The internet and some foreign news media are all abuzz recently with stories that the United States intends to make some type of a strategic military strike against Iran on April 6th (Good Friday). Some of these stories involve the use of tactical nuclear weapons to strike hardened targets in Iran. If you want to read some of these speculations, you can Google “Iran April attack.”

     I have no idea whether these stories are true or not. They are essentially reports about what U.S. political and military leaders may be planning to do in the future. We know that plans are always subject to change, however, so the reported plans may or may not be carried out. I certainly hope that the military strike never takes place.

     If the predicted military strike is executed, the consequences for the U.S., the Middle East, and the world are likely to be severe. The first consequence would be that some people would die in the attacks, and others would be maimed, poisoned or displaced by the violence. But the consequences would go far beyond that.

     Many people in the Middle East feel that the U.S. is waging a war against Islam. A military strike against Iran would reinforce those beliefs, and contribute to the spread of Islamic fundamentalism and of hatred of the West. It is about the worst possible thing we could do if our goal is to reduce the appeal of the fundamentalists.

     Iran would immediately stop selling its oil to the world. Many of the other oil rich nations in the Middle East would probably join in a sympathy boycott. They would conclude, correctly in my opinion, that the U.S. is using its military power to take control of the petroleum resources in the region.

     A major restriction of the petroleum coming from the Middle East would have a devastating impact on the global economy. The price of oil (and of all forms of energy) would soar sky high. Marginal national economies would collapse, leading to greatly increased starvation and death in many places around the world.

     If the U.S. used nuclear weapons, the entire world (other than a few of our most dependant allies) would condemn the U.S. attack as a war crime. We would all become pariahs in the world community. If the U.S. did not use nuclear weapons, the attack is unlikely to stop the Iranian nuclear power program.

     Think for a minute about the ostensible reason for using nuclear weapons. The U.S. is concerned because Iran is pursuing a nuclear energy program, which someday might result in its ability to manufacture nuclear weapons. If Iran manufactures nuclear weapons, it might some day actually be tempted to use one or more of them in war. So, to prevent this possibility from happening at some uncertain point in the future, we would use nuclear weapons in a war today? It is analogous to a police hostage negotiator shooting the hostage because doing so would prevent the hostage taker from possibly being able to do so later.

     While most of the consequences of an attack on Iran would be negative, there is one consequence that would be beneficial. An attack on Iran, especially with nuclear weapons, would jump-start the impeachment movement. I seriously doubt that George Bush would finish out his term in office if he were to order a major military strike against Iran without Congressional authorization. I could also see a major war crimes trial for Bush if nuclear weapons were to be used.

     So, to George Bush I say this: You too are directly in the line of fire if you pull the trigger. Sure, we already know that you like to kill people. But the price for pulling the trigger this time will be paid in part by YOU. Do you really want to play nuclear roulette?

---