Home arrow Authors arrow Paul Adujie arrow Iran Gone Nuclear? Who Decides? Who is Afraid, Why? (II)
Iran Gone Nuclear? Who Decides? Who is Afraid, Why? (II) Print E-mail
Written by Paul I. Adujie   
Saturday, 29 September 2007

Iran Gone Nuclear? Who Decides? Who is Afraid, Why? (II)

Written by Paul I. Adujie

Lawcareer2007@aol.com

New York, United States

After all the pre-war lies which were told by President Bush and his government before the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the current American government may soon start bombing Iran without a scintilla of efforts to even pretend to lie or pretend to proffer any excuse to Americans and the rest of the world, for invading, and in all probabilities, occupying Iran.

The drums of war against Iran is beating loudly and louder everyday.

America has no respect for international law, unless it benefits America! America has observed many UN conventions, protocols and treaties only in their breach. The US has refused to implement the UN Kyoto Protocols on efforts to attain a better world environment and fight or reduce global warning. This week, President Bush ignored a UN debate in New York, on the environment, and instead, organized an American version of the UN conference.

The US has been at loggerheads with the rest of the world and the UN, regarding the UN’s desire to implement International Criminal Court or UN ICC. The US seeks a preferential treatment for American citizens, who the US have argued, should not have to be made accountable to the UN international court.

American has frequently been in World Trade Organization WTO disputes with Canada, China and most of Europe. All, as a result of the US insistence on getting preferential treatment for its heavily subsidized agricultural industries, farms and food producers. And the US also seeks protections for its steel industry etc and so, signatories to the WTO are appalled at US frequent disregard of WTO rules ; US opponents have sued and frequently, they have prevailed against the US unfair practices. And yet, the US is the most aggressive advocate of free market and removal of subsidies. Policies which are imposed on developing nations by the US itself.

America have in my life time managed to have been strange bedfellows with unsavory and undemocratic governments in various parts of the world. America have also managed to have subverted democratically and constitutionally elected government in different parts of the world. America has frequently violated the political independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq, Grenada, Cuba, Panama etc all, in my life time as well. These are the lawless actions of a rogue state or who exactly defines rogue states?

America’s Central Intelligence Agency , CIA, once used a man named Manuel Noriega of Panama. When the CIA no longer needed the “services” Manuel Noriega? He was plucked by the US from his seat of power as the sitting president of Panama and dumped in a prison for 15 years in Florida, United States! A US court has just approved the deportation of Manuel Noriega to France to face money laundering charges there, more jail time is slated for Noriega in Sarkozy’s new France. Ah, Saddam Hussein used to be in the service of the United States as well, as when he fought proxy war against Iran for instance!

America fought Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua in the 1 980s and destabilized that country and the Honduras by arming anti government forces in those countries, even in violation of American laws, hence the Iran-Contra scandal of the Reagan administration, remember Colonel Oliver North? And Admiral Pointdexter?

America invaded Grenada and fought Maurice Bishop, then Prime Minister, he is no more. He has not been heard from ever since.

Clearly, America has used every opportunity to subvert President Castro of Cuba and has in fact blockaded Cuba’s economy for over forty years, thereby strangulating the economy of Cuba. America has supported and financed the overthrow of President Hugo Chavez and the US almost succeeded in its efforts in 2002

America was implicated in its facilitated overthrow of President Betrand Aristide of Haiti in 2004, I certainly have nothing to say in favor of the America or anyone who play any roles in the overthrow of democracy and constitutionalism in any part of the world. Just imagine if all these countries have had atomic-nuclear WMD, just like North Korea, would the US be so fast in antagonizing them? I think not!

Apparently, America has aversion to following international law and rules. America does not care neither does it observe, obey or respect UN protocols and conventions. America does not respect treaties or conventions regarding war prisoners and torture. The US creates new names or labels, such as enemy combatants, this in order for the US to circumvent international law. The US has detained war prisoners without trial. The US also contracted-out extraordinary “rendition” of war prisoners. In plain English, the US has outsourced some unusual treatments of war prisoners to third countries. The US is engaging in illegal conducts and sometimes use the help of other countries to conduct illegalities contrary to US laws.

In this world, the law, treaties and conventions and UN resolutions are targeted at the poor individuals and poor nations. And from all available evidence, this is just the way the world works.

America has thumped its nose at the rest of the world regarding Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it has similarly unilaterally invaded and occupied Iraq despite worldwide stiff opposition to the war against Iraq.

America, has for decades seem to have played abominable and ignominious roles in travails of Angola, Congo, Haiti, Panama, Grenada, Nicaragua and many others. Why, in view of this miserable record, does America always manage to control debate about peace, democracy and weapons proliferations? America frequently undermines foreign government that America does not like and the world seem nonchalant.

Why is this the America which practices gunboat diplomacy and bully-like mantra of might-is-power-is-right is the same America that wants to decide who could possess what weapons? Who could possess F15, F22 fighter jets and or atomic-nuclear and WMD capability? What country really has the right to decide what some other country chooses as its weapons? I take the position that any government’s resources are better spent on bread, butter and public infrastructures for human abundance. No government should waste money on weapons. Conversely, every government that can afford weapons should go ahead! No one should have atomic nuclear WMD capabilities or, everyone should have them! For mutually assured death and destruction or defense.

In a world where the UN is a toothless and clawless lion, President Bush shunned a global opposition to the continued occupation of Iraq, Bush is instead preparing for a parallel invasion and occupation of another Persian Gulf nation of Iran, based on the trumped up charges of nuclear ambition.

Only this week, The New York Times had an editorial in which it was alerting the world about the probability of an American invasion and occupation of Iran, it was titled, “The Crazies and Iran” the newspaper discussed the near cavalier attitude of American war mongers regarding military actions being loudly contemplated against Iran.

America from all indications often act contrary to world opinion. America led Europeans and Israel in undermining and stifling of a popularly elected constitutional and democratic government for Palestine, just because America did not like the winners of a free and fair elections!

America had engaged in similar subversion of constitutional and democratic leaders in Algeria, because they were too close to Islam; And in Egypt, democrats, members of the Islamic Brotherhood were opposed by the Americans because Americans did not like them. But be reminded that President Bush’s power and electoral base, is dominated by extreme right-wing ultra religious Christian conservatives evangelicals!

America obviously does not seem to mind mixing religious orthodoxy with politics in America, but the same America is alarmed by religious influences in Algerian, Iranian, Egyptian politics and elections?

Why is America perpetually interfering in the affairs of independent sovereign nations? Why is America afraid of incremental democracy in these lands where America resorts to subversions and usurpations?

True democracy must be given time to develop and grow in orderly manner, with due attention and respect to local conditions and circumstances.  Democracy does not have to come from America, pre-fabricated as it were; there must be no requirements to be pro-America or be a puppet of America before it is respected as a democracy!

Who, anyways, defines true democracy? I like globalization, but who defines globalization? Must globalization mean that America and its allies remain producers, while the rest of the world is condemned to dumping ground consumer status, where cheap labor may be had? Must world peace rely on the old world order of inequitable division of power entrenched in the establishment of the United Nations over 62 years ago? Must world peace depend on preventing developing countries from protecting their nations and best national interests, because America and its allies do not approve?

Why is this the America which practices gunboat diplomacy and bully-like mantra of might-is-power-is-right is the same America that wants to decide who could possess what weapons? Who could possess F15, F22 fighter jets and or atomic-nuclear and WMD capability? What country really has the right to decide what some other country chooses as its weapons? I take the position that any government’s resources are better spent on bread, butter and public infrastructures for human abundance. No government should waste money on weapons. Conversely, every government that can afford weapons should go ahead! No one should have atomic nuclear WMD capabilities or, everyone should have them! For mutually assured death and destruction or defense. Iran must not be invaded and occupied under any false pretext, just as Iraq was. Where, in view of the abundance of evidence, does America (and France) find the audacity to engage in preachments against Iran’s nuclear ambitions?




RobotRobot is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 1

True democracy must be given time to develop and grow in orderly manner, with due attention and r...Read the full article.

Posted by Robot| 30.09.2007 07:12

Reply Quote



fxofxo is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 2

Sir, may I say again that I don not buy into your idea that maybe because America is wrong, then Iran is right.
At the end of the day you are asking us to replace one tyrant with another.

A tyrant in whose culture a Blackman is still sub-human, a woman is still sub-human, the other man's faith is the faith of an infidel and a man who is convinced that because he supports one side in a land dispute the other side does not have the right to exist and the history of that side is fiction.
What are the facts here because you do not like America we should throw all sense of responsibility to the wind and allow the world to go crazy without a maintenance of order.

Sir, democracy is an inherent human right, it is not subject to a cultural identity or a religious ideology. So I don't understand the idea of democracy growing with time according to local customs.
When a man is hungry in Europe, Africa, Asia or America, it feels the same way.
When a personal rights are trampled upon and an individual is humiliated it feels the same whether it is Burma, USA, Nigeria or China.
When wrong choices are made by unqualified leaders and the economy suffers the social fabric that suffers from generation to generation is not delineated by culture or tradition.

Any community that would not grow and transform would subsequently die, then should we allow those who have a suicide wish to drag the rest of us down.

Certain things in human experience are the same, please do not insult me by telling me that I am not sophisticated enough to choose a competent leader, or to decide on what the rule of engagements should be between the state and the people, or to decide on how much tax I should pay, or what the school curriculum should be in the schools in Lagos or what minimum level of education is required of a parliamentarian.

Maybe Bush is wrong, maybe America is wrong, maybe France and the EU are wrong.
But don't tell me Ahmedinajjad is right, The Mynamar Generals are right, Hugo Chavez is right, Osama Bin Laden is right.

The Greeks, the Romans, The Persians, The Macedonians, The Othomans at one time in history have occupied the position the Americans occupy today.

There has never been a vacume at the top.


Today the stake is different and the challenges are out there in diversity,science, commerce, human right, tolerance, equity, global reach and anti-repudiation
( this last bit is a term used in Info Security).

As a Nigerians lets get to work, the Chinese and the Indians did not become major players by hating the USA or capitalism.
Lets get to work, work on our culture, work on our society, work on our schools, work on our economy, work on our laws, work ...
That is the only way to conquer the world now, I don't want Nigeria seating on the security council if we haven't earned it.
Do you?

Posted by fxo| 01.10.2007 05:45

Reply Quote



FjordFjord is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 3

In criticising George Bush on Iraq, it is easily forgotten that not only America (including George Bush and the awful Clinton before him) and the rest of the world, including most Western countries, were convinced of Saddam's stash of dangerous weapons. the same mistake is being made with Iran; except that it's on a much larger scale. Iran needs to be engaged; the Us shouldn't do it; it's a job better suited for Israel; but that's perhaps not pragmatic enough for other reasons.

Iran needs to be confronted; and it is 'unfortunate' that the US may have to do it.

.

Posted by Fjord| 01.10.2007 06:38

Reply Quote



mulanmulan is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 4

Why must Iran be confronted? Because it has ambitions for nuclear power? Beacause America wants to control the world? Because Iran president dares to speak out against the US and its policy in the middle east? Beacause Ahmadinejad supports Palestine rather than Isreal? Because Bush is a war monger? Abegy...

Posted by mulan| 01.10.2007 07:03

Reply Quote



CelticologistCelticologist is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 5


=mulan;20915464>Why must Iran be confronted? Because it has ambitions for nuclear power? Beacause America wants to control the world? Because Iran president dares to speak out against the US and its policy in the middle east? Beacause Ahmadinejad supports Palestine rather than Isreal? Because Bush is a war monger? Abegy...



A nuclear powered Iran is a danger even for Nigeria. Read about some dude called Ibrahim El-Zakzaki for a start.
The only restraint on an impending Israeli raid on Iran is the United States. Just like the Syrians, Iran has no major card to pull if the Israelis ever rained something down from the air.

Posted by Celticologist| 01.10.2007 11:15

Reply Quote



mulanmulan is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 6

Are you a war monger? Already salivating for the time the bombs will start to fall? Or are you just a bushphiliac? Why should the US or for that matter Isreal have WMD and not Iran or even Nigeria?

OK let me go and read about El-Zakzaki. Meanwhile can you please try answering some of my questions...

Posted by mulan| 01.10.2007 11:29

Reply Quote



AuspiciousAuspicious is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 7


=mulan;20915464>Why must Iran be confronted? Because it has ambitions for nuclear power? Beacause America wants to control the world? Because Iran president dares to speak out against the US and its policy in the middle east? Beacause Ahmadinejad supports Palestine rather than Isreal? Because Bush is a war monger? Abegy...



Because the government of Iran is just as hypocritical as those whom she confronts.

Auspicious.

Posted by Auspicious| 01.10.2007 11:38

Reply Quote



OghreOghre is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 8

Mulan,

But of course you may very be a Muslim so it’s easy to understand your mentality on this.

No one is afraid of Iran getting nuclear weapons if they can convince the world they don’t need it to blow up other countries they think should be wiped from the face of the earth.

While we are there why don’t we allow the Taliban to exercise their right to nuclear weapons?

How about Al-Qaeda? They too are humans like me and you; surely they must have good intentions for wanting atom bombs.

Daft, incoherent write-ups and opinions make the art of sane thinking and expression harder by the day.

What normal human (apart from hard-line fundamentalists) will want Iran to develop nuclear bombs?

Is this even worth discussing?

Posted by Oghre| 01.10.2007 12:05

Reply Quote



JAGA-JAGAJAGA-JAGA is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 9

Paul,
Before we digress on this topical issue, just to let you know that Francois Mitterand was not the immediate past president of France who opposed the US/British and so called 'coalision of the willing' invasion of Iraq. The president of France then was Jacques René Chirac. This information is alluded in paragraphs 7 and 8 of your message.

On the issue at stake, much as I won't hold brief for both US and the state of Israel on the way they execute their foreign policies but I need to make it clear that Ahmadinejad is the root cause of his own problems. Here is a president who abandoned his campaign promises to the electorate but is obsessed with power just for the sake of it. He keeps on boasting to the whole world whoever cares to listen that he is going to crush all enemies of the Islamic republic of Iran. Not done with he also denies the existence of the holocust of which living witneses abound. Indeed the Germans the perpetrators of this atrocities had made restitution and continue to pay other necessary compensations as they arise so as to address this evil. Yet Ahmadinejad says he is going to wipe out the state of Israel from the earth and went as far as hosting a conference in Teheran on holocust denial. This is outrageous and only a tree would remain in same state after being fore warned of its demise!

Ahmadinejad has started on the same path of futility by luring his country into a friutless confrontation with the west. He boasts about his nuclear plant program just the same mistake that Saddam did with WMD which never existed but he displayed attittude that was suspect.

Coming to the issue of developing nuclear bomb, is that a priority for Iran now? The basic developemental institutions are still underdevolped, yet he wants to make the world believe in this bogus programe. Does he want to be like Pakistan who is following the footsteps of India. However, India is far ahead in developmental instutional establishments than Pakistan. At least India has a functional democracy and a robust economy independent of oil/gas. I think Ahmadinejad has nothing to offer the Iranians and should just vacate his office after what he promised to deliver and could no longer accomplish it. With defeat staring him on the face he now looks outside to generate attention that would give him local/international support in order to hide his incompetence.

For the attainment of the so called MAD(Mutaul assured destruction) status in armament, this is a ruse and will never work!. Both NATO and the WARSAW PACT countries then, knew that this was not attainable and was one of the basic reasons that led Gorbachev to dismantle the former USSR. To date, no country has that advantage because the submarine based nuclear missiles could provide up to 3rd strike capabilities not to mention the recent race into space with lots of unknown in place.

Finally, let Iran be assured that the US does not have the courage/capacity to go into another full scale protracted war as 'their nose is already bloodied' in Iraq to borrow the language of Robert Mugabe on his recent UN general Assembly address. Talking of invasion of Iran by the US now is not feasible. The worst case is that they the US may hit some opportunity targets in order to dismantle whatever progress Iran has made on it's nuclear facilities. Israel did exactly that to Iraq under Saddam's regime and I believe this is avoidable if Iranian government would negotiate it's way out of the deadlock or face the actions of the UN nuclear watch agency.

Posted by JAGA-JAGA| 01.10.2007 13:15

Reply Quote



AuspiciousAuspicious is offline 
Villager

avatar
 # 10

Let me guess: Paul I. Adujie (the author of this article) is not afraid of Iran acquring "nukilar" weaponry. Ah, good for him. Me I am.

Sometimes, I think Paul loves to take this views on issues in general - race relations, international politics, pro-OBJ issues (he now appears reformed in that department though) and what's-not just for the sheer attention it gets him.

My opinion. My Guess. Not that it matters, anyways..

Auspicious.

Posted by Auspicious| 01.10.2007 13:22

Reply Quote


Last Updated ( Thursday, 24 April 2008 )
 
< Prev   Next >