Madam Strangelove

What do Iran, Lex Luthor, Dr. No, Darth Vader and Saddam Hussein have in common? They are fictional enemies.

But if you believe Senator Clinton, Iran is the latest threat to mankind. In the April 16 televised presidential debate, George Stephanopoulos asked the Democratic candidates if the United States should adopt a new foreign policy to protect Israel’s security. “Should it be U.S. policy now to treat an Iranian attack on Israel as if it were an attack on the United States?”asked Mr. Stephanopoulos.[i]

“Well, in fact, George, I think that we should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much further than just Israel,” said Senator Clinton. “Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region.”[ii]

Senator Clinton expanded her answer during an interview with Keith Olbermann. “I think deterrence has not been effectively used in recent times. We used it very well during the Cold War, when we had a bipolar world. And what I think the president should do and what our policy should be is to make it very clear to the Iranians that they would be risking massive retaliation were they to launch a nuclear attack on Israel,” said Senator Clinton. “In order to forestall that, creating some kind of a security agreement, where we said, no, you do not need to acquire nuclear weapons. If you were the subject of an unprovoked nuclear attack by Iran, the United States and hopefully our NATO allies would respond to that as well.”[iii]

Mrs. Clinton continued her militaristic rhetoric during an interview with ABC News. “I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran… In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,”said Senator Clinton.[iv]

This is a departure from her previous position regarding hypothetical questions. Senator Clinton often refused to answer hypothetical questions in Democratic presidential debates and during interviews.

Furthermore, Senator Clinton criticized Senator Obama about a comment he made early in the campaign regarding potential military action in Pakistan. “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act,” said Mr. Obama, “we will.”[v]

The media portrayed Senator Obama’s comment as a gaffe. Senator Clinton used that comment to argue Mr. Obama was too inexperienced in foreign affairs to be president. However, the argument lost its effectiveness when the Bush Administration launched an attack against an Al Qaeda target in Pakistan.

Now she wants to destroy Iran because the Iranians may obtain nuclear weapons in the future, thus jeopardizing Israel’s security. What made her change her mind?

First, she is losing the race to become the Democratic presidential nominee. Second, Senator Clinton is trying to prove she is capable of being the Commander In Chief. Third, she is getting desperate and the Bush Administration has demonstrated fear works even if the threat is not real.

President Bush convinced Americans the evil Saddam Hussein possessed a lethal ray gun that could destroy the United States and the evil Iraqi dictator was about to launch an armada of nuclear powered robots to invade the United States. Implausible? Like Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction?

President Bush exploited the fears of Americans to initiate a war against Iraq. The war was based on flawed intelligence. The President took advantage of our insecurity to abuse the Bill of Rights. Mr. Bush used the threat of terrorism to win a second term as president. In politics, fear works. Unfortunately, President Bush created a precedent. To win an election you can scare the electorate into voting for you.

However, there is another factor that is being ignored by the public. The Clintons are motivated by public opinion polls. It is an historical fact. Senator Clinton’s presidential campaign, in particular, is marketed through focus groups. The Clinton campaign may have detected a weakness of Senator Obama’s with Jewish voters and are exploiting that weakness. If Mr. Obama’s support in the Jewish community is soft, then Senator Clinton will try to secure the pro Israel faction of the Democratic Party by implying she is more committed to the security of Israel than Barack Hussein Obama. It is part of the strategy to diminish Senator Obama to the electorate and especially the super delegates.

Senator Clinton is using scare tactics regardless of her true motivation. She learned this skill by observing the Bush Administration over the last seven years and watching movies.

In the movie “Wag the Dog,” a Washington DC poltical insider asks a Hollywood producer to stage a phony war with Albania to distract the public from a presidential sex scandal with a minor. Why Albania? “Because we found out they have the bomb… And wait a second… The bomb’s not there because they’d have to have a rocket… It’s a suitcase bomb. You don’t need missiles. You can put a bomb in a suitcase… And it’s in Canada. Albanian terrorists have placed a suitcase bomb in Canada in an attempt to infiltrate it into the USA,”said Stanley Moss as portrayed by Dustin Hoffman.[vi]

The current presidential campaign has taught us Senator Clinton shares an adverse flaw with President Bush. They do not read. In August 2001, President Bush did not read the Presidential Daily Brief titled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the United States.”

In 2002, Senator Clinton did not read the flawed National Intelligence Estimate’s report about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs, nor did she read the National Intelligence Estimate in 2007. The report clearly stated, “Iran had halted a military program in 2003, though it continues to enrich uranium, ostensibly for peaceful uses.”[vii]

The Mediacracy is participating in the charade because they are asking questions based on a false premise. Furthermore, the media neglects to correct the presidential candidates when they make false assumptions that are based on a false premise.

Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, and is currently not a threat to launch a nuclear attack against Israel. It is extremely irresponsible for President Bush, Senator Clinton and the Mediacracy to declare Iran a nuclear threat.

Americans are uninformed. That is a problem. We do not take the time to research and investigate an issue. We ignore history. For example, in 1974 Pakistan Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutt promised to develop nuclear weapons even if it meant Pakistanis had to “eat grass” to achieve this goal. The urgency to develop nuclear weapons was in response to neighboring India successfully detonating a nuclear device. Pakistan and India are enemies. Pakistan was able to manufacture nuclear fuel using domestic uranium in 1980. Pakistan conducted the first of six nuclear weapons tests in 1998.[viii] It took Pakistan 24 years to develop nuclear weapons – without the consent of the international community.

The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate reported Iran stopped its nuclear program in 2003. Using Pakistan as a template, it would take Iran at least a decade to develop nuclear weapons. The nuclear threat against Israel would not be completed until 2019 – the last year in the second term of the Clinton presidency. But we are being led to believe Iran is currently capable of becoming a nuclear threat by a cynical presidential candidate and by a slothful media.

In January, President Clinton characterized Senator Obama’s position on the Iraq war as a fairy tale, but Senator Clinton’s apocalyptic assumptions about Iran launching a nuclear attack against Israel and her hypothetical decisive response is a true work of fiction. She can call it “Wag the Dog II – The Road to Armageddon.”


[i] “Transcript Democratic presidential debate 4/16/08,” The New York Times.
[ii] “Transcript Democratic presidential debate 4/16/08,” The New York Times.
[iii] Countdown with Keith Olbermann, April 21, 2008.
[iv] Patrick Healy, “Clinton Clearly Outduels Obama in Pennsylvania,” New York Times, April 23, 2008.
[v] Jeff Zeleny, “Obama Calls For Military Shift in U.S. Focus on Terrorism,” New York Times August 2, 2007.
[vi] “Wag the Dog,” New Line Cinemas, 1998.
[vii] Steven Lee Myers, “An Assessment Jars a Foreign Policy Debate About Iran,” New York Times, December 4, 2007.
[viii] “Timeline: Pakistan’s Nuclear Program,” CNN, 2004.