When one hears "We Should Nuke Iran" from crazed, terror-mongering troglodytes other than the raving hair-trigger "Nucuelar Decider" and his PNACian Ziocon cabal, the whole nuclear nightmare scenario becomes all the more shocking.
It seems as if the entire "progressive" (I yearn for better terminology)community is paralysed in a paradoxical struggle to reconcile such virtually unimaginable fantasy with the reality of just how perilously close we are to that horrific outcome. So when the Toronto Sun published a lunatics column by that title the other day, the right-wing corporate media stepped into a hideous new ground, perhaps testing the waters, ~tilting our collective experience of reality towards that most inconceivable insanity...
"We Should Nuke Iran" by the total wacko Toronto Sun columnist Michael Coren is nothing but the desperation screed of a talentless, dismal illiterate writer who resorts to schock schlock to get readers to notice him. This is hideous piece of work which apes all the jingoist schlock propaganda now being spewed around by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld as they ratchet up the drumbeat for what's next in their gruesome GWOT plot.
Is this the new corporate media drumbeat? Is this where FOX is headed, beat to the punch by a Toronto tabloid? Do we have to be kicked in the face to wake up to this possiblity, that some madmen want very badly for this to become our reality?
Coren starts his off his scary screed with this:
It is surely obvious now to anybody with even a basic understanding of history, politics and the nature of fascism that something revolutionary has to be done within months -- if not weeks -- if we are to preserve world peace.
Put boldly and simply, we have to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran.
The nuclear nutcases in the media have made all kinds of insinuation for a long time about their lust to nuke Iran's nukes, but they haven't spelled it out as blatantly as this appalling article.
Here's the way another Canadian columnist, Mark Steyn beats -around-the-Bush:
Once again, we face a choice between bad and worse options. There can be no "surgical" strike in any meaningful sense: Iran's clients on the ground will retaliate in Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, and Europe. Nor should we put much stock in the country's allegedly "pro-American" youth. This shouldn't be a touchy-feely nation-building exercise: rehabilitation may be a bonus, but the primary objective should be punishment--and incarceration. It's up to the Iranian people how nutty a government they want to live with, but extraterritorial nuttiness has to be shown not to pay. That means swift, massive, devastating force that decapitates the regime--but no occupation.
And then there's the other blood-lusting Canadian Ziocon wingnut, Krauthammer:
Which is one of the reasons the Europeans are so mortified by the very thought of a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. The problem is not just that they are spread out and hardened, making them difficult to find and to damage sufficiently to seriously set back Iran's program.
The problem that mortifies the Europeans is what Iran might do after such an attack -- not just cut off its oil exports but shut down the Strait of Hormuz by firing missiles at tankers or scuttling its vessels to make the strait impassable. It would require an international armada led by the United States to break such a blockade.
Such consequences -- serious economic disruption and possible naval action -- are something a cocooned, aging, post-historic Europe cannot even contemplate. Which is why the Europeans have had their heads in the sand for two years. And why they will spend the little time remaining -- before a group of apocalyptic madmen go nuclear -- putting their heads back in the sand. And congratulating themselves on allied solidarity as they do so in unison.
And here's Canada's most repulsive Repuglican, David Frum:
If Iran sees its goals as strengthening Hezbollah, driving the U.S. out of Iraq, and obtaining a nuclear bomb for itself, that list of priorities indicates what the Western world's counter-priorities have to be: destroying Hezbollah, securing Iraq, and halting the Iranian bomb program. The campaign to achieve those counter-priorities begins in Lebanon. It cannot end there.
Losing Iraq and Lebanon has thrown the PNACian train off the track, which exacerbates the possibility of a nuclear attack of Iran. It's understandable why it's so difficult for sane person's to believe that USraeli Ziocons are desperate enough to dare do the dastardly deed, yet every thinking person who has been observing the unfolding of recent history must acknowledge that we have never been closer to the abyss.
It's insanity that Iran is about to be nuked out of its nukes. Reality is to put these Ziocon nutcases out of their misery.