[Organize] Fwd: Hirsch: Nuke Iran, Blame the Jews

[david meieran]

[thoughts?]

Nuke Iran, Blame the Jews
Who Benefits from the Israel-Lebanon Flare-Up?

By Jorge Hirsch
07/24/06 "Information Clearing House"

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14176.htm

Members of the Jewish faith and others correctly point out that Jews  
are often blamed for the sins of others. They may be about to be  
proven right again, in a big way. The current conflict may escalate  
to the point where the US will use nuclear weapons against Iran, in  
what will be the first use of nuclear weapons in war since Nagasaki.  
And the world will blame it on the Jews.

Israel's hugely disproportionate response to Hezbollah's actions is  
causing immense suffering, is in blatant violation of the Geneva  
conventions, and deserves the strongest of condemnations. It is  
especially important for Jews today to distance themselves from  
Israel's immoral government policies and US's support for them.  
Fortunately some are doing this [1], [2], [3], unfortunately, many  
are not. "Thousands of American Jews clogged the streets" in New York  
and elsewhere in the US [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] in  
support of Israel's actions, reports the Jerusalem Post. Both Houses  
of the US Congress have just passed solidly backed bipartisan  
resolutions supporting Israel's actions in Lebanon [1], [2], to  
"solidify long-term backing of Jewish voters" according to the  
Washington Post.

The irony is, Israel's war crimes are going to be dwarfed in  
comparison to the crime against humanity that will take place if the  
US uses nuclear weapons against Iran. Israel, by its disproportionate  
reaction and by accusing Iran (without proof) of being behind  
Hezbollah's actions [1], [2], [3] , [4], will be seen as having  
played a key role if the conflict escalates to engulf Iran and the  
United States. Yet the motivation for those that want this to happen  
[1], [2] is not to ensure Israel's hegemony in the Middle East,  
rather it is to ensure US hegemony in the world.

Israel's Interests

It goes without saying that Israel would benefit from the destruction  
of Hezbollah. Yet it is hard to see how the indiscriminate attack  
against Lebanon that is taking place will achieve anything other than  
strengthening the already strong support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and  
elsewhere in the Arab world. Shmuel Rosner argues in a Haaretz OpEd  
that Israel is "America's deadly messenger", being used to promote  
Bush's "democracy agenda". It certainly appears that Israel's current  
actions are irrational and self-destructive. Unless their real aim is  
to draw Syria and Iran into the conflict, following directions from  
Washington. At the very least it is clear that Israel would not be  
doing this in the absence of a guarantee from the US that it will  
intervene if the conflict widens, which in any event Bush has already  
publicly announced.

If Iran enters the conflict and shoots a single missile against  
Israel, the US will step in and destroy the military infrastructure  
of Iran by aerial bombardment. As suggested by Seymour Hersh and  
others [1], [2], [3], [4], this is likely to involve the US use of  
nuclear "bunker busters".

It has been predicted that if the US or Israel attack Iran, Iran will  
unleash Hezbollah who will carry out devastating attacks against  
Israel. "Hizbollah was also seen as a means of tying our hands on the  
Iranian nuclear threat," says an Israeli official. Well, we are in  
the dress rehersal, and we are seeing that despite all the hype,  
Hezbollah is a paper tiger. Green light for the Iran attack.

Iran's Interests

What is really unusual about the current flare-up in the Middle East  
is the barrage of strident denunciations against Iran, from the Bush  
administration, politicians from across the political spectrum [1],  
[2], [3], [4], [5], [6], and the mainstream media [1], [2], [3], [4],  
that uniformly accuse Iran (without presenting evidence) of being  
behind the Hezbollah actions. This has never happened before when  
there was conflict in Lebanon where Hezbollah was involved, why now?

One argument is Ahmadinejad's stated animosity against Israel.  
However, that has been Iran's stated position since 1979.

The other argument is that Iran is trying to "divert attention" from  
the nuclear issue. That defies the most elementary logic. If Iran was  
really intent in getting nuclear weapons and destroying Israel, it  
would try to keep things as quiet as possible until it gets those  
nuclear weapons, several years into the future.

The reality is that, whether one ascribes to Iran evil or benign  
intentions, Iran draws no benefit whatsoever from the current turmoil  
in Lebanon. Neither does Syria. Consequently the rhetoric from the US  
and Israel suggests a deliberate attempt to draw Syria and Iran into  
the conflict.

The US's Interests

A US attack on Iran has been predicted by analysts for several years.  
The US policy vis-a-vis Iran is clearly directed towards  
confrontation rather than accommodation. There are many reasons for  
the US to attack Iran, including the control of energy resources,  
suppression of a regional power opposite to US and Israeli interests,  
etc. However I have argued for many months that the key reason for  
the US to seek a military confrontation with Iran is that it will  
"force" the US to cross the nuclear threshold and use low yield  
nuclear weapons against Iranian installations. And this is seen as  
essential to further US geopolitical goals.
The United States used nuclear weapons against Japan not because it  
had to. It did so to demonstrate to the world that it was in  
possession of a new weapon that packed the destructive power of  
thousands of bombing missions into a single one. To tell the rest of  
the world, beware.

Since then, it has spent over 5 trillion dollars in building up its  
nuclear arsenal, but nuclear weapons have become "unusable" after 60  
years of non-use. America has achieved nuclear primacy but it is  
useless, until it shows that nuclear weapons are usable again.

Everything has been put in place. The US is likely to have obtained  
classified "intelligence" concerning hidden Iranian chemical and  
biological underground facilities. Low yield B61-11 nuclear bunker  
busters must have been deployed, just in case "surprising military  
developments" give rise to "military necessity". Once Iran is drawn  
into a conflict and shoots a single missile against Israel or US  
forces in the region, the US administration will argue that the next  
Iranian missile could carry chemical or biological warheads and cause  
untold casualties among Americans, Iraqis or Israelis. A low yield  
nuclear bunker buster will be touted as the most "humane" way to  
prevent further loss of life.

Why it may happen

In 1941, a vast military effort was started by the United States to  
create nuclear weapons, culminating in the Trinity test and  
subsequent bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The effort was  
shrouded in secrecy and any moral qualms were set aside. When it  
succeeded, it was argued that many American and Japanese lives had  
been saved by nuking Japan into surrender.

Any speculation during the period 1941-1945 that the United States  
had 100,000 people devoted to create a secret weapon million-fold  
more powerful than any known weapon would have been dismissed as the  
ultimate "conspiracy theory".

Similarly, much evidence indicates that a deliberate project,  
shrouded in secrecy, exists today that will culminate in the nuking  
of Iran, to "save lives". Many are privy to parts of the plan, as  
Seymour Hersh revealed, only a few know the plan in its entirety. Low- 
yield nuclear bunker busters will be used, untested but as reliable  
as the untested "Little Boy" that leveled Hiroshima. Americans will  
buy the "military necessity" argument because it will be true:  
American troops in Iraq will be sitting ducks facing Iranian  
missiles, with or without WMD warheads.

After the US uses nuclear weapons again, it will have established the  
usability of its nuclear arsenal against non-nuclear countries. It  
will be possible to wage war "on the cheap", saving many American  
lives in future conflicts. "Support the troops" is the one thing all  
Americans, no matter how diverse their views are, agree on.

It should not be allowed to happen. The President has sole authority  
to order the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. We know from  
previous actions of this administration what Bush, Cheney and  
Rumsfeld are capable of. There have been radical changes in US  
nuclear weapons policies and in preemption "doctrine", and the Bush  
announcement that the nuclear option is "on the table". In response,  
there needs to be a strong groundswell call to restrict the absolute  
presidential authority of this President to order the use of nuclear  
weapons against Iran. By the general public, by "antinuclear"  
organizations, by scientific, political and professional  
organizations. To push Congress into action before it is too late.  
Without a "nuclear option", the US will be more interested in  
negotiation than in confrontation with Iran.

Cui Bono?

In the short term, Israel certainly will benefit from the destruction  
of Iran's military capabilities. But Israel will not enjoy peace as a  
result, because the nuking of Iran will create enormous animosity  
against Israel in the Muslim world and beyond. To the extent that the  
world buys the US fable that the nuking of Iran was required by  
"military necessity" and not premeditated, Israel (and Jews  
worldwide) will bear a heavier than deserved brunt for having  
contributed to "precipitate" these events.

The US will reap enormous benefits. Flexing its nuclear muscle, it  
will establish its absolute hegemony in the Middle East and Central  
Asia and beyond, and gradually squeeze China and Russia into nuclear  
disarmament and complete submission.

In the end of course we will all lose. Because the nuclear genie,  
unleashed from its bottle in the war against Iran, will never  
retreat. And just like the US could develop nuclear weapons in only 4  
years with completely new technology 60 years ago, many more  
countries and groups will be highly motivated to do it in the coming  
years.

Think about the current disproportionate response of Israel, applied  
in a conflict where the contenders have nuclear weapons. 10 to 1  
retaliation, starting with a mere 600 casualties, wipes out the  
entire Earth's population in eight easy steps. Who will be willing to  
stop the escalation? The country that lost 60,000 citizens in the  
last hit? The one that lost 600,000? 6 million?

As the nuclear holocaust unfolds, some will remember the Lebanon  
conflict and subsequent Iran war and blame it all on the Jews. Others  
will properly blame Americans, for having allowed their Executive to  
erase the 60-year old taboo against the use of nuclear weapons, first  
in doctrine and then in practice, despite having the most powerful  
conventional military force in the world. Others of course will blame  
"Muslim extremism".

And then the blaming will wither away as a three-billion-year old  
experiment, life on planet Earth, comes to an end.

Jorge Hirsch is a Professor of Physics at the University of  
California at San Diego, a fellow of the American Physical Society,  
and organizer of a recent petition, circulated among leading  
physicists, opposing the new nuclear weapons policies adopted by the  
US in the past 5 years. He is a frequent commentator on Iran and  
nuclear weapons. Email to: jorgehirsch at yahoo.com.

‘