http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_ayatollah_is_right_about_one_thing_n
uclear_weapons_are_sinful_20120229/
 
The Ayatollah Is Right About One Thing: Nuclear Weapons Are Sinful
 
By Robert Scheer <http://www.truthdig.com/robert_scheer> 
Truthdig: March 01, 2012

Given my own deep prejudice toward religious zealotry, it has not been
difficult for me to accept the conventional American view that Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, the supreme theocratic ruler of Iran, is a dangerous madman never
to be trusted with a nuclear weapon. How then to explain his recent
seemingly logical and humane religious proclamations on the immorality of
nuclear weapons? His statement challenges the acceptance of nuclear
war-fighting as an option by every U.S. president since Harry Truman, who,
in 1945, ordered the deaths of 185,000 mostly innocent civilians in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

"We do not see any glory, pride or power in the nuclear weapons-quite the
opposite," Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said Tuesday in
summarizing the ayatollah's views. Salehi added, "The production,
possession, use or threat of use of nuclear weapons are illegitimate,
futile, harmful, dangerous and prohibited as a great sin."

Of course, the ayatollah's position will be largely interpreted by the media
and politicians in the United States as a devious trick to lull critics, but
words of such clarity will not be so easily dismissed by his devout
followers. They are words that one wishes our own government would embrace
to add moral consistency to our condemnation of other countries we claim
might be joining us in holding nuclear arms.

As awkward as it may be to recall, it was the United States that gifted the
world with these sinful weapons. And even more to the point of assessing
sin, ours is the only nation that has ever used such weapons toward their
intended purpose of killing large numbers of the innocent. That fact alone
should provoke some measure of humility in responding to Salehi's offer this
week at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to negotiate a treaty
banning nuclear weapons.

Unfortunately, his remarks were all too predictably met with swift
condemnation by the United States. Laura E. Kennedy, the American ambassador
to the conference, said that Iran's claim to be opposed to such weapons
"stands in sharp contrast" to that nation's failure to comply with
international obligations. But the fact is that the administration she
represents has stated that there is as yet no evidence that Iran is
committed to building a nuclear bomb. 

She is right that Iran's resistance to inspection "is hardly illustrative of
a commitment to nuclear disarmament," but such a remark is grotesquely
hypocritical coming from the representative of a nation that has produced
more than half of the world's nuclear arsenal under the most severe
conditions of secrecy. It is also true that U.S. acceptance of nuclear
weapons in Israel and Pakistan, both of which have been recipients of
American military aid despite breaking international nonproliferation codes
to which U.S. presidents have long subscribed, is hardly a sign of
consistency on this issue. 

It is obvious, in a week when the U.S. welcomed North Korea's renewed
commitment to inspections, that even the most recalcitrant of nations can be
induced to reason. The treatment of Iran is complicated by this being a U.S.
election season, during which the Republican candidates, with the exception
of Ron Paul, have been beating the war drums over what they claim is Iran's
nuclear threat. In no way has the GOP's zeal for military confrontation been
chastened by the fact that a similar crusade in 2003 by Republican hawks led
to the invasion of Iraq over patently false claims that it was developing a
nuclear arsenal. The result was a pro-Iranian government in Baghdad. 

Neither Iraq nor Iran had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks that launched
our nation on a never-ending and essentially irrational "war on terror."
Irrational, because the terrorist enemy has come to be defined through
political convenience rather than through an objective threat assessment.
Iran's Shiite leaders were sworn enemies of Osama bin Laden and his
al-Qaida, which was inspired and financed by the Wahhabi Sunnis of Saudi
Arabia. Yet when the Obama administration recently concluded a huge, 10-year
arms deal with the Saudi kingdom, the top Republican candidates were in full
approval. 

Of course the world's people should be alarmed by the prospect of Iran, or
any other nation, joining the nuclear weapons club. But demonizing Iran and
attempting to further isolate that nation's leadership hardly advances the
cause of nonproliferation. If Washington can find a basis of reasonable
accommodation with a bizarrely erratic and paranoid North Korea, serious
negotiations with Iran should be eminently possible. A place to begin would
be with the acceptance that the justifiably reviled ayatollah might for once
be demonstrating moral leadership when he denounces all nuclear weapons,
including those in our own massive arsenal, as sinful. 



[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]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
    [email protected] 
    [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