While corporations have grown ever stronger in the US, they have taken on the role of policy making through lobbyist and special interest groups, funneling countless millions of dollars to elect and re-elect those who will do their bidding. I am convinced the US has now quietly become a fascist country.
The Congress is all but impotent to stop this ongoing drumbeat for continuous war. Look at what little they are doing to withdraw from Iraq; quibbling over a toothless, non-binding resolution against the planned surge of nearly 50,000 troops into Iraq. Nothing said about the proposed $700 Billion 2007 defense budget, paid for with domestic spending cuts. The Democrats who were so recently elected into a majority in both houses of Congress have done nothing to de-escalate the war, because war is good for business- it results in almost instant obsolescence of products, which then must be replaced, the armies must be fed, sheltered and clothed, and the arms race results in ever more complex and expensive weaponry. And every last congress person is now bought off, by corporations who can make or break them, depending on how much re-election cash they provide to those running for election. --- In [email protected], "nablusos108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Fra: http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0204-23.htm > > > > > > Published on Sunday, February 4, 2007 by the Toronto Sun / Canada > > Fight Against Iran Too Familiar > > by Eric Margolis > > > > While the Bush/Cheney administration seems hell-bent on provoking > war with > > Iran, Americans appear far more alarmed by the dangers of global > warming. > > Many of them must regret not voting for "Ecological Al" Gore in > 2000. > > > > While icebergs melt, the U.S.-Iran confrontation is getting very > > dangerous. > > The heaviest concentration of U.S. naval strike forces since the > 2003 war > > against Iraq is concentrating off Iran. > > > > In a disturbing replay of that conflict, CIA drones and U.S. Air > Force > > recon > > aircraft -- along with U.S. and British Special Forces -- are > overflying > > Iran and probing its nuclear and military installations. CIA and > Britain's > > MI6 are stirring unrest among Iran's Kurds and Azerbaijanis, and > arming > > Iranian Marxist and royalist exiles. > > > > A belligerent President George Bush ordered U.S. forces in Iraq > to "kill" > > Iranian agents or diplomats who appear threatening. > > > > U.S. troops in northern Iraq broke into an Iranian liaison office > and > > arrested its military staff. Bush unblushingly warns Iran, not > to "meddle" > > in neighbouring Iraq. > > > > Pentagon sources accused Iran of smuggling weapons and explosives to > > "Iraqi > > insurgents;" though the "insurgents" are in fact Shia militiamen > allied to > > the U.S.-installed Baghdad regime. Half of the 21,000 additional > U.S. > > troops > > headed to Iraq are being positioned to cover the Iranian border and > block > > an > > Iranian threat to the main U.S. -Kuwait-Baghdad supply line. > > > > New contingents of U.S. Air Force personnel and warplanes are > arriving at > > key forward air bases in Bulgaria and Romania that link the U.S. to > the > > Mideast and Central Asia. U.S. bases in Britain, Germany, Diego > Garcia, > > the > > Persian Gulf, Central Asia, and Pakistan are reported on heightened > alert. > > Turkey is being pressed to allow U.S. and Israeli strike aircraft > to use > > its > > air space to attack northern Iran. > > > > The Pentagon's latest strike plan against Iran includes more than > 2,300 > > "high value" targets such as its dispersed nuclear infrastructure > and, > > worryingly, operating reactors, air and naval bases, ports, > > telecommunications, air defences, military factories, energy > networks and > > government buildings. > > > > Iran's water and sewage systems, bridges, food storage, and bomb > shelters > > could also be targeted, as were Iraq's in 2001. > > > > The U.S. Treasury has mounted a highly effective campaign to > strangle Iran > > financially, seriously hurting its foreign banking connections, > retarding > > industrial growth and energy production, and impeding foreign > investment. > > > > The Bush administration and close ally Israel have sharply > intensified > > their > > war of words against Iran, claiming, implausibly, it poses a nuclear > > threat > > to the entire world. > > > > Israeli threats > > > > Politicians in Israel are in dangerous emotional overdrive and > making open > > threats to attack Iran. They claim Iran is a new Nazi Germany and > Israel > > faces a second Holocaust -- in spite of its powerful triad of > nuclear > > forces > > that can survive any surprise attack. > > > > Though UN inspectors find no evidence Iran is producing nuclear > weapons, > > Tehran, like Saddam's Iraq, is being told to prove an impossible > > negative -- > > that it has no nuclear weapons. > > > > With disturbing deja vu, the U.S. Congress and media are swallowing > the > > administration's torrent of unproven allegations against Iran > precisely > > the > > way they lapped up its grotesque lies about Iraq. > > > > Intelligence analysts would conclude either: Washington is trying > to bluff > > Tehran to abandon its entirely legal but worrisome civilian nuclear > power > > program and thus claim a major victory after so many defeats. Or, > the > > cornered Bush/Cheney administration is trying to provoke an air and > naval > > war against Iran as a last desperate, ideologically driven assault > against > > the Muslim world, and divert attention from its Iraq debacle. > > > > 'Not very dangerous' > > > > Amid growing war fever, this week France's President Jacques Chirac > > sensibly > > observed, off the record, that even if Iran had a few nuclear > weapons for > > self-defence, "it is not very dangerous." > > > > Iran would be obliterated by U.S. and Israeli nuclear > counterstrikes if it > > ever used its nukes against Israel, noted Chirac, and is unlikely to > > commit > > national suicide. > > > > After his comments became public, Chirac retracted them when > Washington's > > French-haters went apoplectic. But, as he did before Bush's 2003 war > > against > > Iraq, Chirac spoke with logic and good sense. > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Fra http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0131-28.htm > > > > Published on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 by Consortium News > > Iran Clock Is Ticking > > by Robert Parry > > > > While congressional Democrats test how far they should go in > challenging > > George W. Bush's war powers, the time may be running out to stop > Bush from > > ordering a major escalation of the Middle East conflict by > attacking Iran. > > > > Military and intelligence sources continue to tell me that > preparations > > are > > advancing for a war with Iran starting possibly as early as mid- to- > late > > February. The sources offer some differences of opinion over > whether Bush > > might cite a provocation from Iran or whether Israel will take the > lead in > > launching air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities. > > > > But there is growing alarm among military and intelligence experts > that > > Bush > > already has decided to attack and simply is waiting for a second > aircraft > > carrier strike force to arrive in the region - and for a propaganda > blitz > > to > > stir up some pro-war sentiment at home. > > > > One well-informed U.S. military source called me in a fury after > > consulting > > with Pentagon associates and discovering how far along the war > > preparations > > are. He said the plans call for extensive aerial attacks on Iran, > > including > > use of powerful bunker-busting ordnance. > > > > Another source with a pipeline into Israeli thinking said the Iran > war > > plan > > has expanded over the past several weeks. Earlier thinking had been > that > > Israeli warplanes would hit Iranian nuclear targets with U.S. > forces in > > reserve in case of Iranian retaliation, but now the strategy > anticipates a > > major U.S. military follow-up to an Israeli attack, the source said. > > > > Both sources used the same word "crazy" in describing the plan to > expand > > the > > war to Iran. The two sources, like others I have interviewed, said > that > > attacking Iran could touch off a regional - and possibly global - > > conflagration. > > > > "It will be like the TV show '24'," the American military source > said, > > citing the likelihood of Islamic retaliation reaching directly into > the > > United States. > > > > Though Bush insists that no decision has been made on attacking > Iran, he > > offered similar assurances of his commitment to peace in the months > before > > invading Iraq in 2003. Yet leaked documents from London made clear > that he > > had set a course for war nine months to a year before the Iraq > invasion. > > > > In other words, Bush's statements that he has no plans to "invade" > Iran > > and > > that he's still committed to settle differences with Iran over its > nuclear > > program diplomatically should be taken with a grain of salt. > > > > There is, of course, the possibility that the war preparations are > a game > > of > > chicken to pressure Iran to accept outside controls on its nuclear > program > > and to trim back its regional ambitions. But sometimes such high- > stakes > > gambles lead to miscalculations or set in motion dynamics that > can't be > > controlled. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.27/671 - Release Date: > 2/5/2007 > > >
