Iran War: Mobilization of public opinion continues

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who famously knew exactly where the WMDs in Iraq were, is telling us why Iran is such a danger to us now:  Rumsfeld: Iran Aids Rebels Washington Times 09/08/04 (It's always worth remembering that the Washington Times, owned by Rev. Moon's Unification Church cult, is the de facto house organ for the Bush administration.)

Asked whether Iran is funding Sheik al-Sadr [who leads the radical Shi'a Army of the Mahdi in Iraq], Mr. Rumsfeld said, "There's a lot of speculation to that effect."

Run by radical clerics who imposed their rule through the Revolutionary Guard, Iran is one of the world's top sponsors of international terrorism, according to the U.S. State Department, and, along with Saddam-run Iraq and North Korea, it was dubbed part of an "axis of evil" by Mr. Bush.

Some military intelligence sources say Iran is working to impose the same type of Shi'ite rule in Iraq, as it also seeks nuclear weapons.

Mr. Rumsfeld said to date, countries are not willing to band together to force Tehran to change.

"The problem of proliferation and the problem of terror and the problem of dealing with a country that's separated itself from the civilized community is that those are the kind of things that require the cooperation of a lot of countries," he said. (my emphasis)

"And when you have countries of the world that are not willing to participate in an organized effort to try to persuade a country to behave in a civilized way, it encourages them simply to continue on its merry way. And that's a problem," Mr. Rumsfeld said.

The hawkish Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has also been sounding off on the topic: Iran: A 'Tougher Nut' Than N. Korea Business Week online 09/07/04.

Iran, I think, is a tougher nut, actually, than North Korea. I served in Iran years ago.... And I found Iranians, generally, to be both charming and hegemonistic and very ethnocentric.

The dream of being a player on a large stage is in the breast of most Iranians. So I think they will be a lot more difficult, regarding the elimination of their weapons program.

The "dream of being a player on a large stage" resides "in the breast of most Iranians"?  It's worth being skeptical of arguments for war based on eccentric diagnoses of a country's alleged "national character" like this. 

Iran is much more difficult [than North Korea on nuclear proliferation]. There are some things internal to Iran that one has to look at. Demographics are one. The Persians are almost a minority in their own country now -- they're like 52% or something. There are many more Azeris in Tabriz than there are in Azerbaijan, just for the record. So that has an effect over time of changing things.

They've developed no new infrastructure since the revolution. That impedes them as a society from moving forward.

I'm not sure where he's going with this business about the Persians becoming a minority.  It's probably a public hint that the US will be funding ethnic-based opposition groups of various kinds against the Iranian regime.

At some point, if this publicity/propaganda campaign for war with Iran continues, we'll be seeing conservative outlets digging up comments by critics of the Iraq War pointing out that Iran was actually a more active opponent of American interests than Saddam's Iraq.  But instead of being used to reconsider reckless assumptions, they will be used to justify yet another war.