Addict (drugaddict) wrote,
Addict
drugaddict

Paul Craig Roberts: "Bush Must Go" (COUNTERPUNCH)

TO: Distinguished Recipients
FM: John Whitbeck
Transmitted below is today's brutally honest analysis from Paul Craig
Roberts, who is unlikely to be returning to his prior job at the Wall
Street Journal editorial page.
If his continuing warnings about the coming attack on Iran are
repetitive, they deserve to be repeated, because the situation is
desperately serious. The 60-day time limit for Iran to suspend its
uranium enrichment program set forth in the recent (rather feeble) UN
Security Council resolution expires next month. Of course, Iran will not
have suspended its program by then. Everything will then be in place,
including a UN Resolution which, along with the "will of the
international community", can be cited as having been "defied" at the
same time that America's infinite "patience" can be cited as having been
"exhausted". (All the diplomatic efforts of recent years in relation to
Iran's "nuclear ambitions", to which the Europeans have incomprehensibly
lent themselves and their prestige, have never been intended to succeed
in accordance with their ostensible objective but, rather, to reach this
point, at which their failure could be used by Israel and the United
States as an excuse to justify and market war.)
My personal bet is that the air attack will be carried out by Israel,
with the United States pre-positioned to provide "defensive" naval
support in the Gulf, designed to discourage a vigorous Iranian
retaliation against America's friends in the region (who, Bush announced
on January 10, will be receiving Patriot missile batteries to ease their
nervousness) and, more importantly, to serve as a target for an Iranian
"attack", which could be either real or virtual (Tonkin Gulf-style). The
United States could then act "robustly" in "self-defense" in response to
the "unprovoked attack" on American forces going peacefully about their
business in international waters.
This division of labor has obvious domestic political advantages for the
Bush regime. If the United States were itself to bomb Iran, many members
of Congress, of both parties, as well as mainstream media, could be
expected to rise above the usual knee-jerk compulsion to rally around
the flag whenever the U.S. attacks another country and to severely
criticize the regime for launching yet another war of aggression while
the ongoing ones are still going rather badly. However, it is
inconceivable that more than a handful of members of Congress or media
outlets and commentators would dare to criticize anything that Israel
saw fit to do -- or to criticize the Bush regime for supporting Israel
or for responding however it saw fit to any attack (real or virtual) on
American forces.
Nevertheless, beyond American shores, this scenario is likely to prove
less clever from an Israeli-American standpoint. Thanks to the American
destruction of Iraq (and particularly after the obscene sectarian
lynching of the unlikeliest of "martyrs", Saddam Hussein), sectarian
hatred between Sunnis and Shias is on the verge of spreading beyond Iraq
and engulfing the entire region, which would be a dream come true for
the Israeli right and could even provide the long-awaited opportunity to
carry the Zionist project through to its logical conclusion by
completing the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. However, a
clearly coordinated Israeli/American attack on Iran would be highly
likely to produce a radical reversal of this trend, instantly uniting
the entire Muslim world in enraged solidarity against the
Israeli-American Empire.
Either way, there is a significant risk that the coming year will prove
extraordinarily ugly.
Under the "executive dictatorship" into which America's once admirable
system of government has degenerated, it is difficult to imagine what
anyone can do to stop the man whom Roberts calls the "insane war
criminal in the White House" from killing again. However, passive
resignation should not be a morally acceptable option.
-----------------------------------
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts01152007.html

*January 15, 2007*


 /Bush Must Go/


 Only Impeachment Can Stop Him

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

When are the American people and their representatives in Congress and
the military going to wake up and realize that the US has an insane war
criminal in the White House who is destroying all chances for peace in
the world and establishing a police state in the US?

Americans don’t have much time to realize this and to act before it is
too late. Bush’s “surge” speech last Wednesday night makes it completely
clear that his real purpose is to start wars with Iran and Syria before
failure in Iraq brings an end to the neoconservative/Israeli plan to
establish hegemony over the Middle East.

The “surge” gives Congress, the media, and the foreign policy
establishment something to debate and oppose, while Bush sets his plans
in motion to orchestrate a war with Iran. Suddenly, we are hearing Bush
regime propaganda that there are Iranian networks operating within Iraq
that are working with the Iraqi insurgency and killing US troops.

This assertion is a lie and preposterous on its face. Iranian Shi’ites
are not going to arm Iraqi Sunnis, who are more focused on killing
Iraqi Shi’ites allied with Iran than on killing US troops. If the
Iranians wanted to cause the US trouble in Iraq, they would encourage
Iraqi Shi’ites to join the insurgency against US forces. An insurgency
drawn from 80 per cent of the Iraqi population would overwhelm the US
forces.

CBS reports that the news organization has been told by US officials
“that American forces have begun an aggressive and mostly secret ground
campaign against networks of Iranians that had been operating with
virtual impunity inside Iraq.” To manufacture evidence in behalf of this
lie to feed to the gullible American public, US forces invaded an
Iranian consulate in northern Iraq and kidnapped five consulate
officials, claiming the Iranians were part of plans “to kill Americans.”
In typical Orwellian fashion, Secretary of State Condi Rice described
Bush’s aggression against Iran as designed to confront Tehran’s aggression.

Iraqi government officials in the Kurdish province and the Iraqi foreign
minister have refused to go along with Bush’s propaganda ploy. Iraqi
Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari announced that the Iranian officials
were no threat and were working in a liaison office that had Iraqi
government approval and was in the process of being elevated into a
consulate.

The Iraqi foreign minister said that US troops tried to seize more
innocent people at the Irbil airport but were prevented by Kurdish troops.

The Kurds, of course, have been allies of the US forces, but Bush is
willing to alienate the Kurds in the interest of provoking a war with Iran.

If Bush is unable to orchestrate war with Iran directly, he will
orchestrate war indirectly by having US troops attack Iraqi Shi’ite
militias. Bush has already given orders for US troops to attack the
Iraqi Shi’ite militias, who oppose the Sunnis and have not been part of
the insurgency. Obviously, once Bush can get US troops in open warfare
with Iraqi Shi’ites, the situation for US troops in Iraq will quickly go
down hill. Bush will be able to blame Iranian Shi’ites for arming
Iraqi Shi’ites that he can say are killing US troops.

Bush has also ordered the Persian Gulf to be congested with TWO US
aircraft carrier attack groups. There is no military or diplomatic
reason for even one attack group to be in the Persian Gulf. If Bush
fails to orchestrate a war with Iran by kidnapping its officials or by
attacking Shi’ite militias, he can orchestrate an event like the Tonkin
Gulf incident or have the Israelis pull another USS Liberty incident and
blame the Iranians.

The Tonkin Gulf incident was used by the Johnson administration to
deceive Congress and to involve the US in the Vietnam war. Johnson
alleged a North Vietnamese attack on US warships.

In 1967 Israel attacked and destroyed the US intelligence ship Liberty,
because Liberty’s crew had picked up proof that Israel had initiated the
war with Egypt and intended to attack Syria the next day. Some have
speculated that Israelis hoped their attack on the Liberty could be
blamed on Egypt and used to draw the US into the war against Egypt.

In 2003 the Moorer Commission, headed by Admiral Tom Moorer, former
Chief of Naval Operations and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs,
concluded:

“That in attacking the USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder
against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States.”

“That fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately
prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of USS Liberty.”

“The Captain and surviving crew members were later threatened with
court-martial, imprisonment or worse if they exposed the truth; and were
abandoned by their own government.”

“That due to the influence of Israel’s powerful supporters in the United
States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack
from the American people.”

“That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected
officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any
foreign nation, and specifically are unwilling to challenge Israel’s
interests when they conflict with American interests.”

On the 30th anniversary of Israel’s destruction of the Liberty, Admiral
Moorer said that Israel attacked the Liberty because Israel knew that
the intelligence ship could intercept Israel’s plans to seize the Golan
Heights from Syria, an act of Israeli aggression to which the US
government was opposed. Admiral Moorer said, “I believe Moshe Dayan
concluded that he could prevent Washington from becoming aware of what
Israel was up to by destroying the primary source of acquiring that
information--the US Liberty. Moorer reports that after a 25 minute air
attack “that pounded the Liberty with bombs, rockets, napalm and machine
gun fire . . . three Israeli torpedo boats closed in for the kill . . .
the torpedo boats’ machine guns also were turned on life rafts that were
deployed into the Mediterranean as well as those few on deck that had
escaped damage.”

Admiral Moorer says, “What is so chilling and cold-blooded, of course,
is that they [Israel] could kill as many Americans as they did in
confidence that Washington would cooperate in quelling any public
outcry.” The US invasion of Iraq and the looming US attack on Iran are
proof that Israel has even more power over the White House today.

Bush has many ways to widen his war in the Middle East. His brutal
aggression against Somalia has largely escaped criticism for the war
crime that it is. On January 11 the US National Intelligence Director
told Congress that Hezbollah in Lebanon may be the next US threat. Just
as he lied to the entire world about Saddam Hussein and Iraq, Bush is
lying about Iran. Bush and the neoconservatives are frantic for war with
Iran to get underway before the US Congress forces a US withdrawal from
the failed adventure in Iraq.

Bush’s entire “war on terror” is based on lies. The Bush Regime,
desperate to keep its lies covered up, is now trying to prevent American
law firms from defending the Guantanamo detainees. The Bush Regime is
fearful that Americans will learn that the detainees are not terrorists
but props in the regime’s orchestrated “terror war.”

On January 13 a /New York Times/ (editorial) said that “Cully Stimson,
the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, tried to
rally American corporations to stop doing business with law firms that
represent inmates of the Guantanamo internment camp.” Stimson alleged
that it was “shocking” that American law firms were “representing
detainees down there.” He suggested that when corporate America got word
of if, “those C.E.O.’s are going to make those law firms choose between
representing terrorists or representing reputable firms. We want to
watch that play out.”

The only reason for the Bush Regime’s policy of indefinite detention
without charges is that it has no charges to bring. The detainees are
not terrorists. They are the Bush Regime’s props in a fake war that
serves as cover for the Regime’s hegemonic policy in the Middle East.

The only action that can stop Bush is for both the Democratic and
Republican leadership of the House and Senate to call on the White
House, tell Bush they know what he is up to and that they will not fall
for it a second time. The congressional leadership must tell Bush that
if he does not immediately desist, he will be impeached and convicted
before the week is out. Can a congressional leadership that lives in
fear of the Israel Lobby perform this task?

All the rest is penny-ante. Revoking the Iraqi War Resolution as Rep.
Sam Farr has proposed or requiring Bush to obtain congressional
authorization prior to any US attack on Iran simply lets Bush and his
Federalist Society apologists for executive dictatorship claim he has
commander-in-chief powers and proceed with his planned aggression.
Cutting off funding is not itself enough as Bush can raid other budgets.
Non-binding resolutions of disapproval are meaningless to a president
who doesn’t care what anyone else thinks.

Nothing can stop the criminal Bush from instituting wider war in the
Middle East that could become a catastrophic world war except an
unequivocal statement from Congress that he will be impeached.

Bush has made the US into a colony of Israel. The US is incurring
massive debt and loss of both life and reputation in order to silence
Muslim opposition to Israel’s theft of Palestine and the Golan Heights.
That is what the “war on terror” is about.

*Paul Craig Roberts* was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the
Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street
Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is
coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at:
paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com <mailto:paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com>
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments