[Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran)

Fred Feldman ffeldman at bellatlantic.net
Tue Jul 1 08:16:10 MDT 2008

Marvin wrote;
It's expected to pass after the break, but the Iranians for now don't seem 
too excited about it. According to the the government's English-language 
satellite channel:

and submitted:
Iran ready for US 'War Resolution'
Press TV
July 1 2008

Iran is fully prepared to meet its domestic gasoline needs in the event of 
tougher US-imposed sanctions or a blockade on gasoline imports.

Fred responds:
Well, I am glad that the term "war resolution" is catching on.  This is a
sensible approach, considering that the resolution begins by supposedly
banning use of force without authorization, and then authorizes a massive
use of force -- a naval blockade, as well as other war measures. 

It was "expected to pass" the House last week. Now it is "expected" to pass
after the break. So it seems like a reasonable speculation that something
may be slowing the juggernaut on this. It is positive that it is beginning
to be recognized as a "war resolution" and not a resolution against the use
of force. We will see.

Partly this is an election maneuver by the Democrats, aimed at proving that
they are as tough or tougher than the administration on Iran and thus
earning the votes of Muslim-haters and similar "decent hard-working white

But, whatever represents a continuation and deepening of the deeply-rooted,
currently escalating war drive against Iran. A war drive that goes deeper
than what its immediate effects on oil prices, the national debt, and stock
and bond prices will be, though these will be factors.  Iran has dared to
compete with US imperialism in the Middle East. This is a crime that is
supposed to be punishable by death.

It has dared to be independent in ways that Saddam's Iraq, from the time he
took the full power into his hands, never was. Iraq was an easy target, easy
to make an example of. Iran is a much more difficult target, but also a much
more necessary one to a US attempting to prove that it can still cut the
mustard as a world dominator. 

Retreating on Iran is possible for US imperialism, but it will be a
watershed setback for US imperialism even if Iran makes many concessions as
I am sure the regime is willing to do. The alternative to retreat is war
witb Iran.

We should not dismiss the explosive war character of a US naval blockade of
Iran. It is a US military commitment of massive proportions. 

I am glad Iran is preparing. I know they can maintain their gasoline
supplies. Iran is not an island, for one thing, and has an enormous land
borders with Central Asian states, Afghanistan and Pakistan. 

But for us, that is not the issue. The issue is war, not gasoline supplies.
A naval blockade means a war has begun.

It is the signal Israel needs to be sure it can count on US backing for air
attacks on Iran. It is the signal Israel needs to be sure the US will act
militarily to block retaliation. Israel has no interest in the US government
having "plausible deniability" about an Israeli attack on Iran. That could
be ruinous for the Israeli state.

Iran has its own reasons for shrugging off the threat. A naval blockade will
not break them. But the dynamic of a naval blockade points to acts of
massive human and material destruction against Iran. And without such
destruction, the US will come out of a naval blockade as a loser, even if it
gets some stopgap concessions on nukes or something, and it will not
necessarily get any.`

There's no basis for striking the pose of the "blithe spirit" in this
Fred Feldman 

More information about the Marxism mailing list