Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Well Said, Greenwald

Glenn Greenwald at Salon has posted an astute blog post about the myopia of those who have been beating the drum to go to war with Iran:

Much of the same faction now claiming such concern for the welfare of The Iranian People are the same people who have long been advocating a military attack on Iran and the dropping of large numbers of bombs on their country -- actions which would result in the slaughter of many of those very same Iranian People. During the presidential campaign, John McCain infamously sang about Bomb, Bomb, Bomb-ing Iran. The Wall St. Journal published a war screed from Commentary's Norman Podhoretz entitled "The Case for Bombing Iran," and following that, Podhoretz said in an interview that he "hopes and prays" that the U.S. "bombs the Iranians." John Bolton and Joe Lieberman advocated the same bombing campaign, while Bill Kristol -- with typical prescience -- hopefully suggested that Bush might bomb Iran if Obama were elected. Rudy Giuliani actually said he would be open to a first-strike nuclear attack on Iran in order to stop their nuclear program.

Imagine how many of the people protesting this week would be dead if any of these bombing advocates had their way -- just as those who paraded around (and still parade around) under the banner of Liberating the Iraqi People caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of them, at least. Hopefully, one of the principal benefits of the turmoil in Iran is that it humanizes whoever the latest Enemy is. Advocating a so-called "attack on Iran" or "bombing Iran" in fact means slaughtering huge numbers of the very same people who are on the streets of Tehran inspiring so many -- obliterating their homes and workplaces, destroying their communities, shattering the infrastructure of their society and their lives. The same is true every time we start mulling the prospect of attacking and bombing another country as though it's some abstract decision in a video game.

2 comments:

Larry said...

The "preemptive strike" theory is very dangerous in practice. Deciding where to draw the line is almost impossible. Defending yourself from imminent attack is justified, eliminating threats around the globe is not. Threat is in the mind of the beholder. I do not want Iran to have nuclear power, but bombing civilians does not seem the way to go about it.

Asinus Gravis said...

I remember it well, that line in the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus said be sure to hit the other guy before he can strike you first.

And I believe it was St. Paul who said that Jesus' followers were to carry a big stick and never miss getting in the first blow--just in case the other person might do you some physical injury.

It was St. Peter who famously said that when the Roman official draws back his sword hand against you, sucker punch him first, and then run like hell. God favors the fastest on his feet.

If you find any difficulty finding any of this in your Bible, you need to get the new American Patriots Bible put out by the Republican Christians of the USA.