[Peace-discuss] Democrats, not Republicans, want to bomb Iran

[C. G. Estabrook]

[How long will we keep up the fiction that Congress doesn't act against 
war in the Middle East because the Democrats lack "fortitude" or 
"backbone"?  On the contrary, they don't bring the war to an end because 
they support the policy of which it is a part -- and show a good bit of 
fortitude in doing it: it takes hypocrisy of a sophisticated sort to do 
that while pretending otherwise, because the constituency that elected 
them want the war to end.  It takes conscious and deliberate lies, like 
Pelosi's saying today that "Congress can't end the war without a 
presidential signature.”  --CGE]

	Jon Wiener
	Who Wants To Bomb Iran? Democrats,
	Not Republicans, Says Seymour Hersh
	Posted October 4, 2007

When George Bush and Dick Cheney talk about their plans to bomb Iran, 
they are told "You can't do it, because every Republican is going to be 
defeated"--that's what a Republican former intelligence official told 
legendary investigative reporter Seymour Hersh. "But," the former 
official went on, "Cheney doesn't give a rat's ass about the Republican 
worries, and neither does the President."

I recently spoke with Hersh, whose new piece, "Target Iran," is featured 
in The New Yorker this week.

When I asked Hersh who wants to bomb Iran, he said, "Ironically there is 
a lot of pressure coming from Democrats. Hillary Clinton, Obama, and 
Edwards have all said we cannot have a nuclear-armed Iran. Clearly the 
pressure from Democrats is a reflection of - we might as well say it - 
Israeli and Jewish input." He added the obvious: "a lot of money comes 
to the Democratic campaigns" from Jewish contributors.

But while Democrats argue that we must "do something" about an Iranian 
nuclear threat, Hersh says the White House has concluded their own 
effort to convince Americans that Iran poses an imminent threat has 
"failed." Apparently the public that bought the story of WMD in Iraq is 
now singing the classic Who song, "Won't Get Fooled Again."

Moreover, Hersh reports, "the general consensus of the American 
intelligence community is that Iran is at least five years away from 
obtaining a bomb" - so the public is right to be skeptical.

As a result, according to Hersh, the focus of the plans to bomb Iran has 
shifted from an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities to an emphasis on 
the famed "surgical strikes" on Revolutionary Guard Corps facilities in 
Tehran and elsewhere. The White House hopes it can win public support 
for this kind of campaign by arguing that the Iranian Revolutionary 
Guard Corps is responsible for the deaths of Americans in Iraq.

Why don't Bush and Cheney "give a rat's ass" about getting Republicans 
reelected to the Senate and the House in 2008? "Of course that was 
hyperbole to make a point," Hersh said. "When it comes to choice between 
bombing Iran and taking some political heat, the president will do what 
he wants. Look, no decision has been made, no order has been given, I've 
never said it's going to happen. But I had breakfast this morning in 
Washington with somebody who's close to a lot of military people, and 
there's a sense among them that the president is essentially messianic 
about this. He sees this as his mission. It could be because God is 
telling him to do it. It could be because his daddy didn't do it. It 
could be because it's step 13 in a 12-step program he was in. I just 
don't know."

The biggest problem in US relations with Iran, Hersh said, is that Bush 
refuses to "talk to people he doesn't like. . . . We dealt with China, 
we dealt with the Soviet Union in those bad days of Stalin and Mao. But 
there is no pressure whatsoever" coming from the leading Democratic 
presidential candidates demanding that Bush negotiate with the Iranians 
rather than bombing them.

	###