U.S. military support for Israeli attack on Iran unnecessary
Published: Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Updated: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 20:03
Since the long period of talks with Iran over a nuclear development program have produced little progress, many have speculated that a war with Iran is likely to occur and have advocated a joint pre-emptive strike by the U.S. and Israel.
This is wrong on moral grounds because a pre-emptive strike is international aggression — not defense.
The main allegation about Iran’s development of nuclear weaponry almost echoes the lies of the Bush administration that rallied support for war in Iraq.
There were no WMDs in Iraq, so why should we believe another bold and deceptive accusation this time?
It also seems that Iran has acted more defensively, rather than offensively or aggressively, and has proven time and time again that their rhetoric is simply “muscle flexing” on the international stage where they feel threathened.
And as we cite the human rights records of Iran and their Islamic militant ties, we do not consider these things as justification for war with allies and political friends in the region such as Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has a terrible human rights record and the country’s women are much more socially and culturally oppressed than women in Iran.
There are also the pro-war notions that Israel’s military would not be able to fight and ward off Iranian attacks alone, even though it was only until recently that Iran had built its first domestic military helicopter.
Compared to the militarized nuclear power that Israel is, Iran is no match — and Iran knows that.
The notion that Iran could take out Israel is absurd propaganda straight from the war hawks aimed to spark fear-mongering, general panic and hysteria in the public.
These false notions and facts that have been blown out of proportion are aimed at mobilizing the public opinion for an unjust war.
Iran is surrounded by bases capable of unleashing utter destruction in their nation. Iran has always felt threatened on the world stage by the U.S. and other western powers.
To them, the U.S. and the west have wanted to overthrow their current order ever since the people of Iran overthrew the U.S.-backed dictator, the Shah of Iran.
Iran, being in a country surrounded by western militarization and imperialism (as they see it), is asserting itself.
As Americans are fed a constant diet of anti-Iranian and anti-Muslim propaganda in general, what we see here is a problem not only in diplomacy but perception as well.
Iran is not acting aggressively militarily nor does it see their actions this way.
Iran knows that a nuclear war at their doorstep would be sure destruction, so logically it would not be in their best interests to engage in any aggression or conflict in our nuclear age.
Regardless of Russian tension with the U.S. in its war against Iran, this pre-emptive “defensive” strike would be a boldly aggressive mistake.
Since the conference of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), there was much speculation over the possibility of military confrontation with Iran and this has sparked a lot of emotion.
Many have the notion that a pre-emptive strike is a defensive move and that the U.S. should support Israel no matter what the cost, whether that cost is simply in money or in young American soldiers’ blood.
This is not something that is divided on party lines rather than our individual moral notions.
Many in the Zionist movements are fully dedicated to the government of Israel and seem to not see the deaths of Muslim civilians as terrorist acts of murder, despite the fact that the U.S. has a young population utterly sick of war.
This is not about Judaism or Islam anymore — this is about humanism and general understanding of other people.
We must not let blind ultra-nationalism give way to our moral convictions and we must remember that militant religious solidarity with weapons is dangerous for peace in the world.
It is not only the radical fundamentalist Islamic community that subscribes to religious solidarity, but much of the Zionist movements and American Evangelicals believe in this too.
They seem to see much of this as a perpetual holy war that even Americans of different faiths must engage in.
Though it seems that there is an overwhelming outcry for the U.S. to support a military attack on Israel (as seen at American Israel Public Affairs Committee), this is not moral or logical.
As mentioned earlier, a preemptive strike under the guise of a “defensive” strike is not defensive at all. It would be aggression that even the U.S. would probably punish other nations for doing, even under this guise of security and peacekeeping.
In this turbulent time we must be rational and not turn to war to solve our political problems on the world stage, especially for defense or for a preventative measure.
If war is waged once again in the Middle East, there will be more unnecessary deaths of American soldiers and civilians and more regional instability will result.
In times of peace and war, we must always carefully weigh our options and act logically and another war for the U.S. to engage in is something we do not need.
Our current world stage and the destruction of history have taught us valuable lessons — we must always strive for peace and reason in our society, for the enablers of oppression regard peacetime as the preparation period for perpetual war and destruction.