hamas, but so does Israel through the Mossad, so does the US through the CIA, so does a lot of other countries.

What is the REAL justification for a war with Iran???



This war, when it happens won't be because of some dated nuclear program or Iran's threats towards Israel.

* Iran is moving off the Petro-Dollar and will soon trade oil for gold. This will diminish the dollar's value, since the Petro-dollar based oil trade is the only thing of value sustaining it.
* Iran is the last major oil producing nation that is not under the influence of the US
* Iran has close ties with both Russia and China.

These are also good points. Iran has been threatening to do this (ditch the dollar) for years already. I seem to recall Saddam Hussein threatening to do the same once upon a time, if I'm not mistaken. Of course, all of these factors add up.

[Drunken Cat]

Its more than disturbing, its totally outrageous on several levels. This blood-thirst for war against Iran is completely unnecessary, and unjustified.

Can the US realistically afford another War?

This is total madness!!

The economy is depressed to the point where many if not all economists are predicting a total collapse within a year.
The dollar is devalued to the point where its not even worth the paper its printed on.
We still have active troop involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, that is costing TRILLIONS the US do not have. On top of this, the US is almost 17 TRILLION in debt which is 101.5% of its GDP -- This alone makes an economic collapse almost guaranteed.
A instigated war with Iran will most likely involve both Russia and China, who realize that the US is positioning themselves to dominate control of the oil reserves in the Middle East. And they have explicitly stated that they will not sit idly by and let this take place. They have been ramping up their military and investing billions upon billions, getting ready for the seemingly inevitable.
And last, but certainly not least, Israel is actively trying to instigate this war, knowing full well that US soldiers will be the first to get the call to lay down their lives for this very destructive, very useless effort.

I state again: This is total madness!!

Its like this total loss of reason by world powers was preordained and they have no choice but to fulfill their destiny of complete and utter self-destruction.

I'm not sure that "most economists are predicting a total collapse" is an accurate statement. But that said, I wouldn't necessarily discount those who have.

But mostly, I agree with these comments.

[Drunken Cat]

Funny how people say the Iraq conflict was a false flag war, Iran was the one claiming Iraq had chemical weapons. Iraq used nerve gas against Iran civilians and Iran celebrated the removal of the mass murder named Sadam.

Now if Iran quit pledging to destroy Israel every other day other countries would have no problem in an non nuke country like Iran. Til they get nukes anyways, that might mean the end of Europe and the rest of the free world.

In the words of Chalmers Johnson:

"We know they had chemical weapons, because we have the receipts."

That being said, during the buildup to the war, UN weapons inspectors said they didn't have them, and it seems today that indeed they didn't, as none were ever found. It is certainly conceivable that they destroyed them. But, the excuse of chemical weapons as the justification was clearly a complete farce. It's laughable that people still repeat that line.