b********n
发帖数: 38600 | 1 http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-york-times-publishes-call-to-b
If two major newspapers in, say, Russia published major articles openly
advocating the unprovoked bombing of a country, say, Israel, the U.S.
government and news media would be aflame with denunciations about “
aggression,” “criminality,” “madness,” and “behavior not fitting the
Twenty-first Century.”
But when the newspapers are American – the New York Times and the
Washington Post – and the target country is Iran, no one in the U.S.
government and media bats an eye. These inflammatory articles – these
incitements to murder and violation of international law – are considered
just normal discussion in the Land of Exceptionalism.
On Thursday, the New York Times printed an op-ed that urged the bombing of
Iran as an alternative to reaching a diplomatic agreement that would sharply
curtail Iran’s nuclear program and ensure that it was used only for
peaceful purposes. The Post published a similar “we-must-bomb-Iran” op-ed
two weeks ago.
The Times’ article by John Bolton, a neocon scholar from the American
Enterprise Institute, was entitled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” It
followed the Post’s op-ed by Joshua Muravchik, formerly at AEI and now a
fellow at the neocon-dominated School of Advanced International Studies at
Johns Hopkins. [For more on that piece, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Neocon
Admits Plan to Bomb Iran.”]
Both articles called on the United States to mount a sustained bombing
campaign against Iran to destroy its nuclear facilities and to promote “
regime change” in Tehran. Ironically, these “scholars” rationalized their
calls for unprovoked aggression against Iran under the theory that Iran is
an aggressive state, although Iran has not invaded another country for
centuries.
Bolton, who served as President George W. Bush’s ambassador to the United
Nations, based his call for war on the possibility that if Iran did develop
a nuclear bomb – which Iran denies seeking and which the U.S. intelligence
community agrees Iran is not building – such a hypothetical event could
touch off an arms race in the Middle East.
Curiously, Bolton acknowledged that Israel already has developed an
undeclared nuclear weapons arsenal outside international controls, but he
didn’t call for bombing Israel. He wrote blithely that “Ironically perhaps
, Israel’s nuclear weapons have not triggered an arms race. Other states in
the region understood — even if they couldn’t admit it publicly — that
Israel’s nukes were intended as a deterrent, not as an offensive measure.”
How Bolton manages to read the minds of Israel’s neighbors who have been at
the receiving end of Israeli invasions and other cross-border attacks is
not explained. Nor does he address the possibility that Israel’s possession
of some 200 nuclear bombs might be at the back of the minds of Iran’s
leaders if they do press ahead for a nuclear weapon.
Nor does Bolton explain his assumption that if Iran were to build one or two
bombs that it would use them aggressively, rather than hold them as a
deterrent. He simply asserts: “Iran is a different story. Extensive
progress in uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing reveal its
ambitions.” | l******n
发帖数: 11737 | 2 你特码每次转些英文的来，又不是收费的文章，劳资想看英文网站就不来这里了 |
|
