July 12 / 13, 2008
>From Dylan to Iran 
Talking World War III Blues 
By JAMES ABOUREZK 
I’ve been listening to some old Bob Dylan songs, most notably his “Talking 
World War III Blues,” and “The Masters of War.”  Dylan’s protest music was a 
shattering wake-up call to the country back then, and it is amazing to me how 
similar the words to those old Vietnam era folk songs are to what we’re seeing 
today.  He sang of war profiteering, of the callousness of sending young men 
off to war to die for nothing while old men were talking. 
 
When I was in the U.S. Senate, the CIA once held a briefing for those of us 
interested in Israel’s nuclear weapons program.  I rarely attended those 
briefings, mostly because they swore us to secrecy, then gave us the same 
information that we could have read in the New York Times.  In any event, in 
the 1970s we were told by the CIA that Israel had some 20 nuclear warheads.  
Israel had developed its nuclear weapons program with the help of Apartheid 
South Africa, back then the only country that would allow Israel to conduct 
nuclear testing.
 
Mordechai Vanunu, who was jailed for publicly blowing the whistle on that 
country’s weapons program, spent years in prison for his sins.  He is now out 
of prison, but prevented from leaving Israel or from talking to anyone about 
his knowledge, which at this time is surely outdated.  But Vanunu’s offense was 
to disclose that Israel had some 200 nuclear weapons at their Dimona facility.
In the last few years, both Syria and Iran, fearing Israel’s nuclear 
capability,  have called for a nuclear weapons-free Middle East.  Both 
proposals were either scoffed at or ignored both by the United States and by 
Israel.  Of course, we would expect the Israelis to scoff, for the reason that 
if they were included in such a pact, they would have to give up their nukes, 
which now enables them to retain the title of,  “Bully of the Middle East.”
 
Israel has developed its nuclear weapons program out of sight of the eyes of 
the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, which it has refused to sign, but which 
Iran and most other countries have signed.  
 
What is interesting about the tough talk now coming out of Washington, as well 
as from the two Presidential Candidates, Obama and McCain, is that they are 
advocating sanctions against Iran because of their firing of long range 
missiles, calibrated to reach Tel Aviv.
 
Israel’s refusal to take part in the Treaty is an anomaly that gives George W. 
Bush an excuse to demonize the Iranians for developing a nuclear program, a 
program which, interestingly, American  intelligence agencies have said is not 
for making weapons, but which Israel, Bush and Sen. Joe Lieberman all say is 
for making weapons.
 
They are so certain that it is a weapons program that plans have been drawn up 
to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites.  Israel claims if the U.S. won’t bomb them, it 
will.  Now, the UN used to be an organization that would stand firm against 
such talk, especially if it has the potential to lead to violence, and, in this 
case, leading to a conflagration that threatens to light up the entire Middle 
East, and maybe the rest of the world as well.
  

We don’t really know how far such violence may spread, because the only other 
experience the world has had with nuclear war was when the U.S. “obliterated” 
two cities in Japan in 1945.  “Obliterate” is the word Hillary Clinton used to 
describe how she, as president of the U.S., would react if Iran attacked Israel.
  

But madness is the operative word here.  Israel’s war hawks, along with the 
Israeli Lobby, are frothing at the mouth about Iran, which has no nuclear 
weapons, and, as experts say, are not likely to have them for a number of 
years. Ahmedinejad may very well be nothing more than a loudmouth and certainly 
he may be crazy, but the Mullahs who really run Iran are not.  Even the thought 
that Iran would voluntarily commit national suicide by attacking a 
nuclear-armed Israel with nuclear weapons is a sign of madness in itself.   
With Israel armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, why would we be surprised 
that Iran would also try to develop them?  That’s a question the mainstream 
media refuses to ask when it reports on the bluster by American politicians.
 
With the same lack of foresight that went into post-war planning for the Iraq 
War, the Bush Administration -- and Sen. Lieberman -- cannot wait to bomb 
Iran’s supposed nuclear weapons sites.  The big problem here is that Iran is 
not Iraq.  Iran has a great many ways to retaliate, ways which Saddam Hussein 
did not possess.
 
First, there is the world oil market, already at a breaking point, fueled, not 
by oil shortages, but by speculators.  Iran’s potential blockade of the Persian 
Gulf should they be attacked would bring oil prices to new, and outrageous 
highs, this time as a result both of shortages and by speculation.  Some people 
think that the continuing tension between Bush and Iran is already the cause of 
skyrocketing oil prices.
 
Iran has other weapons other than nuclear at its disposal, and would be able to 
use them against a country as close as Israel.  There is little doubt that an 
Iranian retaliatory attack on Israel would most likely bring the United States 
into another Middle East war “to defend Israel” that we are currently 
ill-equipped to wage—but Israel doesn’t seem to care.  Simply said, because of 
the Iraq War, we have run out of troops to defend even ourselves, to say 
nothing of defending an aggressive Israel.
  
And if what the neocons are saying is true about Iran meddling in Iraq, try to 
imagine some real meddling by Iran with the Shiite dominated government in 
Iraq.  In effect, Iran is holding 150,000 U.S. troops hostage in Iraq.  Add to 
that what Iran might be able to do in Afghanistan, which is already teetering 
on the edge of disaster for U.S. interests there.
 
We should not forget Hezbollah, Iran’s ally in South Lebanon.  One’s 
imagination cannot reach far enough to picture what might happen there, but if 
we hearken back to the 2006 Hezbollah-Israeli war we can begin to get a picture 
of the result.
 
If we define Ahmedinejad as a big-mouthed madman, how can we define George W. 
Bush and Sen. Joe Lieberman, and the leaders of the Israeli Lobby?  These are 
nothing more, as Bob Dylan used to sing, than old men talking while young men 
are dying. The difference here is that George W. Bush’s threats can be backed 
up by the most powerful military in the world, and Israel’s threats can be 
backed up by the most powerful military in the Middle East. 
Incidentally, I find it interesting that Bush attacked Saddam Hussein for no 
reason except that he sat on a lot of oil.  Conversely, neither North Korea, 
which had more tangible nuclear weapons, nor Sudan, which is slaughtering 
people in Darfur, has any oil, so Bush opts for unenthusiastic diplomacy.  And 
neither is threatening Israel as well. 

Should a Bob Dylan imitator once again try to make it in the music world, it’s 
not certain he would react the same way to the nuclear threat in the Middle 
East today as he did to the dangers of the Vietnam War.  America is sorely in 
need of another charismatic folk singer to arouse a supine Congress and a 
half-awake electorate to the dangers America is facing in that part of the 
world.
 
It’s apparent that our leaders have not yet learned that the outcome of wars 
they start are not exactly foregone conclusions.  There is no amount of 
post-war planning that can predict what will happen once the Middle East goes 
up in flames, except for the death and destruction of tens of thousands of 
innocent lives.  Judging from what has happened in Iraq, that’s the kind of 
post-war planning in which our leaders are not involved. 
 
 
James G. Abourezk is a lawyer practicing in South Dakota. He is a former United 
States senator and the author of two books, Advise and Dissent, and a co-author 
of Through Different Eyes. This article runs in the current issue of Washington 
Report For Middle East Affairs and appears here by permission. 
 
http://www.counterpunch.org/abourezk07122008.html


      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to