Brandon Sack, Guest Columnist
Coming of age in the era of President George W. Bush has left me almost incapable of being surprised by politicians' audacious disregard for history and their adamant refusal to learn from past mistakes. But this week I found myself shocked and awed at Sen. John McCain's statements about Iran when addressing a pro-Israeli lobbying organization, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). In his speech, McCain proclaimed, "Tehran's pursuit of nuclear weapons poses an unacceptable risk, a danger we cannot allow" â€" as if it is a fact that Iran is currently pursuing nuclear weapons.
Who cares if a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, a compilation of opinions and findings from our 16 intelligence agencies, reported with "high confidence" that Iran stopped all attempts to develop nuclear weapons in 2003 due to international pressure and scrutiny? Pay no mind to the fact that Iran has been increasingly cooperative with the International Atomic Energy Agency, who has also reported there is no information to suggest Iran is seeking to develop nuclear arms. So what if the only evidence the world has of a nuclear weapons program in Iran is an unverifiable U.S.-provided document, which the U.S. refuses to fully release to the IAEA or Iran, showing loose plans to develop a nuclear missile prior to 2004?
Luckily, we have the Democratic Party to remind us of these facts and to serve as a rebuttal to McCain's truth twisting. Or is there really much of a difference?
Sen. Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to show her toughness on foreign policy, took it a step further than McCain, saying she would "totally obliterate" Iran and its 70 million inhabitants if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons. Clinton conveniently bypassed the whole development part of the nuclear arms equation and went straight for the sort of war mongering that makes McCain, Bush and the rest of the neoconservative contingent salivate with anticipation.
Sen. Barack Obama, on the other hand, has been outspoken on this issue, even in the face of incessant Republican attacks. He has continually pressed for increased diplomacy and unconditional talks with the Iranian regime in order to avoid an armed confrontation.
That is, until last week. In a speech to AIPAC on June 4, Obama repeatedly reassured the audience he would do "everything" in his power to "prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon" â€" obviously hinting at the use of force. In his speech, Obama joined McCain and Clinton in assuming Iran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons. This assumption has dangerous implications.
Obama has also backed off his previous "unconditional talks" position and is now equivocating on what "unconditional" means.
Perhaps even he has already forgotten the run-up to the Iraq war when, despite the lack of a true consensus in the U.S. intelligence community, the Bush administration relentlessly spoke of the threat of nuclear capabilities falling into the hands of a "terrorist state."
Obama should have the courage, just as he did in 2002 before the invasion of Iraq, to point out the fallacies of the Republican propaganda machine â€" where any half-truth or bold faced lie can become fact if its simply repeated enough. Unfortunately, he and most of the American people have fallen into the same fear trap that has led to the deaths of over 4,000 American soldiers and 600,000 to 1.2 million Iraqis.
Sen. Obama, we have heard this story before. Let's not get duped twice in one generation. For as the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on â€" shame on you. Fool me â€" you can't get fooled again." Or something like that.
