Editorial note: If you have not yet read our mission statement above, please do so in order that you can put our blogs in context. 

8 March 2012

STAR WARS

Here we go again.

According to yesterday’s Guardian, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has warned us all that Iran is seeking to build an “inter-continental ballistic nuclear weapon” that threatens the west.

Later in the report Cameron is quoted as saying “there are signs that the Iranians want to have some sort of  inter-continental missile capability. We have to be clear this is a threat potentially much wider than just Israel and the region.”

Which is not the same thing.

On the one hand, Iran is said to be be ‘seeking’ to build an inter-continental ballistic nuclear weapon. On the other hand, there are simply ‘signs’ that the Iranians ‘want’ to have ‘some sort of’ intercontinental missile capability.

Maybe that is just what they do want. We all have things that we want.

Iran is surrounded by a posse of hostile states led by the United States and its major regional satellites, Israel and Saudi Arabia. No surprise then if it wants to protect itself.

I may ‘want’ a farm the size of Argentina. However, as it happens, I am not ‘seeking’ to acquire such a property.

Our first point then is that ‘wanting’ is not the same as ‘seeking’. There is a big difference.

What, in any case, are these ‘signs’ that Iran even wants – let alone seeks – to have ‘some sort’ of intercontinental missile capability?

We just don’t know. Because Mr Cameron did not reveal any ‘signs’. He just affirmed that there were ‘signs’. Just like that.

No evidence needed. Just a little judicious application of smear tactics.

The UK Prime Minister is good at that.

Before he became PM, he was a professional spinmeister. For him, this is straightforward inter-continental public relations.

Oh dear!

According to the Guardian, Mr Cameron was speaking after the British cabinet had been briefed by a security adviser on the imminence of the threat to the UK posed by Iran.

What did the briefing consist of?

You must be joking. They don’t tell you that sort of thing.

Yet we wonder.

Maybe there are also other ‘signs’ showing that Iran is not in any way seeking such a capability?

Maybe there is other evidence that Iran has enough on its hands dealing with Israel and a largely hostile Middle East to bother about storing up further trouble for itself by threatening to launch nuclear attacks on countries all over the world?

Actually, all parties, including Iran’s enemies, are agreed that Iran doesn’t even possess nuclear weapons at the moment. It can only enrich uranium up to 20 per cent, whereas you need enrichment of around 90 per cent to be able to produce a nuclear weapon. So even if it had the missiles, it wouldn’t have the payload.

However, this is propaganda, pure and simple, so we do not hear of any ‘signs’ that might not suit Mr Cameron’s purpose. Which is to suggest, without providing any evidence, that Iran threatens the whole international community – ie western Europe and the United States – with nuclear annihilation.

Clearly, such a threat must be neutralised ASAP. Israel has kindly offered to help by bombing Iran as soon as the United States permits.

But wait a moment. An international conference, attended by Iran, is shortly to get under way to discuss that country’s nuclear capability. With an eye to softening up  public opinion ahead of any attack on Iran, it would be best to make an effort to ensure that that conference fails before taking any action on the ground.

All this is déjà vu to British eyes.

In 2003 the then UK Prime Minister Anthony Blurr told the House of Commons that it would take Iraq only 45 minutes to launch weapons of mass destruction at the countries of the west. The House of Commons obligingly voted for war.

It turned out subsequently that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction nor indeed any rocket capable of delivering such weapons.

By that stage Iraq was a smouldering ruin – and still is.

Another question. Do Britain, Israel or the United States have nuclear weapons capable of hitting Iraq?

The answer, of course, is yes.

So let’s get this straight, then.

The international community – for which, read western oil interests – can attack Iran with nuclear weapons, but Iran is not entitled to develop nuclear weapons itself in order to counter such an attack.

Yes, that is the case. There is one law for the ‘haves’ and another for the ‘have-nots’. It’s called maintaining the imbalance of power.

The tiny coterie that is the club of nuclear weapons states – around 10 of the world’s 195 states – are determined to keep others out. Even if it means bombing them to smithereens.

A final question for the class.  Which country in the world has actually used nuclear weapons in war?

Yes, I thought so, you all know the answer to that one.

Now hold the front page. We have some last-minute highly classified top-secret information for readers.

We have just received a hyper-confidential briefing – the nature and source of which we obviously cannot disclose – to the effect that there are “signs” that Iran is seeking to build a giant intergalactic military-industrial complex “of some sort” on Mars. According to our sources, this is “likely” to pose a threat to the entire universe – or, at the very least, to the whole of the Milky Way.

If I were a Martian, I would be very worried indeed.

But then I’m not.

Sweet dreams, everyone.  Good night.

————–

You might perhaps care to view some of our earlier posts.  For instance:

 1. Why? or How? That is the question (3 Jan 2012)

2. Das Vierte Reich/The Fourth Reich (6 Feb 2012)

3. The shoddiest possible goods at the highest possible prices (2 Feb 2012)

4. Where’s the beef? Ontology and tinned meat (31 Jan 2012)

5. What would Gandhi have said? (30 Jan 2012)

Every so often we shall change this sample of previously published posts.

 ——————–