Change attitude, character, competence, then world will believe.
So far we're not convinced.
Editing and comment by
Carolyn Bennett
America can learn from those against whom it is hysterically hostile.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif reflected on Washington's latest threats and hypocritical utterances.
“The use of chemical weapons is a crime,” he said; “we
believe that it is a crime against humanity. We also believe that the use of force [and]
the threat of use of force is also a criminal offense in international law …
“We believe that nobody has the right to take the law into
their own hands. That is, the United States does not have any legal claim to
act at the same time as a prosecutor, a judge and, unfortunately, the executor
in dealing with issues.”
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali
Khamenei recalled that underlying the pattern of foreign aggression in countries
such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Bahrain, under the pretext of a
Shia-Sunni conflict resulting in the deaths of hundreds [likely more than
hundreds] of innocents ─
 | |
|
 |
| Global Threat USA |
‘Domineering forces and superpowers
─ particularly the United States ─ believe in no limits for ruining countries
and killing people in order to assert their illegal interests’.
 | |
|
…Creating Takfiri [defectors among Muslims
or Muslim accusers of Muslims] groups, on the one hand, and creating seemingly
Islamic and even Shia media, on the other hand, they are trying to foster
conflict among Muslims.
However, the Ayatollah Khamenei expressed hope, given last
night’s speech by the U.S. president, “that the new U.S. approach toward Syria
is a serious one. Not a political game [but] actual ‘change [from] the
arbitrary and wrong U.S. approach of the past few weeks.’” |
M
|
aybe not; decide for yourself. Press TV has published an analysis in transcript
excerpts and responses to “5 most ludicrous war claims in [President] Obama’s
Syria speech.”
1. U.S. President: ‘I possess the authority to order military strikes.’
PT: No you don’t, Mr. President. Only Congress has the
authority to declare war, and ordering military strikes would be a clear act of
war, thus violating the Constitution. It would also violate the War Powers Act,
which says that the President can’t engage in hostilities without a declaration
of war or specific Congressional authorization unless there is ‘a national
emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions,
or its armed forces.’ And Syria has done no such thing.
2. U.S. President: Syria’s use of chemical weapons is ‘a danger to our
security.’
PT/Pres: …Four paragraphs later, the president says it
wasn’t ‘a direct or imminent threat to our security.’
So what kind of a threat is it? Well, a rather tenuous one.
“Other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas
and using them. Over time, our troops would again face the prospect of chemical
warfare on the battlefield.”
PT: Really?
It is very unlikely that some dictator would do
this because he would know that if he did, the U.S. would drop a nuke on his
head.
That was the warning that Saddam Hussein got from the U.S.
in January of 1991, and he didn’t use his chemical weapons even as the U.S. was
destroying most of his army. If that threat was enough to stop Saddam, it’s
likely good enough to stop other dictators.
Obama also acknowledged that ‘the Assad regime does not have
the ability to seriously threaten our military.’
3. U.S. President: ‘If fighting spills beyond Syria’s borders, these
weapons could threaten allies like Turkey, Jordan, and Israel.’
PT: …Obama contradicted himself just a few minutes later
when he said ‘Neither Assad nor his allies have any interest in escalation that
would lead to his demise; and our ally, Israel, can defend itself with
overwhelming force, as well as the unshakable support of the United States of
America.’
4. U.S. President: ‘It’s true that
some of Assad’s opponents are extremists. But al-Qaeda will only draw strength in a more chaotic
Syria if people there see the world doing nothing to prevent innocent civilians
from being gassed.’
PT: Only?
If U.S. missile strikes seriously degrade Assad’s military,
they would certainly help the extremists who are allied with al-Qaeda in Syria.
5. U.S. President: ‘For nearly seven decades, the United States has been
the anchor of global security. This has meant doing more than forging international
agreements; it has meant enforcing them. The burdens of leadership are often
heavy, but the world’s a better place because we have borne them.’
PT: Was the U.S. an ‘anchor of global security’ and an ‘enforcer
of international agreements’ when it overthrew the Mossadegh government in Iran
in 1953, or the Arbenz government in Guatemala in 1954?
Is the world a ‘better place’
because the U.S. helped overthrow Salvador Allende’s democratically elected
government in Chile almost exactly 40 years ago?
Is the world a ‘better place’
because the United States killed 3 million people in Vietnam, Laos, and
Cambodia and because we dropped 20 million gallons of napalm (waging our own
version of chemical warfare) on those countries?
Is the world a ‘better place’
because the United States supported brutal governments in El Salvador and
Guatemala in the 1980s, which killed tens of thousands of their own people?
Is the world a ‘better place’
because George Bush waged an illegal war against Iraq and killed between
100,000 and a million civilians?
And what international agreements
was the United States enforcing when it tortured people after 9/11? [And in this period invaded, occupied,
displaced, disappeared, murdered and terrorized peoples of and not only of Iraq,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia? My addition]
|
M
|
y opinion is if this political performance of a nuclear-powered reckless world power with finger on switch were not so serious, so injurious,
and so embarrassing ─ it would be laughable.
Sources and notes
“U.S. must stop ‘shock and awe’ policy: Iran Foreign
Minister,” September 11, 2013,
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/09/11/323359/us-must-stop-shock-awe-policy-zarif/
“Leader hopes new U.S. approach to Syria real, not political
game,” September 11, 2013,
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/09/11/323259/us-threatens-region-for-israel-leader/
“Iran pursing win-win nuclear game: FM,” September 11,
21013, http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/09/11/323331/iran-pursing-winwin-nuclear-game-fm/
The group of six major world powers
(P5+1: Britain, China, France, Russia, the United States plus Germany) ‘must
enter negotiations with Tehran with a new approach to show political will to
resolve the nuclear issue.’
“The 5 most ludicrous war claims in Obama’s Syria speech,”
September 11, 2013,
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/09/11/323360/five-war-claims-in-obamas-syria-speech/
“Remarks by
the President in Address to the Nation on Syria,” For Immediate Release
September 10, 2013, East Room, 9:01 P.M. EDTM, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/10/remarks-president-address-nation-syria
Direct
excerpt from White House transcript
“…When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the
world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from
memory. But these things happened. The facts cannot be denied. The question now
is what the United States of America, and the international community, is
prepared to do about it. Because what happened to those people -- to
those children -- is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security.
“Let me explain why.
If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using
chemical weapons. As the ban against
these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about
acquiring poison gas, and using them.
Over time, our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare
on the battlefield. And it could be
easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons, and to use them to
attack civilians.
“If
fighting spills beyond Syria’s borders, these weapons could threaten
allies like Turkey, Jordan, and Israel.
And a failure to stand against the use of chemical weapons would weaken
prohibitions against other weapons of mass destruction, and embolden Assad’s
ally, Iran -- which must decide whether to ignore international law by building
a nuclear weapon, or to take a more peaceful path.
“This is not a world we should accept. This is what’s at stake. And that is why, after careful deliberation,
I determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States
to respond to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons through a targeted
military strike. The purpose of this
strike would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his
regime’s ability to use them, and to make clear to the world that we will not
tolerate their use.
“That's my judgment as Commander-in-Chief. But I’m also the President of the world’s
oldest constitutional democracy. So even
though I possess the
authority to order military strikes, I believed it was right, in the absence of a direct or imminent
threat to our security, to take this debate to Congress. I believe our democracy is stronger when the
President acts with the support of Congress.
And I believe that America acts more effectively abroad when we stand
together.
“… Other questions involve the dangers of retaliation. We don’t dismiss any threats, but the Assad
regime does not have the ability to seriously threaten our military. Any other retaliation they might seek is in
line with threats that we face every day.
Neither Assad nor
his allies have any interest in escalation that would lead to his
demise. And our ally, Israel, can defend
itself with overwhelming force, as well as the unshakeable support of the
United States of America.
“… My fellow Americans, for nearly seven decades, the United States has been the
anchor of global security. This
has meant doing more than forging
international agreements -- it has meant enforcing them. The burdens of leadership are often heavy,
but the world is a better
place because we have borne them. …”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/10/remarks-president-address-nation-syria
____________________________________________
Bennett's books are available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY] • See also: World Pulse: Global Issues through the eyes of Women: http://www.worldpulse.com/ http://www.worldpulse.com/pulsewire http://www.facebook.com/#!/bennetts2ndstudy
____________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment