by Finian Cunningham and Michel Chossudovsky
The year 2012 may become known as a watershed for humanity – the year when mankind was precipitated into a global conflagration involving nuclear weapons. The signs are indeed grimly ominous as formidable military forces converge on the Persian Gulf in the long-running stand-off between the United States and Iran.
On side with the US are its European allies in NATO, primarily Britain, Washington’s Middle East client states: Israel and the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf – all bristling with weapons of mass destruction. Recent naval exercises by Iran in the Strait of Hormuz have also displayed a fierce arsenal of missiles and military capability, and Iran has strategic alliances with Russia and China, both of whom will not stand idly by if their Persian partner is attacked.
As we have consistently analysed on Global Research, the conflict between the US-led powers and Iran has wider ramifications. It is part and parcel of Washington’s bid to engineer the social and political upheavals across the Arab World in order to redraw the region in its strategic interests. It is no coincidence that fresh from NATO’s conquest of and regime change in Libya, the focus has quickly shifted to Syria – a key regional ally of Iran. As Michel Chossudovsky has pointed out “the road to Tehran goes through to Damascus”. Regime change in Syria would serve to isolate Iran. Subjugating Iran and returning it to Western tutelage is the prize that Washington and its allies have been seeking for the past 33 years ever since their client the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was deposed by the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
Iran is an energy-rich colossus, with oil and, more importantly, natural gas reserves that put it, with approximately 10% of global reserves, in the world’s top three oil economies alongside Washington’s client states of Saudi Arabia and Iraq. In sharp contrast, the US has less than 2% of global oil reserves.
The conquest of Iran’s oil riches is the driving force behind America’s military agenda. – MORE
In related news:
“What do you want us to do?”
We don’t want intervention, we want attention. We need the media attention to be on Iran. The more the international community condemns what is happening, the more the international media reports it, the more pressure the regime is under. This will save lives …
The Iranian struggle for freedom goes on.
The state is rightly scared:
Signs that indeed “The Movement is alive”!
Events can be followed here:
Here’s an address to share: Smart Protesting Guide
For what has been happening in Iran, see:
Prominent Iranian Academics and Intellectuals Condemn Executions’ Tsunami
A look back
Consider this sharp exchange at TPM today:
hgorwellian – [I]f everyone in the Middle East wants to attack Iran, why don’t they, um, attack Iran themselves?
oleeb – Because then they wouldn’t be able to publicly condemn the US and Israel for attacking Iran. If you look at it from their perspective, why should they if they can get Uncle Dumbshit to attack and become embroiled in yet another middle eastern war? I’m glad our government has thus far resisted *. There is no good argument for attacking them. Even if they get a nuclear weapon it is no threat to the US and if they were to use a nuclear weapon they would be obliterated by hundreds of our nuclear weapons raining down on them in response. They may not be friendly to the US but the Iranian leadership is not insane. – LINK
Couple of related material
From Syria Comment
The Canadian Broadcast Company has published a long report by Neil Macdonald, “Who killed Lebanon’s Rafik Hariri?” It claims to lay out the evidence amassed by the STL against Hizbullah. [...] T_Desco is skeptical that Macdonald gets the story right. He points out a number of inconsistencies with actual reports. – Joshua Landis
Desco writes that he finds the CBC article “absolutely weird.”
If CBC is indeed massaging the public into accepting an eventual massacre in Lebanon, it wouldn’t be the first time that public funds were used to promote a world order devised by a war-mongering and predatory class. In this column, Anti-war‘s Justin Raimondo shows how it’s done in the US media.
Way back, I did a short post on more war-mongering bias at the CBC, interestingly also concerning Iran. As Desco wrote in his comment, what is the CBC’s aim in doing so?