A threat to world peace
Feature Editorial
Michael Griffin
Issue date: 1/14/08 Section: Opinions
Nevertheless, Iran is held up as the bete noire of "civilized" society, which generally just includes the terrorist states of Israel and the world tyrant, largely because of its pursuit in nonviolent self-defense. An exercise in empathy is quite demonstrative of the unjust nature of this point: Imagine that the most powerful country in the world, Iran, invaded Mexico because Mexico required evidence of guilt before extraditing suspects Iran wanted in connection with a criminal investigation (note: the use of force to bring about political goals is the textbook definition of international terrorism). Further, imagine Iran then preventively invaded Canada, which has the second largest known oil reserves in the world, on the patently and demonstrably false pretext that Canada had and sought to use weapons of mass destruction (note: a war of aggression, what was called the "supreme international crime" at Nuremburg, is defined as any war not out of self-defense). Next, imagine that Iran was fear-mongering its population for war with the United States, introduced a resolution in its deliberative body naming the United States military a terrorist organization (which it undoubtedly is), and patrolled the Great Lakes with its unmatched naval threat. As a petty, powerless country without a nuclear deterrent, what would and should the United States do? In reality, what would and should we expect Iran to do?
This imaginative exercise clearly demonstrates the absurdity of United States hostility towards Iran, that is, if we disregard operational principles central to the United States government: namely, aggression, hostility and violence committed against the United States are the supreme evils of the world; aggression, hostility and violence committed by the United States should be viewed as noble exercises of restraint for the benefit of a savage, uncivilized world population.
The aggressor's standard - that which applies to you does not apply to me - is nothing new. Indeed, Thucydides explicated the principle some 2,400 years ago: "the strong do as they may while the weak accept what they must." But because this is the operative principle of the United States government, and because the United States has an extensive, functional empire it has shown no timidity about using, the United States - not Iran - must be seen as the principal, if not single, threat to world peace.
This imaginative exercise clearly demonstrates the absurdity of United States hostility towards Iran, that is, if we disregard operational principles central to the United States government: namely, aggression, hostility and violence committed against the United States are the supreme evils of the world; aggression, hostility and violence committed by the United States should be viewed as noble exercises of restraint for the benefit of a savage, uncivilized world population.
The aggressor's standard - that which applies to you does not apply to me - is nothing new. Indeed, Thucydides explicated the principle some 2,400 years ago: "the strong do as they may while the weak accept what they must." But because this is the operative principle of the United States government, and because the United States has an extensive, functional empire it has shown no timidity about using, the United States - not Iran - must be seen as the principal, if not single, threat to world peace.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Chuck D
posted 1/14/08 @ 7:23 PM CST
You sir are a grade A douche bag. The US military is a terrorist organization? Please. If anything our current military policies in Iraq and Afghanistan are misguided because they are tying to create governments where the people only want to follow a religious cult. (Continued…)
Joe
posted 1/16/08 @ 8:28 PM CST
I second Chuck!
Post a Comment