Hype? Hyperbole? Bombast? Whose...?
Why be surprised when the UN's Atomic Energy Agency's head, Mohamed El Baradei downplays France's warning to and of Iran. He is, after all, reflecting the casual attitude of the United Nations in responding to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's bombast. Hyperbole, violent and vile, is a way of life in the Middle East. Threats to annihilate a neighbour, actively and successfully seeking nuclear armaments, that's all par for the course in that neighbourhood.One supposes the big question should be, why does the United Nations permit itself to be used, its universal auspices to seem to soft-peddle the danger inherent in the threats. Combine the accomplishment of nuclear weapon accessibility with the ardently-violent determination of one nation aspiring to wipe out another and you have a formula for destruction whose very existence is the rationale for the existence of this world body.
The UN's unconcerned shrug gives assent and encouragement to the wild rantings of Tehran. Whose response was to remind the world that its long-range missiles are more than capable, nuclear technology aside, of punishing its transgressors unremittingly. Moreover, when Iran chides France for its temerity in stating the obvious: "The use of such words creates tensions and is contrary to the cultural history and civilization of France", one can only gasp in disbelief.
Turn those words around, and what do we have? The Revolutionary Guard are downright ecstatic, voicing their hallowed belief in their military durability, their abilities to "allow us to hit the enemy at a range of 2,000 kilometres". So watch out, U.S. and coalition forces next door, in Dubai, in Qatar and Bahrain. For starters. Does that give impetus to the need to forestall Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons or does it not?
And should Ahmadinejad address the General Assembly on September 25, as is anticipated, will he again appear with a haloed presence, reminding the assembled world representatives that the end is near as the Hidden Prophet prepares to present his divine self in the process of handing over primacy of the world administration to his faithful disciple? And that the first order of business is destruction of Israel?
In anticipation of which, a Republican U.S. presidential hopeful has written to the UN Secretary-General, advising him that "The Iranian regime under President Ahmadinejad has spoken openly about wiping Israel off the map, has fueled Hezbollah's terror campaign in the region and around the world and defied the world community in its pursuit of nuclear weapons - capabilities that make these threats even more ominous".
To which admonition the UN gives its usual collective shrug and yawn. That these abusive threats and the intent behind them contravene the very charter of the United Nations appears irrelevant to those in charge of the world body.
Outlived their usefulness?
Labels: Technology, Terrorism, World Crises
posted by Pieface @ Tuesday, September 18, 2007
<< Home