Message below from Linda Z in TX in reply to a friend's question regarding Glen Beck and the threats that are broadcast on mainstream media about Iran. . . . . .

An element of the war in Iraq overlooked by the mainstream media is the nationalists vs. the separatists. The true divide in Iraqi politics is not between Sunni and Shia or supporters of the Iraqi government and "anti-government forces," nor is it a clash of "moderates" against "radicals"; the defining battle for Iraq at the political level today is between "nationalists" trying to hold the Iraqi state together and the separatists, which means groups who oppose a unified Iraq with a strong central government.

In Washington the alarm bells are ringing because Iran would be able to attack many countries—particularly Israel--if it did have nuclear weapons. And, of course, the U.S. and other nuclear weapons states would be able to obliterate Iran’s cities and industries with their own nuclear weapons.

Many Washington observers with close ties to the Pentagon and White House see in the Iran standoff a repeat of the weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, both justifications that were used to attack Iraq. Scott Ritter, former chief United Nations weapon inspector, who testified before Congress, that the U.S. needed more time for inspections in Iraq before attacking Iraq, has recently appeared on C-Span making this point and Dennis Kucinich has also spoken about this on the Floor of the House of Representatives speaking for the progressives who can see this issue clearly.

Muslims around the world will see a Christian nation seeking to control 138 billion barrels of oil reserves and one of the largest natural gas deposits in the world reminding them of the invasion of Iraq, another oil rich Muslim nation. Saddam Hussein was not a religious leader. Now Iraq is lead by the Shia people who are in the majority of Iraq and the clerics in power in Iran see this as a plus. The Bush Administration is now attempting to make the case that it is Iran's fault we are losing the war in Iraq.

We can not bring peace to The Middle East via a military solution. General Petreaus is a broken record and has been sounding off the same talking points about making progress in Iraq since 2004 and of course I sent examples of this to you in another email. American servicemen were exposed to Agent Orange during Viet Nam and also White Phosphorous (chemical weapons) still being used as a U.S. weapon of mass destruction in the occupation of Iraq along with Depleted Uranium (DU), which Bill Clinton authorized in 450 bombs dropped on Iraq and also in the Balkan wars. Doctors have been treating veteran’s years ­­after exposure. In 2004, the Vietnamese government claimed they cleared 100,000 mines in recent years.

Politicians make time for photo opportunities with Veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan who have lost a limb, but what about those veterans returning with multiple cancers after being exposed to DU? And what about the people in the Middle East killed, maimed and threatened by the U.S. and the U.S. military proxy in the Middle East, Israel.

The United States has used nuclear weapons against civilian populations, and the United States has the largest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction on the planet. Most dangerous and incredible it is at this very moment the Pentagon and corporate benefactors are developing a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons. As the administration tries to persuade the world to put sanctions on North Korea and Iran to halt their nuclear programs, two teams in the U.S. are competing to design a nuclear weapon, one at Los Alamos in New Mexico and one at the Livermore National Laboratory in California. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran has been reported to make threats against Israel, a key customer of nuclear weapons and military airplanes from the U.S. and President Bush in the tradition of a wild west movie star has proclaimed Bring it On. President Bush advocates the bunker buster nuclear bomb and all options are on the table.