"World Can't Wait...Drive Out the Bush Regime!" - Be There on Oct. 5
By Gary Leupp
Created Oct 3 2006 - 9:26am
Gary Hart in a recent column warns that the Bush administration may be
planning an "October surprise" -- "a preemptive war against Iran sometime
before the November election."

"The steps," writes Hart [1], "will be these: Air Force tankers will be
deployed to fuel B-2 bombers, Navy cruise missile ships will be positioned
at strategic points in the northern Indian Ocean and perhaps the Persian
Gulf, unmanned drones will collect target data, and commando teams will
refine those data. The latter two steps are already being taken. Then the
president will speak on national television. He will say this: Iran is
determined to develop nuclear weapons; if this happens, the entire region
will go nuclear; our diplomatic efforts to prevent this have failed; Iran is
offering a haven to known al Qaeda leaders; the fate of our ally Israel is
at stake; Iran persists in supporting terrorism, including in Iraq; and
sanctions will have no affect (and besides they are for sissies). He will
not say: ...and besides, we need the oil. Therefore, he will announce, our
own national security and the security of the region requires us to act.
'Tonight, I have ordered the elimination of all facilities in Iran that are
dedicated to the production of weapons of mass destruction...'"

I don't agree that Bush wants to go to war because "we need the oil." I
think it more accurate to say that this administration is dominated by
people who think the U.S. needs to acquire hegemony over Southwest Asia in
order to control the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea,
encircle rising China, cow allies and future foes alike with a string of
military bases in the region, and maybe make the neighborhood friendlier to
Israel. I think the whole project and international reactions to it should
be understood in the context of inter-imperialist competition, rather than
mere lust for petrol. But the former Colorado senator and presidential
aspirant is surely right on target in suggesting that Bush has goals quite
other than his stated ones in planning the assault on Iran. And he's right
to warn that such an attack -- however idiotic it may seem to many of us --
is very much on the table as the November elections approach.

Many of those who warn of this simultaneously bemoan the lack of an antiwar
movement effectively organizing opposition. There is in fact a movement of
some significance, however factionalized and flawed. In particular the
organization World Can't Wait [2] has done some excellent work in uniting a
wide range of war opponents in numerous actions and events. Daniel Ellsberg,
Ray McGovern, Alice Walker, Howard Zinn, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Ralph Nader,
Gore Vidal, Ed Asner, Sean Penn, Harry Belafonte, Tom Morello, Martin Sheen,
Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Gloria Steinem, Viggo Mortensen, Margaret Cho, Susan
Sarandon, Jane Fonda, Bianca Jagger, Kurt Vonnegut, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Gen.
Janis Karpinski, Ron Kovic, U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney and thousands of
others have endorsed the group's call to "drive out the Bush regime" and to
"stop the attack on Iran." One step towards this worthy goal is a day of
action October 5, with actions in many U.S. cities. I am not optimistic that
the regime will fall so soon, but I hope there will be a substantial turnout
in those demonstrations and that they will have a political impact.

But let's say we don't stop the attack on Iran. It happens and we learn of
it some morning soon when we switch on the TV to learn that for extremely
precise missile attacks on Iran's nuclear weapons production facilities have
been underway for several hours and that the Iranian leadership has also
been targeted and probably eliminated. We couldn't prevent the criminal
attack on Iraq, and haven't been able to prevent this additional imperialist
atrocity. What do we do? What's the plan?

According to a just released Reuters poll [3], 70%% of Americans polled
oppose a ground invasion of Iran. But 26%% support it! (That's the
incorrigible hardcore butthead community which thinks Saddam Hussein was
involved in 9-11, things are going well in Iraq, and that horrific bloodshed
in the Middle East has to happen before Jesus comes back.) 42%% favor a
strike on Iran's nuclear facilities so long as Israel does the deed
(obviously not a moral issue for them) while 47%% are opposed. While one
would hope that millions of people would fill the streets the day after the
Iran attack, attempting in fact to drive out that regime which so arrogantly
tries to drive out others, I'm afraid the forces aren't there. The
consciousness isn't there. Still, a good turnout this Thursday, Oct. 5,
could help change the political landscape, and could just maybe constitute a
dress rehearsal for the protests that will have to follow the Iran attack.

There will be actions in over 150 cities. I urge all reading this to show up
at the nearest one.

--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson