Saturday, December 23, 2006

The UN Security Council on Iran: We Want Your Oil and Energy Dependence

"Arabs may have the oil, but we have the matches."

--Ariel Sharon, to Robert Friedman, early-1990s.


NEW YORK CITY--So, the UN has been pressured by the US State Department into beginning a new-round of sanctions against Iran because of their uranium-enrichment program. No wanting to look like anything other than a hypocrite, President Bush authorizes the a nuclear-cooperation program with India. This alone will surely enrage the political-hierarchy in Pakistan (concentrated in their intelligence community), and numerous other Arab states who also have nuclear club aspirations. Then, there's Israel, who likely possess a minimum of 50 nuclear warheads. This toleration will only embolden additional-players on the world stage, and it is an irritation that speaks more of power-relationships than actual diplomatic pragmatism.

It's a strange idea that the Bush administration could even field more troops, so Israel must fit-in here somewhere. Still, the call for a surge in troops into Iraq has to be seen within this context. But what of Russia? What of Turkey or Pakistan? How will they react to either an invasion or an attack on Iran? Russian economic-ties to Iran are well-known, and her neighbors will surely be alarmed by any open-provocations from the West. But, while the resolution bars any interventions, this wouldn't stop the United States and her allies from military-actions: it didn't in the case of Afghanistan or Iraq, so why would the UN be able to stop them now? However, Russia has chimed-in:

Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, who was successful in watering down parts of the resolution, emphasized that the resolution did not permit any use of force. Moscow's earlier hesitation over supporting the resolution prompted a phone call on Saturday from President George W. Bush [Ed.-an architect of all of this.] to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who had reviewed the resolution until the last minute following two months of tough negotiations. Russia is building an $800 million light-water reactor for Tehran that is exempted in the resolution. (Reuters, 12.23.2006)

The vote was unanimous, 15-0--a margin the US is used-to, just in-reverse. This is the usual source of anti-UN sentiment in the United States, including in the far-right peanut gallery: if the US doesn't get it way, it's a threat of world-domination by the UN, a sentiment without any credibility. On one-end of this pseudo-argument, the UN is omnipotent, on the other it's "useless." The adherents to this argument aren't worthy of any recognition, and can be viewed as ultranationalist and on the margins of reasonable-debate. Kooks. The sanctions are a ban on basic imports, especially of materials that could be used in a nuclear program. What is strange is the emphasis on even civilian-use of uranium-enrichment. Certainly, some fissile-materials could be misused and conveyed to questionable-elements, and the State Department knows this all-too-well.

America is the Pandora's box of proliferation, particularly in the case of Israel, though espionage between allies is another factor. If the American message on proliferation is anything, it's this: don't get-caught while you're developing you nuclear programs. After a successful-completion, we cannot control you or your ability to develop further. The problem is, this gives any future military-strikes by the US and Israel a sheen of legitimacy, a problem for those who wish for stability in the region. It seems China wants that oil too, and so do a lot of other consumer nations. The catch (-22) is that American troops will probably be the proxy-forces for all of these economic interests:

The Selective Service System is planning a comprehensive test of the military draft machinery, which hasn't been run since 1998. The agency is not gearing up for a draft, an agency official said Thursday. The test itself would not likely [Ed.-barring an urgent need to.] occur until 2009. Meanwhile, the secretary for Veterans Affairs said that "society would benefit" if the U.S. were to bring back the draft and that it shouldn't have any loopholes for anyone who is called to serve. (AP, 12.22.2006)

Why was the Secretary of Veterans Affairs told to recant his previous-statement? Because perceptions have to be molded by Karl Rove and others who support PNAC war-aims in Congress and elsewhere. Merry Christmas early! Moloch wants your kids. Will you hand them over? I wouldn't for the upcoming-conflagration all the global elites have planned for us. At least the rich-kids will be going too; time to hammer-shut those deferments. Still want war? OK, you and your kids can go. Ah, I see you aren't so gung-ho now. You can go to the daily hour-of-hate meeting now.


Israel's WMDs:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/STE203A.html

The BBC's Take on "the death of the neo-con dream" (I'm skeptical):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6189793.stm

Selective Service (Happy Talk!):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/21/AR2006122101327_pf.html

The UN Votes to Sanction Iran:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-iran-nuclear.html?hp&ex=1166936400&en=6d6796bc114418c9&ei=5094&partner=homepage