Iran: Mutually Assured Contention

U.S./West Cold War strategy secretly equipped Israel with nuclear capabilities the purpose of which was to direct a stand-off threat toward the U.S.S.R. It should then come as no surprise that Russia would look for the same facility, with the help of various not-so-black vesicles, to counter the move.
The great Danger accompanying Mr. Obama’s myopia is twofold (primarily):
(1) he’s hopelessly anchored to a virulent contempt for U.S. Military-Intelligence-backed hegemony.
(2) he and his coterie are completely ill-equipped to grasp the ultra-frenetic weave of cross-purpose-interests that defines the malignancy that is the geo-political-economic sewer.
Although I am fully convinced that Mr. Obama’s firmly corrupted intent is to lie waste to the U.S. socio-political structure, I do not believe he intends to walk the planet into a nuclear confrontation. However, mutually assured contention, as we continue to experience, easily overrides rational thought and always at the expense of the American people’s best interests. The so-called Iran Nuke Deal is, in every way, an affirmation and a predictable extension of this “great danger.”
The following are a select group of responses to questions/comments received after the original article was published. We believe you will find them of interest.
#1: As we stated at the time of the red-line breach of Assad (Syria), met by yet another non-response from the U.S. Administration, it is “…inevitable that in the not too distant future we will see Iran move to fill the vacuum created by the U.S. absence; this will be most visible as Iran works to topple unstable U.S.-backed regimes in Iraq, Yemen and Qatar. A move, by Iran, in this direction will bring the threat to the doorsteps of Saudi Arabia which, due to the absent American presence, will force a military response by the Saudi’s and into a direct confrontation with Iran. The U.S. has a security agreement that guarantees an American Military Response to a direct threat aimed at Saudi Arabia. If Mr. Obama takes the same foreign policy approach he applied to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and Egypt then that will leave one last man standing; Israel.”  
#2: In this single point there is no excess in any efforts to emphasize that, in no way, can Iran or any other country, be permitted to develop or possess militarized nuclear capabilities.  To do so, particularly in any volatile region, is to allow the proliferation of a regional and global threat that cannot be contained.
#3: There is yet another point that needs mention as well: What of the security risks to those countries within reach of an Iranian nuclear tipped ICBM? If this country would challenge any Nation posing a threat to its existence then how, in good faith/conscience, can this Nation’s people stand idly by when their representatives license, by their actions, a direct threat to a defenseless people?  We will continue, in ways too numerous to count, to pay a price for our self-imposed tolerance. 
Curtis C. Greco, Founder

 

This entry was posted in Geo-Poli and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.