War With Iran, Part 2

When Admiral William Fallon took over Central Command from General John Abizaid in March 2007, it looked ominously as if the neocons had the US Navy poised to bombard Iran as it did Lebanon in 1983. However, Admiral Fallon turned out to be a man of wisdom and integrity, not the war-monger the Israel Lobby had hoped for. Indeed, as reported in yesterday's The Wall Street Journal, Admiral Fallon argued "publicly that the White House's hard-line rhetoric and implied threats of military force against Iran were dangerous and unproductive." He also said an attack on Iran "would be a mistake." Similarly, Barack Obama, unlike Hillary Clinton and John McCain, favors diplomacy over unnecessary wars. Obama has pledged to meet with Iranian leaders. An article about Fallon in the current Esquire magazine by Thomas P. M. Barnett, a former professor at the Naval War College, is entitled "The Man Between War and Peace." Now Admiral Fallon has abruptly resigned, and it looks as if Barack Obama is the only man between war and peace. The is why the Israel Lobby is trying to destroy Obama.

War With Iran, Part 1

Although most American Jews are peace-loving, normal people, there is a powerful minority of ultramilitaristic Zionists who control the agenda. As professors Mearsheimer and Walt demonstrate in The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, this radical lobby has a strong control over the politicians and the media. Just as the Israel Lobby successfully lied us into an unnecessary war with Iraq, it is now hankering for war with Iran, also to benefit Israel. Thus, the Lobby ranks the presidential candidates in order of the likelihood that his or her election would result in war with Iran. Their favorite is John McCain who is so militaristic he thinks we should never have left Vietnam, a battleground of the Cold War which produced the cold dead bodies of 50,000 US troops. To the chagrin of the neocons, the Cold War ended diplomatically, not militarily. The Lobby's least favorite candidate is Barack Obama who opposed the Iraq War from the start. Whereas McCain is often termed "Bush-on-steroids," Obama is the "Anti-Bush," and Hillary Clinton is "Bush-lite." The war-mongering Lobby likes Hillary because she voted for the 2002 Lieberman-Warner-McCain Resolution authorizing war with Iraq and more importantly, the 2006 Lieberman-Kyl Resolution giving a green light to attacking Iran. As former candidate Mike Gravel pointed out on the PBS Newshour with Jim Lehrer on 10/1/07, it was the Israel Lobby, specifically AIPAC, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, which was behind the Iran resolution. Furthermore, Hillary faithfully follows the neocon " no diplomatic talks without preconditions" policy, which translates to no diplomacy. Diplomacy is anathema to the war-mongers.