What would you do if your army was mired down in a country turned hostile by your invasion, forced to hide behind fortified positions, and only able to make an occasional foray to kill a few women and children along with an occasional insurgent?
A plethora of reports are issued revealing that the reasons you thought you had for invading the country were completely false. The invasion was based on mistaken "intelligence."
You would pull your army out? Ah, that's the difference between sense and nonsense. The Bush administration, with the military stretched to the breaking point, wants to continue to occupy Iraq while starting a war with Iran.
According to news reports, "a US government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: 'If George Bush is re-elected, there will be much more intervention in the internal affairs of Iran,'" including air strikes, embargoes, and the instigation of revolts in Iran to topple the religious leadership.
Having bitten off more than he can chew in Iraq, President Bush wants to start on Iran?
If you think this is bad judgment, just examine the reasoning behind it: The US September 11 Commission has "evidence" that "about eight" of the September 11 hijackers passed through Iran between October 2000 and February 2001.
Think about that for a moment. Does this mean that any country—including our allies—through which a September 11 hijacker passed, without his intentions to commit mayhem on the World Trade Center being detected, is a target for destabilization?
If so, then the United States must be at the top of President Bush's list as the greatest threat to the US.
Only 8 of the hijackers got through Iran, but all 22 and a number of others passed through the US.
Moreover, six months after the World Trade Towers were toppled, the US Dept of State issued US visas to the dead terrorists!
If the US government is not competent to prevent the hijackers from passing through the US—even after the event—why is the allegation that 8 hijackers passed through Iran six months to a year prior to September 11 a justification for war with Iran?
The news reports do not reveal the source for the information that 8 terrorists passed through Iran. For all we know at this point, it is self-serving "evidence" from Iranian exiles, just as the case against Iraq was based entirely on lies serving the cause of Chalabi and Iraqi exiles.
Or perhaps the "evidence" consists of inventions in response to torture at one of the numerous secret detention centers where alleged "insurgents" are held, most of whom, it turns out, are just innocent civilians picked up in street sweeps.
If you think about it, the only people who could possibly know whether September 11 terrorists passed through Iran would be the terrorists themselves, who are dead, and the Iranian government, which denies the claim. So where did the "evidence" come from?
The United States government cannot control its own borders. A million or more illegal aliens sneak into the US every year. The US government has no idea whatsoever who or where the illegal aliens are.
If the US government—an advanced technology superpower—cannot find one million illegals, how is Iran supposed to find eight people and to identify their motives?
The neocon Nazis who control foreign policy in the Bush administration have made it clear in their published writings that their goal is to overthrow Islam throughout the Middle East.
Is this new allegation tortuously linking Iran to al-Qaeda the next step in the Bush administration's campaign of deception in order to widen the war against the Middle East?
Are Americans stupid enough to fall for this very thin rationale for war with Iran?
Americans have fallen for a lot, as the invasion of Iraq testifies, and Fox "news" is there to whip up the hysteria against Iran just as it did against Iraq.
Polls show that 40% of Americans are blindly wrapped in the flag and believe anything President Bush says—despite all evidence to the contrary.
Perhaps it will take war with Iran to topple the neocons who have destroyed American credibility throughout the world. Iran is a Shi'ite nation. War with Iran would alienate the Iraqi Shi'ites, who are 60% of the Iraqi population. So far, most Iraqi Shi'ites have tolerated our presence, because of their hatred of Saddam Hussein. If Bush starts a war with Iran, he will start a war with 15 million Iraqi Shi'ites, and the fate of our "occupying force" will be sealed.
More American aggression in the Middle East is likely to topple our puppets in Pakistan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.
Will President Bush create Osama bin Laden's fantasy—a unified Middle East under revolutionary Islam?
Stay tuned for the next episode of the White House Moron.
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Paul Craig Roberts is the author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice