Would Bush & Company Risk War to Stay in Power?



That is the question on which the election may turn.



Considering that he went to War for trumped up reasons before, it is not out of line to speculate that he would do so again—especially if that meant that keeping republicans in power.



As cynical as that sounds, it reflects a government that stretched the definition of cynicism.



Until now, I have refrained from expressing my views waiting to hear if the Iranians would take credit for the incident of the other day. They have not and I find that Iranians not blowing their horn is more curious than if they had done so.



Quite to the contrary, the Iranians have commented that:



The films shown of the incident were file footage—and that’s a very real possibility.



And, two, that the sound track was faked which I find increasingly credible.



After the bombing of the Cole, I believe the American fleet is under orders to prevent hostile craft from approaching inside of 500 yards of said vessel.



The sound tape did not include at the same time a warning or ship’s signal to the Iranian sailors that if they didn’t turn around, they would be fired upon. I find that quite inconsistent with the accompanying dialogue. I would have expected to hear the ship's warning system, bells, and armed men on deck which we don't really see.



The entire affair seems very questionable.



For many of us who were serving around the time of the Tonkin resolution, it is almost a feeling of déjà vu. And any history buffs will no doubt recall Teddy Roosevelt’s “Remember the Maine” as the reason for advancing the Spanish American war.



If you recall, Bush had backtracked after the NIE report was made public claiming that he only found out about the report while he continued to raise the threat level, an obvious lie.



However, now he is back at it again using this excuse to claim that: 1. Iran is very dangerous (in the same tone that he used to declare that Iraq had WMD) and 2: that “everything is on the table.”

\

It is especially curious that this whole affair has arisen just prior to Bush’s trip to the Middle East.



One might speculate on his real reasons to visit the Middle East since he hadn’t visited Israel, a professed enemy of Iran, before. Is it simply to stoke the flames of war? To involve Israel in doing America’s heavy=lifting?



Why?



To perpetuate the status quo?



Read to keep Republicans in power.



For years, the philosophy of the republicans has been a strong offense is a good defense.



And the best offense that the republicans have is the use of fear. Fear is the mechanism that has allowed Bush & Company to get away with literally murder.



But 9/11 has grown cold. Could it be that Iran is viewed as the new 9/11, a device for keeping republicans in power.



Let me say this, I would never advance this argument if I hadn’t thought long and hard about this government’s willingness to use aggression and warfare to advance secret, personal agendas; nor the fact that Bush & Company has twisted and distorted our fundamental American documents to their own ends. But they have and, thusly, everything they do should be examined under the microscope of justice and objectivity.



Right now, it is contingent upon us to take this presumed threat very seriously and to appoint a Congressional investigation into the facts.



If we do not assert ourselves now, we stand the risk of seeing another Iraq for political reasons I fear.



With Bush & Company, history has a way of repeating itself.



\And I am concerned that our leaders have not picked up on this.



I invite commentary and discussion.



Les Aaron

The Committee for Positive Change

hubmaster@aol.com