ini ms satrioarismunandar di blogspot.com?? saya suka banget baca blogg-nya njenengan terutama resensi2 bukunya & dunia jurnalisme. moga membawa AC-nya di milis yg sedang panas ini:)
--- In ppiindia@yahoogroups.com, Satrio Arismunandar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Crisis Is Upon Us > by Paul Craig Roberts > > A number of experts have concluded that despite the > Bush administration' s desire to attack Iran, the > aggression would be too rash and the consequences too > dire even for the irrational Bush administration. > > Military experts point out that at a time when > generals are calling for more troops for Afghanistan > and Iraq, it would be ill-advised for Bush to add Iran > to the war theater. Experts note that Ira is well > armed with missiles capable of attacking US ships and > oil facilities throughout the Middle East and that > Iran can direct its Shiite allies in Iraq to assault > US troops there and set in motion terrorist actions > throughout the Middle East. > > Diplomatic experts point out that the US is isolated > in its desire for war with Iran and has no ally except > Israel, thus validating Muslim claims that the US is > Israel's instrument against Muslims in the Middle > East. Experts note that military aggression is a war > crime and that US violations of international law > isolate the US and destroy the soft power on which US > leadership has been based. An attack on Iran could be > the last straw for Muslims chaffing under the rule of > US puppet governments in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and > Saudi Arabia. > > Economic experts point out that the impact on the > price of oil would be severe and the economic > consequences detrimental. With the US housing bubble > deflating, now is not the time for an oil shock. > > It is difficult to take exception to this expert > analysis. Nevertheless, the Bush administration > continues to send war signals. Credible news > organizations have reported that US naval attack > groups have been given "prepare to deploy orders" that > would put them on station off Iran by October 21. > > How can Bush administration war plans be reconi led > with expert opinion that the consequences would be too > dire for the US? > > Perhaps the answer is that what appears as > irrationality to experts is rationality to > neoconservatives. Neocons seek maximum chaos and > instability in the Middle East in order to justify > long-term US occupation of the region. Following this > line of thought, neocons would regard the loss of a US > aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf as a way to > solidify public support for the war. US public anger > at the Iranians could even result in US public support > for a military draft in order to win "the war on > terror." > > The Bush administration could bring Congress around by > announcing a "Gulf of Tonkin" incident or by > orchestrating a "terrorist attack." However, this is > unnecessary as Bush has prepared the ground for > bypassing Congress with his propagandistic allegations > that Iran, by arming Iraqi insurgents, sponsoring > terrorism, and building nuclear weapons, is the major > part of the ongoing "war against terrorism." Now that > Iran is blamed for rising violence in Iraq, an attack > on Iran follows as a matter of course. All Bush has to > do is to continue with his lies in order to bring the > American public to a new war hysteria. > > Bush's attorney general has demonstrated that he has > no qualms about validating any and all extra-legal > powers that the White House requires for violating the > US Constitution and international law. The > congressional attempts to block illegal wiretapping > and torture have failed. The Senate has refused to > authorize torture, but the Senate has not prevented > the administration from torturing detainees. The > compromise leaves it to the White House to decide by > executive order whether its interrogation practices > are objectionable. In an editorial (September 22, > 2006), the Washington Post concluded that "the abuse > can continue." > > Polls show that Bush administration propaganda has > convinced a majority of inattentive Americans that > Iran is making nuclear weapons. Polls show that a > majority support an attack on Iran under this > circumstance. The neoconservatives and their media > allies have succeeded in causing the public to confuse > Iran's legal nuclear energy program with a weapons > program. > > The International Atomic Energy Agency, whose > inspectors pour over Iran's nuclear energy program for > signs of a weapons program, recently denounced a House > Intelligence Committee report as "outrageous and > dishonest." Written by the Republican neocon staff, > the Republican report falsely alleges that Iran had > enriched uranium to weapons grade last April and that > the IAEA had removed a senior safeguards inspector to > keep the alleged breach of the Nuclear > Non-proliferation Pact secret. > > Once again neoconservatives have shown that they will > tell any and every lie to achieve their goal of > attacking Iran. Jingoistic anti-UN Bush supporters > will automatically believe the neocon lie and will > swallow right-wing talk radio claims that the UN is > protecting Iran's nuclear weapons program. As we > learned from the Iraq hysteria, facts and experts are > no impediment to the Bush administration' s lies. > > Rumsfeld's neocon Pentagon has rewritten US war > doctrine to permit preemptive nuclear attack on > non-nuclear countries. As the USpaid a huge public > relations cost in terms of world opinion and distrust > of the US by endorsing the first use of nuclear > weapons, the revision of US war doctrine must have a > purpose. > > Neocons claim that tactical nuclear weapons are > necessary to destroy Iran's underground facilities. > However, the real reason for using nukes against Iran > is to intimidate Iran from retaliating and to threaten > the entire Muslim world with genocide unless Muslims > bend to the neocons?will and accept US hegemony over > their part of the world. > > September 25, 2006 > Dr. Roberts [end him mail] is Chairman of the > Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at > the Independent Institute. He is a former associate > editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing > editor for National Review, and was Assistant > Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan > administration. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of > Good Intentions. > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > *************************************************************************** Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia *************************************************************************** __________________________________________________________________________ Mohon Perhatian: 1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik) 2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari. 3. Reading only, http://dear.to/ppi 4. Satu email perhari: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5. No-email/web only: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6. kembali menerima email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/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/
