Quote: Originally Posted by pgs
The democracy that he is shoveling into the sewer will have elections in November 2020 . Can you say the same about Iran ?
Speaking of Iran,
"The fact that the U.S. government (along with some help from the British) overthrew Iranís democratically elected government in 1953, and backed Saddam Husseinís attack on Iran in 1980 that resulted in over a million casualties, has vanished down the memory hole.
One of the bookís strong points is its careful unraveling of U.S.-Iranian relations, setting the record straight on things like the development of Iranís nuclear infrastructure. While the Shah was in power, Washington pushed nuclear power plants on Iran, including nuclear fuel enrichment technology, even though the Americans were aware that it could lead to weapons development. Indeed, thatís exactly how India produced its first nuclear weapon back in 1974.
Erlich also analyzes everything from class structure to Iranís complex ethnicities and explains how the Islamic Republic functions politically and economically. While heís a long-time critic of U.S. foreign policy, Erlich is no admirer of Iranís political institutions. Iran is far more democratic than the absolute monarchies of the Persian Gulf ó with which the Washington is closely allied ó but itís hardly a democracy.
ďIran is ruled by a reactionary, dictatorial clique that oppresses its own people,Ē he writes. ďHowever, that does not make Iran a threat to Americans.Ē What Tehran does threaten ďare the interests of the political, military, and corporate elite who run the United States.Ē On a number of occasions Iran has made peace overtures to the U.S., all of which have been rejected.
Iran is a country with a very long history, and its people have a strong sense of nationalism, even if much of the population isnít overly fond of Iranís top-down political system and clerical interference in everyday life. The idea that the Iranian people will rise up and overthrow their government because of sanctions or in the event of a military attack on the government is, according to Erlich, pure illusion.
The Iran Agenda Today covers a lot of ground without bogging down in an overly detailed accounts of several millennia of history. It certainly provides enough historical context to conclude that an attack on Iran ó which would likely also involve Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and possibly Israel ó would unleash regional chaos with international repercussions.
Such a war would be mainly an air war ó not even the Trump administration is crazy enough to contemplate a ground invasion of a vast country filled with 80 million people ó and would certainly inflict enormous damage.
But to what end?
Iran will never surrender, and its people would rally to the defense of their country. Tehran is also perfectly capable of striking back using unconventional means. Oil prices would spike, and countries that continue to do business with Iran ó China, Russia, Turkey, and India for starters ó would see their growth rates take a hit. No European country would support such a war.
Of course, creating chaos is what the Trump administration excels at, and in the short run Iran would suffer a grievous wound. But Tehran would weather the blow and Americans would be in yet another forever war, this time with a far more formidable foe than Pashtun tribes in Afghanistan or jihadists in Iraq.
Bolton, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may get their war, but war is a deeply uncertain business. As Prussian Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke, one of the founders of modern warfare, once noted, ďNo plan survives contact with the enemy.Ē
Erlich, a Peabody Award winner and the author of five books, has written a timely analysis of U.S. foreign policy vis-ŗ-vis Iran and why, if our country continues on its current path, we ó and the world ó are headed into a long, dark tunnel.