Ernest Goes to Auschwitz

Ernest Goes to Auschwitz

"At yesterday's gathering of world leaders in southern Poland to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, the United States was represented by Vice President Cheney. The ceremony at the Nazi death camp was outdoors, so those in attendance, such as French President Jacques Chirac and Russian President Vladimir Putin, were wearing dark, formal overcoats and dress shoes or boots. Because it was cold and snowing, they were also wearing gentlemen's hats. In short, they were dressed for the inclement weather as well as the sobriety and dignity of the event.


The vice president was dressed in the kind of attire one typically wears to operate a snow blower."

Will Muslim States Unite Against West?

Will Muslim States Unite Against West?

Here's an extremely interesting and timely report from PINR/Yevgeny Bendersky, titled ''Lines in the Sand: Western State Building in the Muslim World''.

Excerpt:

"..If the world's current dependence on oil continues to grow -- as recent reports about China's oil consumption seem to indicate -- many Muslim states will assume greater clout in world affairs, making it harder to treat each of them separately as distinct "identities" vis-à-vis other states.

The latest developments in the "war on terrorism" point to unifying movements in the Islamic world, either with Iran's help or under the banner of al-Qaeda and its allies -- a more coordinated attack on Western principles and Western interests in the Muslim world that cut across the religious and ethnic divides. While U.S. efforts in Iraq have faltered since 2003, the January 30 Iraqi election following a relatively successful election in Afghanistan will prove to be one of the turning points in the development of the Islamic world, which will either accept and foster the Western model and emerge as a collection of distinct and friendly states, or will finally break under the pressure of Iran and al-Qaeda and begin to emerge as a unified religious, political and military entity, heralding a new chapter in world history."

Hersh: US Government Taken Over By Cult

Hersh: US Government Taken Over By Cult

Sy Hersh says we've been taken over by a cult. Read the transcript of Mr. Hersh's recent appearance at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue in New York.

Excerpt:

"...we are been taken over basically by a cult, eight or nine neo-conservatives have somehow grabbed the government. Just how and why and how they did it so efficiently, will have to wait for much later historians and better documentation than we have now, but they managed to overcome the bureaucracy and the Congress, and the press, with the greatest of ease. It does say something about how fragile our Democracy is. You do have to wonder what a Democracy is when it comes down to a few men in the Pentagon and a few men in the White House having their way. What they have done is neutralize the C.I.A. because there were people there inside -- the real goal of what Goss has done was not attack the operational people, but the intelligence people. There were people -- serious senior analysts who disagree with the White House, with Cheney, basically, that's what I mean by White House, and Rumsfeld on a lot of issues, as somebody said, the goal in the last month has been to separate the apostates from the true believers. That's what's happening. The real target has been "diminish the agency." I'm writing about all of this soon, so I don't want to overdo it, but there's been a tremendous sea change in the government. A concentration of power."

What I Heard About Iraq

What I Heard About Iraq

Read this. Don't miss it. Written by Eliot Weinberger, whose '9/12' is published by Prickly Paradigm, it's destined to become a blogger's classic.

*A tip of the hat to Mathew Gross for pointing out the way.

Iraq's Election: Beyond the Rhetoric

Iraq's Election: Beyond the Rhetoric

The Iraq election is a sham. Many will not take part in the elections - not from fear, but because they're seen as phoney. Some say Iraqi democrats can't win in this desperate election. It's no wonder many see the elections as fake. [Only 10%] Of Iraqi expatriates, some not even citizens of Iraq, have begun Iraqi voting in the U.S. With a couple days to go, some Iraqis are asking: "What election?"

In other areas of Iraq, realistic Iraqis are getting ready for the worst. They've seen nothing but chaos, frustration and extreme violence as Iraq readies for this election.

Iraq is certainly no festival of democracy. It's more a travesty of democracy. Even in Baghdad, election security is terribly unsure. Iraqi forces, who run away at the first sign of danger, are expected to do little to stop election day violence. The violent intimidation campaign has nearly paralyzed Baghdad.

Meanwhile, George W. Bush continues to obscure his Iraq Quagmire.

Senator Ted Kennedy wants the troops to get back home.

On last night's NIGHTLINE episode, there was a televised townhall meeting at a church in D.C., (with staged questions). They called it "Iraq-Why Stay?" Ted Koppel moderated. Joseph Wilson laid out a wonderfully rational plan for the future of our disengagement from Iraq. I hope someone's listening. I know our President's administration abhors Joseph Wilson. He's on to their sham and trickery, you see, and he makes his knowlege loud and clear. They wouldn't have exposed Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as CIA - a wicked, cruel, and traitorous act - if they didn't want revenge for the SOTU/yellowcake incident. Wilson reminded the town hall audience that the only reason we should ever commit our Armed Forces to war is to protect America from imminent national security threats. And that is NOT what we are doing in Iraq today. By the Bush administration's arrogance, they will ignore the good advice of men like Wilson and gravely injure America in the process, by weakening and abusing the military. This, my friends, is the kind of leadership we have today.

_________________

*For those of you who saw last night's Nightline's so-called "town hall meeting" and heard a man shouting at the end, I have found out who he was and what he was saying!
See his own accounting here.

Excerpt:

I started chanting "GULF WAR SYNDROME" over and over again, very loudly so it filled the church and drown out Ted Koppel.

He replied, "I am sure I have no idea what you're taking about"

and I yelled, "It's about Depleted Uranium!"

Then I shut up, and he finished his closing and it was over.

As I was waiting to filter out with everybody else, I heard one of the Iraqi's, who was very upset, talking to a producer: "This is not what we expected, we were told we would get a chance to speak in the press release you sent us, and you did not give us the chance to say what we came to say."

Losing Feith

Losing Feith

Douglas Feith, one of the men highly responsible for our being in the Iraq-mess we are in today, will be leaving the DoD in six months. It couldn't happen soon enough for me.

"Someone" must have "something" on him. Something he may not be able to deny. Something incriminating, I'd guess.

Don't ask me what - I'm only guessing. Maybe he's just "damaged goods" after the implication of his involvement with Larry Franklin and the security disaster in Iraq. Sy Hersh's recent allegations certainly couldn't have helped to boost Feith's PR. It takes a major uncovering of impropriety and an elephant-sized monkey wrench to unloose the feithful..er, faithful.. from the Bush Administration these days. It seems it's been done, though.

See Laura Rozen's comments HERE and HERE.

Spongebob vs. the Missionary-Position

Spongebob vs. the Missionary-Position

Spongebob and the missionary position?!?
What could they possible have in common, you ask?

They both appear in a clever piece by SFGate columnist Mark Morford.

Excerpts:

"Note the people who look at hilarious children's cartoons and see only sinister mind control, who look at their fellow human souls and see only an army of debauched heathens, who look (reluctantly) at their own genitals and see only a gnarled clump of pain and confusion, who look up at the beautiful blue sky and see only a massive canopy of daggers.

How incredibly sad. And, for right now, how very, insidiously dangerous...[..]

[..]....They have jammed a black seed of paranoia and dread into the tired soil of American consciousness, and have made it their lifelong duty to ensure that the seed festers and erupts into a gnarled weed of hate and ignorance and bad missionary-position sex with the lights off."

Flip Flopping On The Definition of ‘Freedom’

Flip Flopping On The Definition of ‘Freedom’

The Bush administration’s had a lot of explaining to do about their meaning of “freedom”, the one little word which speechwriters had sprinkled throughout the President’s January 20th inaugural speech, leading to a lot of big questions. Washington Post columnist EJ Dionne says: “You can spin a lot of things. Freedom shouldn’t be one of them.” LINK

The day after the inaugural address, the White House basically said they didn’t really mean what we may have thought they’d meant when President Bush talked about the expansion of “freedom”. They went on to try to explain what they did mean, which in reality, had little to do with the bold speech itself. Dionne calls it the “Freedom Shuffle”. The uncertainty, after sounding oh-so certain and determined, can only increase political division in America and enhance further mistrust amongst foreign nations, according to Dionne. When it depends upon what the definition of “freedom” is on any given day, the President makes it easy for anyone to easily doubt his intent and tenacity in standing up for whatever he thinks the word means. We are only left to scratch our heads and wonder. Dionne says:

The younger Bush’s Freedom Shuffle — he’s an idealist on Thursday and a realist on Friday — may come as a relief to the many foreign policy specialists allergic to grand visions. A majority of Americans will be pleased with the elder Bush’s reassurance that the speech does not mean “newly asserted military forces.”

But the Freedom Shuffle is a terrible mistake for Bush, because the greatest barrier to Bush’s success in his second term is the intense cynicism he has inspired about his motives. This cynicism affects the near majority that voted against him at home but also a vast number of citizens in nations around the world that were once American allies. It is a cynicism that, if it spreads further through the Muslim world, could doom the very best aspirations of Bush’s policy.

Bush supporters see this cynicism as mean-spirited. In fact, it is the bitter fruit of bitter experience. A war originally justified in the name of ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction is transformed with some well-chosen phrases into — presto! — an episode in the long struggle for freedom. The shifting rationale is never acknowledged. His disquisition on this struggle did not even mention the central theater of battle in Iraq. No need to mire grand dreams in grim realities. A nation that should be the world’s leading advocate of human rights gets caught up in a torture scandal, and the president has yet to hold himself or high officials accountable for this deep stain on his country’s reputation.

Bush's Vision of America Will Mean TYRANNY

Bush's Vision of America Will Mean TYRANNY
James Madison would spin like chicken rotisserie in his grave if he knew.

Read the selected quotes below.
James Madison sternly and solemnly warned against concentration of power in all branches of government.
There stands an elected majority in both the House and Senate. (Elected or not, heed Madison's warning from Federalist 47).
We can safely predict President Bush's political intent, should a Supreme Court seat (or two or three) become vacant in the near future. (Did you get a good look at the Chief Justice at the inauguration? I don't think it will be long.)
How can the President expect any of us to believe his rhetoric about fighting tyranny when he plans to create the perfect opportunity for tyranny to reign Supreme (pun intended) in his own country?

QUOTE ONE:

"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny..[..]..From these facts, by which Montesquieu was guided, it may clearly be inferred that, in saying ``There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates,'' or, ``if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers..where the WHOLE power of one department is exercised by the same hands which possess the WHOLE power of another department, the fundamental principles of a free constitution are subverted''

--James Madison, Federalist No 47, February 1, 1788

QUOTE TWO:

"President Bush has indicated he favors nominating justices with a strict constructionist view of the Constitution, a judicial philosophy generally regarded as anti-abortion. Mr. Bush has said he favors a justice in the mold of the high court's strongest conservatives, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas."

--Andrew J. Baroch, Voice of America, 26 November 2004

QUOTE THREE:

"So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world...[..]..All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors."

--George W. Bush, Second Inaugural Address, January 20, 2005

In his inaugural speech last week, President Bush said there could be no justice without freedom.

Heed my warning.
There can be only an end to freedom with Bush' plans for the future of the Supreme Court.

Be prepared for four years of tyranny in your own country, America. The only oppressors the Bush administration will ignore, apparently, is the Bush administration.

"An ELECTIVE DESPOTISM was not the government we fought for; but one which should not only be founded on free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others."

----James Madison, Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788

Kevin Sites: Tsunami Stories

Mannequin in tsunami wreckage. image: Kevin Sites

Kevin Sites: Tsunami Stories

Kevin Sites' latest blog reporting from the Tsunami zone is a must-read.

Excerpt from "Black Plastic" by Kevin Sites:

Mohammed picks up a photo album. It's covered with mud -- the pictures inside ruined. All the years of memories destroyed like the lives they depicted.

A few feet away is an inflated life jacket. I wonder whether if the force of the wave ripped it from the person who was wearing it or whether they cven had a chance to put it on.

The Indonesian soldiers who are recovering bodies here have run out of latex gloves. They improvise by tying black plastic bags around their hands to do mortuary work on a scale they likely never dreamed of.

Universal Press Syndicate Will Harbor Bush Shill Maggie Gallagher

Universal Press Syndicate Will Harbor Bush Shill Maggie Gallagher

Universal Press Syndicate explains why they'll keep Maggie Gallagher.

They hype themselves as having "The best opinions in the universe." Instead, they should call it "the best opinions the Bush administration can purchase."

I'll never trust any of their journalism from here on in. Ted Rall should remove himself from this creepy group as soon as he can. Run, Ted. Run.

Torture:The New Casual Topic

"It's not nice to fool Mother Nature Uncle Sam!...If you think it's butter torture and it's not...it's Chiffon Al Gonzales' acceptable form of interrogation!"

Torture: The New Casual Topic

Tom Tomorrow makes a comically astute point about the new/cavalier (almost breezy) attitude toward the topic of torture. He titles his latest cartoon "How Low Can We Go? The Disturbingly Brief Journey From Unthinkable to Mundane"
Arlen Specter's performance in the Al Gonzales nomination hearing comes to mind...his casual questioning about the "ticking bomb" scenario, in particular. (*Someone's watching waaay too much "24").

________________

James Wolcott says 'Just Say NO' to Gonzales nomination

At Daily Kos, they're telling us that Gonzales has pointed out the Convention Against Torture treaty, as ratified by the Senate, which doesn't prohibit the use of "cruel, inhuman or degrading" tactics on non-U.S. citizens who are captured abroad, in Iraq or elsewhere..Gonzales, White House counsel and a close Bush adviser, described recent reports of prisoner abuse as "shocking and deeply troubling." But he refused to answer questions from senators about whether interrogation tactics witnessed by FBI agents were unlawful..." LINK to News Story-San Jose Mercury

Proposal to Democrats: Disband!

Proposal to Democrats: Disband!

My idea? Nope.
If you're wondering, I didn't propose this.
It's crossed my mind many times lately, though.
I'll bet it's crossed yours, too.
Do you think it's a harsh suggestion?
I don't know....
It was absolutely revolting to hear Sen. John McCain categorizing Dems who would stand up for truth and vote proudly against Condi Rice as "sore losers". (And getting away with it. CNN and FOX are replaying it ad nauseum).

I believe the real losers are the ones who willingly ignore reality for their own cheap political gain. Losers come in Red and Blue; Elephant and Donkey. I'm not being partisan here.

This post is for the Donkeys who refuse to stand up for reality and sell their supporters out at almost every opportunity. Shame on them!

At The American Street, Emma has decided to put it up for public discussion.

I think Emma's "DISBAND" suggestion isn't a bad one.

Seeing how few of the Dems actually stood their ground and voted a resounding "NO" for a woman who lied, bold-faced, to the public about a war into which our nation should never have entered is revolting. If Democrats are so easily intimidated by GOP hacks tossing around terms such as "un-American", they aren't representing those Americans whom they are charged with the duty of representing. The word "worthless" comes to mind.

Someone commented that a proposal of this type is barely necessary. Why propose to have them disband? The Democrats, by their abandonment of duty to the left and even many moderate Democrats, are systematically destroying themselves - and the success of the American system of government hoped for by the nation's Founders.

*An Alternative Idea?
"How about we just shake up the management and put a fighter in charge. Maybe a loud-mouthed Governor from New england or something?"
--Comment by 'Fast Eddie' at American Street

Americans Catching On To Bush Voodoo Optimism on Iraq

Americans Catching On To Bush Voodoo Optimism on Iraq

See the latest AP poll. Already-shaky confidence in Iraq's future has slipped.
Even Southerners and rural Americans are becoming resistant to President Bush's Iraq-related voodoo-optimism. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but sooner or later they're going to have your number.

It won't be long before they'll be calling for the troops to come home.

My only question will be: What took them so long?

Juan Cole: The Speech Bush Should have Given

Juan Cole: The Speech Bush Should have Given

Juan Cole lays out the speech he thinks Bush should have given back in 2002, as he was trying to convince Congress to give him the authority to go to war against Iraq.

Excerpt:

"..There also isn't any operational link between a secular Arab nationalist like Saddam and the religious loonies of al-Qaeda. They're scared of one another and hate each other more than each hates us. In fact, I have to be perfectly honest and admit that if we overthrow Saddam's secular Arab nationalist government, Iraq's Sunni Arabs will be disillusioned and full of despair. They are likely to turn to al-Qaeda as an alternative. So, folks, what I'm about to do could deliver 5 million Iraqis into the hands of people who are insisting they join some al-Qaeda offshoot immediately. Or else.

So why do I want to go to war? Look, folks, I'm just not going to tell you. I don't have to tell you. There is little transparency about these things in the executive, because we're running a kind of rump empire out of the president's office. After 20 or 30 years it will all leak out. Until then, you'll just have to trust me."

Gore Vidal: Bush Inaugural Speech Was Un-American

"I’d say what we have now in the United States is working up a nice tyrannical persona for itself and for us."

--Gore Vidal

Gore Vidal: Bush Inaugural Speech Was Most Un-American Ever
US Could Become Dictatress of the World And Lose Her Soul
LINK-DEMOCRACY NOW

GORE VIDAL QUOTE: "There's not a word of truth in anything that he said. Our founding fathers did not set us on a course to liberate all the world from tyranny. Jefferson just said, “all men are created equal, and should be,” etc, but it was not the task of the United States to “go abroad to slay dragons,” as John Quincy Adams so wisely put it; because if the United States does go abroad to slay dragons in the name of freedom, liberty, and so on, she could become “dictatress of the world,” but in the process “she would lose her soul.” That is what we -- the lesson we should be learning now, instead of this declaration of war against the entire globe. He doesn't define what tyranny is. I’d say what we have now in the United States is working up a nice tyrannical persona for itself and for us. As we lose liberties he’s, I guess, handing them out to other countries which have not asked for them.."

______________________

Gore Vidal: America Has Worst Educational System of Any First World Country

GORE VIDAL: "...And that an American audience would sit there beside the capitol or reverently in front of their TV screens and watch this and not see the absurdity of what was being said -- absolute proof of a couple of things that I have felt, and most of us who are at all thoughtful feel: We’ve got the worst educational system of any first world country. We are shameful when we go abroad, because we know nothing. Just to watch the destruction of the archaeologists’ work at Babylon. Babylon is a center of our culture. Nobody knows that. Nobody knows what it is, except it's a wicked city that the lord destroyed. Well, it was the center of our civilization, the center of mathematics, of writing, of everything. And apparently our troops were allowed to go in and smash everything to bits. Why did they do it? Was it because they are mean bad boys and girls? No. They're totally uneducated. And their officers are sometimes mean and bad, and allow them to have a romp, as they also had in the prisons, none of which we heard about in the last election. We were too busy with homosexual marriage and abortion, two really riveting subjects. War and peace, of course, are not worth talking about. And civilization, God forbid that we ever commit ourselves to that."

Okay, I'll admit it: I'm paranoid about Bushites' intent toward Iran

Okay, I'll admit it:
I'm paranoid about Bushites' intent toward Iran
Knowing they lied, rushed and botched the Iraq situation, I think I have good reason.

Should we be openly promoting the idea of democracy in Iran?

Yes, I think we should... with honor, good faith, and the utmost respect for human rights and the rule of law.

Does that mean attacking them with bombs (as we've done in Iraq)?

I say no, no; one thousand times NO!

First, you do not deliver human rights with a bomb.

It never works.

You support. You do not destroy as a first means of offering your nation's support or convincing people that your nation's intent is forwarded in good faith.

NeoCons showed us how NOT to support human rights and democracy in Iraq. They provided President Bush with the perfect blueprint (a blueprint he willingly accepted) for what NEVER to do again!

Listen to the reasoning of Shirin Ebadi (quoted below-see LINK). It's time for Americans to rely on our own sense and use our own freedom to speak out now...before we enter into another damned disaster.

"Iranian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi has said that while she, too, opposes nuclear weapons, the West would do more good by focusing not on Tehran's nuclear programme but on promoting democracy in the Islamic Republic.

"In a country or a society where people supervise decisions and everything else, like a democratic country, the existence of an atomic bomb cannot be dangerous," Ms Ebadi said."

What is “expansion of freedom"?

What is “expansion of freedom”?

I have a question for you:
Who thinks that President Bush is an abuser of the word “freedom”?

In his inaugural speech today, President Bush recalled America’s “deep commitments”.
He stated he was “determined to fulfill his oath”, and for those who have disagreed with his foreign policy, that is a frightening statement to have heard him make.

He said that our duties are defined by the history we’ve seen together. He’s made some of that history, after the “Day of fire” (9-11) raised a “moral threat” to our nation. (Mortal threat may have been the better word- perhaps I heard him wrong).
President Bush wishes to redeem his narrowly-gained power in the next four years to “reward hope of the decent and the tolerant.” He stated that our liberty depends on liberty in other lands, and that our best hope is the “expansion of freedom”.

WHAT IS “EXPANSION OF FREEDOM”?

What is it going to mean to America?

What will be the dreadful cost?

Shall we ask the Neo Cons?

Shall we ask Donald Rumsfeld?

President Bush said that the urgent requirement of our nation’s security and the “duty of our time” is ending “tyranny in our world”. (This, from the guy who likened nation building to a political disease in 2000).

He vows to help others find their own voice (Or else, I wondered? Snuff their voices out with bombs and American occupation? Have you noticed how big that went over in the Middle east when we charged into Iraq?)

President Bush promises that we will use American power confidently in “freedom’s cause”.
and that freedom is “eternally right”.

The Bush administration’s definition of “freedom” is paramount to the American discussion which must follow; after this inauguration day is over.

President Bush says that human choices move events and that God chooses as He wills.

George Bush claims to have relied upon God’s voice and he made some unfortunate choices these past few years.

He said no one should live at the “mercy of bullies” (I immediately thought to myself: After what we’ve done in Iraq? Hello?)
He said that there’s no justice without freedom.
That depends on what freedom means to you, doesn’t it?

If you ask a lot of Iraq people today (the ones still alive), what their definition of “mercy”, of “bullies”, and of “justice” might be - - well - I think you might be shocked at the difference between their opinion and this American President.

The President focused on the “unfinished work” of American freedom.

I fear he truly believes he needs to finish what he has begun- and then some.

Is anyone worried? Will idealists be the ruin of America by abusing the very word, ” freedom”?

Please Cast Your Vote My Way

Please Cast Your Vote My Way

I've been nominated for The Koufax Awards: Most Deserving of Wider Recognition

Go Here to Vote

It would be deeply appreciated!

Rice admits bad Iraq decisions

Rice admits bad Iraq decisions

Oh, wow. That really does a lot to boost world trust in Ms. Rice.
(Sarcasm intended).

The headline above is a beginning of a truthful exposure - about what this administration's wrong-minded foreign policy has done to American trust - and world trust.

When will Ms. Rice be forced to admit that she willingly misled America?

She has admitted some obvious blunders (which must have really pained her deeply to have to do - she'd probably rather have had a double root canal without novacaine).

I'd heard her misinform the public many times in both the lead-up and the post-"shock and awe"-phase of the pre-emptive attack upon Iraq. I specifically recall her appearance in an interview on the PBS News Hour.

What we knew going into the war was that this man was a threat. He had weapons of mass destruction. He had used them before. He was continuing to try to improve his weapons programs. He was sitting astride one of the most volatile regions in the world, a region out of which the ideologies of hatred had come that led people to slam airplanes into buildings in New York and Washington.
Something had to be done about that threat and the president to simply allow this brutal dictator, with dangerous weapons, to continue to destabilize the Middle East.

LINK

--Condoleeza Rice, July 30, 2003

I'm glad Barbara Boxer dealt with Rice in a straight-on fashion yesterday. I wonder why so many of our Representatves and the media that follows them have been remiss for this long?

Have they learned their lessons yet?

Judging from the Rice confrontation, it looks like they may have begun to learn. When deferring to civility and rules gets us nowhere - when it puts us smack dab in the middle of a war we never should have started - when protocol is abused by bad politics, it's time for giants to awaken..if they are present ANYWHERE in our government today.

We're watching.

I don't want to hear about how we're going to be "spreading freedom" to Iran with bunker busters and a new draft to bulk up a voluntary military of withering numbers.

NEVER AGAIN!


_____________

Why the hawks are circling over Iran
As George W Bush prepares for a second term, his administration is setting its sights on Iran. But, Rupert Cornwell reports, a new foreign policy adventure could be disastrous