Thomas Moore and Mario Loyola wrote an article that was
published on December 13, 2013 in Foreign Policy Magazine under the title: Why
the Iran deal could be a devastating blow to the nonproliferation regime.
The article is supposed to be about the 6 months deal that
was worked out on the Iranian nuclear program. But despite all its pretenses,
it contains only a rehash of things that were said over the years, and were
discredited many times over. In effect, there is nothing new in it that is
worth discussing but for one thing; the article gives us the opportunity to
study how the art and science of self-deception are used to ruin nations – even
a superpower like America .
The two authors begin the article with an absurdity in that
they complain the interim agreement violates the U.N. Security Council
resolutions. So you want to know: Who allowed this to happen? It was the
(P5+1). What does P5 stand for? It stands for the Permanent 5 of the Security
Council. They are the judges who ordered those resolutions, and they are the
ones who can suspend the order long enough to implement an interim deal that
might lead to a permanent solution, and do away with a festering problem.
What's wrong with that? Why complain about it?
After the absurdity, they claim they cannot make sense of
something. They say they do not see why Iran needs to produce nuclear
energy when it has so much oil in reserves. Moreover, they make the point that Iran is
producing more nuclear fuel than is necessary to feed the one station it has.
They also say that if Iran
wanted energy self-sufficiency, it would build oil refineries instead of
nuclear plants, given that the country now produces only 60 percent of the
domestic gasoline it needs. No doubt all this sounds logical to them.
But in reality, Moore and Loyola are only deceiving
themselves and their readers into believing that the Iranian oil reserves will
last for ever, that Iran
will not build more reactors, and that self-sufficiency means not having a
diverse source of energy but having enough gasoline to run cars. Thus, they
conclude: “There is no reasonable doubt that Iran 's nuclear program has a
military purpose.” Whose reasonable doubt would that be, gentlemen?
Yes, there is enough self-deception here, but there is also
a great deal of innate ignorance. The reality is that Iran has oil,
natural gas, uranium, water falls, sun and wind; all of which are developed in
one place or another somewhere in this world to produce energy. Because
hydrocarbons will be depleted – perhaps in a hundred years or maybe a little
longer than that – anything that shows promise is looked into and tried out.
More than anyone, the ancient cultures (of which Iran is one) plan not only for next
year, the next decade or the next generation, but plan for the many generations
that are yet to come. And they will make use of anything that is available to
generate the energy the country will need.
And what that means is that the Iranians look at the hundred
years worth of hydrocarbon reserves they have, and see but a drop in the mighty
ocean of time that moved behind them, and the time that extends ahead of them.
They could not be as impressed as the two authors. As to the problem the
Iranians had at some point with the shortage of gasoline, it is one that all
developing countries encounter when the middle class starts buying cars. The
problem was a little more acute in Iran because the country has a well
developed auto industry, putting more cars on the road than most developing countries
ever did at that stage. But like the others, the Iranians eventually found a
set of solutions that suited their circumstances perfectly well.
Ignoring all of that, and having concluded that Iran 's nuclear program has a military purpose,
Moore and Loyola now use their own arguments to explain Iran 's
behavior. I kid you not; this is what they do. Look what they say: “That's why Iran 's key
nuclear facilities were secret ... that's why they are defended like military
targets.” Well, I ask you, what do you say to people like these? Come to think
of it, there is only one thing to say: Hey you two, Moore and Loyola, Iraq's
power station was blown up using American planes, American bombs, and
information supplied by American satellites – not because it was a military
target but because it was a civilian target that remained undefended. Do you
now understand why the Iranians are so defensive? Do you still blame them?
Yes, that's what happened; a defenseless target was bombed
because it was defenseless. And for many decades after that, the Jews went
around the world bragging about the great criminal act they were able to pull
off and get away with because America
protected them everywhere and all the time. Do you guys want to see a repeat of
this performance … in Iran
this time?
You may want to, but not the Iranians; and no one else in
the world for that matter. Understand that when you live in a neighborhood
infested with a skunk that is constantly being injected with American military
steroids, you protect yourself and your people at the risk of being criticized
by the brainless, the thoughtless and the dumb. And so, you may go ahead all of
you morons out there, you may go ahead and criticize all you want. But in the
end, rest assured that no one sane is listening to you or will ever listen.
Well, our two friends, are listening … but listening to
their own voices of ignorance. So guess what they do next. They talk about the
interim agreement as if it were the final and permanent agreement. Thus, they
list what they would have liked to see in it which they say is not there now.
But you know what this is, my friend? It is the Jewish method of negotiating.
These people hold the gun to your head and ask that you give them everything
they want before they will even sit down to negotiate.
If you comply, they will sit and expect you to tell them
what else you are prepared to give on your own accord so that they be
incentivized to move the gun away from your head. Well, if this sounds to you
like bizarre, my friend, I don't blame you. If you want more information about
it, ask the Palestinians who have been negotiating with them for a number of
generations and getting nowhere.
Still undeterred and unashamed, Moore and Loyola, who
started the article with an absurdity, end it with the mother of all
absurdities. They speak of “the information we have showing that Iran has a
nuclear-weapons program” then lament that the agreement does not require the
Iranians to prove the negative.