[Marxism] Bolton: Israel 'will attack Iran' before new USpresident in office, especially if it's Obama

Marvin Gandall marvgandall at videotron.ca
Thu Jun 26 13:43:18 MDT 2008

S. Artesian:

> No.Haven't climbed down from anything.  I stipulate many.  You stated
> majority.  I corrected your misattribution of majority to me.
> As for naivete.  Come on.  What's more naive, believing somehow that
> authorizing the US of force in support of UN sanctions does not mean a
> significant, big, powerful, portion of the ruling class wants war, or that
> it means it does NOT want war?
Did you just choose to ignore that part of the HR resolution which
specifically does NOT authorize the President to unilaterally use force in
pursuit of more multilateral sanctions? Why would the representatives of a
(big, significant, powerful, many, major, non-major etc.) part of the ruling
class insert that into a resolution if they were preparing the public for
war? They proceeded entirely the other way in regards to Iraq, where the
determination to go to war had already been made, so it's reasonable to
assume the same determination is lacking at present with regard to Iran.

Do you understand the meaning of "relationship of forces"? Do you think the
US political and military high command thinks in these terms? Do you believe
the relationship of forces in the region has been altered in favour of or
against the US since it occupied Iraq? How important do you consider such
factors as a) America's overstretched and vulnerable armed forces in the
Mideast and Central Asia, b) the high price of oil and the falling dollar,
c) the rise of global anti-US imperialist sentiment d) US public exhaustion
and disatisfaction with the aggressive Bush foreign policy of preemptive
warfare, e) the Bush climbdown in North Korea, f) the effect of war on
political divisions within Iran, g) the uncertaintly of hitting the Iranian
nuclear facilities and delaying it's nuclear program, g) the growing
economic ties between Iran and the Gulf states and the public cautions of
the latter to the US about provoking a war with Iran. What do you set
against these?

No one, to be clear, has ruled out the lesser possibility of war. The
argument is over whether we can be certain one way or another, as you
confidently are, and whether pronouncements and an offended sarcasm are a
substitute for attentively following what the politicians and the press are
actually saying, taking the wider context into consideration, and carefully
weighing and re-weighing the odds as the process unfolds and new information
emerges. You might take your cue from Fred Feldman's judicious posts on the
Mideast which do this very well.

BTW, I continue to patiently wait for you to identify and quote
representatives of the "significant" faction which is calling for war with
Iran. We seem to be stuck at Cheney.

More information about the Marxism mailing list