Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Pakistan won’t be the next object of armed conflict with which the US will engage. Joe “loose lips sink ships” Biden says that “nothing is off the table” when it comes to dealing with Iran’s alleged backing of an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the US, from Yahoo! (Yahoo! really should change its name and logo–isn’t it about time that we collectively got over the cutesy aspect of internet startups? Quoting something from its website, just because of the stupid, hick “Yahoo!” name, lends an air of whatever is the opposite of gravitas):
Vice President Joe Biden said today that “nothing has been taken off the table” when it comes to the U.S. response to an alleged plot by Iran to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. and unleash deadly terrorist bombings in Washington, D.C.
“It is an outrageous act that the Iranians are going to have to be held accountable,” Biden told ABC News’ “Good Morning America”. “This is really over the top.”
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced Tuesday the DEA and FBI had disrupted a plot “conceived, sponsored and… directed from Iran” to murder the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. in or outside a crowded Washington, D.C. restaurant which potentially would have been followed up by bombings of the Saudi Arabian and Israeli embassies. The U.S. said an Iranian-American, 56-year-old Manssor Arbabsiar of Corpus Christi, Texas, was working for elements of the Iranian government when he attempted to hire hitmen from the feared Zetas Mexican drug cartel to carry out the hit, but Arbabsiar was unwittingly speaking to a DEA informant from the start.
Now, how much of the idea for the alleged assassination attempt originated with the DEA informant, and how much with the Iranian/US national? If you don’t believe the purer than wind-driven snow US government wouldn’t resort to ensnarement to ensure it keeps the agitation level high for all the wars it is fighting (e.g., Drug, Terror, etc., mainly Truth), then you really are a dimwitted sap that deserves to strap on an M-16 and a rucksack and go save the world from the demons the US finds under every rock.
Is it so hard for people to see that the US government has a conflict of interest when telling its constituents of dangers to their lives? That its primary business–its primary reason for being–is protection, and so it profits handsomely by making the world out to be a far more dangerous place than it is? Can’t people see that the government profits handsomely by fomenting conflict and drawing out the darker angels in our enemies, either by outright ensnarement, or through extra-judicial tomfoolery?
So, maybe it will be war with Iran, instead of Pakistan. No matter. War is coming soon, within the year. There is nothing left politically to do to revive the economy except war. War will operate to relieve the pressure to do something for the economy by diverting attention from the problem, while also helping matters a bit through its fiscally-stimulating aspect. In the main however, war with an external foe is the only hope to keep the combustible internal politics from bursting into flame, the smoldering embers of which are visible in the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements. It will serve to rally the people around the flag pole, and will help immeasurably to see that Obama gets another four years. It will be with a foe big enough to matter, but small enough to be readily subdued. Either of Pakistan or Iran will do.
If provocations can’t be found to justify war, then they will be fabricated, with visions of the Gulf of Tonkin and fantasies of WMD’s dancing in politician’s heads. This latest episode with Iran is just another incident in the grab-bag of potential provocations. If none exist that are deemed sufficient in the public’s eye, then a provocation will be created.
Wars of imperial expansionism are subject, like all things, to the law of diminishing returns, so this war, like Afghanistan and Iraq before it, but not World War Two before them, won’t help much to profitably expand the empire. In fact, the returns will likely be negative, as have been the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Still, it is inevitable. Conjectures about costs and benefits are just that, with each side having its own narrative, but the government side always wins. Remember how oil revenue was to pay for the Iraq war? The more things change…