Iranian hysteria

Felon accidentally shoots off
his own testicle, avoids jail,
Judge says he suffered enough.

I absolutely do not understand this hysteria over Iran and its possible nuclear bomb. First of all there is no evidence that the Iranians are actually pursuing a bomb. Second, what would happen even if they did have a bomb? With one or two or three bombs would they try to destroy Israel and Western Europe? This is a simply absurd assumption, especially as Iran has not attacked anyone for over two hundred years, and Israel and the U.S. would presumably respond massively. Then some say it would set off an arms race in the Middle East. It conceivably could do that, but why assume that Iranians and Arabs are so crazy or irresponsible they would start blowing each other up with nuclear bombs? Even the West versus Russia was not that stupid, and there is no reason to assume any difference for those in the Middle East (unless, of course, you are a bunch of racist paternalists still daydreaming about the “white man’s burden.”). As Israel has had nuclear bombs for years, the only nation in the Middle East to do so, I am rather surprised there hasn’t already been a nuclear arms race in that part of the world. I don’t think it’s because the Arab states are too poor. Anyway, this whole approach to the Middle East seems to me to be predicated on the assumption that Iranians and Arabs must be really stupid and unable to manage their own affairs. Besides, if there were to be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East it would probably not mature until after global warming had already done us all in.

Another article I saw today says that “diplomats” (unnamed diplomats, of course) say that Iran could conduct an underground nuclear test within six months. There is absolutely no evidence for this as far as I can see. Furthermore, the same article then goes on to point out why the Iranians would not do this even if they could (it would tip off Israel which would immediately respond and etc.). The article also suggests that the Iranians are nowhere near having the capacity to launch a nuclear weapon even if they had one, and then goes on, interestingly enough, to point out, it will be years before Iran would be in a position to have and use nuclear weapons. So why, I ask you, all this continued talk about an Israeli attack on Iran, with the blessing of the U.S., and so on? Why do people like Hillary and Gates keep repeating that “nothing is off the table,” and they should not think the U.S. is weak, and blah, blah, blah. At the same time they keep threatening, they also indicate that an attack on Iran is not imminent or planned or whatever. And why do we try to frighten Europeans by pointing out that if Iran had a bomb it would threaten them also? They probably have better intelligence than we do (not a difficult achievement these days) and know more about the situation than we do. Having been following this for months, even years, I have to conclude that it is mostly racist Israeli paranoia which results in nothing but gobbeldy gook instead of common sense on the part of most everyone. I have no doubt that if the West and Israel would reach out diplomatically to Iran, without preconditions, and without assuming they are just irresponsible children, this “problem” would turn out to be mostly a figment of Israeli and U.S. imagination. I believe this would be true no matter who is in charge of Iran at the moment.

As far as I know the American public (at least that portion of it that is actually awake) is in favor of a single-payer health care system. And many of those who are actively involved in trying to negotiate a new health care system also favor a single-payer plan. Obama himself, as a candidate, also favored a single-payer plan. It now seems to be pretty much universally understood that a single-payer system would be much, much less expensive than any other plan, much more cost effective and efficient, and would eliminate the enormous profits that just go to the Insurance industry (an organization completely unnecessary for health care, basically a form of parasitical bloodsuckers). Thanks mostly to Dennis Kucinich it is apparently going to be possible for individual states to opt for a single-payer system should they so desire. The Obama administration, and others, believing there was no chance for a single-payer plan, have opted to create a public option so people, if they wished, could by-pass the insurance leeches entirely. The Insurance and Pharmaceutical and Hospital industries are predictably opposed to even this form of public option. Obama remains determined to get some kind of plan this year, and is talking of just ramming one through without the help of Republicans (and a few Democrats being heavily bribed by the corporations). I don’t know how possible this may be, but if it is possible, why not ram through a single-payer plan and have done with it? If they succeed in getting a public option it will almost inevitably turn into a single-payer plan eventually, so why wait? Why would anyone, especially any Congressperson, who is supposed to have the public interest foremost in their minds, oppose the most efficient and practical plan? Because the Insurance and Pharmaceutical Industries are paying them big bucks to do just that. It is, alas, that simple, and that disgusting.

LKBIQ:
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.
Aesop

TILT:
Alexander the Great’s horse, Bucephalus, was said to have died of old age at thirty. Alexander named a city after him, Bucephala.