When Drones Come Home to Roost Reply

By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit

Exile in Happy Valley

It was fucking beautiful. There are no more accurate words in the English dictionary to describe the vision I saw. I awoke Sunday afternoon, turned the TV on to CNN and there it was in all its infernal glory like Christmas Morning in hell. Standing six-hundred stories high above the sea of sand in Saudi Arabia’s Empty Quarter, a leaning wall of towering flames shimmering across the night sky like an aurora borealis made of fire. As all the usual yammering skulls off camera spun fantastic tall tales about an Iranian conspiracy to deny the House of Saud their Allah given right to rape and pillage with abandon, only one thing, one message, burned through my frontal lobes like Abqaiq crude, “They did it. The Houthis really did it!” The resounding feeling of karmic justice was downright euphoric. I wanted to cry. I wanted to dance. Fuck, I wanted to masturbate to the sight of those rabid dogs getting exactly what they deserved.

After spending nearly half a decade watching Saudi Arabia’s savage holocaust in Yemen and the dogged Houthi rebels courageous if at times downright suicidal resistance, after pouring over a veritable ocean of pictures and footage of starving and slaughtered Zaydi children, somehow this conflict on the other side of the planet had become very personal to me. In spite of being a decadent pagan faggot, the chaste Houthi rebels had come to symbolize a greater narrative beyond their own struggle for independence. They had come to symbolize a greater resistance to a dying empire of Atlantic supremacy represented by their twisted Arab cartels in the Persian Gulf, the Salafi Goliath to the Shia Davids. But now, the unthinkable. David struck back hard with his RC slingshot, landing a spectacular blow to the vital organ Goliath held most dear, his wallet.

READ MORE

Bolton Firing Shows Trump’s Foreign Policy Not Consistent: US Analyst 1

An interview with Tasnim.

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An American political commentator highlighted US President Donald Trump’s inconsistent approach toward foreign affairs, saying the president fired John Bolton to probably develop a “less aggressive stance” than the former US national security adviser.

“Certainly, there is a lack of consistency in the Trump administration when it comes to a variety of matters, including foreign policy,” Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of attackthesystem.com, told Tasnim in an interview.

He added, “Trump likely fired Bolton because the President is inclined toward a less aggressive stance than what Bolton’s supporters would prefer.”

The following is the full text of the interview.

More…

Saudi Arabia ‘such a pariah state on the international level’ Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

Saudi Arabia’s devastating war against Yemen since 2015 has made it “a pariah state” in the world, says an American political analyst in Virginia.

Riyadh’s war as well as its involvement in the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi have made Saudi Arabia very unpopular in the United States too, resulting in a new push in Congress to end the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen, Keith Preston, chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com, told Press TV on Tuesday.

Now, “members of the United States Congress are trying to rein in the Trump administration’s policies towards Saudi Arabia.” 

“The Trump administration has become extremely supportive of the Saudi government because of the relationship that exists between the two countries in terms of arms sales, in terms of the petroleum industry, in terms of geopolitical interests and other things.” 

“Because of the fact that Saudi Arabia has become such a pariah state on the international level, because of what’s going on in Yemen, and because of the killing of Jamal Khashoggi in particular,” Riyadh has become “very unpopular in the United States,” he added.

PressTV-US lawmakers launch new bid to end Saudi war on Yemen

PressTV-US lawmakers launch new bid to end Saudi war on YemenA bipartisan group of lawmakers in the US Congress say they are frustrated with Saudi Arabia’s deadly war against the people of Yemen and want to end it.

A group of Republican and Democratic lawmakers in the US Congress are making a new effort to end Saudi Arabia’s deadly war against the people of Yemen, amid international outrage over the Saudi regime’s bombing of a Yemeni prison that killed over 100 people.

The lawmakers are seeking to protect an amendment to the annual US defense policy bill, which prohibits the Pentagon from providing the spare parts that Saudi Arabia needs to keep its warplanes, which are mostly US-made, in operational status.

The measure also ends certain forms of intelligence-sharing between Washington and Riyadh.

The amendment, first presented by Democratic Representative Ro Khanna of California, has already been adopted by the House of Representatives in its version of the military authorization bill, and now the bipartisan group, which features members of both chambers of Congress, are trying to prevent the amendment’s omission.

US President Donald Trump has pledged to veto any bills that seek to undermine ties with Saudi Arabia as he did one earlier this year which banned a massive $8 billion arms sale to the kingdom.

Trump and his team have time and again touted Saudi Arabia as an important regional partner, which plays a vital role in keeping Israel secure while being considered a counterweight to Iran.

However, the war on Yemen, which has killed tens of thousands of people and caused near-famine conditions in the impoverished country, is drawing international attention.

A United Nations report released Tuesday said the US, UK and France may be complicit in war crimes in Yemen by arming and providing intelligence and logistics support to the Saudi-led coalition that starves civilians as a war tactic.

The report by a UN panel of experts accused the military coalition led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates of killing Yemeni civilians in air raids and deliberately denying them food in a country facing famine.

US war in Afghanistan has become a ‘political liability’ Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

The 18-year US war in Afghanistan has become a “political liability” for the administration of President Donald Trump and is growing more unpopular in the United States, says an American political analyst in Virginia.

“Americans increasingly are in favor of withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan,” said Keith Preston, chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.

The US military “is trying to pull out gradually without giving the appearance of having been defeated; American policy makers do not want to view themselves as having lost the war in Afghanistan,” Preston told Press TV on Thursday.

“I suspect that what they want to do is maintain a puppet government in Afghanistan that will most likely continue in the same way that the current government has, which is essentially an American puppet,” he added.

Trump said Thursday that the US plans to reduce the number of American troops in Afghanistan from 14,000 to 8,600 and then will determine further drawdowns.

In an interview with Fox News, Trump said the US will keep a troop presence in Afghanistan even if Washington reaches an agreement with the Taliban.

“We’re going down to 8,600 [troops] and then we make a determination from there,” the US president said. “We’re always going to have a presence.”

PressTV-Trump: Some troops to stay even after Taliban deal

PressTV-Trump: Some troops to stay even after Taliban dealPresident Trump says the US will keep 8,600 troops in Afghanistan even if it strikes a peace deal with the Taliban.

Trump has repeatedly advocated for bringing US troops back from Afghanistan, putting him at odds with hawkish Republican lawmakers like Senator Lindsey Graham.

US officials have held several rounds of direct negotiations with the Taliban to pull out American forces in exchange for concessions. The militant group says it does not recognize the government in Kabul.

The Taliban said on Wednesday it was close to a “final agreement” with US officials on a deal that would see American forces withdraw from Afghanistan in exchange for a pledge that the country would not become a haven for other militant groups.

The US invaded Afghanistan to overthrow the ruling Taliban regime. US troops were first sent to Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States.

American forces have since remained bogged down in Afghanistan through the presidencies of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and now, Donald Trump.

Trump admin sees China as primary enemy Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

The administration of US President Donald trump views China as the “primary enemy” amid a growing divide between political and business leaders in the United States over how Washington should treat China’s growing military and economic threat, an American political analyst says.

Keith Preston, director of attackthesystem.com, said some in Washington supported Trump’s ongoing military and economic pressure against Beijing while many others called for less tensions in the relationship.

The divide between the elite became clearer on Friday, when Trump implied that the US central bank chief was a greater “enemy” than Chinese President Xi Jinping.

He made the remark after Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell warned the trade war with China is a risk to the US economy.

“We have a very strong dollar and a very weak Fed. I will work ‘brilliantly’ with both, and the US will do great,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “My only question is, who is our bigger enemy, Jay Powell or Chairman Xi?”

Preston told Press TV on Sunday that American corporations relied heavily on China because of cheap labor in the country as well as Beijing’s policy of handing out loans to foreign businesses.

This is while some parts of the US establishment believe the growing trade imbalance between the two sides was hurting the US as it allowed China to boost its economy at America’s expense, Preston added.

“China only has about half the economic power of the United States but the Chinese economy has grown exponentially in recent decades and there are some policymakers and some elites in the United States who are concerned about that and they wish to level this trade imbalance somewhat,” Preston argued.

“Another issue is the fact that China is increasingly viewed [by the US] as a geopolitical rival not only militarily but also economically,” he continued.

The United States is also heavily dependent on China for its military technologies, another factor that has split US officials about the correct approach.

“It is clear that the Trump administration represents a vein of the American that do view China as a primary enemy and wish to take a more hawkish position towards China,” the analyst added.

PressTV-Trump says US central bank chief greater 'enemy' than China

PressTV-Trump says US central bank chief greater ‘enemy’ than ChinaUS President Donald Trump has called Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell a greater “enemy” than Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Trump lashed out at China on Friday, vowing a quick response to its announcement of new tariffs and ordering US companies to leave the country.

China announced earlier on Friday it would impose new tariffs on US soybeans, lobsters, peanut butter and other imports worth $75 billion in retaliation for Washington’s latest round of punitive duties that take effect in two rounds, September 1 and December 15.

The United States will raise existing tariffs on $250 billion in Chinese imports to 30 percent from 25 percent, beginning on October 1, Trump said on Twitter Friday.

He added that the duties on another $300 billion in Chinese products, set to take effect on September 1, will be increased by 5 percent, reaching 15 percent.

Why I’m a Proud Anti-American 1

By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit

Exile in Happy Valley

Anti-American, that’s the popular slur for any critic of American foreign policy, especially in an election year. If you happen to have enough of a conscience to give a shit about who this country happens to be bombing or starving this week, you’re an anti-American, you hate the troops and you should go back to where you came from. The knee-jerk reaction to this knee-jerk reaction from most peaceniks, left and right, is to designate their opposition to empire as a form of patriotism. And I can respect that, but it’s not really my style. I’ve always been the kind of fat insane faggot who owns her slurs and wears them proudly like gang colors. I call it the Eazy E school of political incorrectness. You can be a patriotic pacifist, or you can be an Anti-American with attitude. My homegirls in the Squad have sheepishly chosen the prior, but I for one am proud to be a flag burning, middle finger waging, Anti-American bitch, and if Trump wants to send me back to the County Cork, I’ll pack my bags if he agrees to kiss my ass on the way out.

The stone cold reality is that my fervent anti-imperialism cannot be divorced from the country I live in. America is not a republic inflicted by empire. America is a glorified corporation defined by empire and it always has been. America has grown from a plucky little European slave colony to the deadliest war machine the world has ever seen. You’ll have to forgive me if I have trouble finding something to love about a rabid ax murderer like Uncle Sam, but for the sake of bitching lets unpack some of the cherished myths even antiwar patriots tend to cling to like exiles to a lifeboat.

Let’s start with an easy one. “People died for your freedom!” Every time I hear some Toby-Keith-love-it-or-leave-it-limp-dick belch that one out, I instinctively start laughing and then feel like a total cunt. People died for our freedom? No they didn’t. When was the last time your “freedom” was personally threatened by some bearded zealot from a shithole country? Did the Vietcong threaten our precious freedom to buy Coke and vote for reality TV rapists? Did the Taliban? The only thing these peasant malcontents threatened was America’s ability to treat the Third World like a broodmare.

READ MORE

“A State within a State”: Hezbollah as a Bulwark against the Atlanticist-Zionist-Gulf State Axis Reply

By Keith Preston

Introduction

            Hezbollah is one of the most unique political organizations in the world and has the distinction of having forced the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to withdraw from southern Lebanon on two separate occasions. The first of these was in 2000, ending Israel’s 18-year occupation of the region. The second was during the 2006 Lebanon War following a renewed assault on Lebanon by the IDF. Hezbollah is also considered to be a model “fourth generation warfare” organization by theorists of generational warfare, such as William S. Lind. Fourth generation warfare theory argues that the nature of war has been transformed since the end of World War Two. Because of the invention of nuclear weapons, international warfare between states has largely become cost prohibitive. Consequently, the waging of war has become a matter of conflict between states and non-state actors primarily.

Non-state actors may include any organization that engages in armed conflict outside of the state system, such as guerrillas, insurgents, or terrorists. However, non-state actors also include organizations that provide functions usually considered to be the prerogative of states (such as the provision of social services, education, public infrastructure, or public security), or focal points of public loyalty other than states, such as movements, causes, religions, ideologies, or gangs. Fourth generation warfare theory indicates that many people around the world are transferring their primary loyalties away from traditional national patriotisms toward fourth generation forces of many kinds. For example, rather than considering themselves to be a patriotic citizen of their nation, a person may first consider themselves to be a loyal Muslim, socialist, or devotee of animal welfare. Hezbollah is considered by fourth generation warfare theorists to be the most sophisticated fourth generation model because of its ability to provide traditional state functions on a significant scale, and Hezbollah’s having superseded the Lebanese military as the “national defense” force of Lebanon.

More…

American elite divided over US-China economic ties Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

The American elite are divided over what the economic relationship between the United States and China should be like, says a political analyst.

Keith Preston made the remarks in an interview with Press TV on Saturday when asked about President Donald Trump’s furious reaction after Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell had warned the trade war with China was a risk to the US economy.

In a furious flurry of tweets on Friday, Trump attacked the Powell’s stewardship of the world’s biggest economy.

“As usual, the Fed did NOTHING! It is incredible that they can ‘speak’ without knowing or asking what I am doing, which will be announced shortly,” Trump wrote on Twitter.

“We have a very strong dollar and a very weak Fed. I will work ‘brilliantly’ with both, and the US will do great,” he added.

“My only question is, who is our bigger enemy, Jay Powell or Chairman Xi?”

Preston said, “There is a split within the American elite, within the American economic and political elite over the question of what the economic relationship between the United States and China ought to be.”

“It’s clear that the Trump administration represents a vein of the American elite that do view China as a primary enemy and wish to take a more hawkish position towards China when it comes to things like tariffs and trade and those kinds of issues, economic relationships and also military relationships as well.” 

“On the other hand, there are other sections that the American elite that are very concerned about maintaining a trade relationship that currently exists between the United States and China, they do not want anything to disrupt that,” he added.

Trump lashed out at China on Friday, vowing a quick response to China’s announcement of new tariffs and ordering US companies to leave the country.

The attack came after China announced earlier on Friday it would impose new tariffs on US soybeans, lobsters, peanut butter and other imports worth $75 billion in retaliation for Washington’s latest round of punitive duties that take effect in two rounds, September 1 and December 15.

The United States will raise existing tariffs on $250 billion in Chinese imports to 30 percent from 25 percent, beginning on October 1, Trump said on Twitter Friday.

PressTV-US to hike existing, planned tariffs on Chinese imports

PressTV-US to hike existing, planned tariffs on Chinese importsPresident Trump says the US will hike tariff rates on most imports from China in retaliation for Beijing’s new duties on American goods.

He added that the duties on another $300 billion in Chinese products, set to take effect on September 1, will be increased by 5 percent, reaching 15 percent.

Who’s Afraid of Tulsi Gabbard? Reply

By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit

Exile in Happy Valley

Elections are different for anarchists. We’ve already made our peace with the basic fact that representative democracy is a sham even when it’s not rigged by moneyed oligarchs. So when we do actually take part in the process, it’s usually for purposes of propaganda and/or Machiavellian strategy. One thing Trump was right about is the influence of the deep state, though it’s hardly the shadowy coalition of dope smoking lesbian Bolsheviks the Alex Jones-set imagines them to be (I wish.) Rather, they’re more of a loose coalition of rich old white men who travel back and forth between unelected positions in the federal government and the numerous industrial complexes of the Fortune 500. At the risk of sounding like a member of the tinfoil hat brigade, these are the people who really run this country. Elections, especially at the presidential level, are largely just theater, a glorified reality TV show designed to feed the masses the illusion of living in a democratic society beneath the steel boot of a rapidly decomposing empire.

I personally subscribe to the Murray Rothbard philosophy on elections, which basically goes that since the state is defined by it’s monopoly on the use of force, the best we the people can do when we’re not loading rifles is to support the most antiwar candidate available. To me, this school of thought is made doubly relevant by the fact that theoretically the only thing the president has direct authority over is the armed forces. To say that this philosophy has brought me to some strange places is an understatement. I have personally changed political parties no fewer than three times and counting. And I’ve found myself openly backing everyone from Jurassic goldbugs like Ron Paul to New Age hippie vaxxers like Jill Stein (who’s 2016 campaign sticker continues to haunt Hillaryites from the bumper of my Ford Taurus.)

The DNC’s bottomless clown car of milquetoast morons doesn’t exactly provide a lot of options for the Rothbardian voter. Most of the candidates seem to come from the Oprah School of social democracy, chumming debt besodden millennials with the promise of an endless procession of free shit, payed through taxing super-villains without offering to cut a single missile. The only solidly antiwar candidate was 89 year old former senator Mike Gravel, but since Mike has called it quits after essentially being banned from Cable TV and screwed out of his rightful place in the latest debates, that only leaves contrarian powder-keg, Tulsi Gabbard.

READ MORE

Israeli Lobby behind Senate Failure to Overturn Saudi Arms Sale Veto 1

My recent interview with Tasnim.

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The US Senate failed in its latest bid to block the controversial sale of $8.1bn worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia due to the influence of the powerful Israeli lobby in the United States, an American political analyst said.

“…Saudi Arabia and the UAE are also allies of Israel, which is extraordinarily powerful in the United States as well. The (US) President has a very close relationship with Israel, and the Israel lobby essentially controls much of the US Congress. The American petroleum industry and other US business interests also maintain massive holdings in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. For these reasons, the President vetoed the resolutions, and the resolutions did not receive enough support in the Senate to override the veto,” Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of attackthesystem.com, told Tasnim.

READ MORE

Pompeo has ‘ulterior motives’ in expressing desire to travel to Iran 2

Press TV. Listen here.

It is clear that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has “ulterior motives” in expressing his desire to travel to Iran and be interviewed by Iranian news media, according to American political analyst Keith Preston.

On Thursday, July 25, Pompeo said he was willing to go to Iran for talks amid tensions between Tehran and Washington.

Asked if he would be willing to go to Tehran, Pompeo said in an interview with Bloomberg TV, “Sure. If that’s the call, I’d happily go there… I would welcome the chance to speak directly to the Iranian people.”

Some independent observers have said that Pompeo is actually not very interested in speaking with the Iranian people, but actually is concerned by the way Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif is presenting Iran’s case on the American media to the US public.

They say Pompeo wants to counter Zarif by pushing the idea of travelling to Tehran and speaking to the Iranian media which has suffered several restrictions in the United States. Washington has also pressured social media giants to block Iranian media channels on YouTube and Google.

Preston said that Pompeo “thinks it’s an opportunity to score some propaganda points.”

READ MORE

I’m a Little Bit Ilhan, and I’m a Little Bit Tucker Too 2

By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit

Exile in Happy Valley

As something of a radical contrarian, I often feel like my life is comprised largely of coming out of an endless procession of closets, often without even realizing I’m stepping through the doorway. What? You didn’t know I was a pro-life feminist? You’ve never heard of a libertarian socialist? I genuinely can’t keep up with all the peccadillos you partisan pussies find indigestible. All in all, with this experience of casually shocking boring people, it’s little wonder I took to being queer like a fish in a frying pan.

But some closet doors are heavier than others and at this hybrid moment of Republicrat hysteria, they don’t get much heavier than the simple fact that I have a great deal of respect for both Ilhan Omar and Tucker Carlson, which is a bit like being a unicorn that everyone hates for a different reason. How could this be possible? Well, for one thing, I’ve long held a soft spot in my bleeding heart for both shocking people and, well, shocking-people. As a kid, I couldn’t seem to decide whether I wanted to be Mother Teresa or Marilyn Manson when I grew up. But more than any idiosyncratic character flaw, my respect for these two highly demonized figures stems from the fact that I am and will always be an anti-imperialist above all else. And regardless of their many many flaws both Ilhan and Tucker have been fairly consistent advocates for world peace.

I never expected to like Tucker Carlson and, for the most part, I still don’t. His demonization of immigrants and trans people like myself is nothing short of revolting. But like most paleocons, with Mr. Carlson you take the good with the disgusting. Regardless of how you or I may feel about the bastard’s social cluelessness, you have to be pathologically apoplectic to deny his post-partisan devotion to anti-interventionism. Where Tucker’s beloved pseudo-isolationist Caesar, Donald Trump, has faltered, Carlson has remained courageously resolute.

Since taking the prime time slot of pandering grope-a-holic Bill O’Reilly, Tucker Carlson has delivered some of the most breathlessly eloquent prose in defense of peace that this country has seen since MSDNC had Phil Donahue fired for speaking out against the war in Iraq, often going against the very president he rebuilt his career on defending in the process, and it’s effect appears to be profound. Donald Trump seems to have only reversed his decision to commit mass murder in Iran after a brief phone call with his favorite Fox News host. With an impetuously impressionable man-child in the Oval Office, this xenophobic, binarist dick may have literally saved lives by sticking to his guns on America’s existential need to drop hers. Hate the fucker for who he is, but game recognizes game, and Tucker is looking pretty damn familiar to this tranny peacenik. Crucify me for being big enough admit it.

Perhaps the only thing more enjoyable than seeing a neocon network hijacked by a modern-day Charles Lindbergh has been watching mighty little Ilhan make those same pigfucking giants sweat. While, as an anarchist, I may find Mrs. Omar’s pseudo-socialist, big-government-solves-everything approach to domestic policy nauseatingly tiresome, she has proven herself to be the Lower House’s most doggedly consistent critic of empire since Ron Paul.

READ MORE

The Condition of the World Economy 1

A very good discussion of the world economy by two Marxist-Leninists. I agree with virtually everything they say except for, of course, their interpretation of the role of Communism in the industrial development of the Eastern world.

The Communist revolutions that took place in the East and the Global South in the 20th century were simply a continuation of the bourgeois revolutions of the 18th and 19th century. In every case, these revolutions (from America and France in 1776 and 1789 to Cuba and Cambodia in 1959 and 1975) were rooted in the left-wing of the middle class as revolutions almost
always are. The West is experiencing a bloodless revolution of that kind at present (what the right-wing calls “cultural Marxism’).

Industrial development of communist countries was always made possible by Western capital. An agrarian society can’t experience industrial development by practicing economic autarky. Russia tried that with “war communism” during the Russian Civil and it failed. Hence, Lenin developed the New Economic Policy and began importing industrial technology from Western capitalists.

China attempted a similar approach during the Great Leap Forward only to experience famine and mass starvation. It was the Dengist reforms of the late 70s/early 80s that allowed China to develop on its present mercantilist/national- capitalist model, which is basically the same model used by the Asian Tigers as well as the European nations during the Industrial Revolution.

Even the Khmer Rouge understood they needed the support of Western capital. The purpose of the “killing fields” was to produce as much of an agricultural surplus as possible to sell on the world market in order to be able to import industrial equipment and technology. The Khmer Rouge goal was the achievement of industrialization by the year 2000. After they were dislodged by Vietnam in 1979, they changed their ideology from Maoism to “liberal capitalism” and formed an alliance with the CIA against the Vietnamese.

Nukes For Peace? 1

By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit

Exile in Happy Valley

Surrounded by trigger happy Tonkinesque gunboats and drowning in debt, the Islamic Republic of Iran has made the risky decision to play the last card left in their deck; to defy the P5+1 Deal in order to save the P5+1 Deal. It’s a hell of a gambit but it already has those pussies in the EU clamoring for new talks with the embattled nation. Under the circumstances, I would argue that Iran’s decision to enrich Uranium past the amount allowed in the deal but still far short of anything potentially lethal isn’t just tactically savvy, it’s the right thing to do.

Iran offered Europe and the US everything but a weekly colonoscopy with that deal and we’ve given them jack shit in return for their patience. While Trump shredded the agreement in a reckless Israel-friendly hissy fit, Europe has sheepishly reneged on their promises to stand up to Orange-Man-Bad and ease their own sanctions. Their indecision isn’t just an embarrassing display of geostrategic cowardice that would gag Charles de Gaulle like a gimp, it’s a brazen violation of the very deal they claim to remain committed to. In this dire situation, for Iran to continue to sit on their hands, would be a betrayal of both international diplomacy and their long suffering citizenry who these values are supposed to protect.

But this move also begs a bigger and rather uncomfortable question for peaceniks like me. Could Nukes be good for peace? Just typing those words feels blasphemous on my fingertips, but history speaks for itself. Iraq and Libya both forfeited their own nuclear weapons programs for the sake of self-preservation and both ended up brutally mugged for their efforts by the world’s preeminent nuclear superpower. Further more, international law on this regard, is little more than a sick fucking joke. Iran has been hounded for decades by an illegally nuclear armed Israel and the only nation to ever use one of those goddamn things while even the intelligence agencies of these very rogue states admits that this program is a total fiction. Meanwhile, India and Pakistan continue their own flagrantly illegal arms race while being bathed in buckets of western aid. And evil Iran should what, be the last boy-scout while they get ransacked? It clearly doesn’t make any fucking difference whether they actually have the bombs or not, so why not arm up?

READ MORE