Home » blogs » stereoman's blog

Our Role in Mitigating the Iran Crisis

Submitted by stereoman on May 2, 2006 - 9:11am.
Tags:

Recently I went through a period of despair over the growing cloud of war with Iran. Getting out of that malaise was a matter of putting the matter into a different perspective, comparing the current situation to conditions during the run-up to the Iraq invasion, and recognizing my own responsibility and the limitations of my personal influence on the unfolding of world events.

How differently do you see the current situation? How does your hopefulness compare to your feelings in October of 2002? March of 2003? How do you see your role in the Iran crisis as different? or the same? Please share your thoughts, activities, plans.

During the Winter of 2003, many of us took part in massive demonstrations against invading Iraq, but we were pushing against the tide of public opinion, which we now know was shaped by faulty intelligence and a widespread propaganda campaign guided by clandestine White House operatives. This "secret team" is no longer in place, their leadership is now or will soon be under indictment, and the credibility of the White House is at an all-time low.

Public opinion is markedly different, according to opinion surveys I have read. In October 2005, three in ten Americans felt that the Iraq threat required an immediate military response. By March of 2003, the proportion had grown to half. Today, only 18% believe immediate military action is warranted against Iran - even though Iran has openly admitted to possessing nuclear technology, which Saddam never did.

What work lies ahead for peacemakers to bring about a solution to the Iran crisis?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Iran is next

Submitted by John Klar on May 3, 2006 - 9:54pm.

Bush is likely to invade Iran. The current bickering with the UN is a replay of Iraq, where its failure to act in the manner which America deems best is proffered as proof that it is ineffective, and so we must act unilaterally.
Bush is likely to invade Iraq because he has lost his political capital, and would prefer to rally hawkish support rather than accept responsibility for his disastrous decisions to date.
This is George Orwell's America, where vague foreign conflicts are employed to maintain people's loyalty and fear, torture is OK to "do good," and wealth diparity yields a two-class system in which the lower class is too busy trying to survive to rebel.
We do have the power to retake our nation, by spreading truth to combat falsehood -- as the old adage goes, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
There is serious trouble brewing on America's debt-ridden, oil-dependent horizon, and the longer we defer solutions, the more precipitous will be our fall.
My new book discusses these issues and more. Available at www.pleasantwordbooks.com, it is entitled Christian Words, Unchristian Actions: George W. Bush and the Desecration of Christianity in Modern America. I didn't write this book to get rich, but to attempt to inform people to avert disaster, for the sake of all the world's children. Bush is a megalomaniacal menace, but the truth will reveal him as the charlatan he is. The religious right is beginning to awaken to the fact that they were deceived, and when they (rightly) turn on him, he can finally be the "accountability president" that he touts himself to be. Of course, he will try to avoid truth by the deception of war, so he will try to invade Iran. It is our responsibility to stop him, by spreading the truth, relentlessly and stridently.

Re: Our Role in Mitigating the Iran Crisis

Submitted by Jason White on May 2, 2006 - 10:54pm.

stereoman wrote:
which we now know was shaped by faulty intelligence and a widespread propaganda campaign guided by clandestine White House operatives. This "secret team" is no longer in place, their leadership is now or will soon be under indictment, and the credibility of the White House is at an all-time low.

Not to mention that the military is stretched to the limit and instituting a draft would be political suicide. I'm not concerned that the administration will engage in another illegal war at this time in this political climate. I am very concerned that another 9/11 type incident will occur, changing the climate all together. I hope to God that is not the October surprise that the analysts are already murmuring about. Generally, any widespread injection of fear into the populace might suffice as a pretext to war with Iran and continuation of present policy in general.

In that respect, our work consists of continuing to dispel the fearful spell that much of the population is under, and preventing the grip of fear that might accompany another setback. I think we should declare October to be "No Fear Month" in advance, as a preemptive strike against any October fear surprises.

I think "No Fear" means educating people in the efficacy of non-violent conflict resolution techniques and in drawing attention to our reflex to lash out immediately and violently when we experience setbacks. I think "No Fear" means putting our enormous military in perspective with that of other countries. The best use of the military is as a deterrent to extremist violence. We need to highlight that actually using our military capabilities against real human beings is terribly unfortunate, and indicates a basic failure of diplomatic relations and human compassion. "No Fear" means reaching out with dialog and cultural exchange with our "adversaries".

September 21st is International Day of Peace. Perhaps that is the day that "No Fear Month" starts.