Ending the Iraq War by putting an end to those Mullahs in Iran

I would like to start a debate on the Iraq War and my thesis is that the road to a peaceful and satisfactory resolution of that Iraqi Quagmire runs through Tehran. If you are a war protestor and thus, by definition, you are ‘anti-war’, I make note of the fact that this also means that you are against an Iran War just as you are against an Iraq war. We can make note of the fact your position is therefore morally consistent, or so it would seem on the surface, because you are equally opposed to both of those wars.

However I would like to address the issue of morality by posing a question to you here. Do the American people have a moral responsibility to the people of Iraq, and if the American people were to withdraw from the quagmire and hand over the people of Iraq to those meddling mullahs in Tehran, would the people of America be morally responsible for that unhappy state affairs, now that the people of Iraq will have an equally good chance of becoming thoroughly sick and tired and completely hostile against that cabal of worthless bastards, just as is currently the way the people of Iran feel about their ruthless oppressors, the Mullahs of Tehran.

Now it is my intention here to get people talking, and as part of that dialogue I would like to make my own position clear, and it is that yes, of course, you would be morally responsible for having done such a thing, and furthermore I would like to propose that any American who is in favor of handing the people of Iraq over to those damnable Mullahs should be given a free ticket to Iran, or to Iraq, so that they can share in the experience. If after some time living with those Mullahs they find that the people of Iran were just being unreasonable and those Mullahs were not so bad after all then they can justify their moral position based upon their own personal experience in the matter and I will concede that it was a valid point because they did it to themselves, and didn’t mind, instead of doing to someone else and then not minding much about it later. Now one of the common principles of morality states that you should only do things to other people that you would want to have done to yourself, and with this in mind I would like to propose turning the entire country of America into a Mullah state, should turning Iraq into a Mullah state be the grand design being contemplated by most of the people in that country.

Now if you are ‘anti-war’, and most people these days are, with the numbers growing all the time, then that means that you are shit out of luck. You see, if you check with the Democratic Party, as one example, you will find that their position on withdrawal, while it sounds like a position on withdrawal since the word ‘withdrawal’ is employed, making it sound like it might be a withdrawal position, is actually, if you read the fine print, describing withdrawal from the cities of Iraq and into fortified bases, from which the Democrats will then no doubt be launching air support attacks in defense Iraqi ground forces who will have to take over all the fighting since the Democrats plan to withdraw out of the cities of Iraq and into the countryside of Iraq instead. Now if you are ‘anti-war’ and this position pisses you off and gets you started with some more agitating and activism, you might want to start canvassing around to see if you can find a single politician in Washington, Democrat or Republican, who would be willing to withdraw all the way out of Iraq and hand the place over to those Mullahs in Tehran. At the present time I can’t suggest any names, but like I said, you might start looking around until you do find someone, and if you can’t find anyone currently in Washington, perhaps you can start encouraging some mayor of some city to enter the race, should you be able to find a mayor who is willing to allow Iraq to go to hell in a hand basket by handing the place over to those grasping Muillahs in Tehran. Until such a time as you find someone you can be anti-war and just run yourself ragged, perhaps for years and years and on into the next administration when you can carry on your feud with whoever does get in and who, you will find, just stubbornly refuses to discuss position that hands Iraq over to those Islamic Religious Right Mullahs in Tehran.

So then to make the point clear, all anti-war activity at the present time is futile and you don’t have a hope in hell of even beginning to make any progress for as long as those Mullahs remain enthroned in Tehran. Until such a time as those conniving trouble making bastards are gone, you can exhaust yourself and piss yourself off and get nothing to show for all the prodigious, and I am sure, exhausting effort you put into that hopeless project you have been working upon.

Now there is what you might call the ‘moral leftist’ position, which you might hear from time to time, which suggests that it is the responsibility of the people of Iran to liberate themselves from the Mullahs and no business of everyone else. Everyone is responsible for their own freedom and liberation. Now we need to keep in mind that the people of Iran are very responsible, but they are finding it tough to get liberated right now given that they are staring down the barrel of Mullah’s gun. This is how those Mullah’s maintain their power over a hostile population. They rely upon the armed revolutionary guard and a squad of fanatical ruthless thugs known as the Bajlis. The Bajlis can be compared to Hitler’s brownshirts, a collection of thugs who will beat the shit out of anyone who is properly veiled or who plays wrong music at parties and so forth, while the Revolutionary Guard can be counted upon to gun down protestors with live ammunition, thus ensuring that those rotten bastards stay in power, they hope, forever and ever.

This can make getting liberated difficult and very time consuming, and so we can make note of the fact the people of Iran have not failed to get liberated because of their own moral irresponsibility in this matter. God knows they want to get liberated, so at least their morals are correct, and now if someone could suggest some way that they might actually pull that off that person might want to write that strategy down on a piece of paper and then send it to Iran, for at the moment they are a little short on ideas. They have morals, and they are willing to take personal responsibility for their liberation, trust me, they do, but they just need a workable strategy that won’t get them beaten black and blue or pumped full of hot lead, or locked up for fifty years or publicly executed in the town square.

Now someone might say that the liberation of Iran is an internal affair, and what business it is of Americans to be liberating Iran. After all, there are hundreds of countries in the world. Why not pick one. Now it is possible for Iran to be internally liberated, but it would require full scale civil war between the regular army in Iran and the revolutionary guard. This might work out, and it would take years, and it would entirely wreck their country, but at least they would be showing some responsibility for their own liberation and getting the job done themselves.

Now if the Americans were to liberate the Iranians from those Mullahs this has the potential to be a much quicker and much less painless affair, given the massive military and technological sophistication of American forces, and their ability to pin point target those revolutionary guards and blow them to kingdom come, in theory at least, without blowing the whole country of Iran at up while doing so. As I said, the potential is there. And since no Revolution Guard means no more Mullah, because a Mullah without a gun is a Mullah without so much as a pot to piss in, that would bring about the speedy collapse of that Mullah regime in Iran, since everyone in that country detests them except for the Islamic Religious Right, and they are vastly outnumbered. This would then allow the Iranians to go about a more normal life while just being annoyed by the Islamic Religious Right instead of being brutally oppressed by those fanatical assholes such as is the case today.

Now this then leads us to wonder why Americans, just because they spent trillions on military hardware, should be expected to pick up the additional tab to pay the cost of liberating Iranians. This then leads us back to America’s obvious moral responsibility to the people of Iraq and since it would be impossible to leave Iraq without getting rid of that flock of circling buzzards in Tehran, we can then see why it is the case that Americans have a moral responsibility to get rid of those buzzards, in the process liberating the Iranians, if for no other reason than that finally at long last they can make some progress on getting themselves extracted from the moral disaster of the quagmire in Iraq.

There are those who will object, saying that while this all sounds so very nice, am I not forgetting about that problem of stirring up the Islamic Religious Right all over the Muslim world, and the next thing you know those fanatical bastards will be terrorizing people because they were pissed off when Americans toppled those fanatical brethren of theirs in Tehran. My reply would be that while it is true that there are fanatical murderers out there, who might get all stirred up and make trouble, at least there would be a small improvement in the world in that there would not be fanatical murderers in power in Tehran. So then the world would be slightly better place, even if it wasn’t perfect. As for all those other fanatics still on the loose, I would prefer to see them on the loose while at the same time being flat broke or at least underfunded, and if they were to remain funded I would prefer that they work for their money instead of getting it for free like they do right now. Perhaps they can compromise on their Islamic values and start peddling crack to raise money for their terrorism campaigns, becoming dope peddlers like the Taliban, and even in this case the world would still be a slightly better place because they would have to go out and earn a living which even if that doesn’t stop those terrorist types at least would slow them down a little. Once again, the world wasn’t perfect, but it was an improvement, even if it was a small improvement, and since an improvement is always better than a degeneration or a quagmire, when you put everything onto the balance, it would seem to be well worth the effort.

It is true that it will piss off the Islamic Religious Right to have lost the connection to one of their nerve centers and their favorite government in the whole wide world. This will just mean that they were still pissed off, for it was not like they were in a good mood all the time and then suddenly they got pissed off, for as we know those fanatics are just pissed off all the time. So then pissing them off some more is just a question of degree, of quantity and not substance. Not much changed there except that they became more pissed off, thus making the world a much worse place than it was before.

However even the blackest cloud has a silver lining, and in this case there is also a bright side of things, in that while it would be true that the Islamic Religious Right would get pissed off, and no doubt would mutter dark threats and issue terrorist warnings at the first sign of trouble coming, the best part is that they will just be pissed off by themselves instead of having that gift of getting more and more people pissed off all the time right along with them. For you see, having people dancing in the streets of Tehran and throngs of jubilant Iranian youth celebrating the sweet savor of freedom from those rotten fucking bastards is not very good propaganda for the Islamic Religious Right. I would compare the effect to placing a gun to the head of the Islamic Religious Right and then pulling the trigger and popping those pricks right between the eye balls.

Let us compare this technique with what you Americans are calling ‘the war against Terrorism’. Like me you want to pop those pricks between the eye balls, the only difference being that you load a pistol with real bullets and then pop the pricks between the eye balls, which then creates matyrs, pissing more people off, thus causing the Islamic Religious Right to not just be pissed off by themselves, but rather to grow in size, with more and more people joining and supporting their terrorism. So then the main difference between my strategy for fighting those terrorists and your strategy is that I would prefer to disgrace the religious fanatics and the ruthless hypocrites while you seem to have the idea in your head that you should make martyrs out of them, which will then keep you busy for one hell of a long time. Hopefully you will be able to keep up and not lose to much ground so that even if you cannot make progress at least perhaps you can achieve a stand still and remain running on one spot rather than falling behind.

It is also worth considering the fact that if Americans were to go war against those Mullahs and their Republican guards this would be a project that the American people and the Iranian people could work together on as a mutual project, since you, the American people need to get rid of those Mullahs, or remain bogged down for one hell of long time in Iraq, and the Iranian people really want to get rid of those damnable bastards once and for all. The difference between your two points of view are that the Iranians need to be worried about having you Americans blowing up their entire country and making everything a total wreck as part of that project, while you Americans do not need to worry about being blown up unless that President of Iran makes good on his threats to send terrorists after you. IN that case only a very small part of America will be blown up, and so you, the American still have less to worry about than an Iranian. Now if you Americans were going to blow up the whole country then I can understand that the Iranians might want to just keep their Mullahs, for as bad as things are in that country it could always be one hell of a lot worse, and in that case, you Americans can just stay in Iraq.

It is worth noting here that it is not required that you Americans invade Iran, since to topple a Mullah you only need to blow up the Revolutionary Guard and the Mullah will quickly implode as a consequence of this action. I do not believe that George Bush is very interested in trying to run even one more country, so it is convenient for him that he won’t have to. First Vietnam, then Iraq. I think you can see that it will probably be one hell of a long time before Americans will ever agree to try to run some other country again because it is just a damned bad idea. As for George Bush I think he is thoroughly disgusted and just doesn’t give a damn anymore, or so it would seem. He certainly isn’t much of a fighter, and as a result those moderate Republicans had to show up and kick him in the ass. Therefore I can’t see George Bush being much in favor of taking over Iran since the last time he tried to pull a stunt like that one pretty much did him in. As for George Bush parking himself in Iraq you can expect him to park and then to remain parked for at least as long as those Mullahs remain parked in Tehran.

If you Americans stay in Iraq, could you please just learn to live with it and stop protesting and making a big fuss. This really is getting tiresome and the way I see it is that if you Americans cannot have civil discussion about that Iraq war maybe you should just try to put it out of your mind and just get on with your day and try to pretend you are not in Iraq. Life will be easier for you since you are going to be in Iraq for one hell of a long time no matter who you vote for in the next election, unless you get lucky and elect someone who will agree to just throw those Iraqis to the wolves and thus allow you Americans to wash your hands of the whole sorry mess, while at the same time escaping any deep debates about your moral responsibility for having done something to those people in Iraq that would really piss you off if such a thing was done to you in America.

I believe that the correct anti-war position is to support the war against those Mullahs in Tehran. Since you Americans will probably wind up at war with Tehran in any case, the way the situation is shaping up, this is convenient. Those of you who do not want George Bush going off half cocked might want to start discussing the issue and entering into the process. You might want to hurry up and not drag your asses because those Mullahs have just made a phone call to Kim Il Sung and are going on a shopping spree, and you really don't need those Mullah's stocking up on ammo while you wrangle and talk and talk and wrangle some more. Make your 'yes' a 'yes' or make you 'no' a 'no' and just bloody well shit or get off the pot. You need to have a real debate in that country and no more bullshit or pretending one thing and doing another or scoring points and so on.

There are those who are going to be against war as an option because it is a war, and war is real messy. If your goal was to conquer Tehran, that would be messy, but if your goal was to put the boot to some damned Mullahs, that would not be tidy, since blowing the Revolutionary Guard to kingdom come is not tidy, it need not be real messy. So then you define your goals and then you plan accordingly.

If it turns out that the Bush administration just completely wrecks the whole country of Iran then this would mean that you would be riding the gravy train and that you would be riding that thing all the way into Grand Central Station. Of course I am not hoping for this outcome, but the way I see is that if someone serves a really expensive plate of gravy, and that gravy was already bought and paid for, then you might as well tie on a bib and tuck into that very expensive dish, for it is a shame to waste perfectly good food. For these reasons I am attempting to get you Americans to have a civil discussion about that Iraq war and that ongoing wrangle with those circling buzzards in Tehran, rather than a dogmatic rant or partisan point scoring wrangle, so that whatever it is that you Americans decide to do at least you had it clearly defined before you did whatever it is that you are going to wind up doing.

A Unified Field Theory

The Unified Field Theory
is also available as a zip file -> unified.zip

Introduction :The Pioneer Effect and the New Physics. A brief description of the new physics required to explain the 'Pioneer Effect', which is the constant deceleration of space craft as they fly through space.

Principles of Evolution: A Study in the Evolution of Bedbugs