Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Cheney, you want to talk domination?

Posted by Barry Lando at 8:59 AM on May 14, 2007.


Barry Lando: Let's see--name a nuclear power that is dominating the Middle East.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Did no one detect a hint of irony in the declaration over the weekend by Vice President, Dick Cheney that one of the major U.S. missions in the Gulf was to prevent the Middle East from being dominated by a nuclear armed Iran?

Granted Iran’s obtaining a nuclear weapon is a major concern, but if any nuclear power is dominating the Middle East these days it is not Iran.

It is not Iran who illegally invaded Iraq, has 150,000 plus troops in that country, and talks of withdrawal at the same time as it is building four sprawling military bases that are anything but temporary. It is not Iran that is attempting to shape a new petroleum law in Iraq that will allow its oil companies privileged access to one of the largest deposits of petroleum in the world. It is not Iran that has thousands more troops and special forces in Afghanistan attempting to smash the Taliban—while at the same time provoking a rising tide of revulsion by killing scores of civilians with their massive firepower.

It is not Iran that helped plan and carry out Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia earlier this year—overthrowing a militant Islamist regime on the charge that it was linked with Al Qaeda—a charge regime strongly denied—and created what the United Nations is now calling the most disastrous refugee crisis in the world today.

Nor does Iran have two massive aircraft carrier battle groups patrolling the Gulf—from the deck of one on Saturday Dick Cheney made a saber rattling speech against the government in Teheran—at the same time as the CIA spends tens of millions of dollars a year funding what one could only call “terrorist attacks” against the government of Iran—while other U.S. officials are maintain they want to open negotiations with Iran on its activities in Iraq.

(In an excellent article in April’s Foreign Affairs Ray Takeyh points out that such contradictory U.S. policy have hamstrung relations with Iran for years. )

Nor is it Iran who is offering to double the size of the Saudi Air Force with Iranian built jets. That was the offer made by Dick Cheney on Sunday. Those jets would operate out of the massive bases that the United States also constructed during the 1980’s in Saudi Arabia. Which makes one wonder whatever happened to those billions of dollars worth of now antiquated jets that the U.S. furnished to the Shah of Iran back when he was America’s designated policeman in the region.

It is not Iran that pours billions of dollars of aid each year to the corrupt and despotic Mubarak regime in Egypt—a government that was—like the Saudis and Kuwaitis– supposed to be part of the now very moribund U.S. push for democracy in the Middle East.

Nor is it Iran, but the U.S., who turned its back last summer long enough to allow Israel to lunch devastating raids into Lebanon, causing thousands of deaths and hundreds of millions of dollars in destruction to that country’s infrastructure in a failed attempt to root out Hezbollah.

Sure, Iranian leaders support Hezbollah. Sure they would like their country to become a nuclear state—like Israel, Pakistan and India, and the U.S.—whose military is currently “modernizing” its vast nuclear arsenal.

And certainly Iran would like to be a regional power. And why shouldn’t they? The United States has a certain taste for power itself—now spending more on arms than the rest of the world combined.

The way to deal with Iran is not with carrier strike forces, but with talk, serious negotiations with their leaders across the board on all the issues—as the Iranians themselves offered in 2003. That offer was rejected by the Bush White House, and there are different people in power in Teheran today. But the challenge remains. Attempting to resolve it with rockets and carrier task forces would be a disaster.

It’s time to sit down and start talking with the current leaders of Iran—not half heartedly, as seems to be the present attitude, but with the understanding that the regime in Teheran is not going to be overthrown, and that Iran does have a legitimate interest in affecting what goes on in the turbulent region around it

Digg!

Tagged as: iran, u.s., cheney

Barry Lando, a former 60 Minutes producer, is the author of "Web of Deceit: The History of Western Complicity in Iraq from Churchill to Kennedy to George W. Bush." He also blogs at Barrylando.com.


Washington Post Editorial Board Peddles 'U.S. Knows Best' Position on Iraq
The Washington Post still doesn't believe Maliki, Iraqi officials.
Post by Steve Benen. July 23, 2008.
Looking Back: Rumsfeld Praised Mass Murderers Over PM Maliki
Apparently the Bush Administration not liking Maliki isn't a new thing.
Post by Jonathan Schwarz. July 23, 2008.
Mukasey Asks Congress to Legitimize the "War on Terror"
"This is nothing but a transparent attempt to get bipartisan buy in, before the election, to the Global War on Terror."
Post by Digby. July 23, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Speaking of domination
Posted by: eddie torres on May 14, 2007 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is Dick Cheney trying to get as far away from DC as possible with this "you can't touch me, I'm surrounded by the Navy" ploy?

Which Republican lawmakers were Cheney and Rove blackmailing in the 108th and 109th Congresses?

Did some of the blackmailable activities occur in Cheney's "undisclosed" Pennsylvania bunker?

Are any of the phone numbers in the DC madam's records connected to GOP offices that have been using DoJ and White House email accounts?

Better have those sailors find an island in the middle of the Indian Ocean and drop you off, Dick.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Speaking of domination Posted by: vertical
Its not Iran...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on May 14, 2007 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... that is supposed.. by the Wolfowitz Doctrine (gee.. no wonder he got a job at the World Bunk... where he can keep an eye on many other nations and make sure they never emerge from poverty and debtorship to challenge US power in their regions)... to be the only real power in the whole world while all other nations are subservient.

Domination is right. Our government... and this has been going on for a long while... simply wants to dominate the entire world in one way or another to make itself the largest power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Its not Iran... Posted by: brasilaron
?
Posted by: sui_generis on May 14, 2007 11:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Um, I think a much greater and more apparent irony is that we accomplished EXACTLY THAT -- making Iran more powerful and dominant -- by toppling Iraq.

I mean, DUH. Why did they think we installed and allowed Hussein in the first place? Morons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why is the secular state of Isreal and Zionism never allowed to be questioned?
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on May 14, 2007 1:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Except in "radical" Islamic or "neo-nazi" circles (you will be promptly labeled as such if you question either of them)? There was, and still is to some degree, a HUGE debate and rancor between Jews about the Zionist belief and the foundation of the secular Isreali state. Even today there are a large number of Jews who are still against it. Never mentioned in the press, however. Why isn't the history of the debate and reasoning behind Zionism and Isreal over-looked and never mentioned? No one remembers the "stern gang" who bombed and killed British, Arab, and even Jewish people in Palestine in the zionist campaign of terror intending to get Britian to leave and allow Isreal. Nobody mentioned that certain Zionists actually supported Hitler's initial agititations thinking that it would help spur European Jews to 'return home' and set up a Zionist state (I won't go so far to claim that those Jews actually approved of 'final solution' or the extreme measures but only the initial phases.) Nobody mentions the secret Balfour declaration. Nobody mentions the debate between the United Nations over the founding of Israel. Nobody mentioned the European Jewish intellectuals and leaders who were against Isreali state. Nobody mentions that many true Orthodox Jews are against Isreal because it is a secular state and Isreal/Zion will only come about once the messiah appears. And so forth.......

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

frank67
Posted by: frank67 on May 14, 2007 3:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one in the US government ever questions anything the Israeli government does because the Palestinians are nothing but equivalent to our Native American Indians. You know the extermination of our "natives" was NEVER called genocide! Israel's extermination of Palestinians ISN'T called genocide either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Funny...
Posted by: undercover on May 17, 2007 5:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading the title and first 2 paragraphs, I was sure this was going to be an article about Israel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]