You will not invade Iran

[imomus]

I just want to say one thing very firmly and clearly to the newly re-inaugurated President Bush.

You will not invade Iran. Is that clear? You will not turn the square above into a 'green zone' for stooge politicians of your choosing and a restricted, embedded international press corps. You will not impose by force your conception of 'freedom'. You will not occupy Teheran and Ispahan, after a brief but terrible aerial bombing campaign, with your fucking jeeps, your mercenary 'contractors', your torture squads. You will not kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians now alive. You have no right even to be thinking about such a thing, let alone threatening it. Who the fuck do you think you are to go round the world invading countries one by one?

Hopefully the intelligence squads supposedly preparing a feasibility report on an invasion of Iran at this very moment will tell you the same thing I'm telling you. You (and Tony Blair) will not do this. If you do, I and millions like me will feel an intense revulsion not felt since the Spanish Civil War or Vietnam. We will make life a misery for you, and we will actively resist you every step of the way. I'm talking about individuals, governments, nations. You will become the black sheep of the entire world. You will excommunicate a great nation, your own, from all compassionate consideration. You will become a symbol of the problem, not the solution.

I'm hoping you will continue to be bogged down in the bloody morass of ever-worsening violence you have already perpetrated in Iraq and will not have the resources to commit any more crimes against international law. The violence in Iraq is appalling (it is your fault, and it was predictable). It seems callous to wish that violence to continue, but I can't help agreeing with this analysis in Hong Kong's Wen Wei Po newspaper:

'The main international issue to be faced during President Bush's second term in office will be an Iran war. The US' main attention will focus on West Asia. If the US can quite smoothly realize the goal of transforming Iran, then the US' main strategic direction will shift to East Asia in future, and China will face direct US pressure; if the US' war and political reform in Iraq is not smooth, then this shift will be delayed for a number of years.'

For the sake not just of Iran, but of the far east, we can only hope that the Iraq debacle keeps you tied up for years to come. Of course that's the second-best solution. The best solution is that you simply mind your own business for the next four years. Why not bring 'freedom and democracy' to your own nation first? Why not fight tyranny there? You could start by resigning.

Comments

[imomus.livejournal.com]

One risk we run, even in formulating our revulsion against current developments, is just being on the same page as the current US administration. Not necessarily the page they're really on (because after all, it's hard to imagine them in all honesty saying, amongst themselves, 'Hey, this Iraq war has gone so well, let's start another one!') but the page they want us to be on.

There's a famous report by Ron Suskind of an encounter with a Bush aide:

'The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'''

If that's the case, this blog entry is already a defeat. Instead of promoting my own view of reality, primarily an aesthetic-utopian one, I'm getting on board the Bush Perception Wagon. Even if I'm disagreeing profoundly with what it says, I'm on the same page, letting them set the agenda. And that's already a concession, a small victory for the other side.

Now, I want to know Bush's views on 'disorienteering'. Whaddya mean 'you don't have any opinion'? Everybody has an opinion about disorienteering!

[oracolodeifont.livejournal.com]

very clever. and dangerously near the truth.
the only smart way to face things - apart from a bloodbath world revolution - seems to get involved in politics and fight them on their playground, using the same weapons and the same tricks, but hopefully not the same goals.

(ps: have you ever seen the video 'what barry says'? - it's quite famous and you can find it here (http://www.knife-party.net/flash/barry.html), and it's something that - being a graphic designer - appears to me as a great way to make political 'activism' without marching in the streets. it's beautiful and clear, they should be showing it in schools. especially in graphic design schools)

[w-e-quimby.livejournal.com]

Actually, I disagree-- one doesn't need to use the same tactics to fight a war. Just better ones, or counter-tactics that will advance one's cause effectively against the tactics being employed by the opposition.

[oracolodeifont.livejournal.com]

I don't know if political warfare can be fought like a real war. To win an election, for example, you've got to deal with normal people and gain their faith and their vote. Lately - here in Italy - who screams louder usually wins. Today it seems like you simply cannot be 'clever' and 'sophisticated', you've got to be gross and arrogant and charming.
Polite and acute politician are simply unheard.
I say: it's better gross and arrogant, but intelligent and with good intentions and ideas to rule the country, than gross and arrogant with awful plans for the world.

[w-e-quimby.livejournal.com]

You speak sense, signore. By the way, did you get my email regarding Salo?

[oracolodeifont.livejournal.com]

hey, no! damned hotmail spam filter... write me here: enderby@gmail.com

[w-e-quimby.livejournal.com]

Just did. :)

[djm4]

If that's the case, this blog entry is already a defeat.

Only if it's the only thing you (or I) say or think about international politics. It's OK to let Bush-inspired items creep onto our agenda if we think that ignoring them would be worse. It's not OK for them to be the only thing we discuss (which they're not).

In other words, I recognise all too well the danger you're writing about here, but I don't think this blog entry - taken in the wieder context of your other thoughts and writings - is an example of it.