James Crossley's blog Contact: jgcrossley10 - AT - yahoo - DOT - co - DOT - uk

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

War against Iran?

With the recent controversy over Iran and the nuclear non-proliferation treaty the question of yet another war war has arisen. It has been denied by the UK and US govts but on past history why believe such a denial? Anyway, Dan Plesch in today's Guardian suggests that war with Iran might be a plausible scenario in the not-too-distant future. It's worth reading as it shows, I think, the possibility. It is also a warning against those who think the US can't or won't do it. Naturally if it does go ahead we can expect the usual pieties and lies from the US an UK as they continue to support all sorts of dictators and allow the selling of arms to all sorts of blacklisted countries. It would made the position of the UK interesting. While political support in the US for such an attack is certainly still possible, it is much less likely in the UK. It would be interesting to see how New Labour could (a) say 'no' to the US and (b) convince the British public. I might have added (c) persuade the Labour back benches but as too many of them have proven to be a load of gutless cowards when opposing things like the Iraq war in the name of party unity over morality then they'll come round. So what I am on about? If US says 'jump', the British public oppose it (along with the vast majority of the public in Europe, including Rumsfeld's New Europe), and New Labour decide they'll do it, what's the difference with the Iraq war?

5 Comments:

Blogger J. B. Hood said...

Not sure the US public would support it, actually. 39 percent approval for Bush right now. Not a lot of support for Iraq at all. Don't bank on seeing war in Iran anytime soon. Although keep in mind Bush Blair and friends have to act like they could invade, in order to get Iran to cooperate and cease and desist on her nuclear options.

October 18, 2005

 
Anonymous delilah said...

No diff - they'll do it, they don't care about the public (so what if a few less support it in the US? that won't stop them). The only diff is the name - The Fight for a Better World. Yeah right. Live, love and be merry, for tomorrow we might die. Or assassinate Bush and his poodle.

October 18, 2005

 
Blogger James Crossley said...

Yes, I think you might well be right there Jason on public support. But on political support (by which I mean congress and even media) then they probably would. There is also the possibility of people rallying around the wartime leader as the article said, something not quite as likely in the UK.

October 18, 2005

 
Blogger J. B. Hood said...

Again, this kind of support is possible at the outset of a conflict; it is no longer likely, however. The whole "rally 'round the leader" thing has expired.

Additionally, Congress is also sensitive about MONEY--and after Katrina, we are going to have to cut programs if we invade Iran--which Congress is absolutely not willing to do.

And Bush would need the support of Republican and Democratic moderates as before--something he cannot get, with elections coming up in '06 and '08 and a populace now heavily against war ANYWHERE. N.B. that when Bush tried to go into Iraq, they did it "on the cheap" (few men as possible) and look how that turned out. They know they can't try that in Iran, which has AT LEAST as many extremists as Iraq, and far fewer U.S. allies (Kurds, some Shiites).

Not to say Americans are really fond of Iran--and in truth, it is in terrible shape, a real hell hole, one step above Afghanistan ca. 2001. There's simply a lack of willpower to go invade.

October 18, 2005

 
Blogger James Crossley said...

I hope you're right Jason and I think there's a lot of strength to that logic.

October 19, 2005

 

Post a Comment

<< Home